Blog

Ed Lane Ed Lane

0 Course Enrolled • 0 Course Completed

Biography

Free 365-day Updates To PECB ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Exam Questions

This format of DumpsReview PECB ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor practice material is compatible with these smart devices: Laptops, Tablets, and Smartphones. This compatibility makes ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor PDF Dumps easily usable from any place. It contains real and latest ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor exam questions with correct answers. DumpsReview examines it regularly for new updates so that you always get new PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor exam (ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor) practice questions. Since it is a printable format, you can do a paper study. The PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor exam (ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor) PDF Dumps document is accessible from every location at any time.

The ISO/IEC 27001 standard is an internationally recognized framework that provides a systematic approach to managing and protecting sensitive information. The standard outlines best practices for implementing an ISMS, which is a set of policies, procedures, and processes that manage information risks, ensure confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information. The ISO/IEC 27001 lead auditor certification validates a professional's ability to audit and assess an organization's ISMS based on the ISO/IEC 27001 standard.

PECB ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Certification is a highly regarded certification in the field of information security management. It is designed to test the knowledge and skills of individuals seeking to become certified ISO/IEC 27001 lead auditors. Individuals who hold this certification are considered experts in the field and are highly valued by organizations around the world.

>> Test ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Voucher <<

ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Free Brain Dumps | Real ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Testing Environment

Our ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor exam questions are valuable and useful and if you buy our ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor study materials will provide first-rate service to you to make you satisfied. We provide not only the free download and try out of the ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Practice Guide but also the immediate download after your purchase successfully. To see whether our ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor training dumps are worthy to buy, you can have a try on our product right now.

PECB ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor (PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor) Certification Exam is designed to test an individual’s knowledge and skills in leading and managing an information security management system (ISMS) audit team. ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor exam is based on the ISO/IEC 27001:2013 international standard for information security management systems and covers topics such as risk assessment, audit planning and preparation, audit execution and reporting, and continual improvement of the ISMS.

PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor exam Sample Questions (Q164-Q169):

NEW QUESTION # 164
The purpose of a management system audit is to? Select 1

A. Improve the performance of an organisation's management system
B. Research the performance of an organisation's management system
C. Evaluate the performance of an organisation's management system
D. Manage the performance of an organisation's management system

Answer: C

Explanation:
A management system audit is a systematic, independent and documented process for obtaining objective evidence and evaluating it objectively to determine the extent to which the audit criteria are fulfilled. The audit criteria are a set of requirements that may include policies, procedures, standards, regulations, etc. The purpose of a management system audit is to evaluate the performance of an organisation's management system in terms of its effectiveness, efficiency, compliance, and improvement. A management system audit can also identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and risks of the management system and provide recommendations for improvement.

NEW QUESTION # 165
Scenario 2: Knight is an electronics company from Northern California, US that develops video game consoles. Knight has more than 300 employees worldwide. On the fifth anniversary of their establishment, they have decided to deliver the G-Console, a new generation video game console aimed for worldwide markets. G-Console is considered to be the ultimate media machine of 2021 which will give the best gaming experience to players. The console pack will include a pair of VR headset, two games, and other gifts.
Over the years, the company has developed a good reputation by showing integrity, honesty, and respect toward their customers. This good reputation is one of the reasons why most passionate gamers aim to have Knight's G-console as soon as it is released in the market. Besides being a very customer-oriented company, Knight also gained wide recognition within the gaming industry because of the developing quality. Their prices are a bit higher than the reasonable standards allow.
Nonetheless, that is not considered an issue for most loyal customers of Knight, as their quality is top-notch.
Being one of the top video game console developers in the world, Knight is also often the center of attention for malicious activities. The company has had an operational ISMS for over a year. The ISMS scope includes all departments of Knight, except Finance and HR departments.
Recently, a number of Knight's files containing proprietary information were leaked by hackers. Knight's incident response team (IRT) immediately started to analyze every part of the system and the details of the incident.
The IRT's first suspicion was that Knight's employees used weak passwords and consequently were easily cracked by hackers who gained unauthorized access to their accounts. However, after carefully investigating the incident, the IRT determined that hackers accessed accounts by capturing the file transfer protocol (FTP) traffic.
FTP is a network protocol for transferring files between accounts. It uses clear text passwords for authentication.
Following the impact of this information security incident and with IRT's suggestion, Knight decided to replace the FTP with Secure Shell (SSH) protocol, so anyone capturing the traffic can only see encrypted data.
Following these changes, Knight conducted a risk assessment to verify that the implementation of controls had minimized the risk of similar incidents. The results of the process were approved by the ISMS project manager who claimed that the level of risk after the implementation of new controls was in accordance with the company's risk acceptance levels.
Based on this scenario, answer the following question:
Based on scenario 2, the ISMS project manager approved the results of risk assessment. Is this acceptable?

