Context and scope
Issues, interested parties and boundaries. Amd 1:2024 adds climate change as a consideration.
Texas, U.S. · 22 weeksInterbank Messaging and Resilience Program
U.S. Southwest · 18 weeksPCI DSS 4.0.1 Transition for a Payments Processor
Austin, Texas · 14 weeksSOC 2 Type II Readiness for an HR PlatformWe design, operate and internally audit an ISMS your own teams can sustain, then extend it to privacy and continuity when the business needs them.
ISO/IEC 27001 does not certify that you are secure. It certifies that you run a system that decides how to treat risk, and that those decisions are still being carried out.
Template risk registers and paper management reviews pass Stage 2, then fail at surveillance. We design for the second year, not the first certificate.
Products, locations and cloud accounts customers can understand.
Treatments executives actually made and can explain.
Every Annex A decision traced to a risk or obligation.
Surveillance tests a running system, not a project archive.
Certification bodies raise many nonconformities here, not in Annex A.
Issues, interested parties and boundaries. Amd 1:2024 adds climate change as a consideration.
Leaders set policy, assign roles and resource the ISMS, with evidence of real decisions.
A repeatable risk method, a treatment plan, an SoA, measurable objectives and planned changes.
Competence, controlled documents, and a treatment plan actually being executed.
Impartial internal audits and management reviews that contain decisions.
Root-cause analysis and verified corrective action, not symptom fixes.
Filter by theme, show the eleven new controls or search, then select a control.
Control titles follow ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A. Guidance notes are our summary, not text from the standard.
Same management-system structure: one governance, internal audit and management review.
Now a standalone privacy management system, certifiable without ISO/IEC 27001, though most integrate the two.
Know which activities matter, how fast they must recover and what they depend on, then prove it through exercises.
Each phase ends with an artifact your team owns.
Service and data-flow mapping; a boundary customers recognize.
Clause and control gaps; a risk method your people can repeat.
Proportionate policies, owners, an SoA and an evidence calendar.
Impartial audit and management review before Stage 1.
Rolling audit program and support through recertification.
The auditor’s real question: show me how you decided, and that it is still true today.
A twenty-person SaaS company and a multinational bank should not have the same policy library.
Boundaries, interfaces and interested-party requirements.
Criteria, thresholds and named risk owners.
All 93 controls with status and justification.
Sized to you, written for the people who follow it.
Full scope across the cycle, by independent auditors.
Stage 1 and Stage 2 readiness and open actions.
Build the ISMS once and reuse it widely. Each framework keeps its own scope, evidence and reporting.
| Control area | SOC 2 (TSC) | PCI DSS v4.0.1 | NIST CSF 2.0 | DORA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Governance, policy and roles (5.1–5.4) | Directly addressed | Directly addressed | Directly addressed | Directly addressed |
| Risk assessment and treatment (Clause 6) | Directly addressed | Partially addressed | Directly addressed | Directly addressed |
| Supplier and ICT supply chain (5.19–5.23) | Directly addressed | Partially addressed | Directly addressed | Partially addressed |
| Identity and access (5.15–5.18, 8.2–8.5) | Directly addressed | Directly addressed | Directly addressed | Partially addressed |
| Incident management (5.24–5.28) | Directly addressed | Directly addressed | Directly addressed | Partially addressed |
| Continuity and ICT readiness (5.29–5.30) | Partially addressed | Not addressed– | Directly addressed | Partially addressed |
Directly addressed Partially addressed or different evidence expectations , Not a primary objective. Each certificate or report is still earned on its own terms.
Requested in procurement, often with SOC 2. The key choices: which products are in scope, and how infrastructure as code evidences configuration (8.9) and cloud responsibilities (5.23).
The backbone that DORA, PCI DSS and supervisory expectations hang from. Supplier controls must reconcile with the DORA register of information.
Pair the ISMS with ISO/IEC 27701 for privacy. US customers may still ask for HITRUST.
Design the ISMS to feed national schemes such as FedRAMP and NIST SP 800-53, where MarkTillson prepares cloud providers for authorization.
Versioned baselines with drift detection, when the pipeline itself is controlled.
Acquisition, shared responsibility and how you would exit.
Email, endpoints, SaaS sharing and generative-AI prompts.
Baselines, triage and escalation, beyond log collection.
Select a stage to see what happens and how we support you.
An accredited certification body. We build the system, run the internal audit and stay beside you through Stage 1, Stage 2 and every surveillance visit.
The constraint is operating evidence, not documents: risk treatment under way, an internal audit and a management review before Stage 2. You receive a dated plan once the gap assessment is complete.
No. Your SoA must consider each one and justify inclusion or exclusion. Exclusions without a defensible rationale are a common nonconformity.
No. The transition to the 2022 edition ended on 31 October 2025. We run focused gap assessments against the 2022 requirements and prepare you for recertification quickly.
Sometimes. One control set can support both, but the reports, scope and periods differ, so many buyers ask for each.
Tell us your target date, your scope and who is asking. A senior practitioner will set out the route, the timeline and the effort involved.