PECB ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Implementer Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

Once they made sure that the attackers do not have access in their system, the security administrators decided to proceed with the forensic analysis. They concluded that their access security system was not designed tor threat detection, including the detection of malicious files which could be the cause of possible future attacks.

Based on these findings. Texas H$H inc, decided to modify its access security system to avoid future incidents and integrate an incident management policy in their Information security policy that could serve as guidance for employees on how to respond to similar incidents.

Based on the scenario above, answer the following question:

Which situation described in scenario 7 Indicates that Texas H&H Inc. implemented a detective control?

Scenario 5: Operaze is a small software development company that develops applications for various companies around the world. Recently, the company conducted a risk assessment to assess the information security risks that could arise from operating in a digital landscape. Using different testing methods, including penetration Resting and code review, the company identified some issues in its ICT systems, including improper user permissions, misconfigured security settings, and insecure network configurations. To resolve these issues and enhance information security, Operaze decided to implement an information security management system (ISMS) based on ISO/IEC 27001.

Considering that Operaze is a small company, the entire IT team was involved in the ISMS implementation project. Initially, the company analyzed the business requirements and the internal and external environment, identified its key processes and activities, and identified and analyzed the interested parties In addition, the top management of Operaze decided to Include most of the company's departments within the ISMS scope. The defined scope included the organizational and physical boundaries. The IT team drafted an information security policy and communicated it to all relevant interested parties In addition, other specific policies were developed to elaborate on security issues and the roles and responsibilities were assigned to all interested parties.

Following that, the HR manager claimed that the paperwork created by ISMS does not justify its value and the implementation of the ISMS should be canceled However, the top management determined that this claim was invalid and organized an awareness session to explain the benefits of the ISMS to all interested parties.

Operaze decided to migrate Its physical servers to their virtual servers on third-party infrastructure. The new cloud computing solution brought additional changes to the company Operaze's top management, on the other hand, aimed to not only implement an effective ISMS but also ensure the smooth running of the ISMS operations. In this situation, Operaze's top management concluded that the services of external experts were required to implement their information security strategies. The IT team, on the other hand, decided to initiate a change in the ISMS scope and implemented the required modifications to the processes of the company.

What is the next step that Operaze's ISMS implementation team should take after drafting the information security policy? Refer to scenario 5.

Scenario 10: CircuitLinking is a company specializing in water purification solutions, designing and manufacturing efficient filtration and treatment systems for both residential and commercial applications. Over the past two years, the company has actively implemented an integrated management system (IMS) that aligns with both ISO/IEC 27001 for information security and ISO 9001 for quality management. Recently, the company has taken a significant step forward by applying for a combined audit, aiming to achieve certification against both ISO/IEC 27001 and ISO 9001.

In preparation for the certification audit, CircuitLinking ensured a clear understanding of ISO/IEC 27001 within the company and identified key subject-matter experts to assist the auditors. It also allocated sufficient resources and performed a self-assessment to verify that processes were clearly defined, roles and responsibilities were segregated, and documented information was maintained. To avoid delays, the company gathered all necessary documentation in advance to provide evidence that procedures were in place and effective.

Following the successful completion of the Stage 1 audit, which focused on verifying the design of the management system, the Stage 2 audit was conducted to examine the implementation and effectiveness of the information security and quality management systems.

One of the auditors, Megan, was a previous employee of the company. To uphold the integrity of the certification process, the company notified the certification body about the potential conflict of interest and requested an auditor change. Subsequently, the certification body selected a replacement, ensuring impartiality. Additionally, the company requested a background check of the audit team members; however, the certification body denied this request. The necessary adjustments to the audit plan were made, and transparent communication with stakeholders was maintained.

The audit process continued seamlessly under the new auditor’s guidance. Upon audit completion, the certification body evaluated the results and conclusions of the audit and CircuitLinking's public information and awarded CircuitLinking the combined certification.

A recertification audit for CircuitLinking was conducted to verify that the company's management system continued to meet the required standards and remained effective within the defined scope of certification. CircuitLinking had implemented significant changes to its management system, including a major overhaul of its information security processes, the adoption of new technology platforms, and adjustments to comply with recent changes in industry legislation. Due to these substantial updates, the recertification audit required a Stage 1 assessment to evaluate the impact of these changes.

According to Scenario 10, the certification body evaluated the results and conclusions of the audit and CircuitLinking’s public information when making the certification decision. Is this acceptable?