[Aug 02, 2026] New Updated ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Exam Questions 2026 [Q148-Q168]

NO.148 There is a scheduled fire drill in your facility. What should you do?

Participate in the drill

Excuse yourself by saying you have an urgent deliverable

Call in sick

None of the above

NO.149 You are performing an ISMS initial certification audit at a residential nursing home that provides healthcare services. The next step in your audit plan is to conduct the closing meeting. During the final audit team meeting, as an audit team leader, you agree to report 2 minor nonconformities and 1 opportunity for improvement as below:

Select one option of the recommendation to the audit programme manager you are going to advise to the auditee at the closing meeting.

Recommend certification immediately

Recommend that a full scope re-audit is required within 6 months

Recommend that an unannounced audit is carried out at a future date

Recommend certification after your approval of the proposed corrective action plan Recommend that the findings can be closed out at a surveillance audit in 1 year

Recommend that a partial audit is required within 3 months

According to ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015, which specifies the requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems, clause 9.4.9 requires the certification body to make a certification decision based on the information obtained during the audit and any other relevant information1. The certification body should also consider the effectiveness of the corrective actions taken by the auditee to address any nonconformities identified during the audit1. Therefore, when making a recommendation to the audit programme manager, an ISMS auditor should consider the nature and severity of the nonconformities and the proposed corrective actions.
Based on the scenario above, the auditor should recommend certification after their approval of the proposed corrective action plan and recommend that the findings can be closed out at a surveillance audit in 1 year. The auditor should provide the following justification for their recommendation:
* Justification: This recommendation is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditee has only two minor nonconformities and one opportunity for improvement, which do not indicate a significant or systemic failure of their ISMS. A minor nonconformity is defined as a failure to achieve one or more requirements of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 or a situation which raises significant doubt about the ability of an ISMS process to achieve its intended output, but does not affect its overall effectiveness or conformity2. An opportunity for improvement is defined as a suggestion for improvement beyond what is required by ISO/IEC 27001:20222. Therefore, these findings do not prevent or preclude certification, as long as they are addressed by appropriate corrective actions within a reasonable time frame. The auditor should approve the proposed corrective action plan before recommending certification, to ensure that it is realistic, achievable, and effective. The auditor should also recommend that the findings can be closed out at a surveillance audit in 1 year, to verify that the corrective actions have been implemented and are working as intended.
The other options are not valid recommendations for the audit programme manager, as they are either too lenient or too strict for the given scenario. For example:
* Recommend certification immediately: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor ignores or accepts the nonconformities, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO
19011:20182, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:20151, which requires the certification body to consider the effectiveness of the corrective actions taken by the auditee before making a certification decision.
* Recommend that a full scope re-audit is required within 6 months: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor overreacts or exaggerates the nonconformities, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:
20151, which requires the certification body to determine whether a re-audit is necessary based on the nature and extent of nonconformities and other relevant factors. A full scope re-audit is usually reserved for major nonconformities or multiple minor nonconformities that indicate a serious or widespread failure of an ISMS.
* Recommend that an unannounced audit is carried out at a future date: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor distrusts or doubts the auditee’s commitment or capability to implement corrective actions, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:20151, which requires the certification body to conduct unannounced audits only under certain conditions, such as when there are indications of serious problems with an ISMS or when required by sector-specific schemes.
* Recommend that a partial audit is required within 3 months: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor imposes or prescribes a specific time frame or scope for verifying corrective actions, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:20151, which requires the certification body to determine whether a partial audit is necessary based on the nature and extent of nonconformities and other relevant factors.
A partial audit may be appropriate for minor nonconformities, but the time frame and scope should be agreed upon with the auditee and based on the proposed corrective action plan.
References: ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 – Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems – Part 1: Requirements, ISO 19011:2018 – Guidelines for auditing management systems

NO.150 A hacker gains access to a webserver and can view a file on the server containing credit card numbers.
Which of the Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability (CIA) principles of the credit card file are violated?

