Use these answers to allocate cloud-security duties, set agreement terms, and test the evidence for each service.
This page explains , which ISO lists as withdrawn and replaced by ISO/IEC 27017:2026. Confirm the edition required by your contract or assessment before applying the 2015 control references.
answers recurring cloud-security decisions about provider/customer responsibility, service agreements, privileged administration, virtualization, logging and monitoring, provider evidence, customer controls, audit access, and certification claims.
These focused FAQ modules break this artifact into narrower answer sets so teams can move straight to the right source-backed guidance.
ISO/IEC 27017 does not grant unrestricted cloud-provider audits. Define the contract route for independent assurance, supporting access, exceptions, and escalation.
Apply ISO/IEC 27017 to customer and provider cloud administrators: strong authentication, limited privileges, logged operations, supervised critical work, and review evidence.
Use ISO/IEC 27017 to define cloud security roles, provider measures, evidence, incident handling, supplier dependencies, and exit terms in the service agreement.
Identify the cloud controls the customer should assess, configure, operate, monitor, evidence, and review when provider controls do not meet every security requirement.
Allocate cloud event logging and monitoring between provider and customer, verify accessible events, privileged operations, timestamps, retention, alerts, and evidence.
Check whether a cloud provider's certificate, audit report, or self-assessment supports its claims for the entity, service, location, controls, and period in scope.
Allocate ISO/IEC 27017 cloud-security roles to named provider, customer, and upstream parties for one service, then document, communicate, implement, and review the split.
Allocate tenant isolation, virtual-machine hardening, administrative operations, images, snapshots, and virtual-network policy under ISO/IEC 27017.
is a code of practice for cloud service customers and providers. It adds cloud-specific implementation guidance to ISO/IEC 27002:2013 and seven cloud controls. It is not a law or a standalone management-system requirements standard.
Start with one named service and identify whether the organization is acting as the , the provider, or both in a supply chain. Then allocate each security activity to an identified party. The split can change across SaaS, PaaS, IaaS, managed services, provider chains, and negotiated terms.
Record the result in the agreement, responsibility matrix, configuration, operating procedure, or evidence request that controls the work. Assess applicable law, regulation, sector rules, and contract requirements separately; ISO/IEC 27017 says control selection depends on risk and those external requirements.
Sources (2)
ISO identifies the 2015 edition as guidance for both cloud service providers and customers, based on ISO/IEC 27002, and currently marks it published but due for revision.
Code of practice for information security controls based on ISO/IEC 27002 for cloud services
ITU records the identical July 2015 recommendation as superseded and the December 2025 successor as in force (prepublished), so adopters should confirm which edition their assurance basis requires.
Collect evidence from the system or process that performs the control. For ISO/IEC 27017, that can include the signed service agreement, a service-specific responsibility matrix, provider assurance material, customer configuration exports, privileged-operation logs, monitoring tests, incident records, and termination tests.
Each record should identify the service, customer and provider entities, service model, regions, control boundary, period, owner, exceptions, and follow-up. A certificate or provider report supports only the entities, services, locations, controls, and period within its scope; it does not prove the customer's configuration. Where individual customer audits are impractical or could increase risk, the provider should offer sufficiently transparent independent evidence; if independent audit is impractical, the 2015 guidance calls for a disclosed self-assessment.
Sources (3)
Primary ISO listing for the ISO/IEC 27002 information security control guidance standard.
Information security controls
Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard.
Information security, cybersecurity and privacy protection — Information security management systems — Requirements
Clause 18.2.1 supports service-specific documented evidence, independent audit evidence where customer audits are impractical, and disclosed self-assessment where independent audit is impractical.
Assign owners, request evidence, record decisions and exceptions, and set review dates.
Use the same sequence for each question: define the service and provider chain, identify the customer and provider guidance, map the risk and external requirements, allocate the work, confirm both sides can perform it, and attach operating evidence.
If the service offers only fixed controls, compare them with the customer's requirements and add customer controls or record risk treatment for gaps. For example, a SaaS provider may operate the application and platform while the customer still manages user access, sharing settings, data use, and its response to alerts. Route unresolved contract, evidence, configuration, or supplier-chain gaps to someone authorized to accept the risk or fund correction.
