Cybatar Security Hub
Third-Party Risk Evidence / Supplier Due-Diligence Evidence
Evidence pattern

Supplier Due-Diligence Evidence

What evidence should support a third-party cybersecurity due-diligence decision?

Direct answer

Retain the vendor and service identity, business owner, criticality rationale, systems/data/access dependencies, questionnaire responses, supporting evidence, evidence dates and scope, material findings, exceptions, treatment owners and the final approval or acceptance decision. Keep representations distinguishable from independently verifiable evidence.

Evidence to retain

Dependency evidence

EvidenceVendor/service identity
EvidenceBusiness owner
EvidenceSystems/data/access affected
EvidenceCriticality rationale and review date

Assessment evidence

EvidenceQuestionnaire version and responses
EvidenceSupporting artefacts
EvidenceEvidence scope and freshness
EvidenceAssessor/reviewer notes

Risk evidence

EvidenceMaterial findings
EvidenceExceptions or unknowns
EvidenceTreatment decision
EvidenceOwner and due date

Decision evidence

EvidenceApproval/conditional approval
EvidenceResidual-risk acceptance where applicable
EvidenceReview trigger
EvidenceRenewal or reassessment date

Relevant Cybatar sources

External references

Claim boundary

Evidence quality varies. A supplier-provided document, questionnaire answer or certification can support a decision but should not automatically be treated as proof of every control, service or environment in scope.