A.5.35 Organizational
Independent review of information security
Structured attributes from ISO/IEC 27002:2022 — control type · CIA properties · cybersecurity concept · operational capability · security domain. What do these mean?
Mapped NIST 800-53 r5 controls (9)
Our AI-authored reading (authority llm_unverified, under review) of how this ISO control and each NIST 800-53 control relate. Not an ISO or NIST product.
Direction: ← other covers this;
→ this covers other (F/M/P = full / mostly /
partial). gov = governs / implements (a mandate, not coverage).
Why these map — AI rationale (under review)
- CA-2mostlyaligns with — Both controls require periodic, independent assessments of security controls to evaluate effectiveness and identify needed improvements.
- AU-6partialaligns with — Both emphasize independent review and reporting of security-related information to management for oversight and action.
- CA-5partialaligns with — Findings from the ISO independent reviews directly drive the creation and tracking of corrective actions and milestones.
- CA-7partialaligns with — The ISO control's independent reviews feed into ongoing monitoring by providing objective evidence of control adequacy and gaps.
- PM-4partialaligns with — The ISO control's requirement to initiate corrective actions when deficiencies are found aligns with maintaining and executing a POA&M process.
Aligned NIST CSF 2.0 outcomes (10)
NIST CSF 2.0 outcomes this ISO control aligns with — our AI-authored analysis (authority llm_unverified, under review).
Direction: ← other covers this;
→ this covers other (F/M/P = full / mostly /
partial). gov = governs / implements (a mandate, not coverage).
Why these map — AI rationale (under review)
- GV.OV-03mostlyaligns with — Periodic independent reviews of the information security program directly support evaluating organizational cybersecurity risk management performance and determining needed adjustments.
- GV.OV-01partialaligns with — Independent review findings provide input that informs and may prompt adjustments to the cybersecurity risk management strategy and direction.
- GV.PO-02partialaligns with — Independent reviews assess whether policies and controls remain adequate and trigger corrective actions when gaps are found.
- GV.RR-01partialaligns with — Reporting review results to top management reinforces leadership accountability for cybersecurity risk and the maintenance of a risk-aware culture.
- ID.IM-01partialaligns with — The review process explicitly identifies opportunities for improvement and the need for changes to the information security approach.
Related weaknesses / CWE (5)
Weakness classes this ISO control helps prevent or mitigate — our AI-authored analysis (authority llm_unverified, under review).
Direction: ← other covers this;
→ this covers other (F/M/P = full / mostly /
partial). gov = governs / implements (a mandate, not coverage).
Why these map — AI rationale (under review)
- CWE-250partialfinds — Independent scrutiny can identify processes or services still running with unnecessary privileges and drive their reduction before an attacker can abuse them.
- CWE-284partialfinds — Periodic independent assessment of whether documented security objectives and controls are actually implemented and effective can surface missing or bypassed access-control decisions before they are exploited.
- CWE-285partialfinds — Independent reviewers evaluate whether authorization logic matches policy, thereby reducing the window in which incorrect or missing authorization checks remain in production.
- CWE-732partialfinds — Reviewers examine whether critical resources have correct permission assignments, prompting corrective action when overly permissive settings are discovered.
- CWE-862partialfinds — By requiring competent outsiders to verify that every function enforces the need-to-know principle, the control lowers the likelihood that missing authorization checks persist undetected.
Control IDs, short titles and the structured attribute table (control type, CIA properties, cybersecurity-concept, operational capability, security domain) are facts from ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A / ISO/IEC 27002:2022. The full implementation guidance prose lives in ISO/IEC 27002:2022 — not reproduced here. Cross-walks to NIST 800-53, NIST CSF 2.0, OWASP ASVS, CWE, MITRE ATT&CK and OWASP Web Top 10 are our own AI-authored analysis (authority llm_unverified, under review), not an ISO, NIST, MITRE or OWASP product — how ours compare.