According to the ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) course, the following corrections and corrective actions are expected from ABC in response to the nonconformity:
* B. The Service Manager provides evidence of analysis of the cause of nonconformity and how the ABC evaluates the effectiveness of implemented corrective actions. This is part of the requirement of clause
10.1 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the organization shall determine the causes of nonconformities and evaluate the need for action to ensure that they do not recur or occur elsewhere12.
The organization shall also evaluate the effectiveness of any corrective actions taken12.
* F. ABC identifies and checks compliance with all applicable legislation and contractual requirements involving third parties. This is part of the requirement of clause 4.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the organization shall determine the external and internal issues that are relevant to its purpose and that affect its ability to achieve the intended outcome(s) of its information security management system12. This includes the legal and contractual requirements related to the information security aspects of the organization's activities, products and services12.
* G. The Service Manager implements the corrective actions and Customer Service Representatives evaluate the effectiveness of implemented corrective actions. This is part of the requirement of clause
10.1 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the organization shall implement any action needed and retain documented information as evidence of the results of any action taken12. The organization shall also monitor, measure, analyze and evaluate the information security performance and the effectiveness of the information security management system12.
References:
* 1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) course, CQI and IRCA Certified Training, 1
* 2: ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Training Course, PECB, 2

These two options are not required for audit planning of a certification audit, as they are not relevant to the audit objectives, scope, criteria, and methods. The working experience of the management system representative is not a requirement of ISO/IEC 27001, nor does it affect the conformity or effectiveness of the ISMS. The organisation's financial statement is not part of the ISMS documentation, nor does it provide evidence of the ISMS performance or improvement. The other options are required for audit planning, as they help to determine the audit activities, resources, schedule, and sampling strategy. References: PECB Candidate Handbook1, page 19-20; ISO 9001 Auditing Practices Group Guidance on2, page 1-2; ISO/IEC
27001:2022 (en)3, clause 9.2.

Vehicular incidents are not a type of information security attack. A vehicular incident is an event that involves a vehicle or its driver causing damage or injury to people or property. A vehicular incident may have an impact on information security if it affects the availability or integrity of information or systems that are transported or accessed by vehicles, but it is not an intentional or malicious attack on information security.
Legal incidents are a type of information security attack that involve legal actions or disputes that may compromise the confidentiality or integrity of information or systems. Technical vulnerabilities are a type of information security attack that exploit weaknesses or flaws in software or hardware that may compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information or systems. Privacy incidents are a type of information security attack that involve unauthorized access or disclosure of personal or sensitive information that may compromise the confidentiality or integrity of information or systems. References: : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:
2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 25. : [ISO/IEC 27001 LEAD AUDITOR - PECB], page 13.

The correct answer is Detailed descriptions of all audit findings with corrective actions, because this information is not a required element of a quality review documentation template. Quality review documentation focuses on verifying the adequacy, consistency, and compliance of the audit process itself, not on managing corrective actions.
According to ISO/IEC 17021-1 and ISO 19011, quality review records typically include identification of the reviewer and preparer, confirmation that required audit steps were completed, dates of review activities, and confirmation that conclusions are supported by evidence. These elements ensure traceability, accountability, and procedural compliance.
Option A is required because identifying both the preparer and reviewer supports independence and accountability in the review process. Option C is also required because recording completion dates provides evidence that reviews were performed at the appropriate stage of the audit process.
Option B is incorrect because detailed audit findings and corrective actions belong in audit reports and corrective action tracking systems, not in the quality review template. Including corrective actions in quality review documentation would blur the distinction between audit execution and audit oversight.
Therefore, detailed descriptions of audit findings with corrective actions are not a required element of quality review documentation.

The correct answer is Corrective controls, because the organization is responding to an incident that has already occurred and is taking actions to remove the malware and restore normal operations. Corrective controls are designed to limit damage, eradicate the cause of an incident, and return systems to an acceptable operational state after a security event has been detected.
In this scenario, the malware infection has already bypassed existing security measures, meaning preventive controls failed to stop the incident. The focus now is not on detection, as the infection is already known, but on remediation and recovery. Activities such as malware removal, system restoration from backups, reinstallation of compromised systems, and application of patches are classic examples of corrective controls.
ISO/IEC 27001:2022 addresses this through clause 10.2 on nonconformity and corrective action, which requires organizations to take action to control and correct incidents and deal with their consequences.
Additionally, ISO/IEC 27002:2022 includes controls related to incident response and recovery that support corrective actions after an event.
Option B is incorrect because detective controls, such as monitoring and logging, are intended to identify incidents, not resolve them. Option C is incorrect because preventive controls aim to stop incidents from occurring in the first place, such as antivirus software or access controls. Since the malware has already caused harm, corrective controls are the most appropriate response.