ISO 27001/2 vs SOC 2 Type 2: A Comprehensive Comparison of Security Certifications

READER BEWARE: THE FOLLOWING WRITTEN ENTIRELY BY AI WITHOUT HUMAN EDITING.

Introduction

When organizations seek to demonstrate their commitment to information security to customers, partners, and regulators, two certifications dominate the landscape: ISO 27001/2 and SOC 2 Type 2. While both aim to provide assurance about an organization’s security controls, they differ significantly in their origins, frameworks, certification processes, and practical applications.

This guide provides a comprehensive comparison of these two security certifications, helping you understand their differences, when to pursue each, and how they complement each other—particularly in the United States market.

Overview of the Standards

ISO 27001 and ISO 27002

ISO 27001 is an international standard published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). It specifies requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continually improving an Information Security Management System (ISMS).

ISO 27002 is the companion standard that provides a detailed catalog of security controls and implementation guidance. Organizations use ISO 27002 as a reference when selecting controls for their ISMS, though certification is only available for ISO 27001 compliance.

Key Characteristics:

• Published jointly by ISO and IEC (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 and ISO/IEC 27002:2022 are the current versions)
• Internationally recognized across 160+ countries
• Framework-based approach requiring an ISMS
• Prescriptive control catalog with 93 controls in 4 categories (2022 version)
• Mandatory controls with documented risk-based exclusions

Official Documentation: ISO 27001:2022

SOC 2 Type 2

SOC 2 (Service Organization Control 2) is an auditing framework developed by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). It evaluates service organizations based on five Trust Services Criteria (TSC): Security, Availability, Processing Integrity, Confidentiality, and Privacy.

Type 2 reports evaluate both the design and operating effectiveness of controls over a specified period (typically 6-12 months), as opposed to Type 1 reports which only evaluate control design at a point in time.

Key Characteristics:

• Developed and maintained by AICPA
• Primarily recognized in the United States and Canada
• Principles-based approach using Trust Services Criteria
• Flexible control selection based on organizational commitments
• Only Security (Common Criteria) is mandatory; other criteria are optional

Official Documentation: AICPA SOC 2

Comparing the Standards

Framework Structure

Control Categories Comparison

ISO 27002:2022 Categories (93 Controls)

1. Organizational Controls (37): Policies, responsibilities, asset management, access control
2. People Controls (8): HR security, awareness, training
3. Physical Controls (14): Physical security, environmental protection
4. Technological Controls (34): System security, cryptography, network security

SOC 2 Trust Services Criteria

1. Security (Common Criteria): Foundation for all SOC 2 reports; covers access control, system operations, change management, risk mitigation
2. Availability: System availability commitments and uptime
3. Processing Integrity: Accuracy and completeness of processing
4. Confidentiality: Protection of confidential information
5. Privacy: Collection, use, retention, and disposal of personal information

Mapping Between Standards

The following table shows how SOC 2 Trust Services Criteria map to ISO 27001/2 control domains:

Key Philosophical Differences

ISO 27001 takes a management system approach, requiring organizations to:

• Establish an ISMS governance structure
• Conduct formal risk assessments using a defined methodology
• Implement mandatory documentation (policies, procedures, records)
• Maintain continual improvement processes
• Undergo regular management reviews

SOC 2 takes a principles-based approach, requiring organizations to:

• Define and document system descriptions
• Make commitments to customers about services
• Implement controls that meet Trust Services Criteria
• Demonstrate operating effectiveness over time
• Focus on the specific services being evaluated

Comparing Certification Processes

ISO 27001 Certification Process

Stage 1: Preparation (3-12 months typical)

1. Gap Assessment: Evaluate current security posture against ISO 27001 requirements
2. ISMS Design: Define scope, policies, and management framework
3. Risk Assessment: Conduct formal risk assessment following a documented methodology
4. Control Implementation: Implement controls from ISO 27002 or alternative frameworks
5. Documentation: Create required policies, procedures, and records
6. Internal Audit: Conduct internal audits of the ISMS
7. Management Review: Executive review of ISMS performance

Stage 2: Certification Audit (Two-Phase)

Phase 1 (Documentation Review)

• Review of ISMS documentation
• Readiness assessment
• Identification of audit focus areas
• Duration: 1-2 days (varies by scope)

Phase 2 (Implementation Audit)

• On-site or remote assessment of control implementation
• Interviews with personnel
• Evidence collection and verification
• Duration: 3-10 days (varies by scope and organization size)

Stage 3: Certification and Maintenance

• Certificate Validity: 3 years
• Surveillance Audits: Annual (required to maintain certification)
• Recertification: Full audit every 3 years
• Nonconformities: Must address major nonconformities before certification; minor nonconformities within defined timeframes

Certification Bodies

ISO 27001 certifications must be issued by accredited certification bodies. In the United States, common accreditation bodies include:

• ANAB (ANSI National Accreditation Board)
• UKAS (United Kingdom Accreditation Service)

