ISO/IEC 27035 ISO/IEC 27035 vs NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3
Compare the ISO/IEC 27035 series with NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3 incident-response guidance and show how organizations can use both.
ISO/IEC 27035 is voluntary guidance, not a law or standalone certification scheme. Validate legal, contractual, regulatory, and certification claims against the controlling source.
Use ISO/IEC 27035 when you want a defined five-phase information security incident-management process with separate preparation and ICT operations guidance. Use NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3 when you want incident response integrated across Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 risk management through a . Both are adaptable guidance, and neither creates a universal reporting deadline or certifies an organization.
Side-by-side comparison
ISO/IEC 27035 vs NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3: scope, duties, evidence, and decision rule
This comparison maps the ISO/IEC 27035 series to NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3's without treating either voluntary guide as law or certification.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Choose the lifecycle vocabulary that fits the organization, then map equivalent roles, decisions, records, and improvement actions. NIST explicitly allows organizations to use the incident-response lifecycle model that suits them best.
ISO/IEC 27035 uses management, an incident coordinator, an Incident Management Team, Incident Response Teams, points of contact, monitoring teams, business roles, and external responders according to the organization's design.
Primary ISO listing for incident management principles and process.
preparing for, detecting, reporting, assessing, and responding to incidents
NIST identifies leadership, incident handlers, technology professionals, legal, public affairs and media relations, human resources, physical security, asset owners, third parties, and other internal or external participants.
Readiness precedes an incident; reported events are assessed against organization-defined criteria and then closed or handled through the five-phase process.
Primary ISO listing for incident management principles and process.
preparing for, detecting, reporting, assessing, and responding to incidents
Preparation and lessons learned sit across Govern, Identify, and Protect. Potentially adverse events are analyzed through Detect to determine whether they meet defined incident criteria; once an incident is declared, the response plan is executed and applicable Respond and Recover outcomes follow.
Primary ISO listing for incident management principles and process.
preparing for, detecting, reporting, assessing, and responding to incidents
NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3 provides prioritized CSF 2.0 outcomes plus recommendations and considerations for preparation, detection, response, recovery, and improvement; they are not comprehensive or universally applicable.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Map the ISO process to the relevant CSF outcomes, retaining each publication's status as adaptable guidance and documenting organization-specific choices.
ISO/IEC 27035 records include policy and plan, team authority, event and incident reports, the incident register, assessment and priority decisions, response logs, evidence, communications, closure, and lessons.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Keep one chronology and evidence store where possible. Tag the ISO phase and CSF outcome, preserve provenance, and identify the owner and acceptance criteria for each decision.
ISO/IEC 27035 adoption can be evaluated through exercises, internal audits, customer assurance, management review, and governance review; the guidance itself is not a standalone certification scheme.
Primary ISO listing for incident management principles and process.
preparing for, detecting, reporting, assessing, and responding to incidents
NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3 is guidance, not a certification scheme or statute. Other laws, government policies, contracts, or customer requirements may separately require its use or particular incident practices.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Evaluate implementation against the chosen profile and operating evidence. Test legal and contractual compliance against the controlling sources rather than inferring it from NIST alignment.
Primary ISO listing for incident management principles and process.
preparing for, detecting, reporting, assessing, and responding to incidents
Rev. 3 can map the same records to governance, asset and supplier context, detection, analysis, response, recovery, communications, and improvement outcomes.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Reuse the record when it represents the same event and decision. Add the missing CSF context or ISO process detail instead of duplicating the incident.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Operational implication
Choose the lifecycle vocabulary that fits the organization, then map equivalent roles, decisions, records, and improvement actions. NIST explicitly allows organizations to use the incident-response lifecycle model that suits them best.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Who must act
ISO/IEC 27035
ISO/IEC 27035 uses management, an incident coordinator, an Incident Management Team, Incident Response Teams, points of contact, monitoring teams, business roles, and external responders according to the organization's design.
Primary ISO listing for incident management principles and process.
preparing for, detecting, reporting, assessing, and responding to incidents
NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3
NIST identifies leadership, incident handlers, technology professionals, legal, public affairs and media relations, human resources, physical security, asset owners, third parties, and other internal or external participants.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Trigger or threshold
ISO/IEC 27035
Readiness precedes an incident; reported events are assessed against organization-defined criteria and then closed or handled through the five-phase process.
Primary ISO listing for incident management principles and process.
preparing for, detecting, reporting, assessing, and responding to incidents
NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3
Preparation and lessons learned sit across Govern, Identify, and Protect. Potentially adverse events are analyzed through Detect to determine whether they meet defined incident criteria; once an incident is declared, the response plan is executed and applicable Respond and Recover outcomes follow.
Primary ISO listing for incident management principles and process.
preparing for, detecting, reporting, assessing, and responding to incidents
NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3
NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3 provides prioritized CSF 2.0 outcomes plus recommendations and considerations for preparation, detection, response, recovery, and improvement; they are not comprehensive or universally applicable.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Operational implication
Map the ISO process to the relevant CSF outcomes, retaining each publication's status as adaptable guidance and documenting organization-specific choices.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Evidence and records
ISO/IEC 27035
ISO/IEC 27035 records include policy and plan, team authority, event and incident reports, the incident register, assessment and priority decisions, response logs, evidence, communications, closure, and lessons.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Operational implication
Keep one chronology and evidence store where possible. Tag the ISO phase and CSF outcome, preserve provenance, and identify the owner and acceptance criteria for each decision.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Enforcement or assurance route
ISO/IEC 27035
ISO/IEC 27035 adoption can be evaluated through exercises, internal audits, customer assurance, management review, and governance review; the guidance itself is not a standalone certification scheme.
