Which compliance framework should a SaaS company pursue first?
For a SaaS company, the first framework depends on which customers ask for proof, not on which framework is best known. Start by listing the contracts, security questionnaires and procurement reviews you expect in the next twelve months, then match each request to the proof it actually produces. The proof types differ sharply, and buyers often specify one of them by name.
SOC 2 produces an attestation report issued by a CPA firm, and it is the most common request from US enterprise buyers. A Type 1 report describes the system and the design of controls as of a date, while a Type 2 report adds an opinion on operating effectiveness over a period, which is what most procurement teams want to see. ISO/IEC 27001 produces a certificate issued by an accredited certification body, not by ISO itself, and it matters most for buyers in Europe, Asia-Pacific and multinationals that standardize on it. HIPAA has no certification at all, so a health-facing SaaS vendor shows compliance through a risk analysis and documented safeguards, and any vendor claiming a HIPAA certificate should be questioned. PCI DSS produces an Attestation of Compliance on an official template, completed through a Report on Compliance or a Self-Assessment Questionnaire, and it applies only if your product stores, processes or transmits cardholder data. GDPR produces no certificate; Article 42 certification is voluntary and does not reduce your obligations.
A practical default is to pursue SOC 2 first for a US-focused SaaS company, adding ISO 27001 when European or global buyers require a certificate. Where your roadmap includes both, scope the controls once and map them to both, because the two frameworks overlap heavily. Do two at once when a signed or near-term customer requires both and the timelines are close, or when a PCI DSS scope is unavoidable and SOC 2 evidence can be reused. Confirm with your prospects which report version and scope they accept, because some buyers accept only a Type 2 report from the last twelve months, and that requirement changes the start date.
How SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA, PCI DSS and GDPR differ for SaaS
This table compares the five frameworks a SaaS company is most often asked about on who requests each one, what proof it produces, its assessment cycle, its legal or contractual force and the cost signals that are published. Read each row across to see which proof a customer or regulator will actually accept, then check the cost rows against your own scope.
| Factor | SOC 2 | ISO 27001 | HIPAA | PCI DSS | GDPR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Who asks for it | Mostly US enterprise customers and procurement teams through contract or security questionnaires | Customers and procurement teams, often in Europe and Asia, and some tenders | Covered entities and business associates handling electronic protected health information | Card brands and acquirers through the merchant or service provider program | Applies by law to controllers and processors handling personal data of people in the EU |
| Proof it produces | Attestation report from a CPA: Type 1 covers design at a date, Type 2 adds operating effectiveness over a period | Certificate issued by an accredited certification body, not by ISO | No certificate exists; HHS does not recognize private certifications | Report on Compliance or Self-Assessment Questionnaire, each with an Attestation of Compliance | No audit, attestation or certificate required; Article 42 certification is voluntary |
| Assessment cycle | Point-in-time (Type 1) or observation period (Type 2), set by the scope and the auditor | Three-year certification cycle with at least one audit every calendar year | No external cycle; OCR enforces through complaints, compliance reviews and audits | Annual assessment under PCI SSC templates | Continuous obligation; Article 42 certificates last at most three years |
| Legal or contractual force | Contractual: binding only through customer agreements | Contractual: binding only through customer agreements or tenders | Legal: Security Rule obligations apply to covered entities and business associates | Contractual via card brand rules, enforced through acquirers | Legal: enforced by supervisory authorities with fines |
| Published cost signals | DOJ regulatory analysis (89 FR 86116) cited vendor-sourced estimates of $5,000 to $25,000 for Type 1 and $30,000 to $100,000 for Type 2 | No published audit fee range in the supplied facts; ask certification bodies for a written quote | Penalties published by HHS: $145 to $2,190,294 per violation for penalties assessed on or after January 28, 2026 (45 CFR 102.3) | No published fee range in the supplied facts; ask QSAs or the acquirer for scope-based quotes | No fee range in the supplied facts; costs scale with GDPR program scope and any voluntary certification |
What SOC 2 and ISO 27001 each prove to a customer
SOC 2 is an attestation report, not a certificate. A CPA firm examines a service organization's controls against the AICPA Trust Services Criteria and issues a report. A Type 1 report covers the system description and whether control design was suitable as of a date. A Type 2 report adds an opinion on whether those controls operated effectively over a period, which is the version most US enterprise buyers ask for in security questionnaires and vendor reviews. Security is always in scope through common criteria CC1 to CC9. Availability, processing integrity, confidentiality and privacy are added only when your commitments to customers call for them. Check the scope you agree with your auditor against the commitments in your contracts, because a buyer will read the criteria you were tested against.
