Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Newcomer I

ISO 27001 and Security Operations

ISO 27001 is a management system, focussing on Information Security. I'm reviewing a company which is ISO 27001 certified - see eventually my other post -, but there is a lake of modern security monitoring in place, not even mention a centralised correlation function( like SIEM). So, even when this company is ISO27k1 certified - and therefore think they are in-control, it's from a compliance perspective only.


I try to make them aware that compliance only is not enough; Even when they claim they have a daily security operations in place, without adequate detection capabilities it's an compliance exercise only. To upgrade to realise security, we need more. So, is there a known standard which easily link a full SOC, or even SIEM to ISO27k1 in a pragmatic way? The reason I asked is, this company prefer "known standards / known best practises" and therefor I prefer such a default, instead of preaching my recommendations.


For example; is there a method which will link  ISO27k1 (er eventually NIST CSF) to MITRE ATT&CK? From there I'm probably helped to provide the necessary foundation.


Any suggestions? 

3 Replies
Community Champion

27001 is just the framework and compliance as you said.


I can still certified in 27001, has those risk management framework , security management practice on paper but doing a bad job in those controls.


If people did not look into implementing controls offered in 27002 or NIST 800-53, then 27001 is only as good as on paper which give people a false sense of security. ( or just security on paper and paper only)


To be fair, the only method for providing assurance that information security controls are effective, is to conduct a SOC2 (Service Organisation Control report) attestation.  A SOC 2 is going to cover trust, privacy and security controls and essentially the attestation is performed by an external auditor.  However, the client may need help with identifying the controls to be tested.  ISO 27k doesn't test the effectiveness of controls, but it's a nice to have, in order to give some indication that controls might exist.  Only a SOC 2 can give assurance.  Look any the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) for details on SOC1, SOC and more....!!

Newcomer I

This is an important question. Being certified under ISO 27001 or having a SOC 2 doesn’t necessarily make your company secure. You can use either to demonstrate compliance against a standard or requirements, but you still set the scope, so you could only scope it out to certain aspects of your business and not all, for example. Even with scoped areas, you can demonstrate compliance without following “best practices.” The benefit of ISO 27001 is that it’s an international standard so it’s recognized globally, and it lays the foundation to address some/many/all requirements of other compliance programs such as GDPR (which requires an ISMS), and even aspects of a SOC 2. ISO 27001 also requires a certification audit and an internal audit yearly. It’s typically more comprehensive than a SOC 2 and requires more resources to implement and maintain.

As you pointed out, being certified doesn’t automatically ensure that you’re secure. That’s because the ISO 27001 framework allows you to determine the risks that are most relevant to your business and design your controls to address them. These risks and associated controls will differ from one company to another. Passing your ISO 27001 audit means your auditor found that your organization was able to prove that it has the necessary policies, processes, and procedures in place to address the controls required to meet your ISMS goals and as prescribed by ISO 27001/27002.

Regarding your specific example of a SIEM not being in place — you don’t necessarily need to have a SIEM in order to effectively monitor and respond to security events in your environment; it all depends on your environment. If implemented properly, ISO 27001 would allow you to identify weaknesses in your security program and address them - for example, identifying a lack of visibility and management of security events in a complex environment might lead you towards a SIEM as one solution. What I like about ISO 27001 is that it doesn’t tell you to implement a SIEM. Rather, it ensures that you have controls in place that allow you to identify and respond to events, and it leaves it up to you to address that in the way that makes most sense for your business. Simply having an expensive SIEM that just collects information that nobody looks at isn’t useful, but it allows you to check off a box that says you have a SIEM, which I think is the case in too many cases.
The ISO 27001 stance on passwords is another good example. Annex 9.4.3 states:
“ Password management systems shall be interactive and shall ensure quality passwords.” Then if you look at the implementation guidance in ISO 27002, it says a password management system should:

a) enforce the use of individual user IDs and passwords to maintain accountability;
b) allow users to select and change their own passwords and include a confirmation procedure to allow for input errors;
c) enforce a choice of quality passwords;
d) force users to change their passwords at the first log-on;
e) enforce regular password changes and as needed;
f) maintain a record of previously used passwords and prevent re-use;
g) not display passwords on the screen when being entered;
h) store password files separately from application system data;
I) store and transit passwords in protected form

It doesn’t explicitly require specific complexity or prescribe frequency of password changes, etc. - that’s up to your business to determine, based on how you view the risk.

ISO 27001 certification alone does not necessarily make your company secure. An ISO 27001 implementation will ensure you have the necessary governance in place to operate the ISMS effectively. The specifics of the ISMS should be further informed by external resources such as NIST, OWASP, CIS, and other industry guidance around security. I don’t think that SOC 2 automatically makes your company more secure; on the contrary, it could create more gaps since it doesn’t require a management system to be in place and is not internationally accepted, so I’d caution against any thinking that a SOC 2 is the solution to making your ISO 27001 implementation more secure. Instead, I recommend you identify the security gaps in your program, and consider CIS 20 controls, OWASP, and NIST frameworks as additional guidance for filling in those gaps and maturing your security program. CIS 20
Controls might be helpful in your particular case, because it is easier to map the controls to the ISO 27002 implementation guidelines, and you can use that as a way to build your case for your organization to improve its security (e.g. by implementing additional controls and tools towards attaining CIS IG1, IG2, or IG3 status).