6.1 General
Every ISO/IEC 27002 guideline that speaks of information security must be read as extending to the protection of privacy affected by the processing of personally identifiable information, and every control objective and
3
artefacts
0
held by a system
0
at each review
hard
to go live
Document repository
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review
system holds itEvidence a system already holds
none for this control
periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review
none for this control
governing documentDocuments that govern the control
- Documented adoption of the extended reading across the control set · Document repository
- Control descriptions or a Statement of Applicability showing privacy risk was considered for each control · Policy repository / GRC workspace
- Evidence the reading was applied to controls where this document adds nothing specific · Document repository
First move
This control is evidenced by people and documents, not systems. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date. Do not try to automate it.
Common gaps auditors find
- Extension applied only to the controls where clause 6 adds explicit guidance, leaving the majority judged on security alone
- Controller and processor guidance assumed to differ everywhere, when the same reading applies unless stated
- Extension declared in a policy and never carried into control design
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 sheet5.8.2 Continual improvement · 6.2.1 Management direction for information security