Both ISO 27001 and SOC 2 expect you to train your people. Not vaguely. They want documented, role-appropriate training, delivered continuously, with evidence that the right people completed the right content at the right time.

ISO 27001's Annex A 6.3 requires "information security awareness, education and training," and Clause 7.3 adds the duty to make staff aware of the policies that apply to them. SOC 2's Trust Services Criteria lean on CC1.4 (commitment to competence) and CC2.2 (internal communication of security responsibilities). Both frameworks also expect policy acknowledgements to be tracked, and both auditors will ask to see the reports.

That's where security training platforms come in. A good one takes the whole compliance headache off your plate: delivers training, runs phishing simulations to validate behaviour, distributes policies, chases acknowledgements, and exports the evidence an auditor actually wants. A bad one generates a list of completed modules that tells you nothing about whether your people are any safer.

This guide covers 10 platforms worth looking at in 2026 if compliance is a major driver for your program. Some are human risk management platforms that happen to generate strong audit trails. Some are built from the ground up around compliance documentation. A few are in between. We've broken down what each does well, where it falls short, and which fit which kind of organisation.

What to look for in a compliance-focused security training platform

A training platform for compliance work has to do more than deliver content. The criteria that matter most:

Audit-ready reporting. The platform should export the exact evidence an ISO 27001 auditor or SOC 2 examiner asks for: training completion by user, by role, by policy, with dates and acknowledgements. Anything that forces you to manipulate spreadsheets after export is costing you hours you don't have.

Policy management and attestation. A surprising number of awareness tools leave policy distribution to a separate system. For ISO 27001 Annex A 5.1 and SOC 2 CC2.2, you need to prove policies were communicated, read, and acknowledged. A platform that handles this in the same tool as training is a shortcut worth taking.

Phishing simulations with evidence. Phishing is the clearest way to demonstrate that awareness training is actually working. Simulations need to produce reports an auditor can trace to a specific user, date, and outcome.

Role-based training paths. Neither framework accepts one-size-fits-all training. Finance should see finance-specific content, developers should see secure coding, management should see governance. The platform should support role mapping natively.

Continuous delivery, not annual. Both auditors are wise to the once-a-year compliance course. What they want to see is a rolling program with evidence of ongoing engagement. Scheduling and automation matter here.

Cross-framework mapping. Most organisations doing ISO 27001 are also doing or planning SOC 2 (and probably GDPR, NIS2, or others). A platform that maps its content to the relevant clauses across frameworks saves you from building and evidencing the same program three times.

Integration with what you already run. SCORM support for your LMS. SSO with your identity provider. Reporting exports to your GRC tool. The fewer integration seams, the easier the program is to maintain.

Platform comparison overview

‍

Top 10 security training platforms for ISO 27001 and SOC 2 compliance

1) usecure

https://usecure.io

usecure is a human risk management platform that was designed with compliance reporting built in rather than bolted on. It combines four modules in one system: uLearn for security awareness training, uPhish for phishing simulations, uPolicy for policy management and attestation, and uBreach for dark web credential monitoring. A single Human Risk Score rolls all of this up into a metric you can show an auditor or a board.

For ISO 27001 specifically, usecure publishes a full mapping showing how the platform supports Annex A 6.3, Clause 7.3, and Annex A 5.1. Training records, policy acknowledgements, and phishing results all centralise into the same audit trail, which means one export covers the human side of your ISMS evidence rather than three exports from three tools. Usecure's SOC 2 framework view covers the Trust Services Criteria that rely on human behaviour: CC1.4 (competence), CC2.2 (internal communication), CC7.2 (anomaly monitoring through phishing reporting), and CC7.4 (incident response readiness).

The part that matters most for auditors is uPolicy. Most awareness tools make you manage policies in a separate system, which means you end up stitching evidence together from your awareness platform, your HR tool, and a shared drive full of signed PDFs. uPolicy distributes policies, captures e-signatures, tracks version history, and generates the acknowledgement reports auditors expect, all in the same reporting layer as your training data.

For internal IT and security teams, the IT team offering is designed to be low-admin: automated training cadences, scheduled policy rollouts, AutoPhish running in the background, and audit-ready reports exportable in a couple of clicks. For MSPs delivering compliance support to clients, the MSP offering adds multi-tenant management and white labelling.

