# How We Implement ISO 27001 Annex A Control 5.7 Threat Intelligence in Ninety Days: The Four-Phase Method That Delivers Actionable Intelligence Instead of Threat Feeds
Most organisations approaching ISO 27001:2022 certification treat threat intelligence as a procurement decision. They subscribe to a commercial threat feed, tick the box for Annex A Control 5.7, and assume the requirement is satisfied. Then the certification audit arrives, and the auditor asks to see the documented process for collecting, analysing, and disseminating threat intelligence. The subscription invoice is not that process.
ISO 27001 Annex A Control 5.7 requires that information about information security threats be collected and analysed to produce threat intelligence. The standard does not require expensive platforms or global feeds. It requires a documented, repeatable process that turns raw threat data into intelligence your security operations team can act upon. The evidence an auditor expects includes policies that define roles and responsibilities, procedures that describe collection and analysis workflows, records that demonstrate regular activity, and outputs that show intelligence reaching the stakeholders who need it.
We have developed an ISO 27001 threat intelligence implementation method that satisfies the control's requirements and delivers operational value within a single quarter. The method comprises four phases: asset-to-threat mapping, source selection and validation, analyst workflow design, and stakeholder reporting. Each phase produces documented evidence that auditors recognise and practical outputs that security teams use. This article describes how we deliver each phase, who participates from your organisation, and what you hold at the end.
Why Threat Intelligence Implementation Fails Certification Audits
The gap between purchasing a service and implementing a control is wider than most project teams anticipate. A threat feed subscription provides data—indicators of compromise, vulnerability announcements, adversary profiles—but it does not provide the process that ISO 27001 requires. Auditors examining Annex A 5.7 compliance look for four elements:
Defined scope and objectives. What threats matter to your organisation? Which assets are you protecting? What decisions will threat intelligence inform?
Documented collection process. Where does threat information originate? Who is responsible for gathering it? How often? What criteria determine relevance?
Analysis methodology. How is raw data evaluated, correlated, and contextualised? Who performs analysis? What tools or frameworks guide the work?
Dissemination and action. Who receives intelligence? In what format? How do recipients use it to make security decisions?
Organisations that treat threat intelligence as a product purchase typically lack documentation for all four elements. The result is a finding during the certification audit and a scramble to build processes retrospectively. Our method addresses each element in sequence, producing the documentation and operational capability in parallel.
Phase One: Asset-to-Threat Mapping
Effective threat intelligence begins with understanding what you are defending and what threatens it. The first phase maps your critical information assets to the threat actors, attack vectors, and vulnerability classes most likely to affect them.
We conduct this phase through a structured workshop with your information security team, IT management, and representatives from business units that own high-value assets. The session typically runs half a day. We guide participants through an asset inventory review, identifying which systems, data sets, and services are essential to business operations or subject to regulatory protection requirements. For each asset, we document its classification, location, and existing controls.
Next, we map relevant threat sources. A financial institution faces different adversaries than a healthcare provider or an energy company. We consider threat actor motivation—financial gain, espionage, disruption—and capability. We examine the attack patterns observed in your sector within the Kingdom and the wider region. We review vulnerability disclosures affecting your technology stack.
The output of this phase is a threat landscape document specific to your organisation. It lists your critical assets, describes the threat actors and attack methods that pose the highest risk to each, and explains why those threats are relevant. This document becomes the foundation of your threat intelligence scope statement, satisfying the auditor's first question: what threats does your process address, and why?
You also receive an intelligence requirements matrix that translates each asset-threat pairing into specific questions your threat intelligence process must answer. For example: Are there active exploit campaigns targeting the web application framework we use? Have credential dumps appeared that include our domain? Are there emerging regulatory requirements that affect our data protection controls? These intelligence requirements guide the next phase.
Phase Two: Source Selection and Validation
With intelligence requirements defined, the second phase identifies and validates the sources that will provide the information you need. This phase distinguishes our method from a simple feed subscription: we build a collection plan tailored to your requirements, combining open-source intelligence, sector-specific resources, regulatory alerts, and—where justified—commercial services.
We work with your security operations and threat analysis staff to evaluate candidate sources against three criteria: relevance to your intelligence requirements, reliability of the information, and operational feasibility of integration. Open-source feeds may offer broad coverage but require significant filtering. Sector information-sharing groups provide highly relevant intelligence but may have membership prerequisites. Regulatory bodies such as the National Cybersecurity Authority publish alerts that are authoritative but may not arrive with the frequency your operations require.
For each source, we document its scope, update frequency, access method, and the intelligence requirements it satisfies. We establish validation procedures: how will you assess the credibility of information from this source? What corroboration is required before acting on it? We draft the collection procedure, a step-by-step document that specifies who retrieves information from each source, how often, and where it is recorded.
We also configure the technical integration where needed. If you operate a security information and event management system or a threat intelligence platform, we establish the feeds and parsers. If your collection is manual, we create templates and shared repositories that ensure consistency.
The deliverables from this phase include the collection procedure, a source catalogue with validation criteria, and evidence of initial collection activity. These documents demonstrate to an auditor that your threat intelligence process is not ad hoc; it is planned, repeatable, and grounded in your specific risk profile.
Phase Three: Analyst Workflow Design
Raw threat data becomes intelligence only through analysis. The third phase designs and documents the workflow that your analysts follow to evaluate, contextualise, and prioritise the information collected in phase two.
