What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on OIS-07 Application of the Risk Management Policy?

Current risk register entries carrying assessment dates inside the last twelve months; Risk owner attestations confirming the annual adequacy review of treatment and residual risk; Assessment output covering tenant separation weaknesses and internet reachable entry points; Treatment plans listing responsible person, target date and completion status; Dependency analysis for the subservice organisations supporting the cloud service.

What is the most common gap auditors find on OIS-07?

Register carried forward unchanged with no evidence of a reassessment cycle

BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue) · C5: Organisation of Information Security

`OIS-07` Application of the Risk Management Policy

Run the risk handling process as needed and at least once a year, addressing mixed customer protection needs, weaknesses in the separation of shared resources, attacks through publicly reachable interfaces, unavoidable duty conflicts and subservice dependencies, with risk owners reviewing treatment and residual risk annually.

Source: BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue), OIS-07. 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 BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue) in the compliance library.

The edition of the catalogue is not stamped here; check the edition your attestation is issued against.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

hard

to go live

Policy repository / GRC workspace

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

Assessment output covering tenant separation weaknesses and internet reachable entry points · Document repository

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Risk owner attestations confirming the annual adequacy review of treatment and residual risk · Document repository
Dependency analysis for the subservice organisations supporting the cloud service · Cloud console / configuration management

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Current risk register entries carrying assessment dates inside the last twelve months · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Treatment plans listing responsible person, target date and completion status · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Mostly documents and reviews. Pull the 1 system-held artefact from your Document repository on a schedule; put the documents under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Register carried forward unchanged with no evidence of a reassessment cycle
Residual risk accepted by the security function rather than the accountable owner
Reliance on subservice organisations never entered as a risk at all
New service features launched without passing through the risk process

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

OIS-06 Risk Management Policy · OPS-01 Capacity Management - Planning