Availability

Confidentiality

Integrity

Compliance

NO.151 Which one of the following conclusions in the audit report is not required by the certification body when deciding to grant certification?

The corrections taken by the organisation related to major nonconformities have been accepted.

The organisation fully complies with all legal and other requirements applicable to the Information Security Management System.

The plans to address corrective actions related to minor nonconformities have been accepted

The scope of certification has been fulfilled

NO.152 Scenario 3
NightCore, a multinational technology enterprise headquartered in the United States, specializes in e- commerce, cloud computing, digital streaming, and artificial intelligence (AI). After having an information security management system (ISMS) implemented for over a year, NightCore contracted a certification body to perform an audit for ISO/IEC 27001 certification.
The certification body formed a team of five auditors, with Jack as a team leader. Jack is renowned for his extensive auditing experience in risk management, information security controls, and incident management.
His skill set aligns well with the requirements of auditing principles and processes, enabling him to effectively comprehend the audit scope and apply relevant criteria effectively. Jack also demonstrates a solid understanding of NightCore’s organizational structure, purpose, and management practices and the statutory and regulatory requirements applicable to its activities.
The audit carried out by the audit team followed a rational method to reach reliable and reproducible conclusions systematically. The audit team recognized that only information capable of being verified to some extent should be considered valid evidence. In some rare instances during the audit where the verification of certain information posed challenges and where its degree of verifiability was low, the auditors exercised their professional judgment to assess the reliability and determine the level of reliance that could be placed on such evidence.
During the audit, the auditors documented their observations and inspection notes regarding the operational planning and control of NightCore’s ISMS operations. They also recorded observations of NightCore’s inventory of information and associated assets. Additionally, the auditors reviewed the configuration of firewalls implemented to secure connections to network services.
As the audit approached its final stages, NightCore’s commitment to upholding the highest levels of information security became evident. With ISO/IEC 27001 certification within reach, NightCore is well- positioned to achieve ISO/IEC 27001 certification, enhancing its reputation in the technology sector.
Question
During the audit at NightCore, the auditors focused on key areas of ISMS operations, including operational planning, asset inventory, and firewall configurations. What type of evidence did the auditors collect during the audit conducted at NightCore?

Analytical and documentary evidence

Physical and technical evidence

Mathematical evidence

NO.153 Scenario 8: Tess
a. Malik, and Michael are an audit team of independent and qualified experts in the field of security, compliance, and business planning and strategies. They are assigned to conduct a certification audit in Clastus, a large web design company. They have previously shown excellent work ethics, including impartiality and objectiveness, while conducting audits. This time, Clastus is positive that they will be one step ahead if they get certified against ISO/IEC 27001.
Tessa, the audit team leader, has expertise in auditing and a very successful background in IT-related issues, compliance, and governance. Malik has an organizational planning and risk management background. His expertise relies on the level of synthesis and analysis of an organization’s security controls and its risk tolerance in accurately characterizing the risk level within an organization On the other hand, Michael is an expert in the practical security of controls assessment by following rigorous standardized programs.
After performing the required auditing activities, Tessa initiated an audit team meeting They analyzed one of Michael s findings to decide on the issue objectively and accurately. The issue Michael had encountered was a minor nonconformity in the organization’s daily operations, which he believed was caused by one of the organization’s IT technicians As such, Tessa met with the top management and told them who was responsible for the nonconformity after they inquired about the names of the persons responsible To facilitate clarity and understanding, Tessa conducted the closing meeting on the last day of the audit. During this meeting, she presented the identified nonconformities to the Clastus management. However, Tessa received advice to avoid providing unnecessary evidence in the audit report for the Clastus certification audit, ensuring that the report remains concise and focused on the critical findings.
Based on the evidence examined, the audit team drafted the audit conclusions and decided that two areas of the organization must be audited before the certification can be granted. These decisions were later presented to the auditee, who did not accept the findings and proposed to provide additional information. Despite the auditee’s comments, the auditors, having already decided on the certification recommendation, did not accept the additional information. The auditee’s top management insisted that the audit conclusions did not represent reality, but the audit team remained firm in their decision.
Based on the scenario above, answer the following question:
Based on the decision of the audit team, what is the next step that Clastus should take?

