ISO-IEC-27001-LEAD-AUDITOR practice question 9 of 35

Scenario 4: Branding is a marketing company that works with some of the most famous companies in the US. To reduce internal costs. Branding has…

Full set: 368 questions
Scenario 4: Branding is a marketing company that works with some of the most famous companies in the US. To reduce internal costs. Branding has outsourced the software development and IT helpdesk operations to Techvology for over two years. Techvology. equipped with the necessary expertise, manages Branding's software, network, and hardware needs. Branding has implemented an information security management system (ISMS) and is certified against ISO/IEC 27001, demonstrating its commitment to maintaining high standards of information security. It actively conducts audits on Techvology to ensure that the security of its outsourced operations complies with ISO/IEC 27001 certification requirements. During the last audit. Branding's audit team defined the processes to be audited and the audit schedule. They adopted an evidence based approach, particularly in light of two information security incidents reported by Techvology in the past year The focus was on evaluating how these incidents were addressed and ensuring compliance with the terms of the outsourcing agreement The audit began with a comprehensive review of Techvology's methods for monitoring the quality of outsourced operations, assessing whether the services provided met Branding's expectations and agreed-upon standards The auditors also verified whether Techvology complied with the contractual requirements established between the two entities This involved thoroughly examining the terms and conditions in the outsourcing agreement to guarantee that all aspects, including information security measures, are being adhered to. Furthermore, the audit included a critical evaluation of the governance processes Techvology uses to manage its outsourced operations and other organizations. This step is crucial for Branding to verify that proper controls and oversight mechanisms are in place to mitigate potential risks associated with the outsourcing arrangement. The auditors conducted interviews with various levels of Techvology's personnel and analyzed the incident resolution records. In addition, Techvology provided the records that served as evidence that they conducted awareness sessions for the staff regarding incident management. Based on the information gathered, they predicted that both information security incidents were caused by incompetent personnel. Therefore, auditors requested to see the personnel files of the employees involved in the incidents to review evidence of their competence, such as relevant experience, certificates, and records of attended trainings. Branding's auditors performed a critical evaluation of the validity of the evidence obtained and remained alert for evidence that could contradict or question the reliability of the documented information received. During the audit at Techvology, the auditors upheld this approach by critically assessing the incident resolution records and conducting thorough interviews with employees at different levels and functions. They did not merely take the word of Techvology's representatives for facts; instead, they sought concrete evidence to support the representatives' claims about the incident management processes. Based on the scenario above, answer the following question: According to Scenario 4, what type of audit evidence did the auditors collect to determine the source of the information security incidents?
Answer options
A: Verbal and documentary evidence Correct answer
B: Confirmative and technical evidence
C: Analytical and mathematical evidence
Correct Answer:
A. Verbal and documentary evidence
Explanation

Audit evidence is information used by the auditor to determine whether the auditee's processes conform to the audit criteria. The scenario explicitly states that the auditors "conducted interviews with various levels of Techvology's personnel," which constitutes verbal evidence. It also mentions they "analyzed the incident resolution records," reviewed "personnel files," and were provided with "records that served as evidence that they conducted awareness sessions." These records, files, and documents are all forms of documentary evidence. Therefore, the auditors collected both verbal and documentary evidence.

Why Incorrect

B. "Confirmative evidence" is not a standard classification in auditing guidelines like ISO 19011. While technical evidence might have been reviewed, the scenario explicitly confirms verbal evidence was collected.
C. The scenario does not describe the auditors performing calculations, comparisons, or trend analysis, which are characteristic of analytical evidence. Their work was based on inquiry and document review.

References

1. ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems, Clause 6.4.5, outlines methods for collecting information, including interviews (verbal evidence) and review of documents (documentary evidence).

2. ISO/IEC 27007:2020, Guidelines for auditing information security management systems, Clause 6.4.5, also specifies interviews and document review as primary methods for collecting and verifying information during an ISMS audit.

3. Von Solms, R., & Von Solms, B. (2009). Information Security Governance. Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-79984-1. Chapter 6 discusses the audit process, where evidence gathering through interviews and inspection of records is a fundamental activity to verify the implementation and effectiveness of controls.

Scroll to Top