Practical toolGlobalISO/IEC 27005

ISO/IEC 27005 Residual Risk Approval Workflow

The risk owner should accept residual risk only after reviewing the assessment, treatment plan, expected or measured control effect, acceptance-criteria result, conditions, and review trigger. Escalate the decision when the approved criteria assign it to a higher authority.

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 provides guidance for the ISO/IEC 27001:2022 risk requirements. It does not prescribe an approval form or create a separate certification scheme.

Back to main artifact Review sources

Author

Sorena AI

Published

May 9, 2026

Updated

Jul 24, 2026

Sections

Structured answer sets in this page tree.

Primary sources

Cited legal and guidance references.

Publication metadata

Sorena AI

Published May 9, 2026

Updated Jul 24, 2026

Overview

is the risk left after treatment. The decision record should show whether that level is forecast from a treatment plan or measured after implementation. The risk owner reviews the assessment, treatment, expected or tested effectiveness, comparison with every approved acceptance rule, conditions, and monitoring plan. Accept within delegated authority, escalate when the criteria require a higher authority, or return the risk for further treatment or reassessment.

Section 1

What does ISO/IEC 27005 say about the residual-risk decision?

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 clause 6.1.3 requires risk owners to approve the risk treatment plan and accept the residual information security risks. ISO/IEC 27005:2022 explains that the owner needs understandable assessment results, the treatment plan, and the remaining risk. Acceptance can occur against a forecast residual level while treatment is still planned when the criteria allow it, but the record must say so; after implementation, replace forecasts with follow-up assessment and control-effectiveness evidence.

Plan approval and residual-risk acceptance are separate gates. A risk owner can approve a sound implementation plan yet refuse the forecast remaining risk, or conditionally accept a temporary exposure while named actions are completed. The criteria determine whether the owner can decide or must obtain higher-management agreement.

Trigger: a treatment plan is ready for approval, a follow-up assessment produces a residual level, or an existing acceptance reaches a review condition.
Actor: the risk owner approves the plan and decides on ; the approved criteria may require a manager with higher authority to endorse or make the acceptance decision.
Outcome: accept, accept with recorded conditions, escalate, require further treatment, avoid the activity, share the risk, or reassess when the available information is insufficient.

Sources for this answer

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 clauses 8.6.2 and 8.6.3 explain risk-owner approval, residual-risk acceptance, conditional acceptance, higher-authority escalation, and follow-up assessment.

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 clause 6.1.3(f) requires risk-owner approval of the treatment plan and acceptance of residual information security risks.

Section 2

Which records make residual-risk approval reviewable?

Keep the decision traceable to one risk version, one treatment-plan version, and one criteria version. Record the scenario and scope, risk owner, assessment date and method, pre-treatment level, selected treatment, rationale, implementation owners and dates, resources, status, necessary controls, evidence or assumptions about effectiveness, residual consequence and likelihood, residual level, criteria comparison, decision authority, decision date, conditions, exposure limit, monitoring indicators, and next review trigger.

Label each residual estimate as forecast or measured and identify the evidence date. Show that a control operates with evidence, not with the proposal to implement it.
If the owner overrides the normal acceptance criteria, record the circumstances, justification, approving authority, exposure limit, treatment commitment, and time limit.
Preserve rejected submissions and superseded decisions so a reviewer can see which facts, criteria, or controls changed.
For risk sharing, attach or reference the insurance, supplier, or other agreement and record the liability, dependency, and consequence that remains with the organization.

Sources for this answer

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 clause 8.6.3 links residual-risk decisions to treatment plans, effectiveness, follow-up likelihood and consequence assessment, conditions, justification, and time-dependent thresholds.

Recommended next step

Keep residual-risk approval traceable

Assign the decision owner, collect the assessment and treatment evidence, record conditions, and set the next review trigger.

Assessment workflow

Track residual-risk approval

Assign decision tasks, request treatment and effectiveness evidence, and schedule review checkpoints.