Submit action plans

Evaluate corrective actions

Perform a follow-up of action plans

NO.154 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 mis-addressed labels and, in 15% of company 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?
SH: 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. Referencing the scenario, which six of the following Appendix A controls would you expect the auditee to have implemented when you conduct the follow-up audit?

5.11 Return of assets

8.12 Data leakage protection

5.3 Segregation of duties

6.3 Information security awareness, education, and training

7.10 Storage media

8.3 Information access restriction

5.6 Contact with special interest groups

6.4 Disciplinary process

7.4 Physical security monitoring

5.13 Labelling of information

5.32 Intellectual property rights

Explanation
* B. 8.12 Data leakage protection. This is true because the auditee should have implemented measures to prevent unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information, such as personal data, medical records, or official documents, that are contained in the parcels. Data leakage protection could include encryption, authentication, access control, logging, and monitoring of data transfers12.
* D. 6.3 Information security awareness, education, and training. This is true because the auditee should have ensured that all employees and contractors involved in the shipping process are aware of the information security policies and procedures, and have received appropriate training on how to handle and protect the information assets in their custody. Information security awareness, education, and training could include induction programmes, periodic refreshers, awareness campaigns, e-learning modules, and feedback mechanisms13.
* E. 7.10 Storage media. This is true because the auditee should have implemented controls to protect the storage media that contain information assets from unauthorized access, misuse, theft, loss, or damage. Storage media could include paper documents, optical disks, magnetic tapes, flash drives, or hard disks14. Storage media controls could include physical locks, encryption, backup, disposal, or destruction14.
* F. 8.3 Information access restriction. This is true because the auditee should have implemented controls to restrict access to information assets based on the principle of least privilege and the need-to-know basis. Information access restriction could include identification, authentication, authorization, accountability, and auditability of users and systems that access information assets15.
* I. 7.4 Physical security monitoring. This is true because the auditee should have implemented controls to monitor the physical security of the premises where information assets are stored or processed. Physical security monitoring could include CCTV cameras, alarms, sensors, guards, or patrols16. Physical security monitoring could help detect and deter unauthorized physical access or intrusion attempts16.
* J. 5.13 Labelling of information. This is true because the auditee should have implemented controls to label information assets according to their classification level and handling instructions. Labelling of information could include markings, tags, stamps, stickers, or barcodes1 . Labelling of information could help identify and protect information assets from unauthorized disclosure or misuse1 .
References :=
* ISO/IEC 27002:2022 Information technology – Security techniques – Code of practice for information security controls
* ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Requirements
* ISO/IEC 27003:2022 Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Guidance
* ISO/IEC 27004:2022 Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Monitoring measurement analysis and evaluation
* ISO/IEC 27005:2022 Information technology – Security techniques – Information security risk management
* ISO/IEC 27006:2022 Information technology – Security techniques – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of information security management systems
* [ISO/IEC 27007:2022 Information technology – Security techniques – Guidelines for information security management systems auditing]

NO.155 What is a definition of compliance?

Laws, considered collectively or the process of making or enacting laws

The state or fact of according with or meeting rules or standards

An official or authoritative instruction

A rule or directive made and maintained by an authority.

NO.156 You are the lead auditor of the courier company SpeeDelivery. You have carried out a risk analysis and now want to determine your risk strategy. You decide to take measures for the large risks but not for the small risks.
What is this risk strategy called?

Risk bearing

Risk avoidance

Risk neutral

Risk skipping

NO.157 Select the words that best complete the sentence:
To complete the sentence with the best word(s), click on the blank section you want to complete so that it is highlighted in red, and then click on the applicable text from the options below. Alternatively, you may drag and drop the option to the appropriate blank section.

NO.158 Select the words that best complete the sentence:

NO.159 Which one of the following options best describes the main purpose of a Stage 2 third-party audit?