What usecure doesn't do is automate technical evidence collection across your cloud stack the way Vanta or Drata does. It isn't a GRC platform. It's the human risk layer that most organisations pair with one, and it's built so the evidence flows cleanly into either.

You can start a free trial without a sales call and test it against your own ISO or SOC 2 evidence requirements.

Best fit: organisations pursuing ISO 27001, SOC 2, or both, that want their training, phishing, and policy evidence in one auditable place.

2) KnowBe4

https://www.knowbe4.com

KnowBe4 is the biggest name in the market and has been for years. Its content library is vast: thousands of training modules, role-based paths, and phishing templates covering most of the attack patterns an auditor will ask about. For ISO 27001 and SOC 2, KnowBe4's reporting covers training completion, phishing simulation outcomes, and risk scoring across the organisation.

The strengths are breadth and familiarity. If you need a very specific training module on something obscure, KnowBe4 probably has it. Auditors have seen KnowBe4 output before, so it doesn't raise questions.

The trade-offs show up in day-to-day admin. Running KnowBe4 well often requires more hands-on management than smaller platforms, and users sometimes report that content feels repetitive over longer periods. Policy management isn't a core strength, so most customers run a separate tool for policy distribution and acknowledgement.

Best fit: organisations that value content breadth and name recognition, and have the internal resources to run campaigns actively.

3) Proofpoint Security Awareness Training

https://www.proofpoint.com

Proofpoint's awareness training is built on top of the company's threat intelligence from its email security business. Phishing simulations draw from live campaign data, which means users see the sort of attacks that are actually landing in their inbox rather than generic templates.

For compliance, Proofpoint covers ISO 27001, NIST, GDPR, and similar frameworks with strong enterprise reporting. The ACE framework (Assess, Change, Evaluate) personalises training paths, and People Risk Explorer surfaces the users most likely to be targeted or to click, based on the threat intelligence layer. SCORM compatibility makes it straightforward to integrate with existing LMS platforms.

The trade-off is that Proofpoint works best if you're already a Proofpoint customer. As a standalone training tool, it's less flexible than dedicated platforms, and engagement tends to lag gamified competitors like Hoxhunt and SoSafe.

Best fit: enterprises already running Proofpoint email security that want awareness training in the same ecosystem with strong compliance reporting.

4) Hoxhunt

https://hoxhunt.com

Hoxhunt's angle is behavioural engagement rather than compliance reporting. The platform uses AI-driven adaptive difficulty: employees who catch simulations consistently get harder ones, and those who struggle get scaled-back scenarios until they build confidence. Gamification and leaderboards drive reporting rates that tend to outperform traditional platforms.

For ISO 27001 and SOC 2, Hoxhunt produces the completion and phishing evidence auditors expect, although the platform is more oriented to reducing real risk than to producing polished compliance documentation. Organisations that want to show an auditor strong behavioural metrics (reporting rates, simulation performance over time) do well here. Organisations that want a check-the-box compliance program find the emphasis on engagement over coverage less of a fit.

Enterprise pricing reflects the enterprise positioning. The admin dashboard is sometimes flagged as less intuitive than the end-user experience.

Best fit: mid-market and enterprise organisations where compliance is a driver but behaviour change is the priority.

5) MetaCompliance

https://www.metacompliance.com

MetaCompliance is one of the more compliance-forward platforms on this list, which you'd expect from the name. It combines awareness training, phishing simulations, and policy management in a single platform, with content mapped to ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, and other frameworks. Training content is available in 40+ languages, which helps if you operate across multiple regions.

Policy management is a strength. The platform handles distribution, version control, and attestation tracking, which supports Annex A 5.1 under ISO and CC2.2 under SOC 2 directly. Reporting is aimed at audit use, with completion tracking and policy acknowledgement evidence exportable in auditor-friendly formats.

The platform is often chosen by regulated industries (financial services, legal, healthcare) where compliance documentation is the primary driver. Some users have flagged challenges with spam filter configuration and suppression list management during setup.

Best fit: regulated industries where compliance is the driver and multilingual coverage matters.

