Why India’s GCCs Need SOC 2 and CSA STAR Frameworks

India’s Global Capability Centers (GCCs) are no longer simply offshore delivery units handling routine back-office work. They are increasingly involved in product engineering, artificial intelligence, cloud operations, research and development, analytics, cybersecurity, and other strategic functions for global organizations. Deloitte notes that India had more than 1,800 GCCs as of December 2024, with the ecosystem increasingly evolving into innovation hubs and Centers of Excellence. More recent industry research also highlights the growing role of Indian GCCs in engineering, AI, cloud, and digital transformation.

That evolution creates an important question: Can a GCC demonstrate that the security and operational controls protecting these increasingly critical functions are effective? For GCCs operating in India, SOC 2 and CSA STAR offer two important ways to demonstrate stronger security and cloud assurance. SOC 2 provides assurance around controls relevant to areas such as security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy, while CSA STAR brings a specific focus on cloud security assurance through the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM).

Why Are India's GCCs Facing Greater Security Assurance Expectations?

The modern GCC often sits much closer to the organization's core technology and business operations than its predecessors did. An India-based GCC may develop software used globally, manage cloud infrastructure, process sensitive information, operate data platforms, support AI initiatives, or perform business-critical functions for its parent organization. That means a security incident or control failure within the GCC may have consequences far beyond the Indian entity.

The challenge is not necessarily that GCCs lack security controls. The bigger question is whether they can demonstrate those controls consistently and provide credible assurance to global stakeholders. This can become particularly important when customers, parent companies, procurement teams, or business partners ask questions about access management, incident response, data protection, availability, third-party risk, or cloud security. A collection of internal policies may not be enough to answer those questions. Organizations increasingly need structured assurance that shows how relevant controls are designed and, depending on the engagement, how they operate over time.

Strengthen trust in your organization with a SOC 2 Assessment from INTERCERT. Talk to Our SOC 2 Expert

What Is SOC 2 for GCCs in India?

SOC 2 is an assurance framework developed around the AICPA Trust Services Criteria. A SOC 2 examination evaluates and reports on controls at a service organization that are relevant to security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, or privacy. For SOC 2 for Global Capability Centers, the focus is not simply on obtaining a report, but on demonstrating that the controls relevant to the GCC’s defined services and systems are appropriately designed and operating as intended within the examination scope.

Depending on the GCC’s activities and scope, these controls may cover areas such as logical and physical access, change management, security monitoring, incident management, system availability, data confidentiality, privacy, and vendor or third-party management. This makes SOC 2 particularly relevant for India-based GCCs that provide technology, operational, data, or other services where global stakeholders require assurance over how those services and associated systems are controlled.

Why GCCs Need SOC 2?

The answer depends on the GCC's role, scope, and stakeholder expectations. SOC 2 is not a blanket legal requirement for every GCC in India. However, it can become commercially valuable when customers, business partners, or a global parent organization expect independent assurance over relevant controls. For a GCC operating as a strategic technology or service function, SOC 2 can provide a structured way to demonstrate that its control environment is not simply documented but subject to an independent examination.

What Are the SOC 2 Benefits for GCCs?

The SOC 2 benefits for GCCs go beyond cybersecurity. Key benefits include:

Structured assurance: Provides customers, business partners, and global stakeholders with a recognized form of assurance over relevant controls, reducing the need to respond separately to every security questionnaire.
Greater stakeholder confidence: Demonstrates a focus on areas important to technology-driven GCCs, including security, availability, confidentiality, privacy, and operational reliability.
Greater visibility: Makes the GCC’s security and control environment more visible to the wider organization, particularly when the India center manages systems or services that are strategically important to global operations.
Demonstrable assurance: Translates documented and operational security controls into evidence that can be independently examined, giving stakeholders greater confidence in the GCC’s control environment.

What Is CSA STAR for GCCs in India?

SOC 2 provides a broader control-assurance perspective, but many GCCs also operate extensively in cloud environments, creating a need for greater visibility into their cloud security posture. The Cloud Security Alliance’s Security, Trust, Assurance and Risk (STAR) program is focused specifically on cloud security assurance and transparency. Its Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) provides a cloud-focused control framework, with the latest CCM v4.1 containing 207 controls across 17 security domains.

CSA STAR includes different assurance levels. STAR Level 1 uses a self-assessment based on the CCM, while STAR Level 2 provides an assurance route involving third-party audit or certification. This makes CSA STAR for GCCs in India particularly relevant for organizations where cloud services form a significant part of their technology environment and where stakeholders require greater visibility into cloud security practices.

