# SOC 2 (2017 TSC) CC3.1 — Objective Setting - Source: https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria/cc3-1-objective-setting - Section: [Compliance](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance) › [SOC 2 Trust Services Criteria (2017, with 2022 points of focus)](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria) › Common Criteria (Security) — CC3 - Last updated: 2026-06-05 - Publisher: iCompaas, Inc. (https://www.icompaas.com) **SOC 2 (2017 TSC)**·Criterion `CC3.1`·high·Component: **Common Criteria (Security)** ## What this control requires > The entity specifies objectives with sufficient clarity to enable the identification and assessment of risks relating to objectives. > > — SOC 2 (2017 TSC), Criterion CC3.1 ### In plain English The entity specifies objectives with sufficient clarity to enable the identification and assessment of risks relating to objectives. In practice, this means you can prove you risk objectives-level controls on a defined cadence. ## Why it matters Every SOC 2 audit opinion is built control-by-control from the Trust Services Criteria. A missing or failing criterion produces an exception in the report, which buyers, partners and procurement teams read line-by-line during vendor reviews. This control is rated **high**. Auditors expect a named owner, a remediation SLA, and a tooling artefact that evidences continuous operation. ## What an auditor looks for A SOC 2 auditor (under AT-C §§ 105/205) tests both design and operating effectiveness over the audit window. For each criterion they expect a written control, a control owner, a population of events, and a sample tested against the population — including remediation tickets for exceptions. Within **Common Criteria (Security)**, the assessor will trace your implementation back to the catalogue reference (Criterion CC3.1) and look for objective evidence on the latest two assessment cycles. ## How to implement #### Policy Management **Docs.** Keep each policy in version-controlled Markdown alongside the code that implements it; ship a signed PDF snapshot at each annual review and link the SHA into the SoA. #### Vulnerability Management **Scanners.** Pair an unauthenticated scanner (Nessus / Qualys / Tenable.io) for external surface with an authenticated agent for OS/library CVEs on every host. **SLA.** Document remediation SLAs by CVSS / EPSS: critical 7 days, high 30 days, medium 90 days; report monthly trend to leadership. **Containers.** Scan images in CI (Trivy / Grype / Snyk Container) AND at runtime; block deploys on critical findings without exception. ### Operational checklist - **Risk.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Security.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Management.** Document the trigger, the owner and the cadence. - **Scope:** objectives, identification, management. ## Evidence to collect - **Policy Document.** A signed and version-controlled policy / standard / procedure document. - **Infra Scan.** Continuous infrastructure-posture telemetry — AWS Config, Azure Policy compliance, GCP Organisation Policy, Wiz / Prisma findings. Signed policy or standard documents the safeguard. Focus: Objective Setting (Original component: Risk Assessment). ## Common pitfalls - Policies that no engineer has read; the version in Confluence drifts from the version that's actually being enforced. - Scans that hit only the perimeter; missing authenticated scans of OS, runtime libs and base images so most CVEs are invisible. ## How it maps to other frameworks Computed from shared tags, control component and key-operation subjects — handy when you are reconciling controls across an audit. - [**ISO/IEC 27001:2022 A.8.8** — Management of technical vulnerabilities](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/iso-27001-2022/a-8-8-management-of-technical-vulnerabilities) - [**NIST SP 800-171 Rev. 3 3.12.1** — Security Assessment](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-171-rev-3/3-12-1-security-assessment) - [**NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 RA-5(2)** — Update Vulnerabilities To Be Scanned](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/nist-sp-800-53-rev-5/ra-5-2-update-vulnerabilities-to-be-scanned) - [**CIS Controls v8 7.1** — Establish and Maintain a Vulnerability Management Process](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/cis-controls-v8/7-1-establish-and-maintain-a-vulnerability-management-process) - [**HIPAA (45 CFR Part 164) 164.312(a)(2)(i)** — Access Control - Unique User Identification](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/hipaa/164-312-a-2-i-access-control-unique-user-identification) ## Related controls in SOC 2 (2017 TSC) - [**Criterion CC3.2** — Risk Identification](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria/cc3-2-risk-identification) - [**Criterion CC3.4** — Change Identification](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria/cc3-4-change-identification) - [**Criterion CC5.2** — Technology Control Activities to Support Objectives](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria/cc5-2-technology-control-activities-to-support-objectives) - [**Criterion CC3.3** — Fraud Risk Assessment](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria/cc3-3-fraud-risk-assessment) - [**Criterion C1.1** — Confidential Information Identification and Maintenance](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria/c1-1-confidential-information-identification-and-maintenance) - [**Criterion CC2.2** — Internal Communications](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria/cc2-2-internal-communications) ## References - [AICPA / ASEC — SOC 2 (2017 TSC)](https://www.aicpa-cima.com/topic/audit-assurance/audit-and-assurance-greater-than-soc-2) - Catalogue identifier: `Criterion CC3.1` Topics: governance riskpolicy managementvulnerability management ## Related compliance guidance - [SOC 2 compliance: a practical implementation guide for cloud-native SaaS teams](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/soc-2-trust-services-criteria): Start with the full SOC 2 implementation guide — scope, roadmap, evidence and how the assessment runs. - [ISO/IEC 27001:2022 compliance: a practical implementation guide](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/iso-27001-2022): The certificate most non-US customers ask for instead of SOC 2; the controls overlap enough to run one matrix for both. - [HIPAA compliance for SaaS: a practical implementation guide](https://support.icompaas.com/compliance/hipaa): If health-tech customers ask for SOC 2, they will also ask about the Security Rule; the two are usually evidenced from the same controls.