Platform Security Clarifications — Examples
Sample clarifications for Meta, Microsoft SSPA, and Google Workspace security reviews. Tight, evidence-based responses that reviewers accept.
Platform Security Clarifications — Examples
What Are Security Clarifications?
Platform security reviews (Meta, Microsoft SSPA, Google Workspace) often require clarifications when reviewers need more details about your controls or evidence. Clarifications are concise, evidence-based responses that address specific reviewer questions without overwhelming them.
Effective clarifications:
- Reference specific evidence artifacts by filename and date
- Cite framework controls (SOC 2, ISO 27001, NIST)
- Provide direct answers without unnecessary context
- Include timestamps and ownership for validation
Poor clarifications lead to delays, rejections, or escalated scrutiny. Use these examples as templates for your responses.
Meta Vendor Review Clarifications
Example 1: Access Control Evidence
Reviewer Question: “Please provide evidence of multi-factor authentication (MFA) enforcement for all user accounts accessing Meta’s platform.”
Clarification Response:
MFA is enforced for all user accounts via Okta SSO integration. Evidence: "Okta_MFA_Configuration_Export_2024-01-15.pdf" shows MFA required for all users. Aligns with SOC 2 CC6.1 and ISO 27001 A.9.4.2. Configuration validated quarterly; last review 2024-01-10 by Security Team.
Example 2: Data Encryption
Reviewer Question: “How do you ensure data in transit to Meta is encrypted?”
Clarification Response:
All data in transit uses TLS 1.2+ encryption. Evidence: "SSL_Certificate_Chain_Meta_Integration_2024-01-20.pdf" and "Network_Traffic_Logs_2024-01-15-2024-01-20.pdf" demonstrate encrypted connections. Meets SOC 2 CC6.7 and NIST SP 800-52 guidelines. Certificates renewed annually; next renewal 2024-06-15.
Example 3: Incident Response
Reviewer Question: “Describe your incident response process for Meta-related security events.”
Clarification Response:
Incidents detected via SIEM alerts, triaged within 15 minutes, contained within 1 hour. Evidence: "IR_Playbook_v2.1_2024-01-01.pdf" and "Incident_Ticket_IR-2024-001_2024-01-18.pdf" (ransomware simulation exercise). Aligns with SOC 2 CC7.4 and NIST CSF RS.RP-1. Plan tested annually; last test 2024-01-15.
Microsoft SSPA Clarifications
Example 1: Access Reviews
Reviewer Question: “Provide evidence of quarterly access reviews for privileged accounts.”
Clarification Response:
Privileged access reviewed quarterly with manager approvals. Evidence: "Privileged_Access_Review_Q4_2023_2024-01-05.pdf" shows 100% review completion, 5 deprovisioned accounts. Supports SOC 2 CC6.1 and ISO 27001 A.9.2.5. Reviews conducted by IT Security; next review 2024-04-05.
Example 2: Vulnerability Management
Reviewer Question: “How do you address vulnerabilities identified in scans?”
Clarification Response:
Vulnerabilities scanned monthly, remediated within 30 days for critical/high, 90 days for medium. Evidence: "Nessus_Scan_Report_2024-01-10.pdf" and "Vulnerability_Remediation_Tracking_2024-01-01-2024-01-31.xlsx" show 95% remediation rate. Meets SOC 2 CC7.1 and CIS Control 7.1. Process owned by Security Operations.
Example 3: Subprocessor Management
Reviewer Question: “List all subprocessors and their security assessments.”
Clarification Response:
Current subprocessors: AWS (SOC 2 Type II 2023-12-31), Okta (SOC 2 Type II 2024-01-15), Crowdstrike (SOC 2 Type II 2023-11-20). Evidence: "Subprocessor_Security_Review_Matrix_2024-01-20.xlsx" with assessment summaries. Reviewed annually per SOC 2 CC9.2. Managed by Procurement Team.
Google Workspace Clarifications
Example 1: Data Classification
Reviewer Question: “How do you classify and protect sensitive data in Google Workspace?”
Clarification Response:
Data classified as Public, Internal, Confidential, Restricted. Evidence: "Data_Classification_Policy_v1.3_2024-01-01.pdf" and "DLP_Rule_Google_Workspace_2024-01-15.pdf" enforce encryption and access controls. Aligns with SOC 2 CC6.5 and ISO 27001 A.8.2.3. Policy reviewed annually; last update 2024-01-01.
Example 2: Backup and Recovery
Reviewer Question: “Describe backup procedures for Google Workspace data.”
Clarification Response:
Daily backups via Google Vault, weekly tested restores. Evidence: "Google_Vault_Backup_Config_2024-01-15.pdf" and "Restore_Test_Log_2024-01-08.pdf" (successful 1TB restore in 4 hours). Supports SOC 2 CC9.1 with 24-hour RPO, 4-hour RTO. Owned by IT Operations.
Example 3: Third-Party Access
Reviewer Question: “How do you monitor third-party access to Google Workspace?”
Clarification Response:
Third-party access logged and reviewed monthly. Evidence: "Third_Party_Access_Log_2024-01-01-2024-01-31.pdf" and "Access_Review_Third_Parties_2024-01-20.pdf" show approved vendors only. Meets SOC 2 CC6.1 and CIS Control 12.3. Monitoring via SIEM integration.
General Clarification Best Practices
Structure Your Responses
- Direct Answer: State the control or process clearly
- Evidence Reference: Cite specific artifacts with dates
- Framework Alignment: Link to relevant standards
- Ownership & Timing: Include who owns it and refresh schedules
Common Clarification Triggers
- Outdated Evidence: Always provide current artifacts (within 12 months)
- Incomplete Coverage: Show how controls apply to all relevant systems
- Process Gaps: Demonstrate testing or validation of procedures
- Third-Party Risks: Detail assessments and monitoring of vendors
Timing and Follow-Up
- Respond within 5-7 business days to avoid delays
- Prepare clarifications proactively based on past reviews
- Keep responses under 200 words per question
- Offer additional evidence if reviewers request it
How to Prepare Clarifications
Step 1: Review Past Feedback
Analyze previous review comments to anticipate questions. Common themes include access controls, encryption, and incident response.
Step 2: Map Evidence to Requirements
Create a crosswalk of platform requirements to your evidence library. Reference our Vendor Review Evidence Checklist for mappings.
Step 3: Draft Template Responses
Prepare boilerplate clarifications for standard questions. Customize with specific evidence details for each review.
Step 4: Validate with Mock Reviews
Have internal teams review your clarifications for completeness and clarity before submission.
Step 5: Track and Improve
Log clarification responses and outcomes. Use successful examples to refine future submissions.
Next Steps
Need help preparing clarifications? Bell Tower drafts evidence-based responses and manages platform review submissions.
Frequently Asked Questions
How long do reviewers take to respond to clarifications?
Typically 5-10 business days. Complex clarifications may take longer if additional evidence is requested.
What if I don’t have the requested evidence?
Generate it immediately (e.g., run a scan, export logs). If impossible, explain remediation plans with timelines.
Can I reuse clarifications across platforms?
Adapt them, but each platform has specific requirements. Meta focuses on data handling, Microsoft on SDPR, Google on Workspace security.
How many clarifications are normal?
5-15 per review depending on evidence completeness. Well-prepared submissions have fewer.
What happens if clarifications are rejected?
Reviewers may request more evidence or deny approval. Address gaps and resubmit promptly.