VaultISO 27001ISO 27001 Annex A 5.24: incident management planning and preparation
ISO 27001 · A.5.24

ISO 27001 Annex A 5.24: incident management planning and preparation

Information security incident management planning and preparation

Harry WestFounder & CEO13 March 202312 min read
Inside This Article
What does ISO 27001 Annex A 5.24 information security incident management planning and preparation require?Why does incident readiness matter under the UK GDPR 72-hour clock?How do you build a lean ISO 27001 incident response plan and team?How do you set severity tiers and response targets?What does a single front door for incident reporting look like?How often should you rehearse the incident plan?What do auditors look for, and when is a gap major or minor?How do you engineer incident readiness so it runs itself?Frequently asked questions
Book a discovery call

Key takeaways

Annex A 5.24 is the standing incident capability you build before a crisis: a lean procedure, named roles with deputies, severity tiers and pre-mapped regulatory clocks. Rehearsal and a dated evidence trail are what auditors test. Tooling a 25–250-person firm already uses can keep the whole thing alive.

Scope
Annex A 5.24 is the 'before' control of the incident family: the process, people, reporting route and priorities that must exist before any incident occurs.
Team model
One living procedure, named roles with a deputy for each, and a virtual team drawn from existing staff give a small firm a plan it can keep current.
Regulatory clocks
UK GDPR gives 72 hours to notify the ICO of a qualifying breach, so severity tiers should map in advance which incidents start which regulatory and client clocks.
Audit grading
Auditors trace incident-log entries end to end, check the contact list is current and ask staff how they would report. Overdue exercises grade minor; absent procedures or responders grade major.

The client's security questionnaire asks who leads an incident at 2am on a Saturday, and who deputises. The honest answer is whoever picks up. ISO 27001 Annex A 5.24 replaces that answer with a procedure, named roles and a rehearsed routine that exist before anything goes wrong.

This guide is for security leads, CTOs and COOs at 25–250-person firms heading for ISO 27001:2022 certification. It covers what the control requires, how to build a lean plan and team, severity tiers, reporting, rehearsal, what auditors sample, and how to automate readiness.

What does ISO 27001 Annex A 5.24 information security incident management planning and preparation require?

Annex A 5.24 requires an organisation to prepare for security incidents before one happens. That means an agreed process covering detection, triage, escalation, response, communication, evidence and learning; named, trained people; one known reporting route; management-agreed priorities; and awareness of external reporting clocks. It is the 'before' control of the incident family.

You will see the control written as ISO 27001 A.5.24, or in full as ISO 27001:2022 Annex A 5.24 information security incident management planning and preparation. Either way, it owns the capability that exists before an incident, not the handling of one. Four neighbouring controls pick up from there:

  • ISO 27001 Annex A 5.25 triages events and decides which of them become incidents.
  • A.5.26 runs the response itself. Auditors read the plan under A.5.24 and the incident log under A.5.26.
  • A.5.28 governs how evidence is collected and handled.
  • A.6.8 carries the staff duty to report events, which the reporting channel built under A.5.24 serves.

Read the control proportionately. It does not ask for a security operations centre. It asks that a 50-person firm can show who does what when something goes wrong, and that the answer is written down, agreed and tested.

The control is corrective in character. It exists to limit and repair damage once something has gone wrong, and preparation is what makes that correction fast rather than improvised. It defends confidentiality, integrity and availability alike, because incidents arrive as breaches, tampering and outages.

Why does incident readiness matter under the UK GDPR 72-hour clock?

Incident response is where several clocks converge. UK GDPR requires notifiable personal data breaches to be reported to the ICO without undue delay and within 72 hours of becoming aware, and client contracts may add tighter promises. Firms that improvise miss those windows, and the mishandling usually costs more than the incident.

The ICO personal data breach reporting guidance frames the threshold. Only breaches that meet it go to the ICO, but the 72 hours run from when you discover the breach, not when it happened. Deciding quickly whether a breach qualifies is therefore a preparation task, not a response-day improvisation.

The NCSC incident management overview makes the point about outcomes: whatever the threat, good preparation is the one thing that helps you deal well with an incident. Technical skill works inside the structure you built beforehand.

Other clocks run alongside the ICO's:

  • Client contracts increasingly carry their own notification promises.
  • DORA and NIS2 obligations flow down from regulated clients into their suppliers' contracts.
  • Cyber insurers now ask about response readiness on proposal forms.

