Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

PECB Exam ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Topic 7 Question 42 Discussion

Actual exam question for PECB's ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor exam
Question #: 42
Topic #: 7
[All ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Questions]

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, the ISMS project manager approved the results of risk assessment. Is this acceptable?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: G

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.


Contribute your Thoughts:

Dana
6 days ago
The ISMS project manager approving the risk assessment results seems a bit sketchy to me. Shouldn't the top management have the final say on the risk levels? I mean, they're the ones who set the tone at the top, right?
upvoted 0 times
...
Lezlie
10 days ago
But the ISMS project manager is responsible for the project, so it makes sense for them to approve it.
upvoted 0 times
...
Annamae
10 days ago
I disagree. The top management should be the one approving the risk remaining after the treatment of risk.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lezlie
16 days ago
I think the ISMS project manager should approve the risk assessment results.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel