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

Scenario 7

Lawsy is a leading law firm with offices in Bangkok, Thailand. It has over 50 attorneys offering sophisticated legal services to clients in business and commercial law, intellectual property, banking, and financial services. They believe they have a comfortable position in the market thanks to their commitment to implementing information security best practices and remaining up to date with technological developments.

Lawsy has rigorously implemented, evaluated, and conducted internal audits for the information security management system (ISMS) for two years. Now, they have applied for ISO/IEC 27001 certification at ISMA, a well-known and trusted certification body.

During the stage 1 audit, the audit team reviewed all the ISMS documents created during the implementation phase. They also reviewed and evaluated the records from management reviews and internal audits. Lawsy submitted records of evidence that corrective actions on nonconformities were performed when necessary, so the audit team interviewed the internal auditor. The interview validated the adequacy and frequency of the internal audits by providing insight into the internal audit plan and procedures.

The audit team continued verifying strategic documents, including the information security policy and risk evaluation criteria. During the information security policy review, the team noticed inconsistencies between the documented information describing the governance framework and the procedures. Following the completion of stage 1, the audit team leader prepared the audit plan, which addressed the audit objectives, scope, criteria, and procedures.

During the stage 2 audit, the audit team interviewed the information security manager, who drafted the information security policy. He justified the issue identified in stage 1 by stating that Lawsy conducts mandatory information security training and awareness sessions every three months.

Later, the audit team found that Lawsy did not have procedures for using laptops outside the workplace, even though employees were allowed to take laptops outside the workplace. The company only provided general information about the use of laptops and relied on employees’ common knowledge to protect the confidentiality and integrity of information stored on the laptops.

Following the interview, the audit team examined 15 employee training records (out of 50) and concluded that Lawsy meets the requirements of ISO/IEC 27001 related to training and awareness. To support this conclusion, the auditor photocopied and archived the examined employee training records after completing the audit.

Question

During the audit, the team reviewed a sample of training records from 15 out of 50 employees. What does this situation represent? Refer to the scenario.

After conducting an external audit, the auditor decided that the internal auditor would follow-up on the implementation of corrective actions until the next surveillance audit. Is this acceptable?

Scenario 8

Trustingo has been providing banking and financial services in Estonia since 2010. The company has a network of 30 branches with over 100 ATMs nationwide. To meet strict data security and privacy regulations, Trustingo implemented an information security management system (ISMS) based on ISO/IEC 27001, ensuring better security, improved risk management, and compliance with legal requirements.

Nine months after the successful implementation of the ISMS, Trustingo decided to pursue certification for their ISMS based on ISO/IEC 27001 by an independent certification body. The certification audit included Trustingo's systems, processes, and technologies.

The audit team conducted the Stage 1 and Stage 2 audits jointly, and several nonconformities were detected. The first nonconformity was related to Trustingo's labeling of information. The company had an information classification scheme but no information labeling procedure. As a result, documents requiring the same level of protection would be labeled differently.

The nonconformity also impacted media handling. The audit team used sampling and concluded that 50 of 200 removable media stored sensitive information mistakenly classified as confidential. According to the information classification scheme, confidential information can be stored in removable media, whereas storing sensitive information is strictly prohibited.

The audit team drafted the nonconformity report and discussed the audit conclusions with Trustingo's representatives, who agreed to submit an action plan for the detected nonconformities within two months. Since the certification recommendation is conditional upon filing corrective actions, Trustingo must submit corrective action plans to show how they will address and resolve these nonconformities. Trustingo accepted the audit team leader's proposed solution and addressed the nonconformities by drafting an information labeling procedure and updating the removable media procedure.

Two weeks after the audit completion, Trustingo submitted a general action plan. Although the plan addressed the detected nonconformities and corrective actions taken, it lacked detailed action steps for each nonconformity and did not include specific details on the impacted systems, controls, or operations. The audit team evaluated the action plan. Nevertheless, Trustingo received an unfavorable recommendation for certification.

Question

Which option justifies the unfavorable recommendation for certification? Refer to Scenario 8.