SOC 2
AICPA framework for service organization trust services controls
ISO 17025
International standard for testing and calibration laboratory competence.
Quick Verdict
SOC 2 provides voluntary trust assurance for SaaS data security via AICPA audits, while ISO 17025 accredits testing labs' technical competence and impartiality. Enterprises adopt SOC 2 for vendor trust; labs pursue ISO 17025 for global result acceptance.
SOC 2
System and Organization Controls 2
Key Features
- Type 2 audits operating effectiveness over 3-12 months
- Mandatory Security with four optional Trust Services Criteria
- Independent CPA attestation of data handling controls
- Flexible risk-based scoping for service organizations
- Maps efficiently to ISO 27001 and GDPR frameworks
ISO 17025
ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General requirements for competence
Key Features
- Risk-based impartiality and confidentiality requirements
- Personnel competence lifecycle management
- Metrological traceability and measurement uncertainty
- Method validation and verification processes
- Proficiency testing and result validity assurance
Detailed Analysis
A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.
SOC 2 Details
What It Is
SOC 2 (System and Organization Controls 2) is a voluntary audit framework developed by the AICPA to evaluate service organizations' controls over customer data. It uses Trust Services Criteria (TSC)—a principles-based, risk-focused approach emphasizing Security (mandatory) plus optional areas like Availability, Confidentiality, Processing Integrity, and Privacy.
Key Components
- Five TSC domains, with Security's Common Criteria (CC1-CC9) requiring 50-100 controls on access, monitoring, and risk.
- Built on COSO principles; Type 1 (design at point-in-time) vs. Type 2 (operating effectiveness over 3-12 months).
- CPA-attested reports with management assertions and control tests.
Why Organizations Use It
- Accelerates enterprise sales by satisfying vendor risk assessments (70-80% of deals require it).
- Builds trust, reduces breach liability, and signals maturity to investors.
- Overlaps 80% with ISO 27001, easing multi-framework compliance.
Implementation Overview
- Phased: gap analysis (2-4 weeks), deployment (4-8 weeks), monitoring (3-6 months), audit.
- Targets SaaS/cloud providers; scalable via automation tools like Vanta.
- Annual Type 2 recertification by AICPA-accredited CPAs.
ISO 17025 Details
What It Is
ISO/IEC 17025:2017 is the international standard titled General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. It is an accreditation framework ensuring competence, impartiality, and consistent operation. Its risk-based approach ties management controls to technical validity of results.
Key Components
- Eight main elements: general, structural, resource, process, and management system requirements.
- Focus on impartiality/confidentiality (Clause 4), personnel competence, metrological traceability, measurement uncertainty, method validation.
- Option A/B for management systems; built on risk-based thinking and ILAC mutual recognition.
- Accreditation model via bodies like UKAS, ANAB.
Why Organizations Use It
- Enables market access, regulatory acceptance, and trust in results.
- Mitigates risks from invalid data; required by contracts/regulators.
- Boosts efficiency, credibility; prevents rejection of unaccredited results.
Implementation Overview
- Phased PDCA: gap analysis, documentation, training, validation, audits.
- Applies to labs globally; suits all sizes with technical focus.
- Involves accreditation audits, proficiency testing, continual improvement. (178 words)
Key Differences
| Aspect | SOC 2 | ISO 17025 |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Trust Services Criteria: security, availability, confidentiality, etc. | Laboratory competence: testing, calibration, impartiality, traceability |
| Industry | SaaS, cloud, fintech; service organizations globally | Testing/calibration labs; manufacturing, environmental worldwide |
| Nature | Voluntary AICPA attestation framework | Accreditation standard for technical competence |
| Testing | Type 2 audits over 3-12 months by CPA firms | On-site assessments, proficiency testing by accreditation bodies |
| Penalties | Market exclusion, lost deals, no legal fines | Loss of accreditation, rejected results, no direct fines |
Scope
Industry
Nature
Testing
Penalties
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about SOC 2 and ISO 17025
SOC 2 FAQ
ISO 17025 FAQ
You Might also be Interested in These Articles...
The DORA 'Hot Seat' Blueprint: Preparing Leadership and the Management Body for Regulatory Interviews
Prepare your Board & Management Body for DORA audits. Master the human element: demonstrate active oversight & accountability in regulatory interviews. Get the
SEC Cybersecurity Rules Materiality Determination Framework: Step-by-Step Guide with Checklists and Real-World Examples
Master SEC Form 8-K Item 1.05 materiality determinations with our step-by-step framework, checklists, case law factors, and real-world examples. Avoid enforceme
Top 5 Reasons NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 Overlays Unlock AI Risk Management for Private Sector Enterprises in 2025
Top 5 reasons NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 AI overlays unlock risk management for private enterprises. Tailorable controls combat model poisoning & data leakage. CISO i
Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM
Transform your compliance journey with our AI-powered assessment platform
Assess your organization's maturity across multiple standards and regulations including ISO 27001, DORA, NIS2, NIST, GDPR, and hundreds more. Get actionable insights and track your progress with collaborative, AI-powered evaluations.
Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages
WCAG vs SQF
Discover WCAG vs SQF: Compare web accessibility standards with food safety certification. Master compliance for digital governance & supply chains. Unlock key insights now!
ISO 27017 vs ISO 28000
ISO 27017 vs ISO 28000: Cloud security extensions (27017's 7 controls) vs supply chain resilience. Key differences, benefits & certification guide—secure your CSP now!
GDPR vs EPA
GDPR vs EPA: EU data privacy gold standard meets US environmental powerhouse. Compare principles, extraterritorial reach, fines up to 4% turnover, enforcement. Master compliance now!