A. No, the risk remaining after the treatment of risk should be approved by the top management at any stage
B. Yes, the risk remaining after the treatment of risk should be approved by the ISMS project manager
C. No, the risk remaining after the implementation of new controls for the ISMS should be approved by the ISMS team

Answer: A

Explanation:
In the context of ISO/IEC 27001, the approval of the risk assessment and the acceptance of the remaining risk levels after treatment are typically responsibilities of the top management. This is because top management is accountable for the information security management system and its outcomes, and they have the authority to accept risks on behalf of the organization12. Reference: = The information provided is based on the standard practices of ISO/IEC 27001 risk assessment and treatment processes, which emphasize the role of top management in the approval and acceptance of risks

NEW QUESTION # 166
You are an ISMS audit team leader tasked with conducting a follow-up audit at a client's data centre.
Following two days on-site you conclude that of the original 12 minor and 1 major nonconformities that prompted the follow-up audit, only 1 minor nonconformity still remains outstanding.
Select four options for the actions you could take.

A. Recommend suspension of the organisation's certification as they have failed to implement the agreed corrections and corrective actions within the agreed timescale
B. Recommend that the outstanding minor nonconformity is dealt with at the next surveillance audit
C. Advise the auditee that you will arrange an online audit to deal with the outstanding nonconformity
D. Agree with the auditee/audit client how the remaining nonconformity will be cleared, by when, and how its clearance will be verified
E. Book another follow-up audit on-site to review the one outstanding minor nonconformity once it has been cleared
F. Advise the individual managing the audit programme of any decision taken regarding the outstanding nonconformity
G. Note the progress made but hold the audit open until all corrective action has been cleared
H. Close the follow-up audit as the organisation has demonstrated it is committed to clearing the nonconformities raised

Answer: B,D,F,H

Explanation:
Explanation
According to ISO 19011:2018, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 6.7 requires the audit team leader to conduct a follow-up audit to verify the implementation and effectiveness of the corrective actions taken by the auditee in response to the nonconformities identified during a previous audit1. The follow-up audit should be conducted in accordance with the same principles and processes as the initial audit, and should result in a conclusion on the status of the nonconformities and any remaining issues1.
Therefore, when conducting a follow-up audit, an ISMS auditor should consider the following actions:
* Recommend that the outstanding minor nonconformity is dealt with at the next surveillance audit: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditee has cleared most of the nonconformities, including the major one, and only one minor nonconformity remains outstanding. A minor nonconformity is defined as a failure to achieve one or more requirements of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 or a situation which raises significant doubt about the ability of an ISMS process to achieve its intended output, but does not affect its overall effectiveness or conformity2. Therefore, this finding does not prevent or preclude the continuation of certification, as long as it is addressed by appropriate corrective actions within a reasonable time frame. The auditor should recommend that the outstanding minor nonconformity is dealt with at the next surveillance audit, which is a regular audit conducted by the certification body to confirm the ongoing conformity and effectiveness of an ISMS3.
* Agree with the auditee/audit client how the remaining nonconformity will be cleared, by when, and how its clearance will be verified: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditee has demonstrated commitment and capability to implement corrective actions for the nonconformities identified during the previous audit. The auditor should agree with the auditee/audit client on a realistic, achievable, and effective corrective action plan for the remaining nonconformity, including a clear deadline and verification method. The auditor should also document this agreement in the follow-up audit report1.
* Advise the individual managing the audit programme of any decision taken regarding the outstanding
* nonconformity: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditor has followed a systematic and consistent approach to conducting and reporting the follow-up audit. The auditor should advise the individual managing the audit programme of any decision taken regarding the outstanding nonconformity, such as recommending its closure at the next surveillance audit or agreeing on a corrective action plan with the auditee/audit client. The auditor should also provide sufficient information and evidence to support their decision1.
* Close the follow-up audit as the organisation has demonstrated it is committed to clearing the nonconformities raised: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the organisation has achieved satisfactory results in the follow-up audit. The auditor should close the follow-up audit as the organisation has demonstrated it is committed to clearing the nonconformities raised by implementing effective corrective actions for most of them and agreeing on a plan for the remaining one. The auditor should also communicate the follow-up audit conclusion to the auditee/audit client and other relevant parties1.