To identify nonconformances against a standard

To get to know the organisation’s management system

To determine readiness for certification

To check for legal compliance by the organisation

NO.160 Scenario 2: Knight is an electronics company from Northern California, US that develops video game consoles. Knight has more than 300 employees worldwide. On the fifth anniversary of their establishment, they have decided to deliver the G-Console, a new generation video game console aimed for worldwide markets. G-Console is considered to be the ultimate media machine of 2021 which will give the best gaming experience to players. The console pack will include a pair of VR headset, two games, and other gifts.
Over the years, the company has developed a good reputation by showing integrity, honesty, and respect toward their customers. This good reputation is one of the reasons why most passionate gamers aim to have Knight’s G-console as soon as it is released in the market. Besides being a very customer-oriented company, Knight also gained wide recognition within the gaming industry because of the developing quality. Their prices are a bit higher than the reasonable standards allow.
Nonetheless, that is not considered an issue for most loyal customers of Knight, as their quality is top-notch.
Being one of the top video game console developers in the world, Knight is also often the center of attention for malicious activities. The company has had an operational ISMS for over a year. The ISMS scope includes all departments of Knight, except Finance and HR departments.
Recently, a number of Knight’s files containing proprietary information were leaked by hackers. Knight’s incident response team (IRT) immediately started to analyze every part of the system and the details of the incident.
The IRT’s first suspicion was that Knight’s employees used weak passwords and consequently were easily cracked by hackers who gained unauthorized access to their accounts. However, after carefully investigating the incident, the IRT determined that hackers accessed accounts by capturing the file transfer protocol (FTP) traffic.
FTP is a network protocol for transferring files between accounts. It uses clear text passwords for authentication.
Following the impact of this information security incident and with IRT’s suggestion, Knight decided to replace the FTP with Secure Shell (SSH) protocol, so anyone capturing the traffic can only see encrypted data.
Following these changes, Knight conducted a risk assessment to verify that the implementation of controls had minimized the risk of similar incidents. The results of the process were approved by the ISMS project manager who claimed that the level of risk after the implementation of new controls was in accordance with the company’s risk acceptance levels.
Based on this scenario, answer the following question:
Based on scenario 2, Knight decided to replace the FTP with Secure Shell (SSH) protocol. Should the Statement of Applicability (SoA) be updated in this case?

No, the usage of SSH protocol is not an ISO/IEC 27001 requirement and; therefore, does not need to be included in the SoA

No, because the SoA should be updated only when new controls are added, not when old ones are canceled

Yes, the implementation of the new control should be justified and included in the SoA

NO.161 Which one option best describes the purpose of retaining documented information related to the Information Security Management System (ISMS) of an organisation?

To ensure that all workers will follow the established procedure.

To show compliance with legal requirements.

To show objective evidence to third-party auditors.

To the extent necessary, to have confidence that the processes have been carried out as planned.

NO.162 You are an experienced ISMS audit team leader, talking to an Auditor in training who has been assigned to your audit team. You want to ensure that they understand the importance of the Check stage of the Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle in respect of the operation of the information security management system.
You do this by asking him to select the words that best complete the sentence:
To complete the sentence with the best word(s), click on the blank section you want to complete so that it is highlighted in red, and then click on the applicable text from the options below. Alternatively, you may drag and drop the option to the appropriate blank section.

NO.163 Scenario 2:
Clinic, founded in the 1990s, is a medical device company that specializes in treatments for heart-related conditions and complex surgical interventions. Based in Europe, it serves both patients and healthcare professionals. Clinic collects patient data to tailor treatments, monitor outcomes, and improve device functionality. To enhance data security and build trust, Clinic is implementing an information security management system (ISMS) based on ISO/IEC 27001. This initiative demonstrates Clinic’s commitment to securely managing sensitive patient information and proprietary technologies.
Clinic established the scope of its ISMS by solely considering internal issues, interfaces, dependencies between internal and outsourced activities, and the expectations of interested parties. This scope was carefully documented and made accessible. In defining its ISMS, Clinic chose to focus specifically on key processes within critical departments such as Research and Development, Patient Data Management, and Customer Support.
Despite initial challenges, Clinic remained committed to its ISMS implementation, tailoring security controls to its unique needs. The project team excluded certain Annex A controls from ISO/IEC 27001 while incorporating additional sector-specific controls to enhance security. The team evaluated the applicability of these controls against internal and external factors, culminating in the development of a comprehensive Statement of Applicability (SoA) detailing the rationale behind control selection and implementation.
As preparations for certification progressed, Brian, appointed as the team leader, adopted a self-directed risk assessment methodology to identify and evaluate the company’s strategic issues and security practices. This proactive approach ensured that Clinic’s risk assessment aligned with its objectives and mission.
Question:
According to Scenario 2, was the scope of Clinic’s ISMS determined correctly?

