EvidenceSheet
ISO/IEC 27002:2022 · People controls

6.4 Disciplinary process

A formal disciplinary process is to be established and made known so that action can be taken against staff and relevant outside parties who break the security policy. Purpose: make sure people understand the consequences of breaching the policy, deter breaches and deal properly with those who commit them. Guidance: disciplinary action should start only after it has been verified that a violation actually occurred (5.28). The process provides a graduated response that weighs the nature of the breach (who, what, when, how), its seriousness and consequences; whether it was deliberate and malicious or accidental; whether it is a first or repeat offence; and whether the person had been properly trained. The response also accounts for legal, regulatory, contractual and business requirements and other relevant factors. The process doubles as a deterrent against breaching the policy, topic-specific policies and procedures, and deliberate violations may call for immediate action. Other information: where possible, protect the identity of people subject to disciplinary action in line with applicable requirements; consider rewarding people who show excellent security behaviour.

Source: ISO/IEC 27002:2022, 6.4. 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.

6
artefacts
0
held by a system
2
at each review
hard
to go live
HR system / LMS
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

  • Case records showing that violations were verified before action began · HR system / LMS
  • Evidence that legal, contractual and business requirements were considered in outcomes · HR system / LMS

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • The formal disciplinary procedure covering information security violations, communicated to personnel and relevant external parties · HR system / LMS
  • Criteria for a graduated response considering nature, severity, intent, repetition and training received · HR system / LMS
  • Communication or awareness material making the consequences of violations known · HR system / LMS
  • Provisions for protecting the identity of individuals subject to action · HR system / LMS

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

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

6.3 Information security awareness, education and training · 6.5 Responsibilities after termination or change of employment