Sources (3)
Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard.
Information security, cybersecurity and privacy protection — Information security management systems — Requirements
Primary ISO listing for cloud-service security control guidance.
Code of practice for information security controls based on ISO/IEC 27002 for cloud services
Clauses 4.3, 6.1.1, 8.1.2, and 12.4.1 support comparing preset service capabilities with customer requirements and assigning service-model-dependent access, application, logging, and monitoring work.
A provider's generic responsibility diagram, certificate, or policy title is not enough. Tie each decision to a service boundary, accountable owner, evidence source, change trigger, and escalation path. Those five fields are implementation aids, not extra ISO controls.
Do not treat the standard as law, assume a provider certificate covers the customer's use, or cite ISO/IEC 27002:2022 as the normative base of the 2015 edition. references ISO/IEC 27002:2013; organizations may map newer control sets, but should document that mapping. Do not call ISO/IEC 27017 a standalone management-system certification: ISO/IEC 27001 supplies the certifiable ISMS requirements, and ISO itself does not issue certificates.
Sources (3)
Primary ISO listing for cloud-service security control guidance.
Code of practice for information security controls based on ISO/IEC 27002 for cloud services
Primary ISO listing for the ISO/IEC 27002 information security control guidance standard.
Information security controls
ISO explains that it develops standards but does not issue certificates; external certification bodies perform certification.
Review before selecting a service and when the service model, provider chain, architecture, data location, agreement, control boundary, assurance report, or customer commitment changes. Also confirm the applicable edition when a contract, certification basis, or standards owner changes.
Update every downstream record that depends on the decision, including the agreement, responsibility matrix, control configuration, risk treatment, evidence request, and next review date. Keep unresolved items visible as corrective action or accepted risk. ISO now lists as withdrawn and ISO/IEC 27017:2026 as its replacement. Review the adopted replacement text before changing the 2015 identifiers in these answers.
Sources (3)
Primary ISO listing for the ISO/IEC 27002 information security control guidance standard.
Information security controls
Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard.
Information security, cybersecurity and privacy protection — Information security management systems — Requirements
ISO lists ISO/IEC 27017:2015 as withdrawn and links to the published ISO/IEC 27017:2026 replacement.
"Code of practice for information security controls based on ISO/IEC 27002 for cloud services"
"Information security, cybersecurity and privacy protection — Information security management systems — Requirements"
"Information security controls"
ISO/IEC 27017 is cloud control guidance, not a standalone management-system certification standard. Learn how to check the actual ISO/IEC 27001 claim and scope.
ISO/IEC 27017 cloud provider checklist covering service scope, shared responsibilities, agreements, tenant isolation, operations, evidence, and secure exit.
How cloud providers and customers apply ISO/IEC 27017:2015 through scoped risks, allocated responsibilities, agreements, controls, evidence, and review.
Map ISO/IEC 27017:2015 cloud guidance and CLD controls into an ISO/IEC 27001:2022 ISMS with edition-aware rationale, owners, evidence, and SoA treatment.
Compare ISO/IEC 27017 responsibilities for cloud service providers and customers, with service-model examples, evidence, and review triggers.
What an ISO/IEC 27017:2015 hyperscaler evidence pack should contain, how to test coverage, and where provider assurance must be joined to customer evidence.
A service-specific workflow for testing hyperscaler claims, collecting provider and customer evidence, resolving gaps, and approving cloud risk under ISO/IEC 27017:2015.
How to allocate provider, customer, and shared cloud security activities under ISO/IEC 27017:2015, document hand-offs, and test the allocation against evidence.
Compare ISO/IEC 27017:2015 with CSA CCM v4.1 by scope, control structure, responsibility mapping, assurance use, and evidence.
Compare ISO/IEC 27017:2015 cloud security guidance with ISO/IEC 27018:2025 public-cloud PII processor guidance by scope, role, controls, and evidence.
Compare ISO/IEC 27017 cloud control guidance with SOC 2 attestation reports by purpose, scope, criteria, period, evidence, and customer responsibilities.