A contained technical event becomes a regulatory and commercial one when updates contradict each other and notifications arrive late. Readiness is what lets you tell the client what happened, what you have done and what happens next, in that order.

How do you build a lean ISO 27001 incident response plan and team?

Write one procedure of about ten pages, not forty, that a stressed person can follow at 2am. Name the team by role: incident lead, technical investigator, note-taker, and reach-ins for legal, HR and communications. Give every role a deputy, and use a virtual team drawn from existing staff rather than a dedicated one.

An incident response plan for ISO 27001 should read as instructions, not policy prose. It walks the full arc in the order a stressed reader needs it:

  1. Reporting: how an event reaches the team.
  2. Assessment: who decides whether it is an incident.
  3. Severity: how the tier is set.
  4. Response: who does what.
  5. Communication: who talks to whom, inside and outside the firm.
  6. Evidence: what to preserve before anyone starts rebuilding.
  7. Lessons: how the review is captured.

Name roles, not departments:

  • Incident lead: whoever owns security. At this size that is often the founder, COO or a fractional CISO.
  • Technical investigator: the person who can actually look at the systems.
  • Note-taker: keeps the timeline and decisions as they happen.
  • Reach-ins: legal, HR and communications contacts identified in advance.

Put one person's name against each role. A steering group can advise, but the incident needs a single decision-maker at 2am.

Ownership by committee is no ownership.

The contact list matters as much as the roster. Keep it somewhere that still works when the phone system or corporate chat is down. Include personal mobile numbers for the lead, the investigator and their deputies.

The NCSC guidance on building a CSIRT says a virtual team, pulled together when needed from people with other day jobs, is more cost-effective than a dedicated one. For a firm of 25 to 250 people, that is the realistic model.

Keep training records for the response roles. Procedure documents and periodic training are what an auditor reads as competent personnel.

The design avoids two failures. One is a roster that rots because the named lead left last year. The other is an enterprise SOC playbook suite of twenty runbooks that no 40-person firm will maintain. One living procedure beats a shelf of dead ones.

Free Resource - ISO 27001

The ISO 27001 readiness checklist

Ninety-eight controls mapped to what an assessor actually asks for, in the order they ask it. Written by practitioners who took our ISMS through certification.

AvailablePDF21 pages
  • how to define your ISMS scope
  • the risk-assessment and treatment evidence trail,
  • your Statement of Applicability and residual-risk positions, and
  • the supplier, access-control, and operational-evidence questions most teams miss.

DOC-27001-CHK · v2.4

We'll use your details to give you access to the resource you requested, plus occasional related content. Opt out any time — see our Privacy Notice.

How do you set severity tiers and response targets?

Severity tiers P1 to P4, each with plain criteria and a target response time agreed by management, make the priority call carry authority. Tie the criteria to what is critical in your asset register, and map which severities start which regulatory clocks, so the notify-or-not decision is defensible at speed.

Write each tier as a test a stressed person can apply without asking permission. Example criteria:

  • P1: confirmed loss of client data, or an outage of a system your asset register marks as critical.
  • P2: suspected data exposure, or degraded service on a critical system.
  • P3: a contained event on a non-critical asset, such as one malware alert on a managed laptop.
  • P4: a near-miss or false alarm, logged for the record.

Management signs off the tiers and their target response times. That signature turns the priority call into an authorised one, so the incident lead never waits for approval before paging the team.

Then pre-map the clocks. For each tier, record whether it starts an ICO assessment, a client notification or a staff briefing, and keep a template ready for each. Drafting a regulator notification in hour three of a ransomware event is how windows get missed.

The mapping closes off the usual failure of regulatory duties discovered mid-crisis. Without it, nobody asks whether the ICO needs to know until the 72-hour window is half spent.

Sequence matters, because severity needs something to be relative to. Build the tiers once the asset register and risk assessment exist. From there, the procedure, roles and templates take one to two weeks.

What does a single front door for incident reporting look like?

A single front door means one obvious, low-friction route (a Slack channel, a monitored address or a ticket form) that any member of staff can name without thinking. Feedback keeps that route alive: reporters should hear what happened, or they stop reporting, and events then surface days late through corridor conversation.

Pick the route staff already open every day. Publish it in onboarding, the handbook and the procedure, and it also serves the staff reporting duty in A.6.8. Friction kills reporting, so ask only for what, where and when, and let the incident lead collect the rest.

Feedback is the maintenance. A two-line acknowledgement and a short outcome note tell the reporter the report mattered. A false alarm that earns a thank-you produces the next real report.

Test the door with a new starter: ask where they would report a phishing email. If they hesitate, it is not yet one door.

How often should you rehearse the incident plan?

Rehearse at least annually, and after major changes to systems or people. A half-day tabletop against a realistic scenario counts, provided findings are logged, actions are closed, and the procedure is updated. Ransomware combined with a data-breach clock is the highest-yield pairing. The first run always finds the dead phone number.

Choose a scenario that forces both halves of the plan. A ransomware event where client personal data was also copied out starts the technical response and the notification clock together. Allow a half-day plus preparation, with the lead, investigator, note-taker and a reach-in from legal or communications in the room. Expect to find an ambiguous handoff between lead and investigator, and a template nobody can locate.

A plan nobody has rehearsed is a hypothesis, not a capability.

Make the exercise count by logging and closing it:

  1. Record the scenario, attendees and findings.
  2. Assign each finding an owner and a date.
  3. Close the action and keep the evidence.
  4. Update the procedure and its version date.

Re-run the exercise after major change, such as a new identity provider, a new incident lead or an acquisition. Every real incident gets the same loop: a root-cause discussion, procedure updates and a trail showing the improvements landed.

This inverts two common pitfalls. A plan written for the certificate meets its first test in a real incident, the most expensive tabletop there is. A firefighting culture, where incidents are fixed but never reviewed, sees the same root cause return every quarter.

What do auditors look for, and when is a gap major or minor?

Auditors trace one or two incident-log entries end to end against the procedure and check the contact list is current. They also ask a random interviewee how they would report something suspicious. No procedure, no designated responders, or a real incident handled off-process grades major; overdue exercises or stale rosters grade minor, adding up to major as a pattern.

Expect questions like these in the room:

  • "Talk me through what happens from the moment someone suspects an incident."
  • "Who is your incident lead, who deputises, and when were they last exercised?"
  • "When did you last rehearse, what broke, and what did you change?"
  • "A laptop with client data goes missing on a Friday evening. Which notification obligations start, and how do you meet them over a weekend?"

The Friday laptop is the sharpest of them. A good answer names the severity tier, the personal-data assessment, the ICO clock and any client promise, then says who does each over the weekend. The answer comes from the plan, not from memory.

Auditors check the procedure's review date before its content. Exercise records get the same scrutiny, because findings without closed actions are a finding in themselves.

Assemble the evidence pack before the audit:

  • Procedure: approved, dated and version-controlled.
  • Roster: roles, deputies, current contact details and training records.
  • Severity matrix: response targets with the management sign-off behind it.
  • Exercise artefacts: scenario, attendees, findings and closure dates.
  • Templates: notification drafts and the regulatory mapping.
  • Post-incident reviews: improvements traced into the procedure.
  • Incident log: near-misses and false alarms recorded alongside real events.

An empty incident log doesn't prove a quiet year. To an auditor, it reads as a dead process.

Grading follows a simple logic. An isolated minor is fixable, but the same minor repeated across contact lists, exercises and records is a pattern, and a pattern grades major. The classic example is staff broadly unaware of the reporting route.

With the pack assembled, the audit is a walk-through, not an interrogation.

How do you engineer incident readiness so it runs itself?

Wire readiness into tools people already use. A Slack workflow or portal form opens a structured ticket, severity drives paging, the timeline is captured as the incident runs, and attestations and exercise reminders fire on a schedule. The log self-assembles, and the response tooling keeps a break-glass route for when the identity provider is down.

The reporting workflow comes first. The ticket is timestamped, categorised and acknowledged, which makes the front door frictionless. Severity then drives routing: the tier decides who is paged and when, so response targets are enforced by the system rather than remembered under stress.

The record becomes a by-product. Decisions and communications are captured in the ticket and the incident channel as the response runs. The post-incident review and the auditor's end-to-end trace fall out of the tooling instead of being reconstructed from memory.

Readiness runs on a schedule. Contact-list attestation, template reviews and exercise reminders fire automatically, and overdue tasks surface on the compliance dashboard instead of in the audit. That retires stale-roster rot without anyone remembering to check.