SOC 2 Type 2 Audit Process

Stage 1: Preparation (3-6 months typical)

1. Readiness Assessment: Evaluate current controls against Trust Services Criteria
2. Criteria Selection: Determine which TSC to include (Security required)
3. System Description: Document the system(s) in scope
4. Control Design: Map existing controls to selected criteria or implement new controls
5. Gap Remediation: Address control gaps identified during readiness
6. Evidence Collection: Establish processes for gathering audit evidence

Stage 2: Audit Period (6-12 months)

Control Operation

• Controls must operate effectively throughout the audit period
• Evidence must be collected continuously or at regular intervals
• Exception tracking and remediation processes must be active

Audit Execution

• Typically conducted near the end of the audit period
• Sample testing of control operation
• Walkthrough interviews with control owners
• Evidence review and validation
• Duration: 1-4 weeks (varies by scope)

Stage 3: Report Issuance

• Report Validity: Reports cover a specific period (e.g., January 1 - December 31)
• Report Refresh: Organizations typically undergo annual SOC 2 audits
• Bridge Letters: May be required to cover gaps between report periods
• Exceptions: Included in the report with management responses

Audit Firms

SOC 2 audits must be performed by licensed CPA firms. The auditor provides an opinion on whether:

• Controls are suitably designed (Type 1 and Type 2)
• Controls operated effectively during the audit period (Type 2 only)

Timeline Comparison

Output Artifacts Comparison

ISO 27001 Certification Outputs

Certificate of Registration

The primary output is a formal certificate stating:

• Organization name and legal entity
• ISMS scope (what systems, locations, and processes are covered)
• Certification standard (ISO/IEC 27001:2022)
• Date of initial certification
• Certificate validity period (3 years)
• Certification body name and accreditation mark

Characteristics:

• Publicly shareable
• Verifiable through certification body registries
• Typically one page
• No detailed control information

Statement of Applicability (SoA)

The SoA documents:

• All controls from ISO 27002 (or alternative frameworks)
• Justification for inclusion or exclusion of each control
• Implementation status of selected controls
• Cross-references to organizational policies and procedures

Characteristics:

• Typically confidential/internal document
• May be shared under NDA with customers
• Detailed control-level information
• Usually 10-50 pages depending on format

Certification Audit Report

The detailed audit findings including:

• Audit scope and methodology
• Conformity status for each requirement
• Nonconformities identified (if any)
• Observations and opportunities for improvement
• Auditor recommendations

Characteristics:

• Confidential document
• Rarely shared externally
• Detailed assessment information
• Typically 20-100+ pages

SOC 2 Type 2 Report Outputs

SOC 2 Type 2 Report (Full Report)

A comprehensive report containing:

Section I: Independent Service Auditor’s Report (Opinion)

• Auditor’s opinion on control design and operating effectiveness
• Management’s responsibilities
• Auditor’s responsibilities
• Basis for opinion

Section II: Management’s Assertion

• Management’s claims about the system and controls
• Description of the system
• Principal service commitments and system requirements

Section III: System Description

• Services provided
• System boundaries and components
• Infrastructure, software, people, procedures, and data
• Relevant aspects of control environment

Section IV: Description of Controls

• Trust Services Criteria addressed
• Controls mapped to each criterion
• Control activities and descriptions

Section V: Test of Controls and Results

• Testing procedures performed
• Results of testing (including exceptions)
• Management’s responses to exceptions

Section VI: Other Information (Optional)

• Complementary user entity controls (CUECs)
• Subservice organizations
• Other relevant information

Characteristics:

• Typically 50-200+ pages
• Contains detailed control information
• Includes test results and exceptions
• Usually shared under NDA

SOC 2 Bridge Letter

A letter from the auditor or management covering:

• Period between report end date and current date
• Assertion that no significant changes have occurred
• Confirmation of continued control operation

Characteristics:

• Short document (1-2 pages)
• Covers gap period
• Not a substitute for a SOC 2 report

Artifact Comparison Table

Utility Comparison for US Organizations

Market Recognition

ISO 27001:

• Strong international recognition
• Required for many European and global contracts
• Preferred by multinational organizations
• Growing US adoption but not dominant
• Often required for government contractors (especially international)

SOC 2 Type 2:

• Dominant standard in the US technology sector
• Expected by most US enterprise customers
• Standard requirement in SaaS vendor assessments
• Less recognized outside North America
• Required by many US financial services firms

Industry Applicability

Practical Considerations for US Organizations

When ISO 27001 May Be Preferred

1. International customer base: European and APAC customers often prefer or require ISO 27001
2. Manufacturing and supply chain: ISO 27001 aligns with other ISO standards (9001, 14001)
3. Government contracts: Some contracts specify ISO 27001 compliance
4. Internal improvement: ISMS provides a robust framework for security management
5. Multiple frameworks: ISO 27001 can serve as a foundation for other certifications

