What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on GS-7 Define and implement logging, threat detection and incident response strategy?

Combined logging, detection and response strategy; Log source and retention requirements derived from it; Detection coverage objectives and how they are measured; Incident response responsibilities defined in the strategy.

What is the most common gap auditors find on GS-7?

logging strategy written for compliance only with no detection objective

Azure Security Benchmark v3 (renamed Microsoft cloud security benchmark) · Governance and Strategy

`GS-7` Define and implement logging, threat detection and incident response strategy

Define and implement a logging, threat detection and incident response strategy so threats are detected and remediated rapidly and compliance requirements for logging are met.

Source: Azure Security Benchmark v3 (renamed Microsoft cloud security benchmark), GS-7. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open Azure Security Benchmark v3 (renamed Microsoft cloud security benchmark) in the compliance library.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

moderate

to go live

SIEM / log platform

where the evidence lives

teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

Log source and retention requirements derived from it · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

none for this control

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Combined logging, detection and response strategy · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Detection coverage objectives and how they are measured · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Incident response responsibilities defined in the strategy · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Start with the 1 of 4 artefacts that already live in a system (SIEM / log platform); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

logging strategy written for compliance only with no detection objective
detection and response owned separately with no shared strategy
no measurable coverage objective so gaps are invisible

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

GS-6 Define and implement identity and privileged access strategy · GS-8 Define and implement backup and recovery strategy