FAQGlobalISO/IEC 27017

ISO/IEC 27017 FAQ Shared Responsibility

How should cloud-security responsibilities be split under ISO/IEC 27017?

Allocate each activity for one service to identified customer, provider, and upstream parties; document it in the agreement; confirm each party can perform it; and keep evidence.

Author
Sorena AI
Published
May 9, 2026
Updated
Jul 24, 2026
Questions
4

Structured answer sets in this page tree.

Primary sources
4

Cited legal and guidance references.

Publication metadata
Sorena AI
Published May 9, 2026
Updated Jul 24, 2026
Overview

Under ISO/IEC 27017:2015, means allocating each security action for one named cloud service to identified customer, provider, and upstream parties. Document the split in the operative agreement and responsibility matrix, confirm each party can perform its work, define every handoff and evidence source, and test the boundary. The agreement does not transfer the customer's accountability for deciding to use the service. ISO/IEC 27017 is voluntary guidance rather than a universal legal allocation, and SaaS, PaaS, and IaaS labels do not determine every task by themselves. ISO lists the 2015 edition as published and a revision as under development.

Search this module

Find a question or answer quickly

4 of 4 questions
Question 1

How should teams handle Shared Responsibility under ISO/IEC 27017?

Build the allocation for one customer entity, provider entity, named service and tier, service model, region, current architecture, and provider chain. For each task, record the actor, action, input, handoff, evidence, exception route, and outcome. Clause 6.1.1 says the parties should agree their roles, state them in an agreement, and confirm that the customer can fulfil its allocation. CLD.6.3.1 adds that shared roles should be documented, communicated, and implemented by both sides.

Map identity, customer and provider administration, configuration, vulnerability handling, event logging, monitoring, backup, incident response, digital evidence, data and record protection, provider change, continuity, and exit where relevant. Use provider-owned, customer-owned, or shared only after naming the work. For a shared backup row, for example, state whether the provider supplies snapshots or another capability, who selects scope and retention, who initiates or automates backup, who protects access, who performs restoration, and who tests the result.

Use service-model examples as prompts, not fixed classifications. In IaaS, provider logging can be limited to infrastructure while the customer logs virtual machines and applications, and backup generally resides with the customer unless the provider offers it. In PaaS and SaaS, the provider can operate more layers, but the customer still owns its service decision, customer identities and available settings, customer procedures, and agreed handoffs.

Trace inherited duties through upstream providers. An organization can buy infrastructure as a customer while supplying its own application service as a provider. ISO/IEC 27017 says a provider using peer cloud services should maintain or exceed the information-security levels promised to its own customers and pass security objectives into the supply chain. An upstream dependency does not erase the direct provider's downstream commitment.

  • Name the customer service owner, every customer control owner, the provider contact, upstream dependency owner, handoff reviewer, and risk acceptor.
  • Record the service scope, tier, region, architecture, assumptions, allocation, agreement reference, approval date, evidence from each party, exception, and next review trigger.
  • For every shared activity, record the provider action, customer action, handoff, evidence from each side, and escalation route.
  • Escalate any duty that no identified party can perform or evidence before approving the service.
Citations
ISO/IEC 27017:2015 standard page

ISO lists edition 1, published in December 2015, as guidance for cloud service customers and providers and identifies a revision under development.

Question 2

What evidence shows the responsibility allocation is current?

Keep the executed agreement and incorporated versions, service-specific responsibility matrix, provider documentation, customer procedures, configuration evidence, access and logging reviews, incident contacts, backup specifications and restore tests, change records, assurance material, and exit plan as applicable.

Test the highest-risk handoffs and at least one routine handoff. Trace a provider alert to customer receipt and response, a provider backup capability to the customer's restore test, or a provider change notice to customer impact assessment. Record the service, trigger, owners, expected data and timing, observed result, exception, follow-up owner, and due date.

  • Match provider documentation to the contracted entity, service, tier, region, and current architecture.
  • Link each matrix row to an agreement term, provider record, or customer operating record.
  • Track unowned work, failed handoffs, and unsupported assumptions to correction or authorized risk acceptance.
Citations
Question 3

Who should approve Shared Responsibility decisions under ISO/IEC 27017?

ISO/IEC 27017 does not prescribe internal approval titles. As a practical model, the cloud service owner can approve the complete allocation, each customer control owner can accept the activities assigned to that team, and supplier management can maintain provider and upstream commitments.

Security should challenge gaps and inconsistent allocations. Include privacy, legal, resilience, or regulatory owners when their requirements apply, and send unresolved gaps to the authorized risk owner.

