FAQ item index

Search every question across sub-FAQs

Find the exact question, open the source answer card, and copy a direct link to the anchored sub-FAQ response.

Indexed coverage
32of32items
Across 8 modules • Updated May 9, 2026
Author
Sorena AI
Published
May 9, 2026
Updated
May 9, 2026
Back to sub-FAQs
ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Acceptance

How should teams handle Risk Acceptance under ISO/IEC 27005?

Start with one decision record: scope, required inputs, owner, evidence location, and review condition. Then route the result to treatment or acceptance gates.

For risk work, separate the model from the result: risk criteria, scenario assumptions, likelihood rationale, impact rationale, existing controls, treatment choice, residual risk, and acceptance authority. This keeps the answer useful in audits, customer reviews, incidents, supplier reviews, and management review.

  • Name the accountable owner and reviewer for Risk Acceptance.
  • Record the scope, assumptions, decision, approval date, evidence location, exception status, and next review trigger.
  • Escalate when risk acceptance changes residual-risk exposure, service commitments, customer promises, regulatory duties, or certification evidence.
Citations
Jump to answerOpen module
ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Acceptance

What evidence should prove Risk Acceptance is current under ISO/IEC 27005?

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.

Avoid evidence that only repeats a requirement. A reviewer should be able to see the actual owner, date, system, supplier, AI system, service, incident, risk, or control sample behind the answer.

  • 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.
Citations
Jump to answerOpen module
ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Acceptance

Who should approve Risk Acceptance decisions under ISO/IEC 27005?

The person who can fund, operate, and correct the process should own the decision; governance should review consistency and exceptions.

For high-impact changes, approval should include the teams affected by the evidence: security, privacy, resilience, supplier management, AI governance, legal, risk, or business service owners as relevant.

  • 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.
Citations
Jump to answerOpen module
ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Acceptance

When should Risk Acceptance be reviewed under ISO/IEC 27005?

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.

A stale record is worse than a short record. If the facts change, update the evidence and mark what changed so the next reviewer can trust the page.

  • 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.
Citations
Jump to answerOpen module
ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Owners

How should teams handle Risk Owners under ISO/IEC 27005?

Start with one decision record: scope, required inputs, owner, evidence location, and review condition. Then route the result to treatment or acceptance gates.

For risk work, separate the model from the result: risk criteria, scenario assumptions, likelihood rationale, impact rationale, existing controls, treatment choice, residual risk, and acceptance authority. This keeps the answer useful in audits, customer reviews, incidents, supplier reviews, and management review.

  • Name the accountable owner and reviewer for Risk Owners.
  • Record the scope, assumptions, decision, approval date, evidence location, exception status, and next review trigger.
  • Escalate when Risk Owners changes risk acceptance, service commitments, customer promises, regulatory duties, or certification evidence.
Citations
Jump to answerOpen module
ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Owners

What evidence should prove Risk Owners is current under ISO/IEC 27005?

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.

Avoid evidence that only repeats a requirement. A reviewer should be able to see the actual owner, date, system, supplier, AI system, service, incident, risk, or control sample behind the answer.

  • 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.
Citations
Jump to answerOpen module
ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Owners

Who should approve Risk Owners decisions under ISO/IEC 27005?

The person who can fund, operate, and correct the process should own the decision; governance should review consistency and exceptions.

For high-impact changes, approval should include the teams affected by the evidence: security, privacy, resilience, supplier management, AI governance, legal, risk, or business service owners as relevant.

  • 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.
Citations
Jump to answerOpen module
ISO/IEC 27005 Risk Owners

When should Risk Owners be reviewed under ISO/IEC 27005?

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.

A stale record is worse than a short record. If the facts change, update the evidence and mark what changed so the next reviewer can trust the page.

  • 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.
Citations
Jump to answerOpen module
ISO/IEC 27005 Treatment Options

What are the treatment options under ISO/IEC 27005, and how do we choose?

ISO/IEC 27005 uses four practical treatment choices: accept the risk, avoid the risk, modify the risk by changing controls or plans, or share the risk with another party. The right choice depends on whether the risk is within tolerance, whether the activity can be changed or stopped, whether controls can reduce the risk to an acceptable level, and whether transfer or sharing is available through contracts, insurance, or other arrangements.

Start with one decision record: scope, required inputs, owner, evidence location, and review condition. Then route the result to treatment or acceptance gates. If the risk is already within tolerance, acceptance may be appropriate. If the activity should not continue, avoid it. If the risk can be reduced, modify it. If another party can carry part of the exposure, share it.

  • Name the accountable owner and reviewer for the chosen treatment option.
  • Record the scope, assumptions, decision, approval date, evidence location, exception status, and next review trigger.
  • Escalate when the treatment choice changes risk acceptance, service commitments, customer promises, regulatory duties, or certification evidence.
Citations
NIST SP 800-30 Rev. 1

Risk assessment guidance that lists risk responses and supports choosing between accept, avoid, mitigate, share, or transfer.

Jump to answerOpen module
ISO/IEC 27005 Treatment Options

What evidence should prove Treatment Options is current under ISO/IEC 27005?

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.

Avoid evidence that only repeats a requirement. A reviewer should be able to see the actual owner, date, system, supplier, AI system, service, incident, risk, or control sample behind the answer.

  • 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.
Citations
Jump to answerOpen module
ISO/IEC 27005 Treatment Options

Who should approve Treatment Options decisions under ISO/IEC 27005?

The person who can fund, operate, and correct the process should own the decision; governance should review consistency and exceptions.

For high-impact changes, approval should include the teams affected by the evidence: security, privacy, resilience, supplier management, AI governance, legal, risk, or business service owners as relevant.

  • 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.
Citations
Jump to answerOpen module
ISO/IEC 27005 Treatment Options

When should Treatment Options be reviewed under ISO/IEC 27005?

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.

A stale record is worse than a short record. If the facts change, update the evidence and mark what changed so the next reviewer can trust the page.

  • 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.
Citations
Jump to answerOpen module
Page 2 of 2
Previous12Next