Protect the response tooling itself, so it works when the corporate stack is what is compromised:

  • Ticketing: tight access, with the incident queue limited to the response team.
  • Communications bridge: a backup channel that does not depend on corporate chat.
  • Admin credentials: a break-glass account held offline, with every use logged and reviewed.

Our Fractional CISO service designs the capability, takes the incident-lead seat and runs the annual exercise. Our GRC Engineering service builds the workflows, escalation rules and scheduled checks. None of it needs a SOAR suite. The table compares the four automations by what each catches, how often it runs and the evidence it leaves.

AutomationWhat it catchesCadenceEvidence left
Reporting workflowEvents reported late, or not at allContinuousTimestamped, categorised ticket with acknowledgement
Severity-driven escalationSlow or unauthorised priority callsEvery incidentPaging record against the response target
Self-assembling recordGaps in timeline, decisions and communicationsDuring each incidentTimeline for the post-incident review and the auditor's trace
Scheduled readiness checksStale contacts, outdated templates, overdue exercisesQuarterly attestation, annual exerciseAttestation records on the compliance dashboard

Frequently asked questions

No. A ticket queue or a structured Slack channel plus a disciplined log satisfies the control at 25–250 people. SIEM and SOAR platforms are patterns you grow into when alert volume outgrows manual triage. Buy them for that reason, not for the audit.

Name one senior owner, typically the COO, CTO or founder, who keeps the procedure in date and takes the severity tiers to management for sign-off. The owner need not lead incidents: a fractional CISO can hold the design and the incident-lead seat while the owner keeps the authority to speak for the firm.

No. Only personal-data breaches that meet the ICO's reporting threshold go to the ICO. The ICO's guidance says to start a log even when you may not need to report. Record what happened and your reasoning, including any decision not to notify, so the call is defensible later.

Decide in advance what the internal team handles and where external help starts: forensics, specialist counsel and your insurer's response panel. Keep contact numbers that work out of hours in the plan. Add coordination arrangements with suppliers who would sit inside a real incident, and an escalation route into crisis or continuity plans for scenarios that outgrow IT.

In practice, yes. Response readiness is now a question on cyber insurance proposal forms. Your procedure, roster and last exercise date are answers you will be asked for. Agree with your insurer beforehand how its response panel fits into your escalation steps.

Profile image for Harry West, Founder and CEO of GRCMANA
Author

Harry West

Harry is the founder of GRCMANA, he helps regulated service providers close the enterprise trust gap — turning GRC, cyber resilience and AI governance from paperwork exercises into shippable systems.

Standard engine

ISO 27001 reference directory.

Every control in this framework and the clause guides that sit above them, grouped by control domain. Open any entry for its control definition, implementation steps and the audit evidence it expects. Dimmed entries are planned.

