SOC 2 compliance software built for continuous readiness

Both. For Type I, Scrutineer organizes your control design and evidence for the point in time. For Type II, the continuous evidence collection is exactly what proves controls operated over the review period. Either way, an accredited auditor issues the final report.

SOC 2 compliance software maps your controls to the AICPA Trust Services Criteria, collects the evidence that proves each control operated, and flags gaps before an auditor finds them. The useful ones pull proof automatically from your identity, cloud and ticketing systems and timestamp it, because a Type II opinion rests on controls operating across a period rather than on documents written the week before fieldwork.

SOC 2 covers security and related commitments against criteria fixed by the AICPA. SOC 1 covers controls relevant to your customers financial reporting, and its control objectives are written by your own management rather than selected from a list. The quickest test is who is asking: a customer financial statement auditor wants a SOC 1, a customer security or vendor risk team wants a SOC 2.

It depends on whether your service affects numbers in your customers financial statements. Payroll, billing, claims processing, loan servicing and fund administration usually trigger a SOC 1. Selling software that holds customer data usually triggers a SOC 2. Companies that do both, such as a platform that processes payments and stores sensitive data, genuinely need both, though the IT general controls underneath serve each report.

No. SOC 2 produces an attestation report containing a licensed CPA firm opinion, not a certificate, and there is no pass mark or registry. This matters in questionnaires: describing yourself as SOC 2 certified is technically a misstatement, and buyers who know the difference notice. The accurate phrasing is that you have a SOC 2 Type II report covering a stated period.

A Type 1 opines on whether controls were suitably designed at a single point in time. A Type 2 opines on design plus operating effectiveness across a period, commonly three to twelve months, and publishes the tests performed and their results. Most buyers want a Type 2. A Type 1 is a reasonable first step but rarely satisfies a security review on its own.

Readiness work typically takes one to four months depending on how much control infrastructure already exists. The Type II observation window then adds however long you choose, usually three months for a first report and twelve thereafter, followed by several weeks of fieldwork and report drafting. The window is the part you cannot compress, which is why starting evidence collection early matters more than moving quickly later.

Four things. Map your controls to the Trust Services Criteria you scoped, collect dated evidence continuously rather than on request, show which controls are failing right now, and produce the artifacts an auditor asks for without a manual export. A SOC 2 compliance tool that only stores policy documents leaves you doing the hard part by hand.

No. Scrutineer maps and maintains your controls and evidence and shows where you stand before an audit. The examination is performed by an independent licensed CPA firm and the opinion is theirs. No software can issue a SOC 2 report, and we would rather say so than imply a subscription closes the obligation.

Yes. Scrutineer connects to common cloud, identity, code and ticketing systems to pull evidence where the work already happens, so you are not duplicating effort or maintaining a separate evidence folder by hand.

People search for it, but the category name is a misnomer worth correcting before you buy. No software certifies you, because SOC 2 has no certification to issue: the output is an attestation report signed by an independent licensed CPA firm. What the tools in this category actually do is readiness and evidence work, so judge them on control mapping, evidence freshness and gap detection rather than on any claim about getting you certified.

It is software that collects control evidence on a schedule instead of on request. A SOC 2 compliance tool connects to your cloud, identity and ticketing systems, pulls dated proof that each control operated, flags controls that have drifted, and keeps an audit tracking view of what is ready and what is not. The automation is in the evidence collection and monitoring. The examination itself is still performed by people.

The criteria did not, which is worth knowing before a vendor sells you an upgrade. No new Trust Services Criteria were issued for 2025 or 2026, and the 2017 TSC remains the framework in force. What was revised is the points of focus, the explanatory examples that help a practitioner interpret a criterion. Published sources date that revision to 2022 and to the 2023 guidance edition, and the disagreement does not matter, because points of focus are not criteria and they do not change which controls you need. The AICPA also updated its description criteria implementation guidance in July 2025, which governs how you write the system description rather than what you have to control. One thing did genuinely change, and almost no SOC 2 buying guide mentions it: SSAE 23 aligned the attestation standards with the AICPA quality management standards, amending AT-C 105 and AT-C 205, and it is in force for engagements beginning on or after December 15, 2025. A SOC 2 runs under exactly those two sections, so an examination starting now falls under the amended standard. The practical effect lands on your auditor rather than on your control set, but it is a fair question to ask a firm before you sign.