Navigating ISO 27001 Annex A 5.18: A Practical Guide for AI Companies

Introduction: Why Access Rights Management is Critical for AI Innovation

While ISO 27001 provides a robust framework for information security, applying its controls to the unique environment of an Artificial Intelligence (AI) company requires a specialised focus. The pace of innovation, the nature of digital assets, and the collaborative workflows inherent in AI development present distinct challenges that standard compliance approaches may not fully address.

This guide provides a specific analysis of ISO 27001 Annex A 5.18 Access rights through the lens of an AI business. Effective access management is not merely a compliance checkbox; it is a strategic imperative for protecting your most valuable assets – proprietary training data, complex algorithms, and irreplaceable intellectual property. More than that, robust access control is a key enabler for building trust with enterprise clients, protecting valuation by securing IP, and achieving certifications like SOC 2 that are often prerequisites for major contracts. The goal is to establish a security posture that safeguards these assets without creating friction that slows down the research and development lifecycle.

This guide will break down the control’s fundamental requirements, explore the unique risks AI companies face, provide a practical roadmap for managing the user access lifecycle, and introduce a streamlined solution to accelerate compliance.

---

Understanding the Foundations: What is Annex A Control 5.18?

At its core, Annex A control 5.18 is the organisational control responsible for governing the entire lifecycle of user access to information, systems, and associated assets. It establishes the rules for how access is provisioned when a user joins, reviewed and modified during their tenure, and ultimately revoked upon their departure or a change in role.

The primary purpose of this control is to act as a preventive measure against security incidents. By ensuring that access rights are formally managed and audited, organisations can significantly reduce the risk of unauthorised access, data breaches, and misuse of critical resources. The control’s scope covers the full spectrum of access management:

• Ensuring access to information and associated assets is defined and authorised according to business and operational needs.
• Acting as a preventive control to stop unauthorised access to and modification of information assets.
• Covering the formal processes for the provisioning, review, modification, and removal of access rights for all user types.

Key Principles of Access Rights Management

Effective implementation of control 5.18 is built on several fundamental principles that ensure access is granted responsibly and securely.

1. Authorisation and Approval: As a foundational check, no access should ever be granted by default. It requires explicit authorisation from the owner of the information or asset. For particularly sensitive systems or data, a secondary approval from management may also be necessary to provide an additional layer of oversight.
2. Policy Alignment: To ensure consistency and defensibility, all access decisions must be rooted in established rules. All access rights must be granted in accordance with the organisation’s topic-specific access control policy. This ensures that decisions are not made on an ad-hoc basis but are consistently aligned with pre-defined security requirements and business objectives.
3. Segregation of Duties: From a risk management perspective, this control is your primary defence against unilateral fraudulent actions and critical errors. To prevent conflicts of interest and reduce the risk of error or fraud, the individual who requests access should be different from the individual who approves and implements it. This separation of duties is a critical check and balance in the access management process.
4. The Principle of Least Privilege: This is a core tenet of resilient system design, not just a compliance rule. This security concept dictates that users should be given the minimum level of access – and only the access – they need to perform their designated job functions. This principle is critical for mitigating the blast radius of a compromised account, especially one with access to sensitive model training environments.

While these principles are universally applicable, they take on heightened importance and complexity within the unique asset landscape of an AI-driven organisation.

---

The AI-Specific Challenge: Applying Control 5.18 to Your Unique Assets

AI companies manage assets that are fundamentally different from those in traditional businesses, creating distinct and amplified risks related to access rights. Applying the principles of control 5.18 requires a nuanced understanding of what you are protecting.

Protecting Sensitive Training Datasets

Large, curated datasets are the lifeblood of AI models and often represent a significant investment and a core piece of intellectual property. Unauthorised access to these assets presents a multi-faceted risk, including the outright theft of proprietary data, the subtle corruption of data that could compromise model performance, or the exposure of personally identifiable information (PII) that may be embedded within the dataset. To mitigate this, AI companies must implement rigorous provisioning processes and conduct regular access reviews for data scientists, machine learning engineers, and data annotation teams who interact with these critical assets.

Securing Algorithmic Processes and Models

Proprietary algorithms, model training environments, inference engines, and the compiled model weights are the “crown jewels” for most AI companies. Improper access rights to these systems could lead to catastrophic consequences. A threat actor could disrupt algorithmic processes, steal valuable model weights, or perform unauthorised modifications that poison the model, rendering it useless or, worse, malicious. Applying role-based access controls and the Principle of Least Privilege is paramount here, particularly for separating development, testing, and production environments to ensure that changes are tested and approved before deployment.

Managing the AI Supply Chain

Modern AI development rarely happens in a vacuum. It often relies on a complex supply chain of third-party data sources, pre-trained models from public repositories, and specialised development tools. This is where the principle of Segregation of Duties becomes critical, not just internally, but in how you architect supplier access. A supplier’s weak access controls can quickly become your own, so it is essential to manage access for all third parties by granting temporary rights with defined expiration dates, ensuring they are automatically revoked once the contract or project concludes. The entity requesting third-party access (e.g., a project manager) should be separate from the IT team that provisions and monitors it.