ISO/IEC 27001:2022 is a certifiable management system. An accredited certification body audits your information security management system and, if it passes, issues a certificate. The 2022 edition carries 93 controls in Annex A, grouped under organizational, people, physical and technological themes. The certificate runs on a three-year cycle, and the certification body must audit at least once in every calendar year through surveillance or recertification audits. European and global buyers, and many procurement teams outside the US, often ask for the certificate by name and check it against the accreditation register. Confirm with the certification body which accreditation covers its work before you rely on the certificate in a tender.
Where SOC 2, ISO 27001 and PCI DSS work overlaps
Three frameworks share a large body of security controls, so one control set can often serve several audits. Mappings show where that overlap sits, but they do not prove that one report satisfies another. Each card below names a shared route and the check to run before you rely on it.
CIS Controls as a shared map
The CIS Controls Navigator for v8.1 maps the CIS Controls to 30 frameworks and versions, including SOC 2, ISO/IEC 27001:2022 and PCI DSS v4.0. Teams can use it to build one control inventory and tag each control with the criteria, Annex A entries and PCI requirements it supports. Check that each mapping points to the exact version you will be audited against, since the SOC 2 criteria and the ISO control set were revised separately from PCI DSS v4.0.
NIST CSF references to ISO and PCI
NIST CSF 2.0 informative references point to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 and PCI DSS, among other standards, and the CSF 2.0 Reference Tool lists 363 Implementation Examples. These references let a security lead trace a CSF outcome to a control in each framework. NIST says it does not check the correctness of non-NIST mappings and that listing a mapping does not imply endorsement, so confirm each link against the actual requirement text before you claim coverage.
HITRUST as a harmonized source set
HITRUST describes its CSF as harmonizing more than 70 authoritative sources, including ISO/IEC 27001, PCI DSS and GDPR. For a SaaS company that may later serve healthcare customers, a HITRUST crosswalk can show where one control serves several sources. HITRUST's harmonization is a vendor claim about its own framework, so ask it to show the specific mapping rows that matter for your PCI or ISO scope.
QSA reuse of SOC 2 evidence
PCI SSC FAQ 1567 says a QSA cannot rely on a SOC 2 or SOC 3 report for a PCI DSS assessment. The QSA may, however, reuse evidence from those audits after independently reviewing it. For a SaaS vendor with both reports, this can cut duplicated evidence collection, but it does not remove the QSA's review. Agree early on which SOC 2 populations, periods and system boundaries the QSA will accept.
Mappings do not prove equivalence
ENISA states that its mapping is not a measure of equivalence and does not assess whether a standard fully covers a regulation. NIST makes the same point about informative references. A control that maps to a SOC 2 criterion may still miss the ISO scope statement, the PCI cardholder data boundary or a period the auditor tests. Before you reuse evidence, confirm coverage with each assessor, using the exact scope each one will test.
What HIPAA, PCI DSS and GDPR require from a SaaS vendor
If your product stores or transmits electronic protected health information for a covered entity, the HIPAA Security Rule applies to you as a business associate, and no certificate proves compliance. The Security Rule sits in 45 CFR Part 164 Subpart C and is organized as 18 standards across administrative, physical and technical safeguards, carrying 36 implementation specifications. Fourteen of those are required and 22 are addressable. For each addressable specification you must decide whether it is reasonable and appropriate for your environment, and if you do not implement it, document why and adopt an equivalent measure where that is reasonable. HHS states that private certifications are not endorsed or recognized and do not prevent a later violation finding, so a SOC 2 or ISO 27001 report can support your evidence but does not replace the Security Rule analysis. The Office for Civil Rights enforces the rule through complaints, compliance reviews and audits. HHS proposed a major revision on January 6, 2025 (90 FR 898), and the latest Unified Agenda projects final action for July 2027. Confirm the current status in the Federal Register and the Unified Agenda before you set your roadmap, and plan your risk analysis documentation to cover both the current rule and the proposed changes.
If your product handles cardholder data, PCI DSS is assessed on official PCI SSC templates, not certificates. Depending on your role and transaction volume, the assessment is either a Report on Compliance completed by a Qualified Security Assessor or a Self-Assessment Questionnaire, and each produces an Attestation of Compliance. The PCI SSC states that certificates are not recognized as validation, so do not accept a vendor or a partner who offers one as proof. Ask your acquiring bank or payment brand which assessment type applies to your service provider role, because that answer determines your evidence set and your deadlines. A QSA may not rely on a SOC 2 or SOC 3 report for PCI DSS, but may reuse evidence from those audits after reviewing it independently, which can reduce duplicated evidence work. Ask your QSA early which SOC 2 evidence they will accept and whether your control descriptions match the PCI requirements in scope.
The GDPR requires no audit, attestation or certificate, so a SaaS vendor that processes EU personal data as a processor meets its obligations through contracts, documented processing, security measures and cooperation with customers. Article 42 certification is voluntary. It is issued for at most three years by accredited certification bodies or supervisory authorities, and it does not reduce your responsibility for compliance. Treat any Article 42 mark as one input to customer due diligence, not as a defense. The practical work is to confirm that your data processing agreements, subprocessor list, breach notification path and records of processing match what your product actually does. Confirm with your privacy counsel which of these documents your largest EU customers will request, and whether they expect a SOC 2 or ISO 27001 report to cover the security measures the GDPR describes.
Which frameworks to pursue for US-only, EU-facing, health and payments customers
US enterprise buyers most often ask for a SOC 2 report, because it is an attestation issued by a CPA firm on your controls and it is the report procurement teams know how to read. ISO/IEC 27001 appears more often with buyers who run global programs or who want a certificate from an accredited certification body. Neither is a law, so the requirement lives in the buyer's security questionnaire and master agreement, not in a statute.
- SOC 2 Type 1 or Type 2: A Type 1 report covers control design as of a date. A Type 2 report adds an opinion on operating effectiveness over a period, which many buyers request for a vendor they already use.
- SOC 3 for public use: A SOC 3 report covers the same categories in less detail and can be shared freely, which suits websites and sales collateral. A SOC 2 report is generally restricted in use.
- ISO/IEC 27001 certificate: The certificate comes from an accredited certification body, not from ISO itself. It runs on a three-year cycle with at least one audit in every calendar year.
- Questionnaire answers: Buyers often accept a mapped response to their own questionnaire when a full report is not yet available, so keep a control mapping ready.
- Scope statements: Confirm which systems, locations and trust services categories the report or certificate covers.
Before signing, confirm which report type, report period and scope the contract names, whether a bridge letter is required, and how the vendor handles exceptions in the audit report.
EU customers usually ask for evidence of GDPR processor obligations, and increasingly for evidence that supports their own regulatory duties under NIS2 or DORA when they buy from you. The GDPR requires no audit, attestation or certificate, so a data processing agreement, a documented record of processing and your security measures are the core proof. Article 42 certification is voluntary and does not reduce your responsibility.
- Data processing agreement: Customers will expect a DPA that reflects the processor role and sub-processor controls. This is a contract, not a certificate.
- ISO/IEC 27001 certificate: Many EU buyers treat an accredited ISO/IEC 27001 certificate as the strongest independent proof of an information security management system.
- SOC 2 report: Some EU buyers accept a SOC 2 report as supporting evidence, but it does not replace a GDPR assessment of your processing.
- Supervisory authority supervision: NIS2 and DORA create no certificate. Regulators supervise through inspections, audits and information requests, so expect customers to ask for evidence they can present in those reviews.
- Data location and transfers: Confirm where data is stored and what transfer mechanisms apply, since these are often negotiated separately from the security report.
