What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on 5.29 Information security during disruption?

Business continuity plans that contain information security requirements and the controls, systems and tools needed during disruption; A documented analysis of which security controls must be adapted during disruption and how; Compensating controls defined for security controls that cannot be maintained in disruption; Continuity test or exercise results that include restoration of security to the required level and within the required time; A business impact analysis that considers loss of confidentiality and integrity, not only availability; Plan review and evaluation records after tests and real disruptions.

What is the most common gap auditors find on 5.29?

Continuity plans restore services but omit security controls such as logging, access control or monitoring

ISO/IEC 27002:2022 · Organizational controls

`5.29` Information security during disruption

The organization is to plan how it will keep information security at a suitable level while operations are disrupted. Purpose: protect information and associated assets during disruption. Guidance: work out how security controls need to be adapted during disruption and build security requirements into business continuity management. Develop, put in place, test, review and evaluate plans that keep or restore the security of information supporting critical business processes after an interruption or failure, recovering it to the required level within the required time. Implement and maintain security controls and their supporting systems and tools within the business and ICT continuity plans, processes that keep existing security controls working during disruption, and compensating controls for any that cannot be kept running. Other information: continuity planning may call for security requirements that differ from normal operation depending on the type of disruption; the impact analysis and risk assessment done for continuity should weigh and prioritize loss of confidentiality and integrity as well as availability; ISO 22301, ISO 22313 and ISO/TS 22317 give further guidance.

Source: ISO/IEC 27002:2022, 5.29. 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 ISO/IEC 27002:2022 in the compliance library.

ISO/IEC 27002 is guidance on the Annex A controls; certification is against ISO/IEC 27001. Use this set when your sheet follows the 27002 numbering.

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

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Continuity test or exercise results that include restoration of security to the required level and within the required time · Backup / DR tooling
A business impact analysis that considers loss of confidentiality and integrity, not only availability · Document repository
Plan review and evaluation records after tests and real disruptions · Policy repository / GRC workspace

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Business continuity plans that contain information security requirements and the controls, systems and tools needed during disruption · Policy repository / GRC workspace
A documented analysis of which security controls must be adapted during disruption and how · Document repository
Compensating controls defined for security controls that cannot be maintained in disruption · Document repository

First move

No system holds this evidence for you: it is people and documents. Reminders and routing to the owner still save time. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date.

Common gaps auditors find

Continuity plans restore services but omit security controls such as logging, access control or monitoring
Emergency workarounds bypass security with no compensating measure
Exercises test only availability, never the security state after recovery
The impact analysis ignores confidentiality and integrity

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

5.28 Collection of evidence · 5.30 ICT readiness for business continuity