ClausesThe management systemClause guides · 23 guides
Clause 4.1Understanding the organization and its context→Clause 4.2Understanding the needs and expectations of interested parties→Clause 4.3Determining the scope of the information security management system→Clause 4.4Information security management system→Clause 5.1Leadership and commitment→Clause 5.2Policy→Clause 5.3Organizational roles, responsibilities and authorities→Clause 6.1Actions to address risks and opportunities→Clause 6.2Information security objectives and planning to achieve them→Clause 7.1Resources→Clause 7.2Competence→Clause 7.3Awareness→Clause 7.4Communication→Clause 7.5Documented information→Clause 8.1Operational planning and control→Clause 8.2Information security risk assessment→Clause 8.3Information security risk treatment→Clause 9.1Monitoring, measurement, analysis and evaluation→Clause 9.2Internal audit→Clause 9.2Preparing for Your ISO 27001 Stage 2 Audit: A Practical Checklist→Clause 9.3Management review→Clause 10.1Continual improvement→Clause 10.2Nonconformity and corrective action→
A.5Organizational Controls37 guides
A.5.1Policies for information security→A.5.2Information security roles and responsibilities→A.5.3Segregation of duties→A.5.4Management responsibilities→A.5.5Contact with authorities→A.5.6Contact with special interest groups→A.5.7Threat intelligence→A.5.8Information security in project management→A.5.9Inventory of information and other associated assets→A.5.10Acceptable use of information and other associated assets→A.5.11Return of assets→A.5.12Classification of information→A.5.13Labelling of information→A.5.14Information transfer→A.5.15Access control→A.5.16Identity management→A.5.17Authentication information→A.5.18Access rights→A.5.19Information security in supplier relationships→A.5.20Addressing information security within supplier agreements→A.5.21Managing information security in the ICT supply chain→A.5.22Monitoring, review and change management of supplier services→A.5.23Information security for use of cloud services→A.5.24Information security incident management planning and preparation→A.5.25Assessment and decision on information security events→A.5.26Response to information security incidents→A.5.27Learning from information security incidents→A.5.28Collection of evidence→A.5.29Information security during disruption→A.5.30ICT readiness for business continuity→A.5.31Legal, statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements→A.5.32Intellectual property rights→A.5.33Protection of records→A.5.34Privacy and protection of PII→A.5.35Independent review of information security→A.5.36Compliance with policies, rules and standards for information security→A.5.37Documented operating procedures→
A.6People Controls8 guides
A.6.1Screening→A.6.2Terms and conditions of employment→A.6.3Information security awareness, education and training→A.6.4Disciplinary process→A.6.5Responsibilities after termination or change of employment→A.6.6Confidentiality or non-disclosure agreements→A.6.7Remote working→A.6.8Information security event reporting→
A.7Physical Controls14 guides
A.7.1Physical security perimeters→A.7.2Physical entry→A.7.3Securing offices, rooms and facilities→A.7.4Physical security monitoring→A.7.5Protecting against physical and environmental threats→A.7.6Working in secure areas→A.7.7Clear desk and clear screen→A.7.8Equipment siting and protection→A.7.9Security of assets off-premises→A.7.10Storage media→A.7.11Supporting utilities→A.7.12Cabling security→A.7.13Equipment maintenance→A.7.14Secure disposal or re-use of equipment→
A.8Technological Controls34 guides
A.8.1User endpoint devices→A.8.2Privileged access rights→A.8.3Information access restriction→A.8.4Access to source code→A.8.5Secure authentication→A.8.6Capacity management→A.8.7Protection against malware→A.8.8Management of technical vulnerabilities→A.8.9Configuration management→A.8.10Information deletion→A.8.11Data masking→A.8.12Data leakage prevention→A.8.13Information backup→A.8.14Redundancy of information processing facilities→A.8.15Logging→A.8.16Monitoring activities→A.8.17Clock synchronization→A.8.18Use of privileged utility programs→A.8.19Installation of software on operational systems→A.8.20Networks security→A.8.21Security of network services→A.8.22Segregation of networks→A.8.23Web filtering→A.8.24Use of cryptography→A.8.25Secure development life cycle→A.8.26Application security requirements→A.8.27Secure system architecture and engineering principles→A.8.28Secure coding→A.8.29Security testing in development and acceptance→A.8.30Outsourced development→A.8.31Separation of development, test and production environments→A.8.32Change management→A.8.33Test information→A.8.34Protection of information systems during audit testing→
OtherAdditional Guides7 guides
GuideISO 27001 Statement of Applicability: what it is, with a worked example→GuideISO 27001 implementation→GuideISO 27001 certification and audit process→GuideISO 27001 mandatory documents and records→GuideISO 27001 gap analysis→GuideISO 27001 certification cost→GuideISO 27001 Annex A controls→
ISO 27001 Accelerator

Ready to accelerate your path to certification?

Work with a Trust Architect to scope your ISMS, close the gaps, and get audit-ready — without stalling your roadmap.

Book a Call →
GRCMANA
  • About
  • Insights
  • Contact
Ask the Trust ArchitectBook a Call →
  • About
  • Insights
  • The Vault
    Compliance VaultCyber Essentials→ISO 27001→SOC 2→ISO 42001→
    Domain VaultGRC Fundamentals→Risk Management→AI Governance→GRC Engineering→
    Other ResourcesFree Tools→Templates→Newsletter→
  • Contact
Book a Call →Ask the Trust ArchitectFixed fee. ISO 27001 in as few as six weeks.
GRCMANA

Helping high-growth B2B tech startups close the Enterprise Trust Gap through security, governance, and AI resilience.

ISO 27001ISO 42001ISO 9001Cyber EssentialsEU AI Act ReadyNIST AI RMF

The Vault

GRC EngineeringAI GovernanceISO 27001ISO 42001All Vault Resources

Resources

BlogFree ToolsTemplatesNewsletter

Company

About GRCMANAContactPrivacy PolicyTerms & ConditionsCookie Policy
© 2025 GRCMANA · All rights reservedRegistered in England & Wales under company registration 16810805. VAT Registration 506308024