CISA Certified Information Systems Auditor Question and Answers

A compliance gap analysis is a detailed review of an organization’s current state of compliance against a specific regulation or standard. It helps identify the areas and controls that are not meeting the requirements, assess their risk levels, and determine the corrective actions that can be taken to achieve compliance12. A compliance gap analysis is the most useful tool for an IS auditor to review when auditing against a new regulation, as it provides a clear and comprehensive picture of the compliance status, gaps, and remediation plan of the organization.

References

1: Information Security Architecture: Gap Assessment and Prioritization - ISACA

2: How to perform Compliance Gap Analysis? - Sprinto

The change management process is the set of procedures and activities that ensure that changes to the information system are authorized, tested, documented, and implemented in a controlled manner12. A defect in a recent release indicates that there may be issues with the quality assurance, testing, or approval of the changes, which could affect the reliability, security, and performance of the system3 . Therefore, the auditor’s next step should be to evaluate the change management process and identify the root cause of the defect, as well as the impact and remediation of the incident.

References

1: Change Management - CISA

2: What is Change Management? - Definition from Techopedia

3: How to Audit Change Management - ISACA Journal

The Business Case for Security | CISA

IS auditors primarily provide assurance and oversight. In this context, independent reviews ensure that those responsible for the renovation project are meeting their obligations, following best practices, and managing risks appropriately.

References:

ISACA's Code of Professional Ethics: Emphasizes the IS Auditor's duty to be independent and objective.

The Role of IS Audit: IS Auditors are not project managers but provide objective assessment and guidance regarding controls and risk mitigation within projects.

CISA Review Manual (27th Edition): May have sections discussing the role of IS auditors in infrastructure projects or similar initiatives.

The most appropriate testing approach when auditing a daily data flow between two systems via an automated interface is to perform data reconciliation between the two systems for a sample of 25 days. Data reconciliation is a process of verifying that the data transferred from one system to another is complete and accurate, and that there are no discrepancies or errors in the data flow1. Data reconciliation can be performed by using generalized audit software, which is a type of computer-assisted audit technique (CAAT) that allows the IS auditor to perform various audit tasks on the data stored in different file formats and databases2. By performing data reconciliation for a sample of 25 days, the IS auditor can test the reliability and consistency of the data flow over a reasonable period of time, and identify any potential issues or anomalies that could affect the quality of the data or the functionality of the systems.

References

1: Data Flow Testing - GeeksforGeeks 2: Generalized Audit Software (GAS) - ISACA

The best approach from a risk management perspective when implementing a large and complex data center IT infrastructure is to use a deployment plan based on sequenced phases, as this will allow the organization to break down the project into manageable and measurable stages, and to monitor and control the progress, quality, and outcomes of each phase12. A phased deployment plan can also help to reduce the risks of errors, failures, or disruptions that could affect the entire infrastructure, and to implement corrective actions or contingency plans as needed34.

References

1: Data Center Project Planning: A Guide to Success2 2: Data Center Project Planning: A Guide to Success4 3: Data Center Migration: A Step-by-Step Guide3 4: Data Center Migration: A Step-by-Step Guide1

A backlog consumption report is a report that shows the amount of work that has been completed and the amount of work that remains to be done in a project. It is a useful tool for measuring the progress and performance of a web-based customer service application development project, as it can indicate whether the project is on track, ahead or behind schedule, and how much effort is required to finish the project. A backlog consumption report can also help identify any issues or risks that may affect the project delivery. Critical path analysis reports, developer status reports and change management logs are also helpful for evaluating a project, but they are not as helpful as a backlog consumption report, as they do not provide a clear picture of the overall project status and completion rate. References:

: [Backlog Consumption Report Definition]

: Backlog Consumption Report | ISACA

The most useful information regarding an organization’s risk appetite and tolerance is provided by its risk profile, as this is a document that summarizes the key risks that the organization faces, the potential impacts and likelihoods of those risks, and the acceptable levels of risk exposure for different objectives and activities. A gap analysis is a tool that compares the current state and the desired state of a process or a system, and identifies the gaps that need to be addressed. Audit reports are documents that present the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of an audit engagement. A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, their consequences, and their mitigation actions. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: Governance and Management of IT, Section 2.1: IT Governance

A firewall between internal network segments improves security and reduces risk by inspecting all traffic flowing between network segments and applying security policies. This will prevent unauthorized or malicious access, data leakage, or network attacks from compromising the network resources or data. Logging all packets passing through network segments may provide audit trails and evidence, but not prevent or mitigate security incidents. Monitoring and reporting on sessions between network participants may help to identify anomalous or suspicious activities, but not block or filter them. Ensuring all connecting systems have appropriate security controls enabled may enhance the overall network security posture, but not isolate or segregate different network segments. References: Info Technology & Systems Resources | COBIT, Risk, Governance … - ISACA, section “Book COBIT 2019 Design Guide: Designing an Information and Technology Governance Solution | Digital | English”

This control is best implemented through system configuration because it can be enforced automatically by setting a parameter in the network operating system or directory service. This ensures that temporary workers do not have access to the network beyond their authorized period, and reduces the risk of unauthorized or malicious use of their accounts12.

