Turkey (Turkish)
Germany (German)
Worldwide (English)
Independent reporting over controls at a service organization.
Halkali merkez neighborhood fatih st ozgur apt no 46 , Kucukcekmece , Istanbul , 34303 , TR
SOC 2 is an AICPA-based attestation reporting framework that provides assurance over controls at service organizations relevant to the Trust Services Criteria. It is widely requested in enterprise SaaS and technology vendor reviews.
SOC 2 is not a conventional certificate. The deliverable is an independent report from a qualified CPA/service auditor, and its system scope, criteria, period and exceptions need to be read carefully.
Independent reporting over controls at a service organization.
Security plus relevant Availability, Processing Integrity, Confidentiality and Privacy.
Focuses on description and design as of a specified date.
Also tests operating effectiveness over a specified period.
SOC 2 provides user organizations and business partners with independent assurance about a service organization’s system and controls. Instead of relying only on a vendor security statement, a service auditor examines the defined system against applicable criteria.
A report can include management’s system description and assertion, the auditor’s opinion, criteria, tests and results. Reading the report matters more than merely seeing a SOC 2 badge.
Technically it is an attestation examination and report, not an ISO-style certification. This distinction affects how buyers should interpret claims such as “SOC 2 certified.”
The report is tied to a defined system, criteria and date or period rather than a generic organization-wide badge.
Type 1 addresses the description and design of controls as of a specified date. Type 2 also evaluates operating effectiveness over a defined review period.
Enterprise customers often prefer Type 2 because it demonstrates that controls operated over time.
| Feature | Type 1 | Type 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Time | Point in time | Period of time |
| Control design | Evaluated | Evaluated |
| Operating effectiveness | No period testing | Tested over period |
| Typical use | Initial assurance | Mature operational assurance |
The categories are Security, Availability, Processing Integrity, Confidentiality and Privacy. Security forms the common baseline, while other categories are selected based on service commitments and scope.
Including every category is not automatically better; the criteria should reflect the actual service.
SaaS, cloud, managed services, data processing, fintech infrastructure, HR-tech, API and other B2B technology providers commonly use SOC 2 to streamline customer due diligence.
Organizations outside the United States can also pursue a SOC 2 examination with an appropriate CPA firm; customer expectations, distribution restrictions and subservice organizations should be planned early.
A strong project defines the system, service commitments, applicable criteria and control owners, then closes readiness gaps before the examination period begins.
Evidence should be generated naturally throughout the period: access approvals, tickets, vulnerability scans, restore tests, incidents, change records and employee lifecycle evidence.
Common areas include IAM, MFA, privileged access, production access, change management, code review, CI/CD separation, vulnerability management, incident response, logging, backups and continuity.
A cloud provider’s SOC report does not make your SaaS automatically compliant; your application configuration, users, data and processes remain part of shared responsibility.
Cloud, identity, support and data-center providers may be subservice organizations. Their role and the reporting method need to be described and assessed.
Vendor risk management should cover criticality, contracts, data access, security obligations and periodic review, not simply collect certificates.
System complexity, number of products, selected criteria, staff, subservice providers, existing maturity and review period all influence effort and audit fees.
Readiness support, auditor fees and technical remediation should be budgeted separately.
Check the report type, covered system, period, auditor opinion, testing exceptions, complementary user entity controls and treatment of subservice organizations.
For gaps between report periods, customers may ask about subsequent changes or a bridge letter. SOC 2 reports are generally restricted-use; SOC 3 is designed for broader distribution.
SOC 2 is service-control assurance, ISO 27001 certifies an information-security management system and PCI DSS is specific to payment account data. Multiple frameworks can be required together.
| Framework | Deliverable | Primary focus |
|---|---|---|
| SOC 2 Type 2 | Attestation report | Operating effectiveness of service controls |
| ISO 27001 | Management-system certificate | Information-security risk management |
| PCI DSS | Validation/reporting | Payment account data |
| CREST | Provider accreditation | Cybersecurity service capability |
| FedRAMP | Federal cloud certification | US federal cloud assurance |
Technically no. It is an attestation examination and report performed by an independent CPA/service auditor.
It tests operating effectiveness over a period, not only control design.
No. Service organizations in other countries can pursue SOC 2.
No. Relevant categories are selected according to system commitments and scope.
No. The provider report does not replace controls in your application and organization.
SOC 2 reports are generally restricted-use; SOC 3 is a different general-use report.
We do not claim to be a certification body or independent auditor. We can assist with technical readiness around servers, hosting, access, logging, backups and baseline security controls.