6.14.1 Information security continuity
Planning, implementing and then verifying, reviewing and evaluating information security continuity apply as the base guidance requires, read as keeping the protections around personal data in force through a disruption.
3
artefacts
0
held by a system
2
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
system holds itEvidence a system already holds
none for this control
periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review
- Implementation evidence in the recovery environment · Cloud console / configuration management
- Verification and evaluation records · Document repository
governing documentDocuments that govern the control
- Continuity plans covering the protective controls, not only the service · Policy repository / GRC workspace
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
- Continuity plans that restore the service and silently drop access control and logging
- Verification performed on failover but never on the control set
- Plans not updated after the control set changed
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 sheet6.13.1 Management of information security incidents and improvements · 6.14.2 Redundancies