What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on GRC-05 Information Security Program?

Information security programme document; Mapping of programme components to CCM domains; Programme roadmap and status reports; Gap tracking and remediation; Leadership reporting.

What is the most common gap auditors find on GRC-05?

Domains such as supply chain or endpoint omitted

CSA CCM v4.1 · GRC - Governance, Risk and Compliance

`GRC-05` Information Security Program

An information security programme is developed and run that contains programmes for every relevant domain of the CCM.

Source: CSA CCM v4.1, GRC-05. 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 CSA CCM v4.1 in the compliance library.

Version 4.1 adds 11 controls (among them API security, log sanitisation and a service bill of materials) and renumbers several domains. CSA accepts v4.0.x during its transition; if your STAR assessment is still on v4.0.1, check the numbering against it.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

hard

to go live

Document repository

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

Programme roadmap and status reports · Document repository

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

none for this control

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Information security programme document · Document repository
Mapping of programme components to CCM domains · Document repository
Gap tracking and remediation · Document repository
Leadership reporting · Document repository

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

Domains such as supply chain or endpoint omitted
Gaps tracked without escalation
Programme exists on paper only

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

GRC-04 Policy Exception Process · GRC-06 Governance Responsibility Model