  • 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
Question 4

When should Shared Responsibility be reviewed under ISO/IEC 27017?

ISO/IEC 27017:2015 sets no universal review interval. Set one from risk and applicable requirements, then review when the service model, tier, provider chain, architecture, data location, agreement, provider capability, assurance scope, or customer operating model changes.

Also review after an incident or failed handoff exposes an incorrect assumption. Update the agreement, matrix, procedures, risk treatment, and evidence links together so they describe the same boundary.

  • 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
Primary sources

References and citations

iso.org
Referenced sections
  • Primary ISO listing for the current ISO/IEC 27001 ISMS requirements standard.
"Information security management systems — Requirements"
iso.org
Referenced sections
  • Primary ISO listing for the ISO/IEC 27002 information security control guidance standard.
"Information security controls"
iso.org
Referenced sections
  • Primary ISO listing for cloud-service security control guidance.
"Code of practice for information security controls based on ISO/IEC 27002 for cloud services"
itu.int
Referenced sections
  • The identical 2015 recommendation says shared roles should be allocated to identified parties, documented, communicated, and implemented by customer and provider.
"Responsibilities for shared information security roles in the use of the cloud service should be allocated to identified parties, documented, communicated and implemented by both the cloud service customer and the cloud service provider."
Related guides

Explore more topics

ISO/IEC 27017 Audit Rights FAQ
ISO/IEC 27017 does not grant unrestricted cloud-provider audits. Define the contract route for independent assurance, supporting access, exceptions, and escalation.
ISO/IEC 27017 Certification Reality Guide
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 Admin Access FAQ
Apply ISO/IEC 27017 to customer and provider cloud administrators: strong authentication, limited privileges, logged operations, supervised critical work, and review evidence.
ISO/IEC 27017 Cloud Provider Checklist Template and Workflow
ISO/IEC 27017 cloud provider checklist covering service scope, shared responsibilities, agreements, tenant isolation, operations, evidence, and secure exit.
ISO/IEC 27017 Cloud Security FAQ
Answers to ISO/IEC 27017:2015 cloud-security questions on shared roles, agreements, administration, logging, assurance, virtualization, and customer controls.
ISO/IEC 27017 Cloud Service Agreements FAQ
Use ISO/IEC 27017 to define cloud security roles, provider measures, evidence, incident handling, supplier dependencies, and exit terms in the service agreement.
ISO/IEC 27017 Compliance Guide
How cloud providers and customers apply ISO/IEC 27017:2015 through scoped risks, allocated responsibilities, agreements, controls, evidence, and review.
ISO/IEC 27017 Control Mapping to ISO/IEC 27001 Guide
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.
ISO/IEC 27017 CSP vs CSC Role Split Comparison
Compare ISO/IEC 27017 responsibilities for cloud service providers and customers, with service-model examples, evidence, and review triggers.
ISO/IEC 27017 Customer Controls FAQ
Identify the cloud controls the customer should assess, configure, operate, monitor, evidence, and review when provider controls do not meet every security requirement.
ISO/IEC 27017 Hyperscaler Evidence Pack
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.
ISO/IEC 27017 Hyperscaler Evidence Pack Workflow
A service-specific workflow for testing hyperscaler claims, collecting provider and customer evidence, resolving gaps, and approving cloud risk under ISO/IEC 27017:2015.
ISO/IEC 27017 Logging FAQ
Allocate cloud event logging and monitoring between provider and customer, verify accessible events, privileged operations, timestamps, retention, alerts, and evidence.
ISO/IEC 27017 Provider Evidence FAQ
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.
ISO/IEC 27017 Shared Responsibility Model Guide
How to allocate provider, customer, and shared cloud security activities under ISO/IEC 27017:2015, document hand-offs, and test the allocation against evidence.
ISO/IEC 27017 Virtualization Responsibilities FAQ
Allocate tenant isolation, virtual-machine hardening, administrative operations, images, snapshots, and virtual-network policy under ISO/IEC 27017.
ISO/IEC 27017 vs CSA CCM Comparison
Compare ISO/IEC 27017:2015 with CSA CCM v4.1 by scope, control structure, responsibility mapping, assurance use, and evidence.
ISO/IEC 27017 vs ISO/IEC 27018 Comparison
Compare ISO/IEC 27017:2015 cloud security guidance with ISO/IEC 27018:2025 public-cloud PII processor guidance by scope, role, controls, and evidence.
ISO/IEC 27017 vs SOC 2 Comparison
Compare ISO/IEC 27017 cloud control guidance with SOC 2 attestation reports by purpose, scope, criteria, period, evidence, and customer responsibilities.