Pass the PECB ISO 27001 ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Questions and answers with CertsForce

According to ISO 27001:2022, the standard for information security management systems (ISMS), the correct sequence for the information security risk assessment process is as follows:

Establish information security criteria

Identify the information security risks

Analyse the information security risks

Evaluate the information security risks

The first step is to establish the information security criteria, which include the risk assessment methodology, the risk acceptance criteria, and the risk evaluation criteria. These criteria define how the organization will perform the risk assessment, what level of risk is acceptable, and how the risks will be compared and prioritized.

The second step is to identify the information security risks, which involve identifying the assets, threats, vulnerabilities, and existing controls that are relevant to the ISMS. The organization should also identify the potential consequences and likelihood of each risk scenario.

The third step is to analyse the information security risks, which involve estimating the level of risk for each risk scenario based on the criteria established in the first step. The organization should also consider the sources of uncertainty and the confidence level of the risk estimation.

The fourth step is to evaluate the information security risks, which involve comparing the estimated risk levels with the risk acceptance criteria and determining whether the risks are acceptable or need treatment. The organization should also prioritize the risks based on the risk evaluation criteria and the objectives of the ISMS.

Detection risk refers to the risk that the auditor will not detect a material misstatement or significant issue within the organization's ISMS. In this case, the auditor's inability to identify Company A's insecure network architecture is a detection risk.

According to the PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, the auditee should take the following actions in response to a nonconformity against clause 6.1.3.e of ISO/IEC 27001:20221:

Implement the appropriate risk treatment for each of the applicable controls, as this is the main requirement of clause 6.1.3.e and the objective of the risk treatment process2.

Revise the relevant content in the Statement of Applicability to justify their exclusion, as this is the expected output of the risk treatment process and the evidence of the risk-based decisions3.

Revisit the risk assessment process relating to the three controls, as this is the input for the risk treatment process and the source of identifying the risks and the controls4.

The other options are not correct because:

Allocating responsibility for producing evidence to prove to auditors that the controls are implemented is not a valid action, as the audit team already found that there was no evidence of the implementation of the three controls.

Compiling plans for the periodic assessment of the risks associated with the controls is not a valid action, as this is part of the risk monitoring and review process, not the risk treatment process5.

Incorporating written procedures for the controls into the organisation’s Security Manual is not a valid action, as this is part of the documentation and operation of the ISMS, not the risk treatment process.

Removing the three controls from the Statement of Applicability is not a valid action, as this is not a sufficient justification for their exclusion and does not reflect the risk treatment process.

Undertaking a survey of customers to find out if the controls are needed by them is not a valid action, as this is not a relevant criterion for the risk assessment and treatment process, which should be based on the organisation’s own context and objectives.

 1: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 36, section 4.5.22: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1.3.e3: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1.3.f4: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1.25: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.2. : ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 7.5 and 8. : ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1.3.d. : ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 4.1 and 4.2.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The Statement of Applicability (SoA) is a mandatory document in ISO/IEC 27001:2022 that lists all Annex A controls, their applicability, and justifications for inclusion or exclusion.

C. Correct Answer: The SoA must include justifications for excluding Annex A controls. The scenario states that the project team excluded certain controls but does not mention that justifications were documented. This violates ISO/IEC 27001 Clause 6.1.3 (Information Security Risk Treatment), which requires documenting exclusions with reasons.

A. Incorrect: While the SoA should include an exhaustive list of controls, simply listing applicable controls from Annex A and other sources does not meet the requirement if exclusions are not justified.

B. Incorrect: Including security controls from other sources is allowed and does not invalidate the SoA, as organizations can define additional controls beyond Annex A based on their risk assessment.

Thus, Clinic's SoA is incomplete because it does not provide a justification for the exclusions of Annex A controls, making it non-compliant with ISO/IEC 27001 requirements.

These four scenarios are examples of a lack of competence, which is defined as the ability to apply the knowledge and skills needed to perform a work role or a task effectively and efficiently12. Competence in ISO 27001:2022 is determined by the organisation’s needs and expectations, and it is based on the relevant education, training, or experience of the people involved in the ISMS34. The organisation is required to ensure that all the people who affect the performance of the ISMS are competent, and to provide them with the necessary training and awareness to fulfil their roles and responsibilities35. The four scenarios indicate that the people involved either lack the knowledge or skills to perform their tasks, or have not received the appropriate training or guidance to do so. The other scenarios are not related to competence, but to other factors such as negligence, error, or policy violation.

In the Act phase of the PDCA cycle, the process is reviewed and evaluated based on the results from the Check phase. The actions taken in this phase aim to continually improve the process performance by addressing the root causes of problems, implementing corrective and preventive actions, and updating the process documentation1. References: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) | CQI | IRCA

The most accurate description of the relationship between information security elements is that threats exploit vulnerabilities to damage or destroy assets. This relationship forms the foundational model used in information security risk management, including ISO/IEC 27001:2022.

In this model, assets are anything of value to the organization, such as information, systems, services, or people. Vulnerabilities are weaknesses or gaps in protection that could be exploited. Threats are potential causes of an unwanted incident, such as malicious actors, malware, system failures, or human error. A risk materializes when a threat successfully exploits a vulnerability, leading to an impact on an asset.

Option A correctly captures this causal chain and reflects the risk assessment logic required by ISO/IEC 27001 clause 6.1.2, which requires organizations to identify threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts in combination.

Option B is incorrect because controls do not reduce threats directly; they primarily reduce vulnerabilities or mitigate impacts. Threats often exist outside the organization’s control. Option C is also incorrect because risk is not solely a function of vulnerabilities; it is typically a combination of threats, vulnerabilities, likelihood, and impact.

Therefore, option A best represents the correct and complete relationship among the core information security elements.

Explanation (ISO-aligned)

Security awareness training is an administrative (organizational) control.

ISO/IEC 27002:2022 A.6.3 (Information security awareness, education and training) explicitly categorizes training as an administrative control.

It governs human behavior through policy, procedures, and education, not technology or law.

Legal controls relate to regulations.

Managerial controls relate to governance decisions.

✅ Correct classification: Administrative control.

This situation represents an audit finding, making option A the correct answer. An audit finding is the result of evaluating audit evidence against audit criteria and identifying conformity, nonconformity, or opportunities for improvement. In this case, the auditor evaluated training records and discovered that two employees did not receive adequate information security training, which is a deviation from ISO/IEC 27001 training and awareness requirements.

Audit evidence consists of the records, interviews, or observations used to support findings. The training records themselves are evidence, not the finding. Information sources are where evidence originates, such as documents, personnel, or systems, but they are not the conclusion drawn by the auditor.

Option B is incorrect because the lack of training is not evidence; it is the conclusion derived from evaluating evidence. Option C is incorrect because employees or records may be information sources, but the situation described is the auditor’s evaluative conclusion.

ISO 19011 emphasizes that audit findings must be based on objective evidence and clearly documented. Therefore, identifying that some employees lacked adequate training constitutes an audit finding.

Machine learning is a subset of artificial intelligence that involves the use of algorithms and statistical models to enable systems to improve their performance on a specific task over time with experience or data, without being explicitly programmed. In the context of the scenario, machine learning would be the technology that allows the chatbot to learn from patterns in queries to provide the right answers.