Aligning with the Australian Government’s expectations for cybersecurity can present challenges, especially for organizations unfamiliar with the frameworks in use. For those looking to work with or support government programs, understanding how systems are assessed against the Information Security Manual (ISM) is critical.
The ISM, maintained by the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD), sets out cybersecurity principles to guide the protection of government information and systems. While not a legislated standard, the ISM serves as authoritative guidance for system owners and assessors, particularly during independent security assessments performed by individuals endorsed under the Information Security Registered Assessors Program (IRAP).
IRAP assessments do not result in certification or formal accreditation. Rather, they provide risk-informed observations that help system owners, authorizing officers, and program managers understand the level of security implemented in a system, and whether it aligns with the intent of the ISM.
Below are three important tips for organizations, including those based overseas, that are preparing to undergo an IRAP assessment.
It can be tempting to begin an IRAP assessment by working directly through individual ISM controls. However, early-stage preparation is often more effective when focused on broad ISM topics and control families. This approach allows teams to:
Your IRAP assessor can help confirm the assessment scope and assist in clarifying which topics or controls are most applicable to the system’s security classification and usage.
Unlike frameworks such as SOC 2 or ISO/IEC 27001, which are often compliance- or audit-driven, an IRAP assessment is intended to support risk-informed decision-making. This means:
The goal of the IRAP assessment is to help inform a system’s security posture, not to achieve 100% control implementation for its own sake. System owners should focus on understanding their residual risk and addressing high-priority gaps.
The ISM is extensive and subject to regular updates. Even experienced practitioners can encounter interpretative challenges, especially around technical guidelines such as system hardening, audit logging, or network segmentation.
It’s important to approach the IRAP assessment as a collaborative activity. If you’re unsure how a control should be interpreted or what kind of evidence may be required, seek clarification early. IRAP assessors are expected to be transparent about assessment expectations and are typically willing to help explain how controls apply to your specific environment.
For overseas organizations unfamiliar with the ISM, asking questions during the planning and preparation phase helps avoid rework and ensures a smoother assessment process.
IRAP assessments provide valuable insights into how well a system aligns with Australian Government cybersecurity expectations. While the process can be complex, particularly for international organizations or teams new to the ISM, these challenges can be managed through proactive preparation and collaboration with an ASD-endorsed IRAP assessor.
By adopting a risk-based mindset and engaging early with your assessor, your organization can make the most of the IRAP process and better position its systems for operating in sensitive or government-related environments.
If you are interested to see how your organization stacks up Trustwave offers IRAP Assessment Services performed by ASD-endorsed IRAP assessors. These assessments provide independent insights to help organizations understand how their systems align with the expectations set out in the ISM and PSPF, and to support system owners in identifying areas for uplift.