No, Clinic should have also considered external issues

Yes, the scope of Clinic’s ISMS was determined correctly

No, Clinic should have also included exclusions along with justifications for them as part of its ISMS scope

NO.164 You are carrying out your first third-party ISMS surveillance audit as an Audit Team Leader. You are presently in the auditee’s data centre with another member of your audit team.
You are currently in a large room that is subdivided into several smaller rooms, each of which has a numeric combination lock and swipe card reader on the door. You notice two external contractors using a swipe card and combination number provided by the centre’s reception desk to gain access to a client’s suite to carry out authorised electrical repairs.
You go to reception and ask to see the door access record for the client’s suite. This indicates only one card was swiped. You ask the receptionist and they reply, “yes it’s a common problem. We ask everyone to swipe their cards but with contractors especially, one tends to swipe and the rest simply ‘tailgate’ their way in” but we know who they are from the reception sign-in.
Based on the scenario above which one of the following actions would you now take?

Take no action. Irrespective of any recommendations, contractors will always act in this way

Raise a nonconformity against control A.5.20 ‘addressing information security in supplier relationships’ as information security requirements have not been agreed upon with the supplier

Raise a nonconformity against control A.7.6 ‘working in secure areas’ as security measures for working in secure areas have not been defined

Determine whether any additional effective arrangements are in place to verify individual access to secure areas e.g. CCTV

Raise an opportunity for improvement that contractors must be accompanied at all times when accessing secure facilities

Raise an opportunity for improvement to have a large sign in reception reminding everyone requiring access must use their swipe card at all times

Raise a nonconformity against control A.7.2 ‘physical entry’ as a secure area is not adequately protected

Tell the organisation they must write to their contractors, reminding them of the need to use access cards appropriately

