Understanding SOC 2 Report: A Comprehensive Guide

Verizon reported that 15% of the data breaches involved a third party in 2023 – a 68% increase from the previous year. It indicates the dire need to verify the state of security of your third-party vendors. 

When it comes to evaluating vendor security and compliance, System and Organization Controls 2 (SOC 2) reports have become an industry standard. These reports offer a detailed overview of a service provider’s controls relevant to the Trust Service Criteria, covering aspects like security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy. SOC 2 reports serve as a key tool in assessing the risk exposure and ensuring compliance with internal and regulatory requirements.

Despite their value, interpreting SOC 2 reports can be complex. The reports are highly detailed, often running dozens of pages with technical information that can be overwhelming for stakeholders who lack a background in compliance or cybersecurity. 

Challenges include understanding the scope of the report, differentiating between Type 1 and Type 2 assessments, and recognizing limitations or exceptions noted by the auditor. Organizations must also discern whether the controls evaluated align with their specific needs and risk profile, making it crucial to approach SOC 2 report analysis with a structured framework.

In this guide, we will help you decipher all the aspects of a SOC 2 report so that you can make good decisions based on its content.

Understanding the different SOC 2 report types

What is an SOC 2 Report?

A SOC 2 report is a detailed audit document that evaluates an organization’s internal controls related to the security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy of customer data. It is designed for service providers that store or process data on behalf of clients, ensuring they meet industry standards for protecting sensitive information. The report helps organizations assess the risk of working with third-party vendors and provides assurance about the service provider’s ability to maintain secure and reliable systems.

SOC 2 reports are categorized into two types: SOC 2 Type 1 and SOC 2 Type 2. While both reports are crucial in assessing a vendor’s internal controls related to security and compliance, they serve distinct purposes and are suited to different stages of the vendor evaluation process.

SOC 2 Type 1 Report

A Type 1 report focuses on a vendor’s system and the suitability of the design of its controls at a specific point in time. This report is typically used to provide a snapshot of the controls in place and whether they are suitably designed to meet the relevant Trust Service Criteria. 

Type 1 reports are useful early in the vendor relationship, such as during the initial evaluation phase, as they give a quick overview of the controls implemented but do not provide assurance on how consistently those controls are operated over time.

Type 1 reports are typically requested for short-term projects or when time-sensitive decisions need to be made, and a quick verification of control design suffices.

SOC 2 Type 2 Report

A SOC 2 Type 2 report goes a step further by not only evaluating the design of the controls but also testing their operational effectiveness over a period of time (usually 3-12 months). This report demonstrates whether the controls are functioning as intended on an ongoing basis. SOC 2 Type 2 reports are critical when continuous assurance is needed, particularly for vendors handling highly sensitive data or performing critical services. They offer a more in-depth and reliable evaluation, making them essential for long-term vendor relationships and ongoing risk assessments.

SOC 2 Type 2 reports are more relevant for established vendor relationships or when a high level of assurance is required. They provide detailed evidence of consistent control performance, making them crucial for high-risk engagements where continuous operational effectiveness is essential.

Read also: Choosing the right SOC 2 certification: Type I or Type II

Core components of a SOC 2 report

A SOC 2 report provides a comprehensive overview of an organization’s internal controls related to the five TSCs. Understanding the core components of these reports is essential for evaluating a service provider’s ability to protect sensitive data and maintain operational integrity.

A SOC 2 report has six sections:

• Section 1: Auditor’s opinion: This section provides the auditor’s assessment of whether the controls are fairly presented and operating effectively, serving as the foundation for evaluating the report.
• Section 2: Trust Services Criteria (TSC): It outlines the core criteria—security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy—offered by the service provider, vital for understanding the scope of the audit.
• Section 3: Management’s assertion: This part includes the service organization’s statement, confirming that the controls are properly designed and implemented as claimed.
• Section 4: System description: It details the system, processes, and boundaries, demonstrating how they align with the services the organization offers.
• Section 5: Other information provided by the service organization (Optional): This optional section may include additional details that the service organization chooses to disclose about its controls or operations.
• Section 6: Complementary subservice organization controls (If applicable): If applicable, this section covers controls managed by third-party providers that are essential to the overall system’s security and effectiveness.

Section 1: Auditor’s opinion: Significance and how to interpret it

The auditor’s opinion is one of the most critical sections of a SOC 2 report. It provides a summary of the auditor’s findings and conclusions regarding the suitability of the service organization’s controls. Understanding this section is key to determining the reliability of the report and assessing any associated risks.

