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

The following options are key actions involved in a first-party audit. Order the stages to show the sequence in which the actions should take place.

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.

Scenario 3: NightCore is a multinational technology company based in the United States that focuses on e-commerce, cloud computing, digital streaming, and artificial intelligence. After having an information security management system (ISMS) implemented for over 8 months, they contracted a certification body to conduct a third party audit in order to get certified against ISO/IEC 27001.

The certification body set up a team of seven auditors. Jack, the most experienced auditor, was assigned as the audit team leader. Over the years, he received many well known certifications, such as the ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, CISA, CISSP, and CISM.

Jack conducted thorough analyses on each phase of the ISMS audit, by studying and evaluating every information security requirement and control that was implemented by NightCore. During stage 2 audit. Jack detected several nonconformities. After comparing the number of purchased invoices for software licenses with the software inventory, Jack found out that the company has been using the illegal versions of a software for many computers. He decided to ask for an explanation from the top management about this nonconformity and see whether they were aware about this. His next step was to audit NightCore's IT Department. The top management assigned Tom, NightCore's system administrator, to act as a guide and accompany Jack and the audit team toward the inner workings of their system and their digital assets infrastructure.

While interviewing a member of the Department of Finance, the auditors discovered that the company had recently made some unusual large transactions to one of their consultants. After gathering all the necessary details regarding the transactions. Jack decided to directly interview the top management.

When discussing about the first nonconformity, the top management told Jack that they willingly decided to use a copied software over the original one since it was cheaper. Jack explained to the top management of NightCore that using illegal versions of software is against the requirements of ISO/IEC 27001 and the national laws and regulations. However, they seemed to be fine with it.

Several months after the audit, Jack sold some of NightCore's information that he collected during the audit for a huge amount of money to competitors of NightCore.

Based on this scenario, answer the following question:

Based on audit principles, should Jack contact the certification body regarding the second nonconformity? Refer to scenario 3.