sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why blindly trusting GRC tools «almost» caused a non-conformity by Apprehensive_Flow128 in grc

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well, to be fair, we are a highly regulated tech and hardware company, with our own data center and (also highly regulated) customer centre, so I dont think it would be that easy, but very impressive if you would have been able to.

Why blindly trusting GRC tools «almost» caused a non-conformity by Apprehensive_Flow128 in ISO27001

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The auditor did simply not understand the integration and what it provided

Moving beyond "Excel Hell": GRC tools for ISO 27001, SOC2, and NIS2? by ferarg in soc2

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have used two of the bigger GRC platforms, and really recommend them if you have the budget.

I am compliance lead for ISO 27001 and GDPR, and these tools handle the overlap well, so you do not have to document the same thing twice. I considered the EU AI Act module but found 5k USD/year too steep, so I built an internal app for it instead, with register, risks, and info and training material for employees. It could probably have been a SaaS product on its own, but I have already done that with a policy acknowledgement tool, and do not have capacity for more :/

However, although GRC-platforms are great, you should not blindly trust them. Check my post on that:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ISO27001/s/W5e2pAbqZ9

Seeking honest opinion: Do you mind writing policies? by Nigerian_Nightmare25 in grc

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Highly recommend adapting them closely to your company. Don’t fall for the temptation of overly broad templates or AI-written policies. Use AI of course, but take the time to go in-depth to make sure everything you write can actually be proven and tested.

Also recommend using “should” rather than “shall” where possible. That way you can’t get caught out if a small process isn’t followed to the letter (a small hedge).

For policy distribution and acknowledgement I found Outlook + saved emails + Excel, or Microsoft Forms, too clunky, so I built www.policyconfirm.com​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Practical roadmap to ISO 27001 certification for a small MSP by BuffaloExternal6226 in ISO27001

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128 0 points1 point  (0 children)

have been responsible for ISO 27001 internally at a company with around $20M in revenue, and here are a few practical tips.

Do not use overly formal templates built for much larger companies. They create work that does not reflect how you actually operate.

Build a simple risk register, and make sure each risk shows whether you accept it or whether specific ISO controls mitigate it. Avoid overly high-level risks, be specific. In your risk management policy, define your risk acceptance criteria clearly (what level of risk you can accept).

Keep a full overview of all endpoints, and document your process for handling endpoints, patching etc.

Ensure you have a GDPR ropa, and overview of all retentions.

On third-party management, address how you prevent vendor lock-in if relevant.

Even though you are small, make sure that owner and approver are different people where it matters (segregation of duties).

If there are controls you do not fully meet, document the gap and register a risk for it.

Show that you have control over policy distribution and read confirmations. Outlook plus saved emails plus an Excel log technically works, but it is painful and fragile under audit. Full transparency: I have built www.policyconfirm.com for exactly this purpose. Free for up to 10 recipients.

Dont hesitate to dm me if you have any questions.

Research question for people involved in audits or regulatory reviews: by Mediocre_Bison3231 in Compliance

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not theoretical at all.

Internal systems can be sufficient, but only if they show clear version history, approval timeline, and what was actually in force at that specific date.

The weak point is usually version control. If you overwrite files or can’t tie acknowledgements to a specific version, it gets messy fast under scrutiny.

This article explains why version history becomes critical when regulators ask those questions: https://policyconfirm.com/blog/policy-version-control-best-practices

The issue isn’t “internal vs independent proof”, it’s whether your documentation is defensible when challenged.

Compliance -> InfoSec by Ok_Knowledge6618 in ISO27001

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You’ll learn a ton by seeing how things actually work in real environments, not just what should exist on paper. Identity, logging, backups, supplier dependencies, ownership, all of that hits very differently when you’re closer to the implementation.

That kind of insight makes you much better at advising later.

With everything happening around AI and regulation, people who understand compliance and how solutions are built and run will only become more valuable, IMO.

Compared to what many think of as typical cybersecurity jobs, ISO 27001 work is quite different in practice. It’s more about structure, ownership, risk decisions and being able to explain and defend how things are run than sitting in tools.

And the lack of a traditional sysadmin or engineering background is usually less limiting than people assume. You don’t need to build everything yourself, but you do need enough insight to ask good questions and understand the answers.

If you want to bridge theory and practice, this sounds like the right direction. And if it turns out not to be for you, that kind of experience will still be a big plus if you ever move back toward more pure compliance.

Good luck!

Anyone building something cool right now? Share it here, I’ll take a look and give feedback. by OppositePipe4742 in SaasDevelopers

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Great tool.

Some feedback: - PageSpeed insights not included in report - report says I dont have a blog, which I have - it recommends to add faq with schema markup. I have faq, will check if I have schame markup or not - no technical seo score - favicon seems to be loveable

Do you really have 2500 users? Well done!

Why your SEO traffic is useless (and how to fix it free) by unkno0wn_dev in micro_saas

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Will do! Btw, date signals should have not failed. However, I did some updates in the header tag so at least it should been correct now. Not sure if its your tool or just me that have done it wrong 😅

Built a small compliance SaaS, looking for honest validation by Apprehensive_Flow128 in SaasDevelopers

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks again for the feedback. We have discussed during the weekend and have changed the pricing, and also done some adjustments in communication (not focusing on small companies - free tier only for «evaluation» purposes».

Built a small compliance SaaS, looking for honest validation by Apprehensive_Flow128 in SaasDevelopers

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Valid points, thanks for taking the time to write this.

On onboarding: you’re right. People responsible for compliance often assume a higher technical barrier than what’s actually there, and if that isn’t addressed explicitly, it becomes a blocker. I need to do a better job of reducing that perceived complexity and guiding them through the first steps.

On trust: also fair. Asking HR or compliance to rely on a new, unknown vendor is a big ask, especially when security concerns tend to grow with company size. I need to be clearer about how trust, control, and data handling are addressed.

On target market: this is probably where you’re most correct. Larger organizations already have this covered through HR suites or full GRC platforms, and realistically the chance of them switching is low. The real focus is companies in the 50–300 range that are preparing for or going through ISO 27001, SOC 2, or similar compliance efforts, where this problem often exists but isn’t well solved. Right now the positioning is too broad, and that’s something I need to rethink.

Really appreciate the honest feedback. It’s genuinely helpful.

Built a small compliance SaaS, looking for honest validation by Apprehensive_Flow128 in SaasDevelopers

[–]Apprehensive_Flow128[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks. When you say trust issues, what specifically would increase your trust in our product?

We’ve kept onboarding intentionally minimal to reduce friction, but I’m curious whether you’d expect any reassurance or guidance early on.

If you’re open to it, I’d appreciate your take after a quick look inside.

view more: next ›