The three audit findings that would prompt you to raise a nonconformity report are:
*The organisation is treating information security risks in the order in which they are identified
*The organisation's risk assessment criteria have not been reviewed and approved by top management
*The organisation's information security risk assessment process is based solely on an assessment of the impact of each risk According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1.2, the organisation must establish and maintain an information security risk management process that is consistent with the organisation's context and aligned with its overall risk management approach1. This process must include the following steps:
*Establishing the risk assessment criteria, which must be approved by top management and reflect the organisation's risk appetite and objectives2
*Identifying the information security risks, which must consider the assets, threats, vulnerabilities, impacts, and likelihoods3
*Analysing the information security risks, which must determine the levels of risk and compare them with the risk criteria4
*Evaluating the information security risks, which must prioritise the risks and decide whether they need treatment or not5 Therefore, the audit findings B, E, and F indicate that the organisation is not following the required steps of the information security risk management process, and thus are nonconformities with the standard.
The other audit findings are not necessarily nonconformities, as they may be acceptable depending on the organisation's context and justification. For example:
*Audit finding A may be acceptable if the organisation has identified and treated the additional information security risks that are relevant to its scope and objectives, and has documented the rationale for doing so6
*Audit finding C may be acceptable if the organisation has assigned clear roles and responsibilities for the information security risk management process, and has ensured that the risk owners have the authority and competence to manage the risks7
*Audit finding D may be acceptable if the organisation has defined and communicated the meaning and implications of the emoji-based risk classification, and has ensured that it is consistent with the risk criteria and the risk treatment process8
*Audit finding G may be acceptable if the organisation has justified the use of discrete values for the probability of the information security risks, and has ensured that they are realistic and consistent with the risk criteria and the risk analysis method9
*Audit finding H may be acceptable if the organisation has established and maintained different systems for assessing operational and strategic information security risks, and has ensured that they are integrated and aligned with the overall risk management approach and the ISMS objectives10 References: 1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2; 2: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 a); 3: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 b); 4: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 c); 5: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 d); 6: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, A.0.2; 7: ISO
/IEC 27001:2022, 5.3; 8: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 a) 2); 9: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 c) 2); 10: ISO/IEC
27001:2022, 6.1.2 a) 1); : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC
27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; :
ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022

According to ISO 27001:2022 Annex A Control 8.30, the organisation shall ensure that externally provided processes, products or services that are relevant to the information security management system are controlled. This includes developing and entering into licensing agreements that cover code ownership and intellectual property rights, and implementing appropriate contractual requirements related to secure design and coding in accordance with Annex A 8.25 and 8.2912 In this case, the organisation and the developer have performed security tests that failed, which indicates that the secure design and coding requirements of Annex A 8.29 were not met. The IT Manager explains that the encryption and pseudonymization functions failed because they slowed down the system and service performance, and that an extra 150% of resources are needed to cover this. However, this does not justify the acceptance of the test results by the Service Manager, who is not authorised to approve the test according to the software security management procedure. The Service Manager should have consulted with the IT Manager, who is the owner of the process, and followed the procedure for handling nonconformities and corrective actions. The Service Manager's decision to continue the service based on access control alone exposes the organisation to the risk of compromising the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of personal data processed by the mobile app. Therefore, there is a nonconformity (NC) with clause 8.1, control A.8.30.
According to ISO 27001:2022 Clause 8.1, the organisation shall plan, implement and control the processes needed to meet information security requirements, and to implement the actions determined in Clause
6.1. The organisation shall also control planned changes and review the consequences of unintended changes, taking action to mitigate any adverse effects, as necessary12 In this case, the organisation has not controlled the planned change of the mobile app from version 1.0 to version 1.01, which was a minor update provided by the outsourced developer in response to frequent ransomware attacks. The IT Manager explains that the developer performed an emergency release of the updated software, and gave a verbal guarantee that there will be no impact on any security functions.
However, this is not sufficient to ensure that the change is properly assessed, tested, documented, and approved before deployment. The IT Manager should have followed the change management process and procedure, and verified that the updated software meets the security requirements and does not introduce any new vulnerabilities or risks. The IT Manager's reliance on his 20 years of information security experience and the developer's verbal guarantee is not a valid basis for skipping the re-testing of the software. Therefore, there is a nonconformity (NC) with clause 8.1.
References:
1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) Course by CQI and IRCA Certified Training 1 2: ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Training Course by PECB 2

Lawsy's lack of specific procedures for the use of laptops outside the workplace, despite allowing such use, represents a nonconformity. ISO/IEC 27001 requires that security controls and management processes be clearly defined, documented, and implemented. Relying solely on employees' common knowledge does not fulfill the standard's requirements for managing information security risks associated with mobile and teleworking.
References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Clause A.6.2 (Mobile device and teleworking management)

Yes, it is acceptable for the internal auditor to follow-up on the implementation of corrective actions until verified by the external auditor during the next surveillance audit. This practice supports continuous improvement and ensures that corrective actions are effectively implemented and maintained over time.
References: PECB ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Course Material; ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Clause 9.2 (Internal audit)

The correct response is A, because grading criteria provide a common basis for the evaluation of nonconformities across the organization. Grading criteria are the rules or standards that define the severity or impact of nonconformities, and help to determine the appropriate corrective actions and follow-up activities.
Grading criteria are important for several reasons, such as:
* They ensure consistency and objectivity in the assessment and reporting of nonconformities, and avoid subjective or arbitrary judgments.
* They facilitate the communication and understanding of nonconformities among the auditors, the auditees, and the audit clients, and enable the comparison and benchmarking of nonconformities across different processes, functions, or locations.
* They support the prioritization and allocation of resources for the resolution of nonconformities, and the monitoring and measurement of the effectiveness of the corrective actions.
* They demonstrate the commitment and accountability of the organization to the continual improvement of the ISMS, and the compliance with the ISMS requirements and expectations.
References:
* ISO/IEC 27001:2022, Information technology - Security techniques - Information security management systems - Requirements1
* PECB Candidate Handbook ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor2
* ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor - PECB3
* ISO 27001:2022 certified ISMS lead auditor - Jisc4
* ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Transition Training Course5
* ISO 27001 - Information Security Lead Auditor Course - PwC Training Academy
* ISO 19011:2022, Guidelines for auditing management systems