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS), control A.7.2 requires an organization to implement appropriate physical entry controls to prevent unauthorized access to secure areas1. The organization should define and document the criteria for granting and revoking access rights to secure areas, and should monitor and record the use of such access rights1. Therefore, when auditing the organization’s application of control A.7.2, an ISMS auditor should verify that these aspects are met in accordance with the audit criteria.
Based on the scenario above, the auditor should raise a nonconformity against control A.7.2, as the secure area is not adequately protected from unauthorized access. The auditor should provide the following evidence and justification for the nonconformity:
Evidence: The auditor observed two external contractors using a swipe card and combination number provided by the centre’s reception desk to gain access to a client’s suite to carry out authorized electrical repairs. The auditor checked the door access record for the client’s suite and found that only one card was swiped. The auditor asked the receptionist and was told that it was a common problem that contractors tend to swipe one card and tailgate their way in, but they were known from the reception sign-in.
Justification: This evidence indicates that the organization has not implemented appropriate physical entry controls to prevent unauthorized access to secure areas, as required by control A.7.2. The organization has not defined and documented the criteria for granting and revoking access rights to secure areas, as there is no verification or authorization process for providing swipe cards and combination numbers to external contractors. The organization has not monitored and recorded the use of access rights to secure areas, as there is no mechanism to ensure that each individual swipes their card and enters their combination number before entering a secure area. The organization has relied on the reception sign-in as a means of identification, which is not sufficient or reliable for ensuring information security.
The other options are not valid actions for auditing control A.7.2, as they are not related to the control or its requirements, or they are not appropriate or effective for addressing the nonconformity. For example:
Take no action: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor ignores or accepts the nonconformity, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems.
Raise a nonconformity against control A.5.20 ‘addressing information security in supplier relationships’ as information security requirements have not been agreed upon with the supplier: This option is not valid because it does not address the root cause of the nonconformity, which is related to physical entry controls, not supplier relationships. Control A.5.20 requires an organization to agree on information security requirements with suppliers that may access, process, store, communicate or provide IT infrastructure components for its information assets1. While this control may be relevant for ensuring information security in supplier relationships, it does not address the issue of unauthorized access to secure areas by external contractors.
Raise a nonconformity against control A.7.6 ‘working in secure areas’ as security measures for working in secure areas have not been defined: This option is not valid because it does not address the root cause of the nonconformity, which is related to physical entry controls, not working in secure areas. Control
A.7.6 requires an organization to define and apply security measures for working in secure areas1.
While this control may be relevant for ensuring information security when working in secure areas, it does not address the issue of unauthorized access to secure areas by external contractors.
Determine whether any additional effective arrangements are in place to verify individual access to secure areas e.g. CCTV: This option is not valid because it does not address or resolve the nonconformity, but rather attempts to find alternative or compensating controls that may mitigate its impact or likelihood. While additional arrangements such as CCTV may be useful for verifying individual access to secure areas, they do not replace or substitute the requirement for appropriate physical entry controls as specified by control A.7.2.
Raise an opportunity for improvement that contractors must be accompanied at all times when accessing secure facilities: This option is not valid because it does not address or resolve the nonconformity, but rather suggests a possible improvement action that may prevent or reduce its recurrence or severity.
While accompanying contractors at all times when accessing secure facilities may be a good practice for ensuring information security, it does not replace or substitute the requirement for appropriate physical entry controls as specified by control A.7.2.
Raise an opportunity for improvement to have a large sign in reception reminding everyone requiring access must use their swipe card at all times: This option is not valid because it does not address or resolve the nonconformity, but rather suggests a possible improvement action that may increase awareness or compliance with the existing controls. While having a large sign in reception reminding everyone requiring access must use their swipe card at all times may be a helpful reminder for ensuring information security, it does not replace or substitute the requirement for appropriate physical entry controls as specified by control A.7.2.
Tell the organisation they must write to their contractors, reminding them of the need to use access cards appropriately: This option is not valid because it does not address or resolve the nonconformity, but rather instructs the organization to take a corrective action that may not be effective or sufficient for ensuring information security. While writing to contractors, reminding them of the need to use access cards appropriately may be a communication measure for ensuring information security, it does not replace or substitute the requirement for appropriate physical entry controls as specified by control
A.7.2.
References: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 – Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Requirements, ISO 19011:2018 – Guidelines for auditing management systems

NO.165 Scenario 4: SendPay is a financial company that provides its services through a network of agents and financial institutions. One of their main services is transferring money worldwide. SendPay, as a new company, seeks to offer top quality services to its clients. Since the company offers international transactions, it requires from their clients to provide personal information, such as their identity, the reason for the transactions, and other details that might be needed to complete the transaction. Therefore, SendPay has implemented security measures to protect their clients’ information, including detecting, investigating, and responding to any information security threats that may emerge. Their commitment to offering secure services was also reflected during the ISMS implementation where the company invested a lot of time and resources.
Last year, SendPay unveiled their digital platform that allows money transactions through electronic devices, such as smartphones or laptops, without requiring an additional fee. Through this platform, SendPay’s clients can send and receive money from anywhere and at any time. The digital platform helped SendPay to simplify the company’s operations and further expand its business. At the time, SendPay was outsourcing its software operations, hence the project was completed by the software development team of the outsourced company. The same team was also responsible for maintaining the technology infrastructure of SendPay.
Recently, the company applied for ISO/IEC 27001 certification after having an ISMS in place for almost a year. They contracted a certification body that fit their criteri a. Soon after, the certification body appointed a team of four auditors to audit SendPay’s ISMS.
During the audit, among others, the following situations were observed:
1. The outsourced software company had terminated the contract with SendPay without prior notice. As a result, SendPay was unable to immediately bring the services back in-house and its operations were disrupted for five days. The auditors requested from SendPay’s representatives to provide evidence that they have a plan to follow in cases of contract terminations. The representatives did not provide any documentary evidence but during an interview, they told the auditors that the top management of SendPay had identified two other software development companies that could provide services immediately if similar situations happen again.
2. There was no evidence available regarding the monitoring of the activities that were outsourced to the software development company. Once again, the representatives of SendPay told the auditors that they regularly communicate with the software development company and that they are appropriately informed for any possible change that might occur.
3. There was no nonconformity found during the firewall testing. The auditors tested the firewall configuration in order to determine the level of security provided by these services. They used a packet analyzer to test the firewall policies which enabled them to check the packets sent or received in real-time.
Based on this scenario, answer the following question:
Regarding the third situation observed, auditors themselves tested the configuration of firewalls implemented in SendPay’s network. How do you describe this situation? Refer to scenario 4.

