EvidenceSheet
SOC 2 (2017 Trust Services Criteria) · PI - Processing Integrity

PI1.3 Controls over system processing

Policies and procedures over system processing produce products, services and reporting that meet objectives. Points of focus: processing specifications needed to meet requirements are defined; processing activities are defined to meet them; production errors are detected and corrected promptly; processing is recorded completely, accurately and on time; and authorised inputs are processed in full, correctly and on schedule.

Source: SOC 2 (2017 Trust Services Criteria), PI1.3. 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

  • Processing logs and control totals · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • Error queues and evidence of correction · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Job scheduling and processing monitoring with failure alerts · Policy repository / GRC workspace

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

PI1.2 Controls over system inputs · PI1.4 Controls over output delivery