ISO 27001 certification is the clearest way to verify that a remote interpretation platform actually protects sensitive, spoken conversations rather than simply claiming to. For any organisation buying interpretation services for confidential or regulated content, it should sit near the top of the vendor evaluation checklist, not as an afterthought.
This post explains what the certification covers, why it matters more for interpretation than for most software categories, what Interprefy has done to earn it, and what to check before taking any vendor's compliance claim at face value.
ISO 27001, formally ISO/IEC 27001, is the international standard for information security management. It sets out the requirements for an Information Security Management System, or ISMS: a structured, continuously reviewed set of policies, procedures and controls that protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information.
The current version of the standard, ISO/IEC 27001:2022, organises its requirements into 93 controls across four themes: organisational, people, physical and technological. That range matters because certification is not awarded for having good encryption alone. An organisation has to demonstrate that access control, staff training, supplier management, incident response and physical security are all governed with the same rigour, and it has to prove this to an independent, accredited certification body rather than simply asserting it.
Third-party verification is what separates a genuine security posture from a marketing claim, and that distinction carries more weight in interpretation than in most software categories. Most security discussions centre on data at rest: files, records, databases. Interpretation platforms handle something harder to control, live, unredacted human speech, often containing the most sensitive content in the conversation, since interpreters are frequently the only third party present for discussions that would otherwise stay between two people in the same room. For a closer look at how these risks apply to AI-driven interpretation specifically, see our guide to what security standards automatic speech translation should meet.
A remote interpretation platform has to secure a live audio and video stream in transit, manage access for interpreters who are themselves external to the client organisation, and ensure that any recordings are stored and deleted according to policy. Certification requires this to sit inside a continuously reviewed risk management process rather than a one-off setup.
Being assessed against 93 controls spanning organisational, people, physical and technological safeguards places a platform on the same benchmark used across finance, healthcare and government technology, rather than a bespoke or self-defined security policy.
Certification is granted only once an accredited auditor confirms the management system meets the standard's requirements through direct evidence, not a self-assessment questionnaire. Legal proceedings, merger negotiations, government sessions and clinical consultations all depend on that chain holding at every point, not just at the database layer.
For an organisation buying interpretation services, certification translates into three practical benefits: better protection of personal information, stronger safeguarding of intellectual property, and assurance that a platform's defences are kept current rather than left static after launch.
Participant and interpreter data, including the content of live conversations, is protected through encryption in transit and at rest, role based access control, and authentication measures such as Single Sign-On, SAML 2.0 and two-factor authentication that limit who can reach event data.
Confidential discussions, from merger negotiations to unreleased product details, require that everyone with access to the stream is bound by clear obligations. This means interpreters and support staff operate under non-disclosure agreements before they can access any event stream, not as an informal courtesy but as a documented control.
A management system is maintained through continuous monitoring, not reviewed once a year. Certified organisations undergo annual surveillance audits and a full recertification audit roughly every three years, supported by regular independent penetration testing and oversight from a dedicated Information Security Officer.
Achieving ISO 27001 is not a self-declared badge. It requires a two-stage external audit: an initial review of documented policies and risk assessments, followed by an in-depth assessment of whether those policies are actually being followed in practice. Certification is granted only once an accredited auditor confirms the ISMS meets the standard's requirements, and it does not end there. Certified organisations undergo annual surveillance audits and a full recertification audit roughly every three years, so the certificate reflects an ongoing state, not a one-off achievement.
Interprefy went through this process and has hold the ISO 27001 certification since November 2021, with auditors reporting zero nonconformities across the assessment, placing it among the first in the interpretation technology sector to hold the certification. That audit history, rather than the certificate itself, is the more useful signal: it shows the management system has been tested by an outside party and found to hold up.
In practice, certification sets the framework; the operational detail is what it translates into day to day. Interprefy secures data in transit with TLS 1.2 and AES-256-GCM encryption, uses role based access control to limit who can reach event data, and offers Single Sign-On, SAML 2.0 and two-factor authentication for enterprise clients. Data is stored within the European Union, interpreters and support staff operate under non-disclosure agreements before they can access any event stream, and the platform undergoes regular independent penetration testing. A dedicated Information Security Officer oversees continuous monitoring against the ISMS, which is what keeps the certification current rather than static.
None of this removes risk entirely. What it does is give organisations evaluating interpretation vendors something more concrete than a promise: an externally audited system, reviewed annually, built specifically to protect the kind of live, sensitive communication that interpretation exists to carry.
Not every claim of ISO 27001 compliance carries the same weight, and it is worth checking the detail rather than the badge on the footer of a website. Three things are worth confirming directly with any vendor: the exact scope of the certificate, since some organisations certify a narrow part of the business rather than the platform being purchased; the identity and accreditation of the certifying body, since certification only carries weight when it comes from a recognised, independent auditor; and the date of the most recent surveillance audit, since a certificate from several years ago with no evidence of ongoing review says less than it appears to. Our guide to assessing customer security, privacy and SLA promises covers the broader set of questions worth asking any interpretation or translation vendor beyond certification alone.