Significance of the Auditor’s Opinion

The auditor’s opinion represents the culmination of the SOC 2 examination. It expresses the auditor’s professional judgment on whether the controls within the scope of the report are:

• Fairly presented: Whether the system description accurately reflects the controls implemented by the organization.
• Suitably designed: Whether the controls are appropriately designed to achieve the intended Trust Service Criteria (TSC).
• Operating effectively (for SOC Type 2 reports): Whether the controls were consistently implemented and functioned as intended over the evaluation period.

The significance lies in the fact that the auditor’s opinion provides third-party validation of the service provider’s claims about their control environment. Stakeholders, including customers, partners, and regulators, rely on this opinion to make informed decisions regarding the service provider’s risk posture.

How to interpret the auditor’s opinion?

The auditor’s opinion typically falls into one of the following categories:

a. Unqualified (clean) opinion

This is the most favorable outcome, indicating that the auditor found no significant issues. The controls were fairly presented, suitably designed, and (for SOC 2 Type 2 reports) operating effectively without significant exceptions. An unqualified opinion gives users confidence in the service organization’s control environment.

b. Qualified opinion

A qualified opinion indicates that while most controls were satisfactory, there were specific exceptions or deficiencies that prevent the auditor from providing a clean opinion. This may include issues with the design or operation of certain controls. Users should carefully evaluate the significance of these exceptions and consider how they might impact their own risk assessments.

c. Adverse opinion

An adverse opinion is rare but serious. It suggests that the controls are either not suitably designed or are failing to operate effectively, leading to a high level of risk. Organizations receiving an adverse opinion may have substantial compliance gaps that could pose significant risks to stakeholders.

d. Disclaimer of opinion

A disclaimer occurs when the auditor is unable to form an opinion, typically due to scope limitations or lack of sufficient evidence. A disclaimer is a red flag that suggests there were issues preventing the auditor from completing a thorough evaluation. Users should approach such reports with caution, as the lack of a definitive opinion limits the report’s reliability.

Key points to consider when interpreting the opinion

• Scope of the report: Ensure that the opinion applies to the services and controls relevant to your organization’s needs.
• Exceptions and deficiencies: Pay attention to any exceptions noted by the auditor, as they could indicate potential risks or areas of weakness.
• Impact on business decisions: Consider how the opinion aligns with your risk tolerance and whether the report provides sufficient assurance for your purposes.

Read also: 7 Steps to Pick the Right SOC 2 Auditor

Section 2: Trust Services Criteria (TSC): Overview of the criteria and their importance

The Trust Services Criteria (TSC) provide the framework for SOC 2 assessments, focusing on key principles that evaluate a service organization’s controls across five categories:

Importance of the Trust Services Criteria

• Standardization across industries: The TSC provides a consistent framework for assessing controls across different sectors, aiding in easier comparison and evaluation.

• Risk management alignment: The criteria help organizations design controls that mitigate key security and operational risks.

• Building trust and assurance: Adherence to the TSC demonstrates a strong commitment to security and compliance, building credibility with customers and partners.

• Flexible application: The TSC can be tailored to specific business needs, allowing organizations to focus on relevant criteria like security, availability, or confidentiality.

In summary, the TSC framework ensures robust security and compliance, making it essential for organizations aiming to build trust and meet industry standards in their service operations.

Read also: What are the common criteria in SOC 2 and why do they matter?

Section 3: Management’s assertion: Role in attesting to the design and implementation of controls

Management’s assertion plays a critical role in attesting to the design and implementation of controls within an organization, especially in the context of SOC reports. The assertion is a formal statement by the management that it has established and maintained effective controls over a specific reporting period. It covers key aspects such as:

This assertion is a cornerstone of SOC 1 and SOC 2 reports, serving as the foundation for the auditor’s opinion and reflecting the organization’s commitment to internal control and compliance standards.

Section 4: System description: How it aligns with services offered

The system description in SOC reports is a detailed narrative that explains how an organization’s systems and processes align with the services it offers. This description is crucial because it provides context for how the organization meets its control objectives and complies with the requirements of frameworks like SOC 2. 

Key aspects include:

• Service offerings and boundaries: The system description outlines the specific services provided by the organization, such as cloud hosting, data processing, or IT management. It clarifies which systems, processes, and components are within scope, distinguishing them from those that are outside the audit’s purview.

• Alignment with control objectives: The description demonstrates how the systems and processes support the organization’s control objectives. For example, if an organization offers SaaS solutions, the system description would explain how security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy controls align with the software services offered.

• Technical infrastructure and processes: It details the underlying infrastructure (e.g., data centers, software applications, and network configurations) and processes (e.g., user access management, change management) that deliver the services. This aligns the organization’s technical and operational controls with the service offerings.

