ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Implementer Dumps - PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 : 2022 Lead Implementer exam Practice Exam Questions

Scenario 7: InfoSec, based in Boston, MA, is a multinational corporation offering professional electronics, gaming, and entertainment products. Following several information security incidents, InfoSec has decided to establish teams of experts and implement measures to prevent potential incidents in the future.

Emma, Bob, and Anna were hired as the new members of InfoSec's information security team, which consists of a security architecture team, an incident response team (IRT), and a forensics team. Emma’s job is to create information security plans, policies, protocols, and training to prepare InfoSec to respond to incidents effectively. Emma and Bob would be full-time employees of InfoSec, whereas Anna was contracted as an external consultant.

Bob, a network expert, will implement a screened subnet network architecture. This architecture will isolate the demilitarized zone (DMZ), to which hosted public services are attached, and InfoSec's publicly accessible resources from their private network. Thus, InfoSec will be able to block potential attackers from causing unwanted events inside the company's network. Bob is also responsible for ensuring a thorough evaluation of the nature of an unexpected event, including how the event happened and what or whom it might affect.

On the other hand, Anna will create records of the data, reviews, analyses, and reports to keep evidence for disciplinary and legal action and use them to prevent future incidents. To do the work accordingly, she should be aware of the company's information security incident management policy beforehand. Among others, this policy specifies the type of records to be created, the place where they should be kept, and the format and content that specific record types should have.

As part of InfoSec's initiative to strengthen information security measures, Anna will conduct information security risk assessments only when significant changes are proposed and will document the results of these risk assessments. Upon completion of the risk assessment process, Anna is responsible for developing and implementing a plan for treating information security risks and documenting the risk treatment results.

Furthermore, while implementing the communication plan for information security, InfoSec’s top management was responsible for creating a roadmap for new product development. This approach helps the company to align its security measures with the product development efforts, demonstrating a commitment to integrating security into every aspect of its business operations.

InfoSec uses a cloud service model that includes cloud-based apps accessed through the web or an application programming interface (API). All cloud services are provided by the cloud service provider, while data is managed by InfoSec. This introduces unique security considerations and becomes a primary focus for the information security team to ensure data and systems are protected in this environment.

Based on this scenario, answer the following question:

Which of the following cloud service models did InfoSec use?

Scenario 10: ProEBank

ProEBank is an Austrian financial institution known for its comprehensive range of banking services. Headquartered in Vienna, it leaverages the city's advanced technological and financial ecosystem To enhance its security posture, ProEBank has implementied an information security management system (ISMS) based on the ISO/IEC 27001. After a year of having the ISMS in place, the company decided to apply for a certification audit to obtain certification against ISO/IEC 27001.

To prepare for the audit, the company first informed its employees for the audit and organized training sessions to prepare them. It also prepared documented information in advance, so that the documents would be ready when external auditors asked to review them Additionally, it determined which of its employees have the knowledge to help the external auditors understand and evaluate the processes.

During the planning phase for the audit, ProEBank reviewed the list of assigned auditors provided by the certification body. Upon reviewing the list, ProEBank identified a potential conflict of interest with one of the auditors, who had previously worked for ProEBank's mein competitor in the banking industry To ensure the integrity of the audit process. ProEBank refused to undergo the audit until a completely new audit team was assigned. In response, the certification body acknowledged the conflict of interest and made the necessary adjustments to ensure the impartiality of the audit team

After the resolution of this issue, the audit team assessed whether the ISMS met both the standard's requirements and the company's objectives. During this process, the audit team focused on reviewing documented information.

Three weeks later, the team conducted an on-site visit to the auditee’s location where they aimed to evaluate whether the ISMS conformed to the requirements of ISO/IEC 27001. was effectively implemented, and enabled the auditee to reach its information security objectives. After the on-site visit the team prepared the audit conclusions and notified the auditee that some minor nonconformities had been detected The audit team leader then issued a recommendation for certification.

After receiving the recommendation from the audit team leader, the certification body established a committee to make the decision for certification. The committee included one member from the audit team and two other experts working for the certification body.

The certification body’s final decision for certification was made by acommitteethat includedone auditor from the audit teamand two other experts.

Question:

Is this acceptable?

Scenario 10: ProEBank

ProEBank, an Austrian financial institution, implemented an ISMS and prepared for ISO/IEC 27001 certification. During planning, the company identified aconflict of interestwith one auditor, who had previously worked with their main competitor. ProEBankrefused to undergo the audituntil a new audit team was assigned. The certification body acknowledged the issue and replaced the team.

ProEBank is an Austrian financial institution known for its comprehensive range of banking services. Headquartered in Vienna, it leaverages the city's advanced technological and financial ecosystem To enhance its security posture, ProEBank has implementied an information security management system (ISMS) based on the ISO/IEC 27001. After a year of having the ISMS in place, the company decided to apply for a certification audit to obtain certification against ISO/IEC 27001.

To prepare for the audit, the company first informed its employees for the audit and organized training sessions to prepare them. It also prepared documented information in advance, so that the documents would be ready when external auditors asked to review them Additionally, it determined which of its employees have the knowledge to help the external auditors understand and evaluate the processes.

During the planning phase for the audit, ProEBank reviewed the list of assigned auditors provided by the certification body. Upon reviewing the list, ProEBank identified a potential conflict of interest with one of the auditors, who had previously worked for ProEBank's mein competitor in the banking industry To ensure the integrity of the audit process. ProEBank refused to undergo the audit until a completely new audit team was assigned. In response, the certification body acknowledged the conflict of interest and made the necessary adjustments to ensure the impartiality of the audit team

After the resolution of this issue, the audit team assessed whether the ISMS met both the standard's requirements and the company's objectives. During this process, the audit team focused on reviewing documented information.

Three weeks later, the team conducted an on-site visit to the auditee’s location where they aimed to evaluate whether the ISMS conformed to the requirements of ISO/IEC 27001. was effectively implemented, and enabled the auditee to reach its information security objectives. After the on-site visit the team prepared the audit conclusions and notified the auditee that some minor nonconformities had been detected The audit team leader then issued a recommendation for certification.

After receiving the recommendation from the audit team leader, the certification body established a committee to make the decision for certification. The committee included one member from the audit team and two other experts working for the certification body.

Question:

Is ProEBank's decision to require a new audit team due to a perceived conflict of interest acceptable?