EvidenceSheet

PI1.2 Controls over system inputs

Input policies and procedures, with completeness and accuracy controls, produce products, services and reporting that meet objectives. Points of focus: the characteristics inputs must have are defined; inputs are checked against those requirements; and records of input activity are created and kept completely, accurately and on time.

Source: SOC 2 (2017 Trust Services Criteria), PI1.2. 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 SOC 2 (2017 Trust Services Criteria) in the compliance library.

These are criteria, not controls: you design controls that meet them, and which criteria are in scope follows the categories your report covers (Security always; Availability, Confidentiality, Processing Integrity and Privacy only if chosen). A Type 2 report tests that the controls operated across the period, so the evidence asked for is samples across that period, not one copy.

3
artefacts
1
held by a system
1
at each review
moderate
to go live
SIEM / log platform
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

  • Input logs retained · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • Reconciliations of records received to records loaded · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Input validation rules and rejection handling · Document repository

First move

Start with the 1 of 3 artefacts that already live in a system (SIEM / log platform); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

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

PI1.1 Quality information about processing objectives, data definitions and specifications · PI1.3 Controls over system processing