Before signing, confirm which GDPR roles the contract assigns, which evidence the customer may request during its own supervisory review, and whether NIS2 or DORA flow-down clauses apply.
Health customers handling electronic protected health information must comply with the HIPAA Security Rule when they are covered entities or business associates. There is no HIPAA certification. HHS states that no Security Rule standard requires certification and that it does not endorse or recognize private certifications, so a vendor's proof is documentation of safeguards plus a business associate agreement.
- Business associate agreement: This is the legal instrument that binds a SaaS vendor handling ePHI to Security Rule obligations. Confirm it is in place before any ePHI flows.
- Risk analysis and documentation: Offer the documented risk analysis, policies and records that map to the Security Rule's administrative, physical and technical safeguards.
- SOC 2 or HITRUST as supporting evidence: Many health buyers ask for a SOC 2 report or a HITRUST assessment as third-party evidence. Neither is a HIPAA certificate, and buyers should not treat either as one.
- Addressable specifications: For addressable implementation specifications, the customer expects a documented assessment and an equivalent measure where the specification is not implemented.
- Pending rule change: HHS has proposed Security Rule revisions that are not final, so confirm which version the contract references.
Before signing, confirm the BAA terms, breach notification timing, subcontractor flow-down and which HIPAA version the customer expects you to meet.
Payment customers handling cardholder data are usually bound by PCI DSS through their acquirer or card brand. A SaaS vendor that stores, processes or transmits cardholder data, or that can affect its security, is generally assessed as a service provider. PCI DSS proof is documented on official PCI SSC templates, not on certificates.
- Attestation of Compliance: The AOC accompanies either a Report on Compliance completed by a Qualified Security Assessor or a Self-Assessment Questionnaire. Certificates are not recognized as validation.
- ROC or SAQ choice: The assessment type depends on the vendor's role and volume, which the customer's acquirer or card brand determines. Confirm which applies before scoping.
- SOC 2 reuse: A QSA cannot rely on a SOC 2 or SOC 3 report for PCI DSS, but may reuse evidence from those audits after independently reviewing it, which can reduce duplicated evidence work.
- Responsibility matrix: Customers will ask which PCI DSS requirements the vendor covers and which they retain. Document this per requirement.
- Scope of cardholder data environment: Keep the in-scope systems explicit, since the assessment scope drives the cost and effort.
Before signing, confirm the PCI DSS version referenced, the assessment type and date, the responsibility matrix, and the notice you must give if your compliance status changes.
Who assesses each framework and what the output looks like
This table lists who assesses each framework, what the output is and how often it recurs for the five frameworks most SaaS teams weigh first. Use it to match the proof a customer will ask for against the work and calendar your team commits to.
| Framework | Assessor or authority | Output | Cycle and source |
|---|---|---|---|
| SOC 2 | CPA firm performing an AICPA attestation examination | Type 1 report on system description and control design as of a date; Type 2 report adds operating effectiveness over a period | Type 1 is point in time, Type 2 covers a period; use of a SOC 2 report is generally restricted, while SOC 3 is a general use report (AICPA) |
| ISO/IEC 27001 | Accredited ISMS certification body | Certificate of conformity to the standard, issued to the organization | Three-year certification cycle with at least one audit every calendar year, surveillance or recertification (European Accreditation FAQs 51.7 and 37.12) |
| HIPAA Security Rule | HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR) through complaints, compliance reviews and audits | No certificate; HHS does not endorse or recognize private certifications | No certification cycle; OCR enforces the rule and may audit (HHS FAQ 2003, OCR HIPAA Audit Program) |
| PCI DSS | Qualified Security Assessor (ROC) or the merchant or service provider itself (SAQ) | Report on Compliance or Self-Assessment Questionnaire, each with an Attestation of Compliance; certificates are not recognized | Annual assessment against the current PCI SSC templates (PCI SSC FAQ 1220) |
| GDPR | Supervisory authorities and accredited certification bodies for voluntary Article 42 certification | No audit, attestation or certificate is required; Article 42 certification is voluntary and does not reduce controller or processor responsibility | Article 42 certification issued for at most three years (EUR-Lex, Regulation (EU) 2016/679) |
| NIS2 (where a SaaS provider is in scope) | National competent authorities | No certificate of compliance; oversight through inspections, audits, scans and information requests | Ongoing supervision and administrative fines under Articles 32 to 34 (EUR-Lex, Directive (EU) 2022/2555) |
In what order should a SaaS company add these frameworks?