6) SoSafe

https://sosafe-awareness.com

SoSafe is a European platform that pairs gamified awareness training with AI-driven phishing simulations. The platform's Adaptive Difficulty Engine adjusts training frequency and phishing complexity per user, and simulations cover email, SMS, QR codes, and (in early access) voice.

For compliance, SoSafe's GDPR focus is the standout. The platform hosts data within the EU and has strong privacy-by-design posture, which matters if you're pursuing ISO 27001 with a European auditor or running SOC 2 alongside GDPR obligations. Content is available in 30+ languages, and the Phishing Report Button gives end-users a native way to flag suspicious emails with feedback built in.

SoSafe launched an MSP-specific platform in mid-2025 with multi-tenant management and no minimum licence requirement. For direct customers in the EU mid-market, the core platform is a solid fit.

Best fit: EU mid-market organisations that need GDPR-aligned privacy posture alongside ISO 27001 or SOC 2 training evidence.

7) Terranova Security (Fortra)

https://www.terranovasecurity.com

Terranova Security, now operating as Fortra's Human Risk Management offering, has been in the awareness training space for more than 20 years. Content is available in 40+ languages and built on a pedagogical framework designed around behaviour change over time.

For ISO 27001, SOC 2, and GDPR, Terranova's reporting is governance-led. The platform leans toward formal campaigns tied to risk frameworks, with phishing simulations, gamified Cyber Game modules, and the Cyber Hero Score to track user progress. Integration with the broader Fortra portfolio (email security, data protection, threat intelligence) gives larger organisations a single-vendor option for multiple security domains.

The platform is a stronger fit for larger organisations with dedicated compliance teams than for lean IT shops. Configuration takes more time, and the payoff is depth of content and reporting rather than speed of deployment.

Best fit: global enterprises with formal governance programs and audit requirements across multiple frameworks.

8) Infosec IQ

https://www.infosecinstitute.com

Infosec IQ, from Infosec Institute (part of Cengage Group), is an awareness platform built around structured training programs and compliance coverage. It supports role-based training paths for phishing, password security, data protection, and regulatory topics, with phishing simulations tied into scheduled training.

For ISO 27001 and SOC 2, the platform's strength is structured compliance reporting: completion tracking by role, documented audit trails, and content paths mapped to specific regulatory topics. Organisations that need to demonstrate training coverage and completion rates for audits tend to gravitate here.

The trade-off is that Infosec IQ leans more toward coverage than behavioural depth. Adaptive features are lighter than Hoxhunt or CybSafe, and engagement depends more on program design than platform mechanics.

Best fit: organisations that need documented training programs tied to compliance frameworks, with strong audit paper trails.

9) Ninjio

https://ninjio.com

Ninjio's differentiator is its content: short, Hollywood-style animated episodes delivered monthly, each based on a real breach. Users tend to actually watch Ninjio content in a way they don't watch generic video training, which translates into better completion rates and retention. The platform has been a consistent Leader in G2's Security Awareness Training category, most recently in the Spring 2026 Grid report.

For ISO 27001 and SOC 2, Ninjio supports the training evidence side: completion tracking, phishing simulation data, and a Risk Score per user. In 2026, the platform launched NINJIO Insights, a reporting suite built on Snowflake and Sigma that produces audit-ready compliance evidence, and Sensei AI for automated phishing simulation generation and report triage.

The platform's emphasis is engagement first. Compliance reporting works, but policy management isn't a native function, so you'll still need a separate tool for Annex A 5.1 / CC2.2 if Ninjio is your primary training platform.

Best fit: mid-market organisations that want engagement and content quality as the primary lever, with compliance as a secondary driver.

10) CybSafe

https://www.cybsafe.com

CybSafe is a behavioural science-based security awareness platform. Rather than focusing on training completion, the platform builds a picture of user behaviour through a Security Behaviours Database (SebDB), then uses that data to deliver interventions designed to shift behaviour over time.

For compliance, CybSafe produces the expected evidence: training completion, phishing results, and behavioural risk scoring. What it adds is a richer behavioural metric set that auditors increasingly accept as evidence of a maturing program, beyond simple completion rates. The platform is a stronger fit for organisations that want to tell a behaviour-change story to auditors, not just a coverage story.