NEW QUESTION # 167
You are performing an ISMS initial certification audit at a residential nursing home that provides healthcare services. The next step in your audit plan is to conduct the closing meeting. During the final audit team meeting, as an audit team leader, you agree to report 2 minor nonconformities and 1 opportunity for improvement as below:

Select one option of the recommendation to the audit programme manager you are going to advise to the auditee at the closing meeting.

A. Recommend certification immediately
B. Recommend that a full scope re-audit is required within 6 months
C. Recommend certification after your approval of the proposed corrective action plan Recommend that the findings can be closed out at a surveillance audit in 1 year
D. Recommend that an unannounced audit is carried out at a future date
E. Recommend that a partial audit is required within 3 months

Answer: C

Explanation:
According to ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015, which specifies the requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems, clause 9.4.9 requires the certification body to make a certification decision based on the information obtained during the audit and any other relevant information1. The certification body should also consider the effectiveness of the corrective actions taken by the auditee to address any nonconformities identified during the audit1. Therefore, when making a recommendation to the audit programme manager, an ISMS auditor should consider the nature and severity of the nonconformities and the proposed corrective actions.
Based on the scenario above, the auditor should recommend certification after their approval of the proposed corrective action plan and recommend that the findings can be closed out at a surveillance audit in 1 year. The auditor should provide the following justification for their recommendation:
Justification: This recommendation is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditee has only two minor nonconformities and one opportunity for improvement, which do not indicate a significant or systemic failure of their ISMS. A minor nonconformity is defined as a failure to achieve one or more requirements of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 or a situation which raises significant doubt about the ability of an ISMS process to achieve its intended output, but does not affect its overall effectiveness or conformity2. An opportunity for improvement is defined as a suggestion for improvement beyond what is required by ISO/IEC 27001:20222. Therefore, these findings do not prevent or preclude certification, as long as they are addressed by appropriate corrective actions within a reasonable time frame. The auditor should approve the proposed corrective action plan before recommending certification, to ensure that it is realistic, achievable, and effective. The auditor should also recommend that the findings can be closed out at a surveillance audit in 1 year, to verify that the corrective actions have been implemented and are working as intended.
The other options are not valid recommendations for the audit programme manager, as they are either too lenient or too strict for the given scenario. For example:
Recommend certification immediately: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor ignores or accepts the nonconformities, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:20151, which requires the certification body to consider the effectiveness of the corrective actions taken by the auditee before making a certification decision.
Recommend that a full scope re-audit is required within 6 months: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor overreacts or exaggerates the nonconformities, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:20151, which requires the certification body to determine whether a re-audit is necessary based on the nature and extent of nonconformities and other relevant factors. A full scope re-audit is usually reserved for major nonconformities or multiple minor nonconformities that indicate a serious or widespread failure of an ISMS.
Recommend that an unannounced audit is carried out at a future date: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor distrusts or doubts the auditee's commitment or capability to implement corrective actions, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:20151, which requires the certification body to conduct unannounced audits only under certain conditions, such as when there are indications of serious problems with an ISMS or when required by sector-specific schemes.
Recommend that a partial audit is required within 3 months: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor imposes or prescribes a specific time frame or scope for verifying corrective actions, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:20151, which requires the certification body to determine whether a partial audit is necessary based on the nature and extent of nonconformities and other relevant factors. A partial audit may be appropriate for minor nonconformities, but the time frame and scope should be agreed upon with the auditee and based on the proposed corrective action plan.