When SOC 2 Type 2 May Be Preferred

1. US-focused SaaS companies: SOC 2 is the de facto standard for vendor assessments
2. Rapid market entry: Faster initial certification timeline
3. Customer expectations: US enterprise customers specifically request SOC 2 reports
4. Flexible scope: Can start with Security only and add criteria over time
5. Control transparency: Detailed reports help customers assess specific controls

Pursuing Both Certifications

Many organizations pursue both ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type 2 to maximize market coverage. Consider:

Advantages of Dual Certification:

• Complete coverage for US and international markets
• Control overlap reduces implementation effort (approximately 70-80% overlap)
• Demonstrates comprehensive security commitment
• Satisfies diverse customer requirements

Implementation Strategy:

1. Start with one: Choose based on immediate market needs
2. Build on common controls: Identify overlapping requirements
3. Maintain integrated documentation: Single control framework mapped to both standards
4. Coordinate audit schedules: Align timing to reduce audit fatigue
5. Consider combined assessments: Some firms offer integrated audits

Cost Comparison (Approximate US Costs)

Note: Costs vary significantly based on organization size, scope, existing security posture, and consulting vs. in-house approach.

Integration with Other Frameworks

Both certifications can serve as foundations for additional compliance requirements:

From ISO 27001:

• ISO 27017/27018 (cloud security)
• ISO 27701 (privacy management)
• SOC 2 (significant control overlap)
• NIST Cybersecurity Framework
• GDPR compliance programs

From SOC 2:

• SOC 1 (financial controls)
• HITRUST (healthcare)
• ISO 27001 (with gap analysis)
• CSA STAR (cloud security)
• StateRAMP/FedRAMP (government)

Choosing the Right Certification

Decision Framework

Use this framework to guide your certification decision:

Primary Market:

• US-focused → SOC 2 Type 2 (priority)
• International → ISO 27001 (priority)
• Both → Consider dual certification

Customer Requirements:

• Analyze current and prospective customer security questionnaires
• Identify which certifications are explicitly requested
• Consider industry-specific requirements

Organizational Maturity:

• Early-stage startup → SOC 2 Type 2 (faster, more flexible)
• Established organization → Either (based on market needs)
• Security-mature organization → Both (leverage existing controls)

Resource Availability:

• Limited resources → Start with one certification
• Dedicated security team → Consider parallel implementation
• Strong documentation culture → ISO 27001 may be easier

Timeline Pressures:

• Urgent customer requirement → SOC 2 Type 1 (point-in-time) as bridge
• 6-12 month timeline → SOC 2 Type 2
• 12-18 month timeline → ISO 27001 or both

Recommendations by Company Type

B2B SaaS Companies (US Focus)

1. Start with SOC 2 Type 2 (Security + Availability)
2. Add ISO 27001 if international expansion planned
3. Consider additional criteria (Confidentiality, Privacy) based on data handling

Enterprise Software Vendors

1. Pursue both SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO 27001
2. Align audit cycles for efficiency
3. Maintain integrated control framework

Financial Technology (FinTech)

1. SOC 2 Type 2 with all relevant criteria
2. Consider SOC 1 for financial transaction processing
3. ISO 27001 for international markets

Healthcare Technology

1. SOC 2 Type 2 with Security and Confidentiality
2. Align with HIPAA requirements
3. Consider HITRUST certification

Managed Service Providers

1. SOC 2 Type 2 as baseline
2. ISO 27001 for enterprise clients
3. Consider industry-specific certifications (PCI-DSS, etc.)

Conclusion

ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type 2 are both valuable security certifications that serve different markets and purposes. Understanding their differences helps organizations make informed decisions about their security certification strategy.

Key Takeaways:

1. ISO 27001 provides an internationally recognized management system framework, ideal for organizations with global operations or European customers

2. SOC 2 Type 2 is the dominant standard in the US technology sector, providing detailed assurance reports that US customers expect

3. The certification processes differ significantly: ISO 27001 involves a structured ISMS audit, while SOC 2 evaluates control effectiveness over a defined period

4. Output artifacts vary: ISO 27001 produces a shareable certificate; SOC 2 produces comprehensive reports typically shared under NDA

5. For US organizations: SOC 2 Type 2 often takes priority, but ISO 27001 remains important for international business

6. Dual certification is increasingly common and provides comprehensive market coverage

7. Control overlap between the standards allows organizations to leverage implementation efforts across both certifications

The right choice depends on your organization’s market focus, customer requirements, resources, and timeline. Many organizations find that pursuing both certifications—either sequentially or in parallel—provides the broadest market coverage and demonstrates the strongest commitment to information security.

Additional Resources

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Standard
• ISO/IEC 27002:2022 Control Guidance
• AICPA SOC 2 Overview
• Trust Services Criteria (TSC)
• NIST Cybersecurity Framework
• Cloud Security Alliance STAR Registry