CybSafe is newer and smaller than KnowBe4 or Proofpoint, which means it's less widely recognised in audit contexts, though that's changing quickly. Content library depth is narrower, and some customers pair it with another tool for volume content.

Best fit: enterprises treating ISO 27001 or SOC 2 as part of a broader behavioural security program rather than a compliance checkbox.

How to choose the right platform for compliance

Start with what your auditor will actually look at. Both ISO 27001 and SOC 2 auditors want four things: evidence training was delivered to the right people, evidence policies were acknowledged, evidence phishing resilience has been tested, and evidence the program runs continuously. Any platform that produces those four things cleanly will get you through an audit. The differences are in how much manual work it takes to produce them.

Think about whether policy management matters. If you already run a separate tool for policy distribution and acknowledgement, any of the training-focused platforms will fit in. If you don't, look hard at the tools that do both (usecure, MetaCompliance). Managing policy attestation in a shared drive is a common audit finding and a time sink you don't need.

Consider cross-framework scope. Organisations pursuing only SOC 2 have a shorter list than those pursuing ISO 27001, and those tackling both often need GDPR and occasionally NIS2 besides. Platforms that map content and evidence across frameworks (usecure, MetaCompliance, Terranova, Proofpoint) save you from rebuilding the same program three times.

Match the engagement model to your audit philosophy. Some auditors still accept coverage metrics (completed modules, acknowledged policies) as primary evidence. More are asking for behavioural metrics (reporting rates, phishing trends, risk scores). If your audit partner is in the second camp, platforms with richer behavioural data (usecure, Hoxhunt, CybSafe) will help the conversation.

Finally, look at deployment time. Compliance deadlines don't wait. Platforms that ship with pre-built ISO and SOC 2 mappings out of the box (usecure, MetaCompliance, Infosec IQ) will be generating evidence weeks before platforms that require heavy configuration.

If you want to see how one platform handles the human risk side of both frameworks end-to-end, start a free usecure trial and run it against your own auditor's expectations.

FAQ

Does ISO 27001 explicitly require security awareness training?

Yes. Annex A 6.3 requires "information security awareness, education and training" for all personnel. Clause 7.3 requires staff to be aware of the ISMS policies relevant to their role. An auditor will ask to see documented evidence of both.

Does SOC 2 require security awareness training?

SOC 2 doesn't use the word "training" as a single explicit requirement, but the Trust Services Criteria that underpin every SOC 2 report (CC1.4, CC2.2) require you to demonstrate competence and communicate security responsibilities to staff. In practice, every SOC 2 examination asks for training evidence.

How often do we need to train staff for ISO 27001 or SOC 2?

Annual training alone rarely satisfies a modern auditor. Best practice, and increasingly auditor expectation, is a continuous program: short, role-specific training delivered monthly or quarterly, with phishing simulations and policy updates running alongside. The platforms on this list are designed for continuous delivery, not one-shot annual courses.

What evidence will an auditor actually ask for?

Typically: a list of staff and their completion status for each required training module, phishing simulation results per user over time, policy acknowledgement records showing who signed what and when, evidence of role-based training paths, and proof that the program is running continuously (scheduled campaigns, automated reminders, historical completion data).

Do we need a separate tool for policy management?

Not if your training platform handles it natively. usecure and MetaCompliance both include policy management in the same system as training, which keeps your evidence in one place. Most other platforms leave policy distribution to a separate tool, which works but adds admin and stitching at audit time.

What if we're pursuing both ISO 27001 and SOC 2 together?

Common scenario, especially for B2B SaaS. The frameworks overlap significantly on training and policy requirements, so you can usually run one program and map the evidence to both. Pick a platform with explicit mappings to both frameworks (usecure, MetaCompliance, Terranova, Proofpoint) to avoid doing the same work twice.

Are phishing simulations actually required for certification?

Neither framework literally requires simulated phishing. Both expect you to demonstrate ongoing awareness and that controls are effective, and phishing simulations are the clearest way to evidence that for an auditor. In practice, organisations that skip phishing testing tend to face tougher questions during audit than those that include it.