Auditing ISO 27001 Annex A 8.8 Management of Technical Vulnerabilities is the rigorous technical evaluation of an organisation’s exposure to known exploits. The Primary Implementation Requirement is systematic scanning and risk-based patching, providing the Business Benefit of a reduced attack surface and hardened infrastructure integrity.
ISO 27001 Annex A 8.8 Management of Technical Vulnerabilities Audit Checklist
This technical verification tool is designed for lead auditors to establish the resilience of infrastructure against known exploits. Use this checklist to validate compliance with ISO 27001 Annex A 8.8.
1. Vulnerability Management Policy Formalisation Verified
Verification Criteria: A documented policy exists defining the roles, responsibilities, and timelines for identifying and remediating technical vulnerabilities.
Required Evidence: Approved Vulnerability Management Policy or Patch Management Standard with explicit remediation SLAs (e.g., ‘Critical’ patches within 14 days).
Pass/Fail Test: If the organisation lacks a formalised document specifying timelines for vulnerability remediation, mark as Non-Compliant.
2. Technical Vulnerability Scanning Coverage Confirmed
Verification Criteria: Automated scanning tools are active and cover all assets identified in the master asset register, including on-premise, cloud, and containerised environments.
Required Evidence: Scan configuration reports from tools such as Nessus, Qualys, or Rapid7 showing full IP range or asset tag inclusion.
Pass/Fail Test: If critical production environments or newly provisioned cloud subnets are excluded from the scanning scope, mark as Non-Compliant.
3. Scanning Frequency Alignment Validated
Verification Criteria: Vulnerability scans are performed at a frequency defined by the risk assessment (e.g., weekly or monthly) and after significant system changes.
Required Evidence: Historic scan logs showing consistent execution intervals over the previous 12-month period.
Pass/Fail Test: If the organisation has failed to perform a comprehensive vulnerability scan within the last 90 days, mark as Non-Compliant.
4. Critical Vulnerability Prioritisation Logic Verified
Verification Criteria: A formalised risk-rating mechanism (e.g., CVSS score) is utilised to prioritise remediation efforts based on the severity of the vulnerability.
Required Evidence: Vulnerability reports showing categorisation by severity and an active “Risk Acceptance” log for deferred items.
Pass/Fail Test: If ‘Critical’ vulnerabilities (CVSS 9.0-10.0) are treated with the same urgency as ‘Low’ vulnerabilities, mark as Non-Compliant.
5. Remediation SLA Compliance Confirmed
Verification Criteria: Vulnerabilities are remediated within the timeframes specified in the internal policy, with evidence of closure for identified flaws.
Required Evidence: Comparative report showing “Date Identified” vs “Date Closed” cross-referenced against the policy SLAs.
Pass/Fail Test: If more than 10% of ‘Critical’ or ‘High’ vulnerabilities exceed their remediation deadline without an approved extension, mark as Non-Compliant.
6. Patch Deployment Verification Records Identified
Verification Criteria: Successful deployment of security patches is verified through post-patch rescanning or automated patch management reports.
Required Evidence: Rescan reports showing “Vulnerability Resolved” or “Clean” status following a remediation cycle.
Pass/Fail Test: If the organisation marks vulnerabilities as ‘fixed’ in a tracker without technical verification that the patch successfully applied, mark as Non-Compliant.
7. External Vulnerability Intelligence Integration Verified
Verification Criteria: The organisation utilises external threat intelligence sources (e.g., CISA KEV, NVD) to identify new vulnerabilities relevant to their specific technology stack.
Required Evidence: Subscriptions to vendor security advisories or evidence of CISA/NVD alerts triggering internal assessment tasks.
Pass/Fail Test: If the organisation only reacts to annual audit findings rather than proactive threat advisories, mark as Non-Compliant.
8. Zero-Day Vulnerability Response Plan Validated
Verification Criteria: A documented emergency procedure exists for responding to ‘zero-day’ vulnerabilities that cannot be immediately patched.
Required Evidence: Incident Response Plan containing a specific ‘Emergency Patching’ or ‘Compensating Control’ subsection.
Pass/Fail Test: If there is no process for implementing temporary blocks or WAF rules for unpatchable critical flaws, mark as Non-Compliant.
9. Authorised Software Whitelisting Enforcement Confirmed
Verification Criteria: Technical controls restrict the installation of unauthorised software that could introduce vulnerabilities into the environment.
Required Evidence: MDM/EDR configuration logs showing active software whitelisting or the removal of local administrative rights for standard users.
Pass/Fail Test: If a standard user can install unapproved third-party executable files on their corporate endpoint, mark as Non-Compliant.
10. Management Review of Vulnerability Metrics Recorded
Verification Criteria: Senior management reviews vulnerability metrics (e.g., mean time to remediate, total open vulnerabilities) to ensure resource adequacy.
Required Evidence: Management Review Meeting (MRM) minutes or security dashboard exports presented to leadership within the last 6 months.
Pass/Fail Test: If the ISMS management review fails to include an analysis of the current technical vulnerability posture, mark as Non-Compliant.
| Control Requirement | The ‘Checkbox Compliance’ Trap | The Reality Check |
|---|---|---|
| Identification | Tool identifies “Scanner is integrated” and marks as green. | Verify the Scope. Check if the scanner API only sees the Cloud instances but misses the 20 legacy on-premise servers. |
| Remediation SLAs | Platform marks a task “Compliant” when the user clicks ‘Done’. | Demand the Rescan Proof. A user clicking ‘Done’ in a GRC tool does not mean the CVE was actually patched on the server. |
| Risk Prioritisation | Tool sorts vulnerabilities by CVSS score automatically. | Verify Context. A CVSS 10 on a test machine is less urgent than a CVSS 7 on a public web server; the tool ignores context. |
| Risk Acceptance | SaaS tool allows a manager to “Dismiss” a vulnerability. | Inspect the Justification. GRC tools often permit “Risk Acceptance” without a technical compensating control or expiry date. |
| Reporting | Tool generates an automated “Vulnerability Trend” chart. | Check for Stale Data. If the scanner hasn’t run for 40 days, the GRC chart is showing a “false positive” green status. |
| Zero-Day Capability | Tool records “Incident Plan” is uploaded. | Test the Tactics. Can the team show a WAF rule or IP block used during a recent high-profile exploit (e.g., Log4j)? |
| Asset Integrity | Platform assumes the asset list is 100% complete. | Perform a Discovery Scan. GRC tools fail when they don’t account for “Shadow IT” that isn’t in the official registry. |
About the author
