--- title: "ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Management FAQ" canonical_url: "https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq" source_url: "https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/items" author: "Sorena AI" description: "ISO/IEC 27005 FAQ for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance." published_at: "2026-05-09" updated_at: "2026-05-09" keywords: - "ISO/IEC 27005 FAQ" - "ISO/IEC 27005" - "ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management" - "ISO/IEC 27005 FAQ checklist" - "ISO/IEC 27005 FAQ evidence" - "ISO/IEC 27005 FAQ implementation" - "FAQ" - "global compliance" --- **[SORENA](https://www.sorena.io/)** - AI-Powered GRC Platform [Home](https://www.sorena.io/) | [Solutions](https://www.sorena.io/solutions) | [Artifacts](https://www.sorena.io/artifacts) | [About Us](https://www.sorena.io/about-us) | [Contact](https://www.sorena.io/contact) | [Portal](https://app.sorena.io) --- # ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Management FAQ ISO/IEC 27005 FAQ for ISO/IEC 27005 Information Security Risk Management: practical decisions, evidence, owners, review cadence, and source-linked implementation guidance. *FAQ* *Global* *ISO/IEC 27005* ## ISO/IEC 27005 FAQ Answer iso/iec 27005 risk-management questions with explicit owner, evidence, and escalation expectations for ISO/IEC 27005. Applied to this decision area, this page focuses on scope, ownership, evidence, review triggers, and escalation criteria supported by source-linked risk-management guidance. This FAQ helps teams determine what must be owned, what evidence must be present, and when review or escalation is required. ## Browse sub-FAQ modules ### [ISO/IEC 27005 Asset And Scenario Modeling FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/asset-and-scenario-modeling.md) How should teams model assets and scenarios under ISO/IEC 27005 risk assessments? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - 4 items ### [ISO/IEC 27005 Impact FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/impact.md) How should teams handle Impact under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - 4 items ### [ISO/IEC 27005 Inherent vs Residual Risk FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/inherent-vs-residual-risk.md) How should teams distinguish inherent risk from residual risk under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - 4 items ### [ISO/IEC 27005 Likelihood FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/likelihood.md) How should teams handle Likelihood under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - 4 items ### [ISO/IEC 27005 Review Cadence FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/review-cadence.md) How should teams handle Review Cadence under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - 4 items ### [ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Acceptance FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/risk-acceptance.md) How should teams handle Risk Acceptance under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - 4 items ### [ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Owners FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/risk-owners.md) How should teams handle Risk Owners under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - 4 items ### [ISO/IEC 27005 Treatment Options FAQ](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/treatment-options.md) How should teams handle Treatment Options under ISO/IEC 27005? Practical answer with owners, evidence, review triggers, and external source references. - 4 items Browse all indexed questions: [/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/items](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/items.md) ## All FAQ items *Page 1 of 2. Showing 20 of 32 items.* ### [How should teams model assets and scenarios under ISO/IEC 27005 risk assessments?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/asset-and-scenario-modeling.md#how-should-teams-model-assets-and-scenarios-under-isoiec-27005-risk-assessments) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Asset And Scenario Modeling](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/asset-and-scenario-modeling.md)* Start by naming the asset, the threat source, the relevant vulnerability or predisposing condition, and the expected impact. Then write the scenario as a short, testable statement that links those pieces together. - Name the accountable owner and reviewer for Asset And Scenario Modeling. - Record the scope, assumptions, decision, approval date, evidence location, exception status, and next review trigger. - Escalate when Asset And Scenario Modeling changes risk acceptance, service commitments, customer promises, regulatory duties, or certification evidence. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [What evidence should prove Asset And Scenario Modeling is current under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/asset-and-scenario-modeling.md#what-evidence-should-prove-asset-and-scenario-modeling-is-current-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Asset And Scenario Modeling](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/asset-and-scenario-modeling.md)* The evidence should show the process operating. For this artifact, the strongest record usually includes risk criteria, scenarios, likelihood and impact rationale, treatment decisions, residual-risk approvals, and review records. - Use source records from the system of work, not screenshots created only for audit day. - Keep exceptions visible as risk acceptance, corrective action, or management-review input. - Update linked registers when the answer changes an owner, risk, control, service, supplier, or review date. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. - [NIST SP 800-30 Rev. 1](https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-30r1.pdf?ref=sorena.io) - NIST risk-assessment guidance used for comparison with ISO/IEC 27005. ### [Who should approve Asset And Scenario Modeling decisions under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/asset-and-scenario-modeling.md#who-should-approve-asset-and-scenario-modeling-decisions-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Asset And Scenario Modeling](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/asset-and-scenario-modeling.md)* The person who can fund, operate, and correct the process should own the decision; governance should review consistency and exceptions. - Use a named owner, named backup, and named escalation forum. - Separate preparation work from risk acceptance and final approval. - Keep approval records with the evidence rather than in disconnected email threads. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [When should Asset And Scenario Modeling be reviewed under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/asset-and-scenario-modeling.md#when-should-asset-and-scenario-modeling-be-reviewed-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Asset And Scenario Modeling](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/asset-and-scenario-modeling.md)* Review it at planned intervals and whenever the underlying scope, service, supplier, control, risk, AI system, personal data flow, incident process, or customer commitment changes. - Set a planned review date and a change-trigger rule. - Use findings to update controls, procedures, contracts, risk registers, or training. - Carry unresolved items into management review or risk acceptance. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [How should teams handle Impact under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/impact.md#how-should-teams-handle-impact-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Impact](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/impact.md)* Start with one decision record: scope, required inputs, owner, evidence location, and review condition. Then route the result to treatment or acceptance gates. - Name the accountable owner and reviewer for Impact. - Record the scope, assumptions, decision, approval date, evidence location, exception status, and next review trigger. - Escalate when Impact changes risk acceptance, service commitments, customer promises, regulatory duties, or certification evidence. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [What evidence should prove Impact is current under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/impact.md#what-evidence-should-prove-impact-is-current-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Impact](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/impact.md)* The evidence should show the process operating. For this artifact, the strongest record usually includes risk criteria, scenarios, likelihood and Impact rationale, treatment decisions, residual-risk approvals, and review records. - Use source records from the system of work, not screenshots created only for audit day. - Keep exceptions visible as risk acceptance, corrective action, or management-review input. - Update linked registers when the answer changes an owner, risk, control, service, supplier, or review date. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. - [NIST SP 800-30 Rev. 1](https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-30r1.pdf?ref=sorena.io) - NIST risk-assessment guidance used for comparison with ISO/IEC 27005. ### [Who should approve Impact decisions under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/impact.md#who-should-approve-impact-decisions-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Impact](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/impact.md)* The person who can fund, operate, and correct the process should own the decision; governance should review consistency and exceptions. - Use a named owner, named backup, and named escalation forum. - Separate preparation work from risk acceptance and final approval. - Keep approval records with the evidence rather than in disconnected email threads. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [When should Impact be reviewed under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/impact.md#when-should-impact-be-reviewed-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Impact](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/impact.md)* Review it at planned intervals and whenever the underlying scope, service, supplier, control, risk, AI system, personal data flow, incident process, or customer commitment changes. - Set a planned review date and a change-trigger rule. - Use findings to update controls, procedures, contracts, risk registers, or training. - Carry unresolved items into management review or risk acceptance. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [How should teams distinguish inherent risk from residual risk under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/inherent-vs-residual-risk.md#how-should-teams-distinguish-inherent-risk-from-residual-risk-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Inherent vs Residual Risk](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/inherent-vs-residual-risk.md)* Start with one decision record: scope, required inputs, owner, evidence location, and review condition. Then route the result to treatment or acceptance gates. - Name the accountable owner and reviewer for Inherent vs Residual Risk. - Record the scope, assumptions, decision, approval date, evidence location, exception status, and next review trigger. - Escalate when Inherent vs Residual Risk changes risk acceptance, service commitments, customer promises, regulatory duties, or certification evidence. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [What evidence should prove Inherent vs Residual Risk is current under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/inherent-vs-residual-risk.md#what-evidence-should-prove-inherent-vs-residual-risk-is-current-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Inherent vs Residual Risk](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/inherent-vs-residual-risk.md)* The evidence should show the process operating. For this artifact, the strongest record usually includes risk criteria, scenarios, likelihood and impact rationale, treatment decisions, residual-risk approvals, and review records. - Use source records from the system of work, not screenshots created only for audit day. - Keep exceptions visible as risk acceptance, corrective action, or management-review input. - Update linked registers when the answer changes an owner, risk, control, service, supplier, or review date. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. - [NIST SP 800-30 Rev. 1](https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-30r1.pdf?ref=sorena.io) - NIST risk-assessment guidance used for comparison with ISO/IEC 27005. ### [Who should approve Inherent vs Residual Risk decisions under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/inherent-vs-residual-risk.md#who-should-approve-inherent-vs-residual-risk-decisions-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Inherent vs Residual Risk](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/inherent-vs-residual-risk.md)* The person who can fund, operate, and correct the process should own the decision; governance should review consistency and exceptions. - Use a named owner, named backup, and named escalation forum. - Separate preparation work from risk acceptance and final approval. - Keep approval records with the evidence rather than in disconnected email threads. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [When should Inherent vs Residual Risk be reviewed under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/inherent-vs-residual-risk.md#when-should-inherent-vs-residual-risk-be-reviewed-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Inherent vs Residual Risk](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/inherent-vs-residual-risk.md)* Review it at planned intervals and whenever the underlying scope, service, supplier, control, risk, AI system, personal data flow, incident process, or customer commitment changes. - Set a planned review date and a change-trigger rule. - Use findings to update controls, procedures, contracts, risk registers, or training. - Carry unresolved items into management review or risk acceptance. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [How should teams handle Likelihood under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/likelihood.md#how-should-teams-handle-likelihood-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Likelihood](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/likelihood.md)* Start with one decision record: scope, required inputs, owner, evidence location, and review condition. Then route the result to treatment or acceptance gates. - Name the accountable owner and reviewer for Likelihood. - Record the scope, assumptions, decision, approval date, evidence location, exception status, and next review trigger. - Escalate when Likelihood changes risk acceptance, service commitments, customer promises, regulatory duties, or certification evidence. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for ISO/IEC 27005, cited because likelihood must be defined inside a structured information-security risk management process that supports an ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [What evidence should prove Likelihood is current under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/likelihood.md#what-evidence-should-prove-likelihood-is-current-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Likelihood](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/likelihood.md)* The evidence should show the process operating. For this artifact, the strongest record usually includes risk criteria, scenarios, Likelihood and impact rationale, treatment decisions, residual-risk approvals, and review records. - Use source records from the system of work, not screenshots created only for audit day. - Keep exceptions visible as risk acceptance, corrective action, or management-review input. - Update linked registers when the answer changes an owner, risk, control, service, supplier, or review date. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. - [NIST SP 800-30 Rev. 1](https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-30r1.pdf?ref=sorena.io) - NIST risk-assessment guidance used for comparison with ISO/IEC 27005. ### [Who should approve Likelihood decisions under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/likelihood.md#who-should-approve-likelihood-decisions-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Likelihood](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/likelihood.md)* The person who can fund, operate, and correct the process should own the decision; governance should review consistency and exceptions. - Use a named owner, named backup, and named escalation forum. - Separate preparation work from risk acceptance and final approval. - Keep approval records with the evidence rather than in disconnected email threads. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [When should Likelihood be reviewed under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/likelihood.md#when-should-likelihood-be-reviewed-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Likelihood](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/likelihood.md)* Review it at planned intervals and whenever the underlying scope, service, supplier, control, risk, AI system, personal data flow, incident process, or customer commitment changes. - Set a planned review date and a change-trigger rule. - Use findings to update controls, procedures, contracts, risk registers, or training. - Carry unresolved items into management review or risk acceptance. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [How should teams handle Review Cadence under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/review-cadence.md#how-should-teams-handle-review-cadence-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Review Cadence](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/review-cadence.md)* Start with one decision record: scope, required inputs, owner, evidence location, and review condition. Then route the result to treatment or acceptance gates. - Name the accountable owner and reviewer for Review Cadence. - Record the scope, assumptions, decision, approval date, evidence location, exception status, and next review trigger. - Escalate when Review Cadence changes risk acceptance, service commitments, customer promises, regulatory duties, or certification evidence. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [What evidence should prove Review Cadence is current under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/review-cadence.md#what-evidence-should-prove-review-cadence-is-current-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Review Cadence](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/review-cadence.md)* The evidence should show the process operating. For this artifact, the strongest record usually includes risk criteria, scenarios, likelihood and impact rationale, treatment decisions, residual-risk approvals, and review records. - Use source records from the system of work, not screenshots created only for audit day. - Keep exceptions visible as risk acceptance, corrective action, or management-review input. - Update linked registers when the answer changes an owner, risk, control, service, supplier, or review date. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. - [NIST SP 800-30 Rev. 1](https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication800-30r1.pdf?ref=sorena.io) - NIST risk-assessment guidance used for comparison with ISO/IEC 27005. ### [Who should approve Review Cadence decisions under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/review-cadence.md#who-should-approve-review-cadence-decisions-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Review Cadence](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/review-cadence.md)* The person who can fund, operate, and correct the process should own the decision; governance should review consistency and exceptions. - Use a named owner, named backup, and named escalation forum. - Separate preparation work from risk acceptance and final approval. - Keep approval records with the evidence rather than in disconnected email threads. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ### [When should Review Cadence be reviewed under ISO/IEC 27005?](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/review-cadence.md#when-should-review-cadence-be-reviewed-under-isoiec-27005) *Module: [ISO/IEC 27005 Review Cadence](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/review-cadence.md)* Review it on a planned schedule and on an ongoing basis, and update it whenever the underlying scope, service, supplier, control, risk, AI system, personal data flow, incident process, or customer commitment changes. NIST risk guidance says the useful life of assessment results is bounded in time, that organizations should determine how long results remain relevant, and that updates should be triggered by significant changes and incidents. - Set a planned review date and a change-trigger rule. - Use findings to update controls, procedures, contracts, risk registers, or training. - Carry unresolved items into management review or risk acceptance. Sources for this answer: - [ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/80585.html?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for current ISO/IEC 27005 risk-management guidance. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001?ref=sorena.io) - Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard. ## FAQ Pagination - Canonical index (page 1): [/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/items](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/items.md) - Page 1 rule: `/page/1` is intentionally not generated; use the canonical index markdown URL. - Current page: 1 of 2 Pages: [1](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/items.md) | [2](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/items/page/2.md) [Next page](/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/items/page/2.md) *Recommended next step for ISO/IEC 27005* *Placement: after implementation guidance* ## Operationalize ISO/IEC 27005 FAQ Define owner, evidence requirements, evidence requests, and the next review date before approval. - [Open Assessment Autopilot for ISO/IEC 27005](/solutions/assessment.md): Convert ISO/IEC 27005 FAQ into accountable tasks, evidence requests, and review checkpoints. - [Talk through ISO/IEC 27005 implementation](/contact.md): Review your current scope, evidence gaps, and next implementation steps. --- [Privacy Policy](https://www.sorena.io/privacy) | [Terms of Use](https://www.sorena.io/terms-of-use) | [DMCA](https://www.sorena.io/dmca) | [About Us](https://www.sorena.io/about-us) (c) 2026 Sorena AB (559573-7338). All rights reserved. Source: https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/global/iso-27005/faq/items