Primary ISO listing for incident management principles and process.
preparing for, detecting, reporting, assessing, and responding to incidents
NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3
NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3 is guidance, not a certification scheme or statute. Other laws, government policies, contracts, or customer requirements may separately require its use or particular incident practices.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Operational implication
Evaluate implementation against the chosen profile and operating evidence. Test legal and contractual compliance against the controlling sources rather than inferring it from NIST alignment.
Primary ISO listing for incident management principles and process.
preparing for, detecting, reporting, assessing, and responding to incidents
NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3
Rev. 3 can map the same records to governance, asset and supplier context, detection, analysis, response, recovery, communications, and improvement outcomes.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
Operational implication
Reuse the record when it represents the same event and decision. Add the missing CSF context or ISO process detail instead of duplicating the incident.
NIST source for cybersecurity incident response roles, CSF 2.0 alignment, preparation, detection, response, and recovery recommendations.
Incident Response Recommendations and Considerations for Cybersecurity Risk Management
1
Section 1
Should an organization use ISO/IEC 27035 or NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3?
Many organizations can use both. ISO/IEC 27035-1 defines plan and prepare; detect and report; assess and decide; respond; and learn lessons. Part 2 expands preparation and learning, while Part 3 covers ICT detection, notification, triage, analysis, evidence storage, containment, eradication, recovery, and reporting operations.
NIST SP 800-61 Rev. 3 is an April 2025 . Govern, Identify, and Protect support prevention, preparation, impact reduction, and improvement; Detect, Respond, and Recover cover discovery, management, containment, eradication, recovery, reporting, and communications. NIST says organizations may use the incident-response lifecycle model that suits them best, so a one-to-one phase conversion is unnecessary.
Use Rev. 3 for current NIST alignment; it superseded Rev. 2 and has a materially different scope and structure.
Select one vocabulary for live response, then map roles, decision states, records, communications, and improvement actions to the other publication.
Add laws, regulations, contracts, insurer terms, and sector requirements as separate overlays with their own thresholds, recipients, content, and clocks.
NIST's final publication page identifies Rev. 3 as an April 2025 CSF 2.0 Community Profile that supersedes Rev. 2.
2
Section 2
Which records support the two approaches?
Use operating records, not a crosswalk alone. ISO/IEC 27035 evidence should show the incident policy and plan, Incident Management Team and Incident Response Team authority, reporting channels, tested assessment criteria, event and incident registers, response actions, evidence handling, closure, and lessons learned.
NIST-aligned evidence should connect the same incident to CSF outcomes: governance decisions, asset and supplier context, risk and vulnerability information, monitoring and adverse-event analysis, incident declaration and prioritization, investigation records, containment and eradication, recovery validation, communications, and improvement actions. Preserve integrity and provenance for incident data, metadata, and investigation records.
Preparation: approved policy and plan, roles and alternates, contacts, supplier responsibilities, asset and service priorities, playbooks, training, exercises, tools, and protected communication channels.
Primary ISO listing for ICT incident response operations guidance.
information security incident response in ICT security operations
3
Section 3
How should teams run one workflow against both publications?
Before incidents, assign leadership, incident handlers, technology owners, legal, communications, human resources, physical security, business continuity, asset owners, and relevant third parties. Define event sources, reporting routes, declaration criteria, response authority, evidence rules, external notification overlays, service priorities, and secure out-of-band communications. Exercise the people and decisions, not only the technical playbook.
During an event, detect and report it, preserve the original facts, assess whether it is an incident, assign priority, and activate the needed responders. Analyze scope and root cause, record actions and evidence provenance, contain and eradicate the cause, restore affected assets and operations, validate recovery, communicate with authorized parties, and revise the assessment as facts change.
Keep ISO phase and CSF outcome tags on the same incident record instead of creating duplicate tickets.
Track external legal and contractual reporting separately because neither guide supplies the controlling threshold or deadline.
Feed lessons into risk assessment, safeguards, monitoring, plans, exercises, supplier requirements, and response procedures as soon as the lesson is reliable.
Do not map the superseded Rev. 2 phases as if they were Rev. 3. Rev. 3 still shows the old model for context, but its recommendations are organized as a and place continuous improvement across the lifecycle.
Do not reduce either publication to a security operations center checklist. Both depend on leadership, business and asset owners, legal and communications roles, suppliers, continuity planning, risk decisions, and recovery priorities.
Do not force every event into an incident record; preserve the assessment and close false positives or non-incidents under defined criteria.
Do not treat a CSF mapping or ISO procedure as proof that responders followed it.
Do not overwrite early facts, decisions, or evidence when the scope and priority change; preserve the chronology and provenance.
Primary ISO listing for planning, preparing, and lessons-learned guidance.
plan and prepare for incident response and to learn lessons
5
Section 5
How should teams review the combined process?
ISO/IEC 27035 treats learning as a defined phase and calls for improvements to incident management, risk work, controls, and response-team performance. NIST Rev. 3 uses the CSF Identify Improvement category across all Functions, so lessons can be recorded and acted on during preparation, detection, response, and recovery rather than waiting for final closure.
For each finding, record the evidence, affected policy or control, risk, owner, due date, planned change, acceptance test, and verification result. Re-run the failed scenario or control. Update the crosswalk only after the operating process changes.
Review plans periodically and after material incidents, exercises, supplier changes, architecture changes, and new reporting obligations.
Measure response outcomes that support decisions, such as time to assess, containment effectiveness, recovery validation, repeat causes, and overdue actions.
Escalate unresolved authority, staffing, tooling, supplier, evidence, and recovery risks to leadership.