SOC 3 explained: the public-facing trust report
A SOC 3 is a freely distributable, general-use report built on the same Trust Services Criteria as SOC 2, but stripped of the detailed control descriptions and test results. It's a marketing and trust signal, not a substitute for the SOC 2 your customers' procurement teams will actually ask for.
What a SOC 3 report actually is
A SOC 3 is an AICPA System and Organization Controls report that examines the same Trust Services Criteria as SOC 2 — security plus any of availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy your organization chooses to include. The defining difference is its intended audience: SOC 3 is a 'general use' report, meaning anyone can read it without signing a non-disclosure agreement. To make that possible, it omits the sensitive material a SOC 2 contains: the detailed description of your system, the specific controls the auditor tested, and the individual test procedures and results. What remains is the auditor's opinion, a short management assertion, and a high-level system overview. In practice it functions as a public attestation that a CPA firm examined your controls and reached an opinion, without exposing the operational detail.
How SOC 3 relates to SOC 2 Type 2
A SOC 3 is almost always derived from an underlying SOC 2 engagement rather than performed in isolation. Because the auditor is testing operating effectiveness over a period of time, a SOC 3 is effectively the public-facing cousin of a SOC 2 Type 2 report, covering a defined window such as a trailing twelve months. The two reports rest on the same fieldwork and the same set of criteria; the auditor simply produces a condensed, sanitized version for general distribution alongside the restricted-use SOC 2. Many service organizations commission both from the same examination, since the marginal cost of adding a SOC 3 to an existing SOC 2 is modest compared to running a separate engagement. That overlap is also why a SOC 3 inherits the same scope decisions — if confidentiality wasn't in your SOC 2 scope, it won't appear in the SOC 3 either.
Why it can't replace SOC 2 for procurement
Security and vendor-risk teams evaluating you as a supplier need to see what the auditor actually tested and whether any exceptions were noted, and a SOC 3 deliberately withholds that. There are no control matrices, no description of complementary user-entity controls, and no detail on testing exceptions or management responses — all of which a diligent reviewer relies on to assess residual risk. As a result, enterprise procurement and third-party risk questionnaires almost universally request the full SOC 2, typically under NDA. Handing over a SOC 3 in response to a SOC 2 request will usually stall the review rather than satisfy it. Treat SOC 3 as evidence that a report exists, not as the report procurement will accept.
Marketing use and the AICPA SOC logo
The natural home for a SOC 3 is your public trust or security page, where prospects who haven't yet entered a sales conversation can self-serve assurance. Because it carries no NDA obligation, you can link to the PDF openly, cite it in RFP responses, and reference it in security marketing. Organizations that complete a SOC examination may also use the AICPA SOC for Service Organizations logo, subject to the AICPA's guidelines — generally for twelve months following the report date, and with the specific reporting period clearly communicated for a Type 2. Be precise in any public claim: state the report type and the exact period covered, since the auditor's conclusions only speak to the window that was examined. Vague badges that omit the period invite skepticism and can run afoul of the logo guidelines.
When to issue both — and who can skip SOC 3
Issuing both makes the most sense for SaaS and infrastructure companies that sell to enterprises but also want a frictionless public trust signal: the SOC 2 handles procurement, the SOC 3 handles marketing and inbound trust. If your buyers are mostly other businesses with formal vendor-risk programs, the SOC 2 is non-negotiable and the SOC 3 is a low-cost bonus. Conversely, a SOC 3 alone is rarely sufficient for a B2B vendor, because you'll still get asked for the detailed report. Very early-stage companies or those with no public-facing trust narrative may reasonably defer the SOC 3 and add it later when marketing value materializes. The decision is less about compliance and more about whether public, no-NDA distribution is worth the small incremental effort on top of an examination you're already paying for.