Why GCCs Need CSA STAR?

Cloud environments introduce questions that traditional security assessments may not always address with sufficient cloud-specific depth. An India GCC may operate across IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS environments while depending on multiple cloud providers, technology vendors, and interconnected platforms. Responsibilities can also be distributed between the GCC, its parent organization, cloud providers, and other third parties.

CSA's CCM is designed specifically around cloud security and privacy controls, while the STAR Registry provides public visibility into participating organizations' security and compliance posture. CSA notes that STAR is intended to promote transparency and reduce the complexity associated with multiple customer questionnaires. For cloud-heavy GCCs, this can make the framework particularly relevant when communicating security expectations to customers, partners, or global business stakeholders.

What Are the CSA STAR Benefits for GCCs?

The CSA STAR benefits for GCCs are closely connected to cloud transparency and assurance:

Structured cloud security visibility: Provides a more structured view of cloud-specific security controls and how they align with recognized cloud security practices.
Greater stakeholder transparency: Gives customers, business partners, and global stakeholders clearer visibility into the GCC’s cloud security posture.
Reduced questionnaire burden: A recognized assurance mechanism can provide a common reference point when stakeholders repeatedly request information about the same cloud security controls.
Cloud-specific assurance: Adds a dedicated cloud security perspective to assurance activities, which is particularly relevant for Indian GCCs involved in cloud migration, cloud-native development, SaaS platforms, data environments, and AI-enabled services.

SOC 2 vs CSA STAR: What Is the Difference?

SOC 2 and CSA STAR should not be treated as competing versions of the same framework. They address different assurance needs and can serve different purposes depending on a GCC’s services, technology environment, and stakeholder expectations.

Primary Focus

SOC 2: SOC 2 focuses on providing assurance over controls relevant to areas such as security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy. It is particularly relevant for service and technology environments where stakeholders need assurance over how systems and data are managed.
CSA STAR: CSA STAR is specifically focused on cloud security assurance and transparency. It provides a cloud-focused perspective on security controls, making it particularly relevant for organizations with significant cloud-based operations.

Core Criteria

SOC 2: SOC 2 examinations are based on the AICPA Trust Services Criteria, covering Security, Availability, Processing Integrity, Confidentiality, and Privacy.
CSA STAR: CSA STAR uses the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) as its core cloud security control framework. The CCM is designed specifically around cloud-related security and privacy considerations.

Assurance Approach

SOC 2: SOC 2 involves an independent examination of controls within a defined scope. The resulting report provides stakeholders with information about the design and, depending on the type of examination, operating effectiveness of relevant controls.
CSA STAR: CSA STAR offers different assurance levels. Level 1 is based on a self-assessment, while Level 2 involves third-party assurance through certification or an attestation-based approach.

Best Fit

SOC 2: SOC 2 can be a strong fit for GCCs providing technology, operational, data, or other services where global stakeholders require assurance over the organization’s control environment.
CSA STAR: CSA STAR is particularly relevant for GCCs with substantial cloud responsibilities, including cloud services, SaaS platforms, cloud-native environments, and other cloud-dependent operations.

Can GCCs Use SOC 2 and CSA STAR Together?

Yes, where the organization's scope and stakeholder expectations make both relevant. For instance, consider an India GCC that develops a global SaaS platform. Its stakeholders may want assurance over security, availability, confidentiality, privacy, and operational controls. At the same time, they may want greater visibility into the cloud-specific controls surrounding the platform. SOC 2 can address the broader control environment within its defined scope, while CSA STAR can add a cloud-focused perspective.

There is also an important relationship between CSA STAR and ISO/IEC 27001. CSA states that STAR Level 2 can build on other industry certifications and standards, and its STAR Certification path uses ISO/IEC 27001 together with the CCM. CSA also clarifies that STAR certification is intended as a supplement or extension to ISO/IEC 27001 rather than a replacement. Therefore, GCCs should not view these frameworks as a checklist of certifications to collect. The better approach is to determine which assurance mechanisms match the GCC's actual services, risks, cloud exposure, and stakeholder requirements.

India's Regulatory Environment Adds Another Layer

Security assurance for GCCs in India exists within a broader regulatory and contractual environment. India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 were notified by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology in November 2025, making privacy governance an important consideration for GCCs that handle personal data.

However, it is important to distinguish regulatory obligations from assurance frameworks. SOC 2 and CSA STAR do not replace applicable Indian laws, contractual obligations, or sector-specific requirements. Instead, they can form part of a broader governance and assurance strategy. The appropriate approach depends on what the GCC does, the type of information it handles, the systems it operates, the expectations of its customers, and the requirements of its global parent organization.