• Operational dependencies: The description addresses dependencies on third-party services or external systems that are integral to delivering the primary service. This ensures transparency and helps clients understand how these dependencies impact the overall service quality and control effectiveness.

• Client expectations and use cases: The system description connects the services offered with typical client use cases and how controls ensure service delivery according to agreed standards. For instance, if the service is data hosting, the description would cover how confidentiality and availability controls protect client data in line with service commitments.

Section 5: Other information provided by the service organization (Optional)

In a SOC report, the “Other Information Provided by the Service Organization” section is optional but can include additional context, insights, or explanations that are not covered in the main report but are still relevant to users. This information typically serves to enhance transparency and provide stakeholders with a more comprehensive understanding of the service organization’s controls, processes, or environment. Examples include:

• Future plans or initiatives: The service organization may include details about upcoming changes, improvements, or initiatives related to its controls, systems, or service offerings. For example, a company might discuss planned upgrades to its security infrastructure or forthcoming certifications.

• Non-control-related information: The organization might choose to share information about aspects that are not directly related to controls but are still important to stakeholders. This could include industry recognition, customer satisfaction metrics, or other performance indicators.

• Additional compliance information: The service organization might provide details about compliance with other frameworks or regulations, such as GDPR, HIPAA, or ISO standards, that go beyond the scope of the SOC report but are relevant to stakeholders.

• Client responsibilities: Sometimes, this section clarifies the responsibilities or actions expected from clients to ensure the effectiveness of certain controls. For example, while the service organization may provide encryption, it might be up to clients to properly configure and manage encryption keys.

• Subsequent events: If there have been significant events after the audit period that might impact controls (like a merger, acquisition, or system change), the service organization may choose to disclose this information.

• Management’s perspective or commentary: Management might provide an overall summary, perspectives on their control environment, or commentary on the results of the audit. This could include statements on the organization’s commitment to security, reliability, and ongoing improvements.

• Supplementary metrics or analytics: The service organization could include performance metrics, system uptime statistics, or other data that support the effectiveness and reliability of its service offerings.

While this information is optional, it can be valuable for providing a more rounded view of the service organization’s operations, offering greater context for users who rely on the SOC report for decision-making.

Section 6: Complementary subservice organization controls (If applicable)

Complementary Subservice Organization Controls (CSOCs) refer to controls implemented by subservice organizations that are critical to achieving the control objectives of the primary service organization. 

In SOC reports, these controls are considered when the service organization relies on third-party vendors (subservice organizations) to deliver certain aspects of its service, such as cloud hosting, payment processing, or data storage. 

Key points related to CSOCs include:

• Overview and relevance: The SOC report typically identifies the subservice organizations and describes the services they provide. It explains why these services are critical to the overall control environment and how they impact the service organization’s ability to meet control objectives.

• Carve-out vs. Inclusive method: The service organization can present subservice organization controls using one of two methods:

• Responsibilities and dependencies: The SOC report highlights the complementary nature of these controls, emphasizing that both the service organization’s and the subservice organization’s controls are necessary to achieve the control objectives. The service organization outlines its reliance on these controls and specifies the controls it expects the subservice organization to implement.

Examples of CSOCs:

For a cloud hosting provider, controls over physical security, environmental safeguards, and availability might be the responsibility of the subservice organization.

For a payment processing vendor, controls over transaction integrity, data encryption, and fraud monitoring might be relevant.

How CSOCs impact users: The SOC report explains to users (e.g., customers or auditors) that they need to consider these complementary controls when evaluating the overall control environment. It provides guidance on how users should assess the subservice organization’s controls in relation to their own risk management or compliance needs.

Monitoring and vendor management: The service organization describes how it monitors the effectiveness of the subservice organization’s controls, such as by reviewing the subservice organization’s SOC reports, conducting vendor assessments, or implementing additional controls.

Complementary Subservice Organization Controls are critical to providing a full understanding of how the service organization’s control objectives are met when third parties are involved. Including them in the SOC report ensures transparency and helps users assess the reliability and security of the overall service delivery.

Read also: Introducing Kai: Your Ultimate Control Copilot

What are the warning signs to watch for in a SOC 2 report?