Navigating these complex challenges requires a structured, repeatable process for managing access from the moment a user joins to the moment they leave.

---

---

---

A Practical Compliance Roadmap: Managing the User Access Lifecycle

To effectively implement control 5.18, an organisation must establish a documented and repeatable process for managing access rights throughout the entire user lifecycle. This operational framework ensures that access is provisioned, reviewed, and revoked in a timely and auditable manner, triggered by specific business events.

The following table outlines a clear process for managing access based on common employee lifecycle events:

Event	Trigger	Key Lifecycle Actions	Timeline
Joiner	Signed Contract + Start Date	Provision Role-Based Access	Day 1
Mover	Job Title Change (HR)	Revoke old rights + Add new rights	< 48 Hours
Leaver	Resignation / Termination	Immediate Disable (Kill Switch)	< 1 Hour
Review	Quarterly Schedule	Manager-Led Access Recertification	Every 90 Days

Essential Documentation and Procedures

Supporting this lifecycle process requires a clear governance structure built on key documentation and established procedures.

• An Access Control Policy: While not a mandatory document under the standard itself, a documented Access Control Policy is considered a best practice and is the most effective way to define and evidence your approach to an auditor. It serves as the single source of truth for your organisation’s rules for granting, reviewing, and revoking access.
• Centralised Records: You must maintain a comprehensive record or log of who has access to what. This ensures all access rights are attributable to a specific, unique user, providing a clear audit trail. Auditors will test this by sampling user accounts and requesting evidence of their access approvals and periodic reviews; a centralised log makes this defensible.
• Regular Access Reviews: User access rights must be reviewed periodically to ensure they remain appropriate. These reviews should occur at least annually, with a recommended best practice of quarterly reviews for privileged accounts or those with access to high-risk systems. Records of these reviews must be maintained as evidence.
• Prompt Revocation Processes: A well-designed exit procedure is critical. One of the most common audit findings is the failure to remove access for former employees. Processes must be in place to ensure all physical and logical access rights are promptly revoked when a user leaves the organisation.

Creating this comprehensive framework of policies, procedures, and records from scratch can be a daunting and time-consuming task, diverting focus from core business activities.

---

The Solution: Streamlining Compliance with the High Table Toolkit

Implementing a robust access control framework that addresses the unique risks of an AI company is a complex undertaking. A strategic decision to accelerate compliance involves leveraging a pre-built framework, such as the High Table ISO 27001 Toolkit, which is designed to provide the necessary governance structure and documentation to satisfy the requirements of Annex A 5.18. It provides a proven, auditor-verified methodology to fast-track implementation while minimizing operational friction.

Your Key to Compliance: The Access Control Policy Template

Central to the toolkit is the pre-written ISO 27001 Access Control Policy template. This document sets out your organisation’s entire approach to access control, from provisioning to revocation. By starting with a comprehensive template, you can rapidly document the correct procedures, ensure nothing is missed, and prepare the exact evidence an auditor will expect to see.

Using a professionally developed toolkit helps your organisation avoid common and costly mistakes. Simple errors, such as forgetting to remove leavers’ accounts or failing to properly document access reviews, are frequent audit findings. A structured toolkit provides the guardrails to prevent these issues, allowing your team to build a resilient and auditable security programme while staying focused on innovation.

---

---

---

Conclusion: Securing Your Future with Proactive Access Management

For an AI company, effective access rights management under ISO 27001 Annex A 5.18 is not just a matter of compliance – it is a strategic necessity for protecting the algorithms, data, and intellectual property that define your competitive edge.

By understanding the unique access-related risks to your training datasets and proprietary models, implementing a clear user access lifecycle process, and leveraging a dedicated solution like the High Table ISO 27001 Toolkit, you can build a secure and compliant environment. This transforms compliance from a defensive necessity into a proactive strategy that builds customer trust and protects enterprise value.

About the author

Stuart Barker is a veteran practitioner with over 30 years of experience in systems security and risk management.

Holding an MSc in Software and Systems Security, Stuart combines academic rigor with extensive operational experience. His background includes over a decade leading Data Governance for General Electric (GE) across Europe, as well as founding and exiting a successful cyber security consultancy.

As a qualified ISO 27001 Lead Auditor and Lead Implementer, Stuart possesses distinct insight into the specific evidence standards required by certification bodies. He has successfully guided hundreds of organizations – from high-growth technology startups to enterprise financial institutions – through the audit lifecycle.

His toolkits represents the distillation of that field experience into a standardised framework. They move beyond theoretical compliance, providing a pragmatic, auditor-verified methodology designed to satisfy ISO/IEC 27001:2022 while minimising operational friction.