Demonstrate your commitment to security and build customer trust with SOC 2. Talk to Our SOC 2 Expert

How Should an India GCC Approach SOC 2 and CSA STAR?

A practical approach to SOC 2 or CSA STAR should begin with understanding the GCC’s scope and assurance needs rather than treating the framework itself as the starting point. The objective is to identify what needs to be assured, why it matters, and which assurance approach best fits the GCC’s responsibilities.

Define the GCC’s Responsibilities

Start by establishing what the GCC actually operates and controls. This includes identifying relevant systems, applications, services, data, cloud environments, and business processes. A clearly defined scope provides a better basis for determining which controls are relevant and which assurance framework aligns with the GCC’s activities.

Understand Stakeholder Expectations

The assurance requirements may come from different parts of the organization. Customers, global parent companies, procurement teams, or contractual partners may have specific expectations around SOC 2, CSA STAR, ISO 27001, or other forms of assurance. Understanding these expectations early can prevent the GCC from pursuing an assurance approach that does not address its key business requirements.

Evaluate the Existing Control Environment

The GCC should examine how its existing controls operate across areas such as access management, change management, incident response, vendor management, cloud security, privacy, monitoring, and business continuity. The focus should be on how controls operate in practice and whether there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate their operation, rather than simply checking whether policies exist.

Select the Appropriate Assurance Path

Once the GCC understands its scope, risks, and stakeholder expectations, it can determine whether SOC 2, CSA STAR, or a combination of both is appropriate. The decision should reflect the nature of the services provided, the importance of cloud environments, the information handled, and the type of assurance required by stakeholders.

Build Evidence Into Normal Operations

Evidence should be generated as part of routine control activities rather than assembled only when an assessment is approaching. Maintaining records of access reviews, monitoring activities, change management, incident handling, vendor reviews, and other relevant controls on an ongoing basis can make the assurance process more representative of how the GCC actually operates.

Common Mistakes GCCs Should Avoid

GCCs should avoid common security assurance gaps that can weaken control effectiveness and increase risk. A clear, ongoing approach helps keep assurance aligned with business and technology needs.

Treating Security Assurance as an IT Responsibility

Security assurance should not sit entirely with the IT or security team. GCCs often depend on interconnected functions such as operations, HR, procurement, legal, governance, and business leadership. When ownership is limited to technology teams, important controls around people, vendors, processes, and business decisions can be overlooked.

Assuming the Cloud Provider Owns All Security Responsibilities

Moving systems or services to the cloud does not transfer every security responsibility to the cloud provider. Cloud environments operate under a shared responsibility model, with different responsibilities depending on the services and architecture involved. GCCs should clearly establish who owns relevant controls and how those responsibilities are monitored and evidenced.

Choosing a Framework Because Others Use It

A framework that works well for one GCC may not address another GCC’s specific assurance needs. The decision should be based on the services provided, systems and data involved, cloud exposure, stakeholder expectations, and the type of assurance required. This makes the framework selection more relevant to the GCC’s actual operating environment rather than simply following market practice.

Treating Assurance as a One-Time Exercise

Completing an assessment or obtaining an assurance report should not mark the end of the process. GCC environments continue to evolve as organizations adopt new cloud services, AI capabilities, applications, vendors, and digital processes. Controls therefore need to remain relevant and operational as the technology and business environment changes.

Creating Greater Confidence in Supplier Performance

For India’s GCCs, security assurance is becoming less about having controls on paper and more about demonstrating that those controls are relevant, consistently managed, and aligned with the organization’s wider responsibilities. As GCCs take on greater roles across cloud, AI, software engineering, data, and global operations, the expectations of customers, parent organizations, and business stakeholders are likely to become more demanding.

SOC 2 and CSA STAR can serve different but complementary assurance needs. SOC 2 provides assurance over relevant controls within a defined scope, while CSA STAR brings a dedicated cloud security perspective. The right approach is therefore not to pursue frameworks simply because they are widely adopted, but to consider the GCC’s services, technology environment, cloud exposure, risks, and stakeholder expectations.

Choosing the right certification and assurance partner is equally important. INTERCERT is an independent third-party certification body providing certification and assurance services through an impartial, professional, and transparent audit process. With experienced auditors and a focus on internationally recognized certification practices, INTERCERT works with organizations seeking credible assurance that reflects their actual control environment and business requirements.