Detecting concerns during a SOC report review involves the following steps. Each of these steps helps ensure that risks are identified and addressed effectively. Here’s a breakdown:

1. Spotting red flags

• Identifying control exceptions: When reviewing a SOC report, it’s essential to look for any reported exceptions where controls did not operate effectively. Red flags include recurring exceptions, significant control failures, or deviations from expected control operations that could indicate systemic issues or potential risks.
• Indicators of weaknesses: Pay attention to control areas with repeated deficiencies, unexplained variances, inconsistent evidence, or lack of timely corrective actions. These could signal deeper issues in the organization’s control environment.
• Impact on control objectives: Assess whether any identified exceptions directly affect key control objectives (e.g., security, availability, confidentiality). High-impact exceptions may require immediate remediation or indicate broader issues in the control environment.

2. Reviewing exceptions and assessing remediation

• Understanding exceptions: Exceptions should be clearly explained, including what caused them, their frequency, and their impact. It’s crucial to determine if the exceptions are isolated incidents or part of a pattern that requires attention.
• Evaluating management’s response: The service organization’s response to exceptions is critical. Effective responses include timely identification, root cause analysis, and documented remediation plans. A strong remediation process should address not only the symptoms but also the underlying causes of the exceptions.
• Assessing the effectiveness of remediation: Review any evidence showing that corrective actions have been implemented and whether they have been effective in preventing future exceptions. If the SOC report includes updates on previously identified issues, ensure that they have been resolved satisfactorily.
• Tracking remediation timelines: The speed and thoroughness of remediation efforts are important indicators of the organization’s commitment to maintaining a robust control environment. Delayed or incomplete remediation efforts are red flags.

3. Analyzing Complementary User Entity Controls (CUECs)

• Understanding CUECs: Complementary User Entity Controls are controls that users (e.g., customers) must implement on their end to fully achieve the control objectives. The service organization’s controls alone are not sufficient; users must also fulfill their responsibilities.
• Identifying gaps in CUECs: Evaluate whether the service organization has clearly communicated the required CUECs to users. Ambiguities or lack of clarity regarding these controls can lead to risks if users do not understand or implement them properly.
• Evaluating user responsibilities: Ensure that users have sufficient guidance to implement the necessary CUECs. This includes reviewing any provided documentation, training resources, or guidelines that explain how users should implement these controls.
• Assessing potential risks from missing CUECs: If users fail to implement CUECs, it can lead to gaps in the overall control environment. Assess the potential risks associated with unfulfilled CUECs and consider whether additional measures are needed to mitigate these risks.

Best practices for SOC 2 report review

Following the steps shown below will help ensure a thorough and effective review of SOC 2 reports, leading to better risk management and compliance outcomes.

1. Establishing a consistent review process

• Define roles and responsibilities: Assign a dedicated team or individual responsible for reviewing the SOC 2 report.
• Create a checklist: Develop a standard checklist to ensure all critical aspects of the report are reviewed, such as control objectives, test results, and auditor opinions.
• Review timeline: Set a schedule for regular reviews, especially if you rely on multiple vendors who provide SOC 2 reports.

2. Aligning the report with your risk management strategy

• Identify relevant controls: Focus on the controls that directly impact your business, data security, and compliance requirements.
• Map controls to risks: Ensure the controls addressed in the SOC 2 report correspond with the specific risks identified in your risk management strategy.
• Evaluate gaps: Compare the SOC 2 controls with your organization’s internal risk controls to identify potential gaps and areas for improvement.

3. Assessing report scope and coverage

• Understand the scope: Verify which Trust Service Criteria are covered.
• Determine relevance: Assess whether the scope of the report matches your specific needs and industry requirements.

4. Engage with the service provider

• Request clarifications: If there are areas of uncertainty or unclear results, follow up with the service provider for additional details.
• Verify remediation plans: Ensure that any identified issues have remediation plans in place and track their implementation over time.

5. Utilize the report for continuous improvement

• Incorporate findings into strategy: Use insights from the SOC 2 report to refine your risk management strategies and strengthen your own internal controls.
• Monitor vendor performance: Use the findings as part of ongoing vendor management and monitoring activities.

SOC 2 report: A bird’s eye view of your vendor’s security and compliance

In conclusion, understanding and interpreting SOC 2 reports is crucial for managing third-party risk and ensuring compliance. As vendor relationships become more integral, SOC 2 reports provide a framework to assess a provider’s controls against industry standards. However, navigating these reports requires clarity on key components, including the differences between SOC Type 1 and SOC Type 2 reports and recognizing potential red flags.

By following a consistent review process and aligning findings with your risk strategy, SOC 2 reports enable informed decisions that enhance security and compliance.

Scrut simplifies SOC 2 compliance with automated monitoring, expert guidance, and streamlined solutions—whether you’re seeking certification or maintaining controls. Partner with Scrut for comprehensive SOC 2 support.

Get started with Scrut today and take the next step toward hassle-free SOC 2 compliance!

FAQs