Acceptable, technical evidence is required to validate the operation of technical processes

Unacceptable, the auditors should only observe the testing of system or equipment configurations and not test the system themselves

Unacceptable, firewall configurations should not be tested during an audit since this can have an impact systems’ operation

NO.166 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?

Verbal and documentary evidence

Confirmative and technical evidence

Analytical and mathematical evidence

NO.167 You are an experienced audit team leader guiding an auditor in training.
Your team is currently conducting a third-party surveillance audit of an organisation that stores data on behalf of external clients. The auditor in training has been tasked with reviewing the PEOPLE controls listed in the Statement of Applicability (SoA) and mplemented at the site.
Select four controls from the following that would you expect the auditor in training to review.

Confidentiality and nondisclosure agreements

How protection against malware is implemented

Information security awareness, education and training

Remote working arrangements

The conducting of verification checks on personnel

The operation of the site CCTV and door control systems

The organisation’s arrangements for information deletion

The organisation’s business continuity arrangements

Explanation
The PEOPLE controls are related to the human aspects of information security, such as roles and responsibilities, awareness and training, screening and contracts, and remote working. The auditor in training should review the following controls:
Confidentiality and nondisclosure agreements (A): These are contractual obligations that bind the employees and contractors of the organisation to protect the confidentiality of the information they handle, especially the data of external clients. The auditor should check if these agreements are signed, updated, and enforced by the organisation. This control is related to clause A.7.2.1 of ISO/IEC
27001:2022.
Information security awareness, education and training : These are activities that aim to enhance the knowledge, skills, and behaviour of the employees and contractors regarding information security. The auditor should check if these activities are planned, implemented, evaluated, and improved by the organisation. This control is related to clause A.7.2.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022.
Remote working arrangements (D): These are policies and procedures that govern the information security aspects of working from locations other than the organisation’s premises, such as home or public places. The auditor should check if these arrangements are defined, approved, and monitored by the organisation. This control is related to clause A.6.2.1 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022.
The conducting of verification checks on personnel (E): These are background checks that verify the identity, qualifications, and suitability of the employees and contractors who have access to sensitive information or systems. The auditor should check if these checks are conducted, documented, and reviewed by the organisation. This control is related to clause A.7.1.1 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022.
References:
ISO/IEC 27001:2022, Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Requirements PECB Candidate Handbook ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, 1 ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor – IECB, 2 ISO 27001:2022 certified ISMS lead auditor – Jisc, 3 ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Transition Training Course, 4 ISO 27001 – Information Security Lead Auditor Course – PwC Training Academy, 5

NO.168 Information has a number of reliability aspects. Reliability is constantly being threatened. Examples of threats are: a cable becomes loose, someone alters information by accident, data is used privately or is falsified.
Which of these examples is a threat to integrity?

a loose cable

accidental alteration of data

private use of data

System restart

[Aug 02, 2026] New Updated ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Exam Questions 2026 [Q148-Q168]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply