# SOC 2 Product Security Audit Template Pack

> **Why this page exists:** Product Security leaders often need a compact set of documents that explain **how controls are designed and operated** across source control, CI/CD, cloud, Kubernetes, secrets, and production support. This page links to template documents that help structure those narratives in a form that is useful for SOC 2 readiness work and evidence collection.

## What this pack is for

Use these templates when you need to show that Product Security controls are:

* clearly owned;
* intentionally designed;
* reviewed on a defined cadence; and
* supported by repeatable evidence.

The templates are **illustrative skeletons**, not legal or audit conclusions. They are meant to accelerate internal drafting and reduce blank-page overhead.

## Included templates

| Template                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              | Control theme                                                    | Typical evidence it points to                                          |
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| [PS-018 — Logical Access, Access Provisioning, and Privileged Access Standard](https://github.com/D3One/Product-Security-Gitbook/blob/main/assets/product-security-policy-templates/PS-018-logical-access-access-provisioning-and-privileged-access-standard-template.docx)           | access provisioning, privileged access, recertification, SoD     | tickets, approver records, access exports, quarterly review sign-off   |
| [PS-019 — Secure Change Management, Release Approval, and Evidence Standard](https://github.com/D3One/Product-Security-Gitbook/blob/main/assets/product-security-policy-templates/PS-019-secure-change-management-release-approval-and-evidence-standard-template.docx)               | controlled changes, release approvals, emergency-change handling | PRs, CI logs, deployment records, post-change review                   |
| [PS-020 — Vulnerability Management, Patch Cadence, and Exception Evidence Standard](https://github.com/D3One/Product-Security-Gitbook/blob/main/assets/product-security-policy-templates/PS-020-vulnerability-management-patch-cadence-and-exception-evidence-standard-template.docx) | findings lifecycle, patch timing, exception governance           | finding tickets, SLA dashboards, change evidence, exception records    |
| [PS-021 — Logging, Monitoring, and Incident Evidence Retention Standard](https://github.com/D3One/Product-Security-Gitbook/blob/main/assets/product-security-policy-templates/PS-021-logging-monitoring-and-incident-evidence-retention-standard-template.docx)                       | logging, monitoring, immutable evidence, retention               | SIEM records, cloud audit logs, object-lock settings, retention policy |
| [PS-022 — Backup, Recovery, and Production Data Protection Standard](https://github.com/D3One/Product-Security-Gitbook/blob/main/assets/product-security-policy-templates/PS-022-backup-recovery-and-production-data-protection-standard-template.docx)                               | backup security, restore testing, production-data handling       | backup job history, restore tests, access reviews, masking approvals   |

## How to tailor the templates well

1. Replace placeholders with real systems, groups, and systems of record.
2. Keep policy statements short and link to runbooks or platform standards for technical detail.
3. Align evidence language to the actual artifacts your teams can consistently produce.
4. Remove any section that sounds nice but cannot be operated or evidenced in practice.
5. Make sure control ownership reflects engineering reality, not only the org chart.

## Good supporting evidence patterns

* ticket-based provisioning and deprovisioning records;
* protected-branch and CI policy configuration exports;
* immutable deployment and release evidence;
* privileged access logs or session records;
* access recertification exports and tracked remediation;
* restore-test evidence with actual timing and outcome;
* exception records with expiry, owner, and compensating controls.

## Read next

* [SOX 404-Style ITGC for Product Security, DevSecOps, Cloud, and Kubernetes](/metrics-audit-risk-evidence-and-compliance/index-1/sox404-style-itgc-for-product-security-devsecops-cloud-and-kubernetes.md)
* [Compliance-to-Engineering Evidence Pass](/metrics-audit-risk-evidence-and-compliance/index-1/compliance-to-engineering-evidence-pass.md)
* [Product Security Policy Library and DOCX Starter Pack](/metrics-audit-risk-evidence-and-compliance/index/product-security-policy-library-and-docx-templates.md)


---

# Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation

If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question.

Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter:

```
GET https://docs.product-security.expert/metrics-audit-risk-evidence-and-compliance/index-1/soc2-product-security-audit-template-pack.md?ask=<question>
```

The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language.
The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation.

Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.