Refer to Scenario 4 (FinSecure)
Finsecure is a financial institution based in Finland, providing services to a diverse clientele, encompassing retail banking, corporate banking, wealth management, and digital banking, all tailored to meet the evolving financial needs of individuals and businesses in the region. Recognizing the critical importance of information security in the modern banking landscape, FinSecure has initiated the implementation of an information security management system (ISMS) based on ISO/IEC 27001. To ensure the successful implementation of the ISMS, the top management decided to contract two experts to lead and oversee the ISMS implementation project.
As a primary strategy for implementing the ISMS, the experts chose an approach that emphasizes a swift implementation of the ISMS by initially meeting the minimum requirements of ISO/IEC 27001, followed by continual improvement over time. Additionally, under the guidance of experts, FinSecure opted for a methodological framework, which serves as a structured framework that outlines the high-level stages of the ISMS implementation, the associated activities, and the deliverables without incorporating any specific tools.
The experts conducted a risk assessment, identifying all the supporting assets, which were the most tangible ones. They assessed the potential consequences and likelihood of various risks, determining the level of risks using a methodical approach that involved defining and characterizing the terms and criteria used in the assessment process. These risks were categorized into nonnumerical levels (e g., very low, low. moderate, high, very high). Explanatory notes were thoughtfully crafted to justify assessed values, with the primary goal of enhancing repeatability and reproducibility.
After completing the risk assessment, the experts reviewed a selected number of the security controls from Annex A of ISO/IEC 27001 to determine which ones were applicable to the company's specific context. The decision to implement security controls was justified by the risk assessment results. Based on this review, they drafted the Statement of Applicability (SoA). They focused on treating only the high-risk category particularly addressing unauthorized use of administrator rights and system interruptions due to several hardware failures. To address these issues, they established a new version of the access control policy, implemented controls to manage and control user access, and introduced a control for ICT readiness to ensure business continuity.
Their risk assessment report indicated that if the implemented security controls reduce the risk levels to an acceptable threshold, those risks will be accepted
Question:
Did the experts draft the Statement of Applicability (SoA) in accordance with ISO/IEC 27001?
Which of the following is the most suitable option for presenting raw data in a user-friendly, easy-to-read format?
During an internal audit, it was found that a junior developer had unrestricted write access to the production source code repository and development tools, with no formal access controls in place. What type of security control should have been implemented to manage this risk?
Scenario 9:
OpenTech, headquartered in San Francisco, specializes in information and communication technology (ICT) solutions. Its clientele primarily includes data communication enterprises and network operators. The company's core objective is to enable its clients to transition smoothly into multi-service providers, aligning their operations with the complex demands of the digital landscape.
Recently, Tim, the internal auditor of OpenTech, conducted an internal audit that uncovered nonconformities related to their monitoring procedures and system vulnerabilities. In response to these nonconformities, OpenTech decided to employ a comprehensive problem-solving approach to address the issues systematically. This method encompasses a team-oriented approach, aiming to identify, correct, and eliminate the root causes of the issues. The approach involves several steps: First, establish a group of experts with deep knowledge of processes and controls. Next, break down the nonconformity into measurable components and implement interim containment measures. Then, identify potential root causes and select and verify permanent corrective actions. Finally, put those actions into practice, validate them, take steps to prevent recurrence, and recognize and acknowledge the team's efforts.
Following the analysis of the root causes of the nonconformities, OpenTech's ISMS project manager, Julia, developed a list of potential actions to address the identified nonconformities. Julia carefully evaluated the list to ensure that each action would effectively eliminate the root cause of the respective nonconformity. While assessing potential corrective actions, Julia identified one issue as significant and assessed a high likelihood of its recurrence. Consequently, she chose to implement temporary corrective actions. Julia then combined all the nonconformities into a single action plan and sought approval from top management. The submitted action plan was written as follows:
"A new version of the access control policy will be established and new restrictions will be created to ensure that network access is effectively managed and monitored by the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Department."
However, Julia's submitted action plan was not approved by top management. The reason cited was that a general action plan meant to address all nonconformities was deemed unacceptable. Consequently, Julia revised the action plan and submitted separate ones for approval. Unfortunately, Julia did not adhere to the organization's specified deadline for submission, resulting in a delay in the corrective action process. Additionally, the revised action plans lacked a defined schedule for execution.
Did Julia make an appropriate decision regarding the nonconformities with a high likelihood of reoccurrence?
Copyright © 2021-2026 CertsTopics. All Rights Reserved