The sequence starts from the contract requests customers actually send, builds shared controls and evidence once, and then extends that base to additional frameworks without duplicating work. Confirm each date and transition rule with your certification body or assessor before you plan around it.
Inventory the contract requests that arrive
Start by listing every security questionnaire, audit report request and framework clause that customers and prospects have sent in the last contract cycles, grouped by framework and by who asked. Sales, account management and the security lead own this list, and the output is a short ranking of which report or certificate closes deals and which only appears in some contracts. Done means each request maps to a named framework and a named customer segment, so you can see whether SOC 2, ISO 27001 or PCI DSS is the first ask.
Map the in-scope system and data boundary
Define the product, environments, data types and third parties that the first assessment will cover, and record which customer segments bring in health or cardholder data. Engineering and the security lead do this together, because an overly broad boundary raises the evidence load for every later framework. The check that closes this step is a written system description that names the services, locations and sub-processors in scope, reviewed by the people who will sign the report.
Build shared controls for access and change
Implement the controls that almost every framework tests: identity and access management, multi-factor authentication, privileged access reviews, change management with peer review and deployment approvals, and vendor management. Engineering owns the technical work and the compliance lead owns the control descriptions. Each control should have a named owner, a written procedure and a recurring evidence artifact, such as an access review export or a change ticket sample. The step is complete when each control runs in production and produces evidence without manual reconstruction.
Centralize logging, risk and incident evidence
Set up centralized logging for the in-scope systems, a documented risk register with a review cadence, and an incident response procedure with tabletop exercises on record. These controls feed several frameworks at once, so building them once avoids separate evidence sets later. Check that logs are retained under your policy, that the risk register has dated reviews and that the incident procedure names roles. You know this step is done when a sample of each record can be produced for an auditor within a single working session.
Run the first attestation customers ask for
Engage an independent CPA firm for the attestation most of your customers request, which for many US-facing SaaS companies is a SOC 2 report, and decide between a Type 1 (control design as of a date) and a Type 2 (operating effectiveness over a period). The CPA firm, not your team, issues the report, and the cost is set by the firm's written scope and the number of control tests. The step closes when the report is issued and your team has a process for distributing it under the access restrictions that apply to a SOC 2 report, which are narrower than those for a SOC 3 general use report.
Map the controls to the next framework
Before starting a second framework, use published mappings to show which existing controls, policies and evidence already satisfy its requirements, and list the gaps. Official sources help here: the CIS Controls Navigator publishes mappings to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, SOC 2, PCI DSS v4.0 and other frameworks, and NIST's informative references list cross-mappings. Treat these as starting points, because NIST does not check non-NIST mappings and ENISA states its mapping is not a measure of equivalence. The output is a gap list with owners, which becomes the scope for the next project.
Prepare for ISO 27001 certification if requested
If customers require ISO/IEC 27001 certification, select an accredited certification body and ask it how it applies the ISO/IEC 27006-1:2024 requirements under IAF MD 29:2024, which accredited bodies had to apply to all clients by 31 March 2026. Also confirm that any older certificate to the 2013 edition has been transitioned, because IAF MD 26:2023 required all ISO/IEC 27001:2013 certifications to expire or be withdrawn by 31 October 2025. The certification body issues the certificate, and your team should confirm the cycle, which runs three years with at least one audit in each calendar year. Confirm these dates directly with the certification body before you commit a timeline.
Extend to PCI DSS using reused evidence
If the product takes or transmits cardholder data, scope the PCI DSS assessment with your acquirer or payment brand and decide whether a Report on Compliance by a Qualified Security Assessor or a Self-Assessment Questionnaire fits your volume. A QSA cannot rely on a SOC 2 report alone, but may reuse evidence from it after independent review, which reduces duplicated work. The step closes with a signed Attestation of Compliance on the PCI SSC template, because PCI SSC states that certificates are not recognized as validation. Keep a single evidence repository so that each later audit draws from the same dated records.
What drives the cost of SaaS compliance work
The cost of a SaaS compliance project is rarely one invoice. It is spread across the readiness work your own team does, the fee of the party that issues the report or certificate, and the tooling and remediation that come before either. For a SOC 2, the auditor is a CPA firm and its fee is the largest external line. For PCI DSS, the Qualified Security Assessor (QSA) is paid to complete the Report on Compliance, or the assessment is a Self-Assessment Questionnaire that your own staff complete with an Attestation of Compliance. For ISO/IEC 27001, the certification body charges the audit. Your engineers, security lead and operations staff are an internal cost whether or not anyone sends a bill for them, and that time is usually the one nobody budgets.
The Justice Department's regulatory analysis for its October 2024 proposed rule on US sensitive personal data (89 FR 86116) cited vendor-sourced estimates of $5,000 to $25,000 for a SOC 2 Type 1 audit and $30,000 to $100,000 for a Type 2 audit. Those are third-party estimates in a federal rulemaking, not a price list, and they will not reflect your system boundary or number of criteria in scope. Scoping, gap analysis and the first audit are one-time work. Surveillance audits for ISO/IEC 27001 and the annual SOC 2 period are recurring, along with evidence collection, access reviews, policy updates and any retainer you keep with a consultant. Tooling subscriptions also recur, and they often grow with headcount.
ISO and PCI quotes depend on scope and must be requested in writing, because no supplied figure gives a reliable range for either. Ask each provider to state the systems, locations, number of sites, sample sizes and whether the work covers one framework or a combined assessment. For a quote, request the audit fee, travel, re-audit or extra-day rates, the annual surveillance fee and the cost of the three-year ISO cycle, and whether evidence you already produced for a SOC 2 can be reused. Ask who performs the work, what is excluded and which items are priced separately, so that two quotes can be compared on the same basis.
Common questions SaaS teams ask before hiring outside help
Should SaaS teams pursue SOC 2 or ISO 27001 first for US or EU customers?
Start with the framework your largest or most demanding customers name in their security questionnaires, because that request decides the proof you need first. SOC 2 is an attestation report issued after an examination by a CPA firm. ISO/IEC 27001 is a certification from an accredited certification body, because ISO itself does not certify organizations. Under ISO/IEC 17021-1, a certification cycle lasts three years with at least one audit in every calendar year, and accredited bodies must apply ISO/IEC 27006-1:2024 to all clients from 31 March 2026. Some EU buyers ask for ISO 27001 by name, and some US buyers ask for SOC 2, but the pattern varies by customer. Ask each top customer which proof they accept and whether they require a specific scope before you commit.
How long is a SOC 2 Type 2 observation period?
No single length applies to every engagement, so confirm the period with your CPA firm before fieldwork is scheduled. A Type 1 report covers the system description and the suitability of control design as of one date. A Type 2 report adds an opinion on operating effectiveness over a period, which is why it takes more evidence and more time to produce. Ask the auditor how much evidence they will test across the period, and ask customers whether they expect a report that covers a recent window. The US Justice Department's regulatory analysis for its October 2024 proposed rule on sensitive personal data cited vendor-sourced estimates of $30,000 to $100,000 for a Type 2 audit, compared with $5,000 to $25,000 for Type 1, which shows how the longer period adds to cost.
Does HIPAA certification exist for SaaS vendors?
No. There is no HIPAA certification. HHS states that no Security Rule standard requires an entity to certify compliance, and HHS does not endorse or recognize private organizations' certifications. Such certifications also do not prevent HHS from later finding a violation. If your customer is a covered entity, or your company acts as a business associate, the Security Rule still applies to electronic protected health information under 45 CFR 164.302. Your work is to show how each applicable standard is met and documented. Ask customers whether they want a SOC 2 or another report as supporting evidence, and confirm the business associate agreement terms with counsel.
Is GDPR certification required for SaaS companies?
No. The GDPR requires no audit, attestation or certificate. Certification under Article 42 is voluntary, is issued for at most three years by accredited certification bodies or supervisory authorities, and does not reduce the controller's or processor's responsibility for compliance. A SaaS company acting as a processor still has to meet the Regulation's obligations for the personal data it handles for customers. EU customers often ask for documents such as a data processing agreement, a list of sub-processors or an existing SOC 2 or ISO 27001 report, so confirm which documents each customer requires. If you pursue Article 42 certification later, check the certifying body's scope and the certificate's expiry date against your product and processing activities.
What does the work need from our internal team?
Expect the internal team to own the system description, the controls and the evidence, because the auditor tests what the company says it does. A SOC 2 is an assertion-based examination under AT-C section 205, which requires the service auditor to obtain written representations from management, so leaders must sign off on the description and the control statements. Management's description is prepared against the AICPA's 2018 description criteria (DC 200). The 2017 Trust Services Criteria contain 61 criteria, and the common criteria CC1 to CC9 apply to every SOC 2, so engineering, HR, IT operations and management each hold parts of the evidence. Assign a named owner to each control and a contact who can answer auditor questions promptly.
Can our team run SOC 2 or ISO 27001 without outside help?
Your team can carry much of the internal preparation, but the independent part cannot be done in-house. A CPA firm issues a SOC 2 report, and an accredited certification body certifies ISO/IEC 27001. DeployOpen plans, implements and documents controls and evidence for these assessments, but it does not issue audit reports, attestations or certifications. Whether your team can take this on depends on how much time people can commit, how well they know the criteria or Annex A controls, and how many systems are in scope. Most DeployOpen engagements are fixed-scope, with scope, deliverables and timelines agreed in writing before work starts, and ongoing support is available as a retainer. Before deciding, ask an internal owner to map each control to an existing process and list the gaps.
What drives the cost of SOC 2 or ISO 27001 up or down?
The main drivers are the report type, the scope and how ready your controls already are. Cost has several components: the independent auditor or certification body fee, internal staff time, remediation work and any tooling, each paid to a different party. The US Justice Department estimate cited for its October 2024 proposed rule put a SOC 2 Type 1 audit at $5,000 to $25,000 and a Type 2 audit at $30,000 to $100,000, drawn from vendor publications, so treat these as market signals, not quotes. Adding Trust Services Categories beyond security adds criteria and work. Evidence reuse can lower the cost: a PCI DSS Qualified Security Assessor may reuse SOC 2 evidence after independently reviewing it. Ask every quote to state the scope, the report period, the number of systems and sites, and which evidence can be reused.
How DeployOpen prepares SaaS teams for SOC 2, ISO 27001 and HIPAA readiness
DeployOpen is a Chainscore Labs company that plans, implements, hardens, documents and supports self-hosted open-source platforms inside the client's own infrastructure. For SaaS teams weighing SOC 2, ISO 27001 and HIPAA, we prepare the systems, controls and evidence that an independent auditor or certification body will later assess, without issuing any audit report or certificate ourselves.
How we scope
- Scope is agreed in writing before work starts, naming which frameworks, systems and environments are covered.
- We map the target framework's control set to your existing tooling, cloud accounts and hosting so gaps are visible up front.
- The scope states which deliverables are documented, which are built, and which remain the responsibility of your auditor or assessor.
How we build
- We implement and configure the self-hosted platforms your controls depend on, such as logging, identity, backup and access tooling.
- Security testing of applications, APIs and infrastructure is run where the scope includes it, so findings can feed remediation before assessment.
- Evidence collection is designed so the control owner can reproduce each artifact the auditor will ask for.
How we hand over
- You receive documentation of the controls, configurations, system descriptions and evidence sources defined in the written scope.
- Handover covers how each control is operated day to day, who owns it, and which records must be retained.
- We state clearly which items still need confirmation from your auditor, certification body or assessor, since DeployOpen does not issue attestations.
How we support
- Ongoing support, upgrades and continuous testing are available as a retainer after the initial scope is delivered.
- Retainer scope is set in writing, covering which platforms, controls and testing cycles it includes.
- Ask any provider to confirm in writing which parts of a readiness engagement fall outside its deliverables, including final audit fees and certification body costs.
