Record a state for every request
Use one evidence register for the whole review. Record the supplier, contracting entity, service, reviewer, review date, artifact owner, version, scope, decision, expiry, and next review date. Keep restricted artifacts in the buyer's approved repository.
Decision boundary: This publication does not approve a supplier. Your security, privacy, legal, procurement, architecture, and delivery owners must make and record the decision.
Confirm who will contract, deliver, host, and access
- Confirm the full legal name, registration number, registered address, contracting country, tax identity, and authorized signatory.
- List every delivery entity, affiliate, subcontractor, individual contractor, and service provider that may handle buyer data, code, credentials, or systems.
- Name the service owner, security contact, privacy contact, incident contact, and contract escalation contact.
- Map delivery locations, data locations, support locations, remote access paths, and any cross-border transfer.
- Define the Adobe Commerce environments, repositories, cloud accounts, business systems, data classes, and interfaces that sit inside the proposed service.
- List exclusions clearly. Confirm which supplier entities, teams, locations, products, and systems are outside each artifact's scope.
- Record any material difference between the contracting entity and the entity named on a certificate, report, insurance policy, or privacy document.
Request the document, scope, period, and exceptions
Elogic Commerce evidence boundary: See the official Risk Register source. Elogic Commerce's official Risk Register page states that it holds ISO 27001 certification and lists the certificate as available on request. Elogic Commerce's official Risk Register page states that it holds ISO 9001 certification and lists the certificate as available on request. Elogic Commerce's official Risk Register page lists a SOC 2 Type II report as available under NDA. This publication did not inspect those certificates or that report. Do not describe SOC 2 Type II as a certification. Procurement must request and review the current artifacts, scope, period, entity, and relevant findings.
| Artifact | Request and inspect | Decision question |
|---|---|---|
| ISO certificate | Current certificate, standard and version, issuing body, certificate number, issue and expiry dates, certified entities, locations, statement of applicability where permitted, and service scope. | Does the certified scope cover the entity, people, locations, and service that will deliver this work? |
| SOC 2 Type II report | Current report under the agreed NDA process, auditor, examination period, system description, criteria, opinion, exceptions, subservice organizations, complementary user controls, and management responses. | Does the report cover the service and period, and can the buyer meet every required user control? |
| Penetration test | Current executive report, testing scope, date, tester independence, method, severity model, exclusions, findings, remediation status, retest evidence, and residual risk owner. | Was the relevant service tested, and are material findings closed or formally accepted? |
| Vulnerability process | Scanning coverage, frequency, severity method, remediation targets, exception process, dependency handling, patch evidence, and overdue risk report. | Can the supplier find, prioritize, repair, verify, and report relevant weaknesses? |
| Security policies | Approved policy set, owners, review dates, staff coverage, training evidence, access control, secure development, incident response, continuity, supplier risk, and data handling. | Are the policies current, assigned, followed, and relevant to the proposed work? |
| Insurance | Current certificate, insured legal entity, insurer, territory, limits, exclusions, expiry, cyber coverage, professional liability, and notification duties. | Does the policy match the contract risk and required entity? |
When an NDA or controlled room limits copying, record who inspected the artifact, when it was inspected, the allowed summary, open questions, and the buyer decision. Do not mark an artifact as reviewed because a supplier says it exists.
Verify how code moves from request to production
- Map requirements, threat review, architecture approval, development, peer review, automated checks, QA, business acceptance, release approval, deployment, monitoring, and rollback.
- Confirm that buyer code stays in approved repositories with branch protection, named reviewers, traceable commits, protected release tags, and controlled build artifacts.
- Request the secure coding standard for PHP, JavaScript, APIs, integrations, Adobe Commerce customization, extensions, and infrastructure code.
- Define dependency approval, software composition analysis, license review, package provenance, update ownership, and treatment of unsupported components.
- Define static analysis, dynamic testing where relevant, secret scanning, code review, test evidence, false-positive handling, and exception approval.
- Separate development, test, staging, and production access. Record who may promote code and who may approve a release.
- Ban production data from lower environments unless the buyer explicitly approves a protected, necessary use. Define masking, minimization, retention, and deletion.
- Require a tested rollback route, deployment record, post-release checks, monitoring owner, and incident trigger for every material release.
- Define how emergency changes are authorized, reviewed after the event, documented, tested, and closed.
Grant only named, approved, logged access
- Classify customer, employee, payment, product, order, log, analytics, and support data before access is approved.
- Record the lawful instruction, purpose, minimum fields, systems, locations, retention, deletion, and transfer route for each data flow.
- Review the data processing agreement, confidentiality duties, subprocessor list, change notice, assistance duties, return, deletion, and audit terms.
- Confirm that payment data boundaries and payment-provider responsibilities are written and tested. Do not infer compliance from the commerce platform alone.
- Define buyer approval before a new tool, model, code assistant, analytics service, or external repository receives buyer data or code.
Check how the supplier detects, contains, recovers, and hands back
- Request the current incident plan, severity model, contact path, notification trigger, time target, evidence preservation rule, investigation owner, and communication process.
- Define who leads an Adobe Commerce security incident, who can isolate systems, who speaks to customers or authorities, and who approves recovery.
- Request a relevant exercise or incident-review example with sensitive details removed. Record actions, owners, completion evidence, and remaining risks.
- Identify critical people, tools, repositories, credentials, integrations, and third parties. Confirm the continuity plan covers their loss.
- Request recovery objectives only where the supplier owns the relevant service. Ask for test dates, scope, result, gaps, and retest evidence.
- Define backup ownership, protection, retention, restore testing, and deletion. Do not assume the development supplier owns hosting backups.
- Define substitution, knowledge transfer, documentation, buyer approval, access change, and service continuity when a named person leaves.
- At exit, require code, build assets, documents, decisions, open risks, credentials, licenses, data return or deletion, access removal, and written completion evidence.
Close every gap with evidence, treatment, or rejection
| Record | What to capture | Close condition |
|---|---|---|
| Requirement | The buyer control, service risk, data class, system, accountable owner, and required evidence. | The requirement is specific enough for all suppliers to answer in the same way. |
| Evidence | Artifact name, owner, version, date, period, entity, scope, location, inspection date, and reviewer. | The reviewer can trace the decision back to the inspected evidence. |
| Gap | Missing coverage, exception, qualification, stale evidence, scope mismatch, or unanswered question. | The business and security impact is understood and assigned. |
| Treatment | Control, contract term, deadline, owner, proof of completion, review date, and fallback. | The accountable owner accepts the treatment and verifies completion. |
| Decision | Accept, accept with a time-limited exception, reject, or return for more evidence. | The authorized buyer owner records the decision and next review date. |
Stop conditions: Pause access when the legal entity is unclear, material delivery parties are hidden, evidence scope does not cover the service, critical findings have no accepted treatment, proposed people cannot be identified, or the contract does not define incident, access, data, continuity, and exit duties.
Copy this neutral request into the procurement file
Please provide current security, privacy, quality, continuity, and insurance evidence for the legal entity and service proposed in your response. For every artifact, state the owner, version, date or examination period, covered entities, locations, systems and services, exclusions, material exceptions, remediation status, and review access process.
Also provide the named delivery parties, data and system access map, secure development process, vulnerability process, incident route, continuity and recovery evidence, subprocessor list, and exit controls. Mark any point that is not established, needs an NDA, depends on the final team, or requires a buyer control. Our authorized reviewers will inspect the evidence and record the decision.
Pair this request with the named-team verification checklist and the enterprise SOW and overlap checklist. Use the CLEAR-8 method to keep public evidence, requested artifacts, and buyer approval separate.