What is a CAIQ questionnaire?
CAIQ is a Cloud Security Alliance questionnaire used to assess cloud provider security controls. SaaS teams should answer it with scoped claims, evidence links, owners, and review dates.
CAIQ questionnaire template with answers and evidence
Turn Cloud Security Alliance CAIQ questions into scoped, evidence-backed, owner-reviewed security questionnaire answers for SaaS customer reviews.
CAIQ answer rowQuestion to evidence
Control area
Approved answer
Evidence link
Exception note
Direct answer
A useful CAIQ template should not be a blank checklist. It should show acceptable answer patterns, weak answers, evidence to attach, owners, and when an exception must be disclosed.
Copyable CAIQ answer template
Use these rows as a starting point, then verify your current control scope before sending answers to a customer.
| CAIQ area | Question | Acceptable answer pattern | Evidence to attach | Weak answer |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identity and access | How are administrative users authenticated and reviewed? | Administrative access uses SSO or MFA, least-privilege roles, documented approval, periodic review, and offboarding controls. | Access policy, IdP groups, access review export, offboarding checklist. | Access is described as role-based with no review cadence, owner, or evidence. |
| Encryption | Is customer data encrypted in transit and at rest? | Customer data is encrypted in transit and at rest within the documented production scope, with key ownership and exceptions identified. | Encryption policy, architecture note, KMS configuration, SOC 2 section. | A generic yes relies only on cloud provider marketing copy. |
| Logging and monitoring | Which security events are logged and reviewed? | Authentication, privileged actions, access changes, infrastructure events, and relevant application security events are logged with retention and review process. | Logging policy, SIEM query, alert examples, retention setting. | Logs exist but no one can show retention, alert ownership, or investigation workflow. |
| Vulnerability management | How are vulnerabilities identified, prioritized, and remediated? | The team uses scanning, dependency review, severity targets, owner assignment, exception tracking, and retest evidence. | Scanner reports, SLA policy, ticket samples, exception record. | The answer says scans are performed but gives no remediation or exception process. |
| Subprocessors | Which subprocessors can process customer data? | The subprocessor list names vendors, purpose, data type, region when available, notification process, and review owner. | Subprocessor page, DPA, vendor risk record, data-flow note. | The vendor says it uses trusted providers but does not name them. |
| AI and automation | Do AI tools or automation systems process customer data or security questionnaire answers? | AI use is scoped by approved vendor, data category, retention setting, human review rule, and evidence source. | AI vendor review, admin settings, DPA, retention note, answer-library approval record. | AI answers are generated from unknown sources with no owner review. |
Turn CAIQ into an answer library
Store each CAIQ row with owner, last review date, source evidence, customer-safe wording, and exception status.
FAQ
Short answers for CAIQ questionnaire response work.
How should a SaaS team answer CAIQ questions?
Normalize each CAIQ question, map it to an approved answer, attach evidence, mark exceptions, route sensitive claims to owners, and store the result in an answer library.
Can a SOC 2 report replace CAIQ answers?
SOC 2 can support many answers, but CAIQ responses still need control-specific scope, evidence, exceptions, and customer-safe wording.
What evidence should be attached to CAIQ answers?
Attach policies, SOC 2 sections, access review exports, architecture notes, encryption evidence, vulnerability records, subprocessor pages, and owner approvals.
Need a shortlist for your workflow?
Send the formats you receive, your current answer-library setup, and whether you need portal support. We will use those signals to prioritize the next comparison updates.