We facilitate a working session with the individuals who will perform threat analysis—typically members of your security operations centre, IT risk team, or information security unit. We define the analysis steps: initial triage to filter irrelevant data, correlation with your asset inventory and existing security events, severity assessment using a consistent framework, and contextualisation that explains what the threat means for your organisation.
We document decision criteria at each step. What makes a threat indicator relevant? When does a vulnerability disclosure require immediate action versus routine patching? How do you distinguish between general awareness information and intelligence that demands a response? These criteria are captured in an analysis procedure that any qualified analyst can follow.
We also design the intelligence output format. Effective threat intelligence is concise, actionable, and tailored to the recipient. We create templates for intelligence reports, alerts, and briefings. Each template specifies what information is included, how it is presented, and what action the recipient is expected to consider.
During this phase, we conduct a pilot cycle. Your analysts apply the new workflow to a sample of recent threat data. We observe the process, identify friction points, and refine the procedures. The pilot produces sample intelligence outputs that demonstrate the process in operation—valuable evidence during a certification audit.
The deliverables from phase three are the analysis procedure, intelligence output templates, and records from the pilot cycle. Together, these documents show an auditor that your organisation has a defined, tested methodology for turning threat data into intelligence.
Phase Four: Stakeholder Reporting and Feedback
Threat intelligence has value only when it reaches the people who can act on it. The fourth phase establishes the dissemination process and the feedback loop that ensures intelligence remains relevant.
We work with your information security leadership to identify intelligence stakeholders: the security operations team that responds to incidents, IT management that prioritises patching and configuration changes, risk and compliance functions that update assessments, and executive leadership that makes investment and policy decisions. Each stakeholder group has different intelligence needs and different tolerances for detail and frequency.
We design a dissemination matrix that specifies what intelligence each stakeholder receives, in what format, and on what schedule. Tactical intelligence—indicators of compromise, active exploits—goes to the SOC daily or in real time. Strategic intelligence—emerging threat trends, changes in the regulatory landscape—goes to leadership monthly or quarterly. We draft the distribution procedures and configure the delivery mechanisms, whether email, shared dashboards, or briefing meetings.
Equally important is the feedback mechanism. Stakeholders must have a channel to report whether the intelligence they receive is useful, timely, and actionable. We establish a quarterly review process in which the threat intelligence function meets with stakeholders to assess effectiveness and adjust priorities. This review is documented, providing evidence of continual improvement—a core ISO 27001 principle.
The final deliverables from this phase include the dissemination matrix, distribution procedures, sample intelligence reports delivered to stakeholders, and the schedule for the quarterly review. These documents complete the evidence set that Annex A Control 5.7 requires.
Integration with the Broader ISMS Implementation
Threat intelligence does not operate in isolation. It informs and is informed by other components of your information security management system. The intelligence requirements defined in phase one are derived from your risk assessment. The procedures documented in phases two and three become part of your ISMS policy framework. The stakeholder reporting in phase four feeds into management review.
When we implement your ISO/IEC 27001:2022 ISMS, we ensure that threat intelligence is integrated across the scope, risk assessment, Statement of Applicability, policies, internal audit and management review. The threat landscape document informs your risk register. The intelligence procedures are referenced in your Statement of Applicability as evidence of Annex A 5.7 implementation. The quarterly stakeholder review is incorporated into your management review agenda. The internal audit includes a review of threat intelligence records to verify that the process operates as documented.
This integration ensures that threat intelligence is not a standalone project but a functioning element of your ISMS, ready for scrutiny during both stage 1 and stage 2 certification audits.
Full Deliverables: What You Hold at the End
At the conclusion of the four-phase method, you hold a complete, auditable threat intelligence capability:
- Threat landscape document describing your critical assets and relevant threats
- Intelligence requirements matrix specifying the questions your process must answer
- Collection procedure detailing sources, access methods, and retrieval schedules
- Source catalogue with validation criteria for each feed or resource
- Analysis procedure defining the workflow from raw data to actionable intelligence
- Intelligence output templates for reports, alerts, and briefings
- Dissemination matrix specifying stakeholders, formats, and frequencies
- Distribution procedures and delivery mechanisms
- Records of pilot analysis cycles and initial intelligence outputs
- Quarterly review schedule and feedback mechanism
- Integration documentation linking threat intelligence to risk assessment, policies, and management review
These deliverables satisfy the documentation requirements of ISO 27001 Annex A Control 5.7 and provide your security operations with a practical, repeatable process for generating and using threat intelligence.
Moving from Subscription to Process
If your organisation is planning ISO 27001:2022 implementation and you recognise that threat intelligence requires more than a product purchase, we can help. We implement your ISO/IEC 27001:2022 ISMS—scope, risk assessment, Statement of Applicability, policies, internal audit and management review—ready for certification, and we ensure that Annex A controls such as threat intelligence are not only documented but operationally effective.
The four-phase method described in this article is delivered as part of our ISMS implementation service or as a focused engagement for organisations that already hold certification and need to strengthen a specific control. The timeline is ninety days from project start to full operational capability, fitting comfortably within the broader four to eight month ISMS implementation cycle.
Threat intelligence that satisfies an auditor and serves your security team is not a product you buy. It is a process you build. We know how to build it.
