What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on A.3.14 Protection of records?

Retention schedule entry for privacy policies and procedures; Archive of superseded versions with effective dates; Evidence the archive can produce the version in force on a given date.

What is the most common gap auditors find on A.3.14?

Superseded privacy notices overwritten in place

ISO/IEC 27701:2025 · Annex A Table A.3 information security controls with PII-specific guidance

`A.3.14` Protection of records

The organization shall keep its privacy policies and supporting procedures, and every earlier version replaced by an update, for as long as its retention schedule requires, because the policies in force now or at an earlier date may need to be examined, for instance when resolving a dispute with a customer or during a supervisory authority's investigation.

Source: ISO/IEC 27701:2025, A.3.14. 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 27701:2025 in the compliance library.

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

Evidence the archive can produce the version in force on a given date · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Retention schedule entry for privacy policies and procedures · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Archive of superseded versions with effective dates · Document repository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

Superseded privacy notices overwritten in place
Retention period for policies shorter than the limitation period for claims

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

A.3.13 Legal, statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements · A.3.15 Independent review of information security