Episode 29 — Evidence for A/C/PI/P: What “Good” Looks Like
Auditors evaluate whether controls for Availability, Confidentiality, Processing Integrity, and Privacy are designed and operating effectively, so your evidence must be relevant, complete, and reliable. “Good” evidence ties a stated control to a dated sample that demonstrates performance over the period. For Availability, think DR test plans, results, and remediation tickets with timestamps; for Confidentiality, encryption configs, key rotation logs, and DLP incident reviews; for Processing Integrity, reconciliations, edit-check logs, and defect resolution traceability; for Privacy, DPIAs, DSR tickets, and retention job outputs. The exam expects you to distinguish screenshots as point-in-time artifacts from population-and-sample evidence that proves ongoing operation.
In practice, curate evidence with context: label the control objective, system component, time window, and data source; avoid redactions that undermine verifiability; and ensure repeatability by documenting how reports were generated. Chain-of-custody matters—store artifacts in read-only repositories with versioning and access logs. Sampling should reflect a defined population, selection method, and coverage rationale; ad hoc cherry-picking erodes credibility. Automate where possible: export logs to immutable stores, schedule report generation, and link tickets to controls. A strong evidence pack tells a coherent story from policy to practice, reducing back-and-forth during fieldwork and lowering the risk of exceptions. Produced by BareMetalCyber.com, where you’ll find more cyber audio courses, books, and information to strengthen your educational path. Also, if you want to stay up to date with the latest news, visit DailyCyber.News for a newsletter you can use, and a daily podcast you can commute with.
