Research artifacts mapped to selected Annex A controls.

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A names the controls. This page offers an illustrative mapping for technical vulnerability management, secure coding, and security testing; it is not ISO certification or an audit opinion.

Discuss the mapping → How the chain works

FrameworkISO/IEC 27001:2022

JurisdictionISO/IEC

ReferenceAnnex A.8.8 / A.8.25 / A.8.28 / A.8.29

ScopeISMS scope

SecHive evidencetechnical

Auditor opinionout of scope

Important boundary. This page is an illustrative reference mapping. Framework references describe evidence mapping and control alignment. SecHive is not presently certified or independently audited under these frameworks unless explicitly stated. This page is not legal advice, evidence that SecHive implements these controls, or a claim that any organization satisfies ISO/IEC 27001:2022.

§ Articles → Evidence

How research artifacts may relate to ISO/IEC 27001:2022.

The mapping is intentionally narrow and illustrative. The final relevance and sufficiency of evidence must be determined by the organization and its qualified assessor.

Article / control	What it requires	SecHive artifact
A.5.7 — Threat intelligence	Threat intelligence collected and analysed.	Hypothesis graph with named threat scenarios per engagement.
A.8.8 — Management of technical vulnerabilities	Information about technical vulnerabilities used to evaluate exposure and take action.	Per-finding evidence with severity, impact and remediation guidance.
A.8.25 — Secure development life cycle	Rules for the secure development of software and systems established.	Source-audit and PR-audit run modes, both with proof-first separation.
A.8.28 — Secure coding	Secure coding principles applied.	Source candidates routed to engineering with code references retained.
A.8.29 — Security testing in development and acceptance	Security testing processes defined and implemented.	Mode-labeled run output with reproducible artifacts.

§ Review view

How artifacts can be organized.

A practical format for technical review; acceptance by an auditor or assessor is not implied.

For the CISO

Mappable evidence per Article 21(2) sub-clause.
Time-bounded findings with severity and impact.
Retest records that close the loop with the engineering team.

For the legal / compliance team

Redaction manifests for cross-border or supplier engagements.
Operator identity recorded on every disposition.
Artifact hashes on report bundles.

For engineering

Deterministic replay.sh per finding.
Source references when source mode is enabled.
Negative evidence for refuted candidates.

For the auditor

Run-mode-labeled evidence rows.
sha256 binding to underlying artifacts.
Methodology spine consistent across engagements.

§ Sample evidence

A page from the matrix.

SecHive renders an evidence matrix per engagement. Below is one row, redacted.

EVIDENCE ROW — sample

# evidence-row.yaml — redacted
control:    A.8.29  # effectiveness testing
finding_id: VTX-RPL-0042
mode:       black-box
target:     redacted
target_ref: image@sha256:9c4e…  # pinned
artifact:
  path:    artifacts/replay.sh
  sha256:  7c3a…
  review:  human-approved
disposition:
  reviewer:  redacted-operator
  state:    confirmed
retest:
  status:    fixed @ 2026-04-18
  evidence:  artifacts/retest-receipt.json

What a reviewer sees

The control id and the finding id, bound together.
A run-mode label (black-box, source-aware, etc.).
A sha256 of the underlying artifact.
A reviewer disposition with operator identity.
A retest record if the finding has been remediated.

See the full output matrix →

Discuss a ISO/IEC 27001:2022 reference mapping.

Bring an authorized scope and the evidence questions you are working through.

Contact SecHive → All frameworks