ISO 27001:2022 Annex A 5.7 Threat intelligence for Tech Startups

ISO 27001 Annex A 5.7 is a security control that mandates the collection and analysis of Threat Intelligence to identify technical vulnerabilities before they are exploited. It requires organisations to evaluate risk exposure from emerging threats and implement appropriate mitigation measures. This provides the Business Benefit of shifting from reactive patching to proactive defence, safeguarding critical data.

If you run a tech startup, the term “Threat Intelligence” probably conjures images of massive Situation Rooms with wall-to-wall screens and a team of analysts shouting about “state-sponsored actors.” It feels expensive. It feels like enterprise bloat.

But here is the reality: ISO 27001 Annex A 5.7 isn’t asking you to be the NSA. It is simply asking you to stop flying blind. For a startup, Threat Intelligence is about answering one question: “What is out there that could kill us, and how do we stop it before it does?”

The Business Case: Why This Actually Matters

You cannot patch what you don’t know is broken. Annex A 5.7 is your mechanism for knowing before the hackers do. It shifts your security posture from Reactive (fixing things after they break) to Proactive (fixing things because you know breakers are coming).

• Sales Angle: Enterprise buyers ask: “How do you stay aware of emerging threats?” If your answer is “We check Hacker News sometimes,” you fail. They need to see a systematic intake of intelligence (e.g., US-CERT, CVE feeds) to trust you with their data.
• Risk Angle: The “Log4j” Nightmare. Companies that had proper Annex A 5.7 channels knew about Log4j hours before the mainstream press. They patched and were safe. Those who didn’t spent their Christmas scrambling. This control buys you time.

The “No-BS” Translation: Decoding the Requirement

The Auditor’s View: “Information about technical security vulnerabilities of information systems being used shall be obtained in a timely fashion, the organisation’s exposure to such vulnerabilities evaluated and appropriate measures taken to address the associated risk.”

The Startup’s View: Subscribe to the right newsletters and actually read them. Connect your alerting tools to the people who build your infrastructure so you know when to update.

For a Developer, this translates to:

• Frameworks: Subscribe to GitHub Security Advisories for your repo.
• Infrastructure: Subscribe to AWS/Azure Security Bulletins.
• Community: Join the local OWASP chapter or a relevant Slack community.

DORA, NIS2, and AI Laws

Intelligence sharing is a pillar of modern regulation. It is no longer optional to operate in a silo.

• DORA (Fintech): Encourages the exchange of cyber threat information and intelligence. Annex A 5.7 is how you demonstrate participation in these information-sharing arrangements (TLPT – Threat Led Penetration Testing relies on this intel).
• NIS2: Requires entities to use “Threat Intelligence” to prevent incidents. You must show you are connected to your national CSIRT (Computer Security Incident Response Team) and receiving their alerts.
• AI Act: The field of AI security (Adversarial Machine Learning) is brand new. Regulators expect you to stay current. Annex A 5.7 is where you document that you are following bodies like the AI Safety Institute to keep your models secure against prompt injection and poisoning.

Why the ISO 27001 Toolkit Trumps SaaS Platforms

SaaS platforms often sell “Threat Feeds” as an expensive add-on. You don’t need to pay for what is publicly available.

Feature	ISO 27001 Toolkit (High Table)	Online SaaS GRC Platform
Flexibility	Add any feed (Substack, Discord, RSS). You choose the source.	Limited to the feeds the vendor has integrated. Often outdated.
Ownership	You own the process. It integrates directly into your Slack/Teams.	Alerts live in the platform dashboard, which devs rarely check.
Cost	One-off fee. Uses free industry sources.	Monthly subscription for “Premium Intel” which is often just repackaged free data.
Relevance	Highly targeted to your stack.	Generic “Global Threat” maps that look cool but offer zero actionable value.

Top 3 Non-Conformities When Using SaaS Platforms

1. The “Dashboard Fatigue” Fail: The SaaS tool pulls in 1,000 alerts a day from generic sources. The team mutes the notifications because it’s noise. The auditor asks about a specific relevant threat, and the team missed it. Fail.
2. The “Proprietary Lock-in” Gap: You rely on the SaaS tool for news. You cancel the subscription. You now have zero threat intelligence capability. Major Non-Conformity for lack of resilience.
3. The “Context Blindness” Error: The tool alerts you to Windows server vulnerabilities, but you run 100% Linux. The auditor sees unaddressed “Critical” alerts in your dashboard that you ignored because they were irrelevant. It looks like negligence.

Step 1: Curate Your Sources (The Input)

You don’t need expensive subscription feeds. The best intelligence for a tech startup is often free, provided you know where to look. You need to gather intelligence from three layers:

• Strategic (The Big Picture): High-level info about trends. Are attackers targeting Fintechs? Sources: CISA alerts, ENISA reports.
• Tactical (The “How”): The tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) attackers use. Sources: MITRE ATT&CK framework, OWASP Top 10.
• Operational (The Specifics): The most critical layer for your dev team. Specific IoCs and vulnerabilities. Sources: GitHub Dependabot, AWS Security Bulletins.

Step 2: Filter the Noise (The Processing)

Context is King. If you receive an alert about a critical vulnerability in “Oracle WebLogic” but you run entirely on a serverless AWS stack, that intelligence is useless to you. Discard it. Annex A 5.7 is as much about ignoring irrelevant threats as it is about acting on real ones.

Step 3: From Intel to Action (The Output)

This is where you pass the audit. An auditor doesn’t want to see a folder full of unread PDFs. They want to see a ticket.

1. Trigger: You receive an alert from GitHub about a vulnerability in a package.
2. Analysis: The Lead Dev confirms, “Yes, we use that package in production.”
3. Action: A Jira/Linear ticket is created: “Patch dependency XYZ due to Critical CVE.”
4. Resolution: The PR is merged, and the ticket is closed.

The Evidence Locker: What the Auditor Needs to See

To pass the audit, have these artifacts ready in your folder:

• The Threat Intel Register: A simple document listing your sources (e.g., “We monitor CISA and AWS”).
• Slack Screenshots: Show the auditor the #threat-intel channel where a team member said “Hey, this looks bad, let’s patch.”
• Jira Tickets: Show a ticket titled “Patch OpenSSL” linked to a CVE alert. This connects the intel to the action.

Common Pitfalls & Auditor Traps

• The “Ghost List”: You listed 10 groups in your document in 2023. In 2026, the auditor asks “What was the last update from Group X?” and you realise that group shut down 2 years ago. Review your list annually.
• The “Information Silo”: The CTO reads the news but never tells the devs. Intelligence must be shared to be effective.
• The “Twitter Trap”: “I follow security guys on X.” Valid intel, but hard to audit. Formalise it by listing specific accounts in your register.

Handling Exceptions: The “Break Glass” Protocol

What if a Zero-Day vulnerability hits that isn’t in your standard feeds? (e.g., a leak on a dark web forum).

• The Trigger: Unverified intel from an informal source (e.g., a DM on LinkedIn).
• The Action: CTO convenes an emergency “Threat Assessment” meeting.
• The Paper Trail: Document the meeting minutes. “Received tip-off regarding X. Investigated. Found no exposure.”
• The Outcome: You proved agility and due diligence outside of standard channels.

The Process Layer: The Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)

Tools: Feedly (RSS Aggregator), Slack, Jira.

1. Daily: Automated feeds post to Slack.
2. Weekly: Security Lead spends 15 mins reviewing high-priority alerts.
3. Quarterly: Review the list of sources. Remove dead ones, add new ones (e.g., AI Safety).
4. Annually: Confirm membership status for any paid feeds.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

About the author