Explore next step

Talk to Sorena

Talk through implementation

Review your current scope, evidence gaps, and next implementation steps.

Explore next step

Section 3

How should the approval workflow operate?

Start by confirming the risk, scope, assessment version, criteria version, owner, and treatment-plan status. Determine whether the submission seeks plan approval, acceptance of a forecast, or acceptance after implementation. For a forecast, test the assumptions, implementation dates, dependencies, and planned control effects; after implementation, examine operating and effectiveness evidence and reassess consequence and likelihood. Compare the resulting residual level with every applicable criterion before routing the decision to the authorized owner.

Gate 1 - plan approval: the risk owner checks the treatment option, expected benefits, necessary controls, implementers, resources, constraints, performance measures, reporting, dates, and status. Return an incomplete or unintelligible plan.
Gate 2 - residual assessment: the assessor records forecast or measured control effectiveness, consequence, likelihood, level, uncertainty, and evidence. Return to assessment if the available information cannot support the decision.
Gate 3 - criteria and authority: compare the result with combined-score, separate consequence and likelihood, risk-class, legal, contractual, exception, and time rules. Route it to the decision level assigned by the criteria.
Gate 4 - decision and record: accept, conditionally accept, reject, avoid, share, require further treatment, or reassess. Record the authority, rationale, conditions, action owner, expiry or review date, monitoring indicators, and effective date.
Gate 5 - follow-up: monitor treatment progress and the factors behind the assessment. A missed milestone, failed control, expired condition, or changed risk input reopens the decision.

Sources for this answer

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 describes treatment as an iterative cycle of planning, implementation, effectiveness assessment, acceptability decision, and further treatment when needed.

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requires documented information about the risk treatment process and implementation results.

Section 4

Which approval mistakes should teams avoid?

An approval status without the underlying decision is not enough. Do not treat plan approval as proof that controls work, or treat risk acceptance as permanent. Do not lower a score to fit a threshold, silently change criteria for one risk, or let the person implementing a control accept risk beyond their delegated authority.

Do not describe ISO/IEC 27005 guidance as a prescribed form, legal permission, or separate certification requirement.
Risk sharing, including insurance or outsourcing, does not remove the organization's remaining risk or the need for an acceptance decision.
A temporary exception needs a defined extent, owner, action commitment, deadline, and escalation path; otherwise it is an indefinite acceptance.

Sources for this answer

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 permits justified overrides and time-limited acceptance but calls for explicit comments, conditions, and the appropriate level of authority.

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 distinguishes treatment planning, plan implementation, and retained documented results.

Section 5

When should residual-risk approval be reviewed?

Review at the recorded date and when the acceptance conditions no longer hold. ISO/IEC 27005 sets no universal approval duration. Reassess after a failed control test, missed treatment milestone, incident or near miss, material scope or business change, new threat or vulnerability information, changed legal or contractual requirement, changed likelihood or consequence, or revised risk appetite or acceptance criteria.

The evidence owner monitors the specified indicators and raises a review when a threshold or condition is breached.
The risk owner confirms whether the accepted level remains within the current criteria and delegated authority.
Close or supersede an acceptance only after recording the new assessment and decision; preserve the earlier version in the change history.

Sources for this answer

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 clauses 5.2, 9.1, and 10.5 call for planned and event-driven reassessment and monitoring of changes to threats, vulnerabilities, likelihood, consequences, criteria, and treatment effectiveness.

Primary sources

References and citations

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard page

iso.org

Referenced sections

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 distinguishes treatment planning, plan implementation, and retained documented results.

"Information security management systems — Requirements"

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 standard page

iso.org

Referenced sections

ISO/IEC 27005:2022 clauses 5.2, 9.1, and 10.5 call for planned and event-driven reassessment and monitoring of changes to threats, vulnerabilities, likelihood, consequences, criteria, and treatment effectiveness.