As the Information Security Management System audit team leader, you are conducting a second-party audit of an international logistics company on behalf of an online retailer. During the audit, one of your team members reports a nonconformity relating to control 5.18 (Access rights) of Appendix A of ISO/IEC 27001:2022. She found evidence that removing the server access protocols of 20 people who left in the last 3 months took up to 1 week whereas the policy required removing access within 24 hours of their departure.
When the auditee was asked why there was a delay in removing access they replied, 'no one was available in the IT department during that period as a result of COVID-19. As soon as an IT officer became available the rights were removed.
You note that she intends to raise a minor non-conformity against Access rights control (5.18). How should you respond to this?
Which two of the following are valid audit conclusions?
You are conducting an ISMS audit in the despatch department of an international logistics organisation that provides shipping services to large organisations including local hospitals and government offices. Parcels typically contain pharmaceutical products, biological samples, and documents such as passports and driving licences. You note that the company records show a very large number of returned items with causes including misaddressed labels and, in 15% of cases, two or more labels for different addresses for the one package. You are interviewing the Shipping Manager (SM).
You: Are items checked before being dispatched?
SM: Any obviously damaged items are removed by the duty staff before being dispatched, but the small profit margin makes it uneconomic to implement a formal checking process.
You: What action is taken when items are returned?
SM: Most of these contracts are relatively low value, therefore it has been decided that it is easier and more convenient to simply reprint the label and re-send individual parcels than it is to implement an investigation.
You raise a nonconformity against ISO 27001:2022 based on the lack of control of the labelling process.
At the closing meeting, the Shipping Manager issues an apology to you that his comments may have been misunderstood. He says that he did not realise that there is a background IT process that automatically checks that the right label goes onto the right parcel otherwise the parcel is ejected at labelling. He asks that you withdraw your nonconformity.
Select three options of the correct responses that you as the audit team leader would make to the request of the Shipping Manager.
You are performing an ISMS audit at a residential nursing home that provides healthcare services. The next step in your audit plan is to verify the information security incident management process. The IT Security Manager presents the information security incident management procedure (Document reference ID: ISMS_L2_16, version 4).
You review the document and notice a statement "Any information security weakness, event, and incident should be reported to the Point of Contact (PoC) within 1 hour after identification". When interviewing staff, you found that there were differences in the understanding of the meaning of the phrase "weakness, event, and incident".
The IT Security Manager explained that an online "information security handling" training seminar was conducted 6 months ago. All the people interviewed participated in and passed the reporting exercise and course assessment.
You would like to investigate other areas further to collect more audit evidence. Select three options that would not be valid audit trails.
Scenario 6: Sinvestment is an insurance company that offers home, commercial, and life insurance. The company was founded in North Carolina, but have recently expanded in other locations, including Europe and Africa.
Sinvestment is committed to complying with laws and regulations applicable to their industry and preventing any information security incident. They have implemented an ISMS based on ISO/IEC 27001 and have applied for ISO/IEC 27001 certification.
Two auditors were assigned by the certification body to conduct the audit. After signing a confidentiality agreement with Sinvestment. they started the audit activities. First, they reviewed the documentation required by the standard, including the declaration of the ISMS scope, information security policies, and internal audits reports. The review process was not easy because, although Sinvestment stated that they had a documentation procedure in place, not all documents had the same format.
Then, the audit team conducted several interviews with Sinvestment's top management to understand their role in the ISMS implementation. All activities of the stage 1 audit were performed remotely, except the review of documented information, which took place on-site, as requested by Sinvestment.
During this stage, the auditors found out that there was no documentation related to information security training and awareness program. When asked, Sinvestment's representatives stated that the company has provided information security training sessions to all employees. Stage 1 audit gave the audit team a general understanding of Sinvestment's operations and ISMS.
The stage 2 audit was conducted three weeks after stage 1 audit. The audit team observed that the marketing department (which was not included in the audit scope) had no procedures in place to control employees' access rights. Since controlling employees' access rights is one of the ISO/IEC 27001 requirements and was included in the information security policy of the company, the issue was included in the audit report. In addition, during stage 2 audit, the audit team observed that Sinvestment did not record logs of user activities. The procedures of the company stated that "Logs recording user activities should be retained and regularly reviewed," yet the company did not present any evidence of the implementation of such procedure.
During all audit activities, the auditors used observation, interviews, documented information review, analysis, and technical verification to collect information and evidence. All the audit findings during stages 1 and 2 were analyzed and the audit team decided to issue a positive recommendation for certification.
Based on scenario 6, during stage 1 audit, the auditor found out that some documents regarding the ISMS had different format. What should the auditor do in this case?
Enter your email address to download PECB.ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor.v2025-07-02.q187 Dumps