NEW QUESTION # 168
Scenario 7: Webvue. headquartered in Japan, is a technology company specializing in the development, support, and maintenance of computer software. Webvue provides solutions across various technology fields and business sectors. Its flagship service is CloudWebvue, a comprehensive cloud computing platform offering storage, networking, and virtual computing services. Designed for both businesses and individual users. CloudWebvue is known for its flexibility, scalability, and reliability.
Webvue has decided to only include CloudWebvue in its ISO/IEC 27001 certification scope. Thus, the stage 1 and 2 audits were performed simultaneously Webvue takes pride in its strictness regarding asset confidentiality They protect the information stored in CloudWebvue by using appropriate cryptographic controls. Every piece of information of any classification level, whether for internal use. restricted, or confidential, is first encrypted with a unique corresponding hash and then stored in the cloud The audit team comprised five persons Keith. Sean. Layla, Sam. and Tin a. Keith, the most experienced auditor on the IT and information security auditing team, was the audit team leader. His responsibilities included planning the audit and managing the audit team. Sean and Layla were experienced in project planning, business analysis, and IT systems (hardware and application) Their tasks included audit planning according to Webvue's internal systems and processes Sam and Tina, on the other hand, who had recently completed their education, were responsible for completing the day-to-day tasks while developing their audit skills While verifying conformity to control 8.24 Use of cryptography of ISO/IEC 27001 Annex A through interviews with the relevant staff, the audit team found out that the cryptographic keys have been initially generated based on random bit generator (RBG) and other best practices for the generation of the cryptographic keys. After checking Webvue's cryptography policy, they concluded that the information obtained by the interviews was true. However, the cryptographic keys are still in use because the policy does not address the use and lifetime of cryptographic keys.
As later agreed upon between Webvue and the certification body, the audit team opted to conduct a virtual audit specifically focused on verifying conformity to control 8.11 Data Masking of ISO/IEC 27001 within Webvue, aligning with the certification scope and audit objectives. They examined the processes involved in protecting data within CloudWebvue. focusing on how the company adhered to its policies and regulatory standards. As part of this process. Keith, the audit team leader, took screenshot copies of relevant documents and cryptographic key management procedures to document and analyze the effectiveness of Webvue's practices.
Webvue uses generated test data for testing purposes. However, as determined by both the interview with the manager of the QA Department and the procedures used by this department, sometimes live system data are used. In such scenarios, large amounts of data are generated while producing more accurate results. The test data is protected and controlled, as verified by the simulation of the encryption process performed by Webvue's personnel during the audit While interviewing the manager of the QA Department, Keith observed that employees in the Security Training Department were not following proper procedures, even though this department fell outside the audit scope. Despite the exclusion in the audit scope, the non conformity in the Security Training Department has potential implications for the processes within the audit scope, specifically impacting data security and cryptographic practices in CloudWebvue. Therefore, Keith incorporated this finding into the audit report and accordingly informed the auditee.
Based on the scenario above, answer the following question:
Did Keith make the appropriate decision regarding Webvue's documents during the virtual audit?

A. Yes, taking screenshots of document copies is allowed without prior permission, provided the audit is not being recorded
B. No, because he should have obtained permission before taking screenshot copies of documents
C. No, as screenshot copies are not permitted at all during virtual audits

Answer: B

Explanation:
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth
B . Correct Answer:
ISO 19011:2018 mandates that auditors must obtain permission before making copies of documents.
Virtual audits must adhere to confidentiality agreements to protect sensitive data.
A . Incorrect:
Screenshots cannot be taken without permission, even if the audit is not recorded.
C . Incorrect:
Screenshots are allowed with prior authorization, ensuring proper data handling.
Relevant Standard Reference:

NEW QUESTION # 169
......

ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Free Brain Dumps: https://www.dumpsreview.com/ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor-exam-dumps-review.html

Cookie	Duration	Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional	11 months	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy	11 months	The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.

Ed Lane Ed Lane

Biography

COOKIE NOTICE