References1: Configuration and Change Management - CISA2: What is IT Governance? - Definition from Techopedia

 An IT risk assessment is the process of identifying and assessing the threats facing an organization’s information systems, networks, and data. An IT risk assessment helps an organization to understand its current risk profile, prioritize its risks, and implement appropriate controls to mitigate them. An IT risk assessment also helps an organization to comply with relevant laws and standards, such as ISO 27001 or CMMC.

One of the key steps in an IT risk assessment is the identification of vulnerabilities. Vulnerabilities are the weaknesses or gaps in an organization’s information security that could be exploited by internal or external threats. Vulnerabilities can exist in various aspects of an organization’s information security, such as:

Hardware: The physical devices and components that store or process information

Software: The applications and programs that run on hardware devices

Network: The communication channels and protocols that connect hardware devices

Data: The information that is stored or transmitted by hardware devices or software applications

People: The users or personnel who access or manage information systems or data

Processes: The procedures or workflows that govern how information systems or data are used or maintained

By identifying vulnerabilities in each of these aspects, an organization can assess its exposure to potential threats, such as hackers, malware, natural disasters, human errors, or sabotage. By identifying vulnerabilities, an organization can also determine its risk level for each threat scenario, based on the likelihood and impact of a successful attack. By identifying vulnerabilities, an organization can also identify the existing or required controls to prevent or reduce the impact of an attack.

Therefore, an IT risk assessment should include the identification of vulnerabilities as a crucial component.

References:

4: What Is an IT Risk Assessment? (Plus Benefits and Components) | Indeed.com

5: How to Perform a Successful IT Risk Assessment - Hyperproof

6: IT Risk Resources | ISACA

The senior auditor’s most appropriate course of action is to have the finding reinstated, because the auditee’s claim of correcting the problem is not sufficient evidence to support the removal of the finding. The auditor should verify that the corrective action has been implemented effectively and that it has resolved the underlying issue or risk. The auditor should also document the evidence and results of the verification in the work papers. The other options are not appropriate, because they either accept the auditee’s claim without verification, delegate the responsibility to the auditee or escalate the issue unnecessarily. References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, chapter 1, section 1.51

ISACA, IT Audit and Assurance Standards, Guidelines and Tools and Techniques for IS Audit and Assurance Professionals, section 12062

Implementing incident escalation procedures is the best way to ensure that an incident receives attention from appropriate personnel in a timely manner, because it defines the roles and responsibilities, communication channels, and escalation criteria for handling different types of incidents34. Incident escalation procedures help to prioritize and coordinate the response efforts and ensure that the incident is resolved by the most qualified and authorized personnel. Completing the incident management log, broadcasting an emergency message, and requiring a dedicated incident response team are not sufficient to ensure that an incident receives attention from appropriate personnel in a timely manner, because they do not specify how to escalate the incident based on its severity, impact, or complexity. References: 3: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 6, Section 6.3.2 4: CISA Online Review Course, Module 6, Lesson 3

The best recommendation to prevent unauthorized access to cloud-based applications and data is to implement multi-factor authentication (MFA). MFA is a method of verifying the identity of a user by requiring two or more pieces of evidence, such as a password, a code sent to a phone, or a biometric factor. MFA adds an extra layer of security to prevent unauthorized access, even if the user’s password is compromised or stolen. MFA can also help comply with data privacy and security regulations, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).

The other options are not as effective as MFA in preventing unauthorized access. An intrusion detection system (IDS) is a tool that monitors network traffic and alerts administrators of suspicious or malicious activity, but it does not prevent access by itself. Updating security policies and procedures is a good practice, but it does not ensure that users follow them or that they are enforced. Utilizing strong anti-malware controls on all computing devices can help protect against malware infections, but it does not prevent users from accessing cloud-based applications and data from any Internet-connected web browser.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019, p. 2471

ISACA, CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription2

What Is Cloud Security? | Google Cloud3

5 Cloud Application Security Best Practices | Snyk4

The greatest risk if two users have concurrent access to the same database record is data integrity. Data integrity is the property that ensures that the data is accurate, complete, consistent, and valid throughout its lifecycle. If two users have concurrent access to the same database record, they may modify or delete the data in a conflicting or inconsistent manner, resulting in data corruption, loss, or duplication. This can affect the reliability and quality of the data, and cause errors or anomalies in the database operations and functions. The IS auditor should verify that the database has adequate controls to prevent or resolve concurrent access issues, such as locking mechanisms, transaction isolation levels, concurrency control protocols, or timestamping methods. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.7

 This is because privacy regulations are laws or rules that protect the personal information of individuals from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, or transfer by third parties. Payroll audit documentation may contain sensitive and confidential data, such as employee names, salaries, benefits, taxes, deductions, and bank accounts. If the audit management application is hosted by a third party in a different country, the organization may need to comply with the privacy regulations of both its own country and the host country, as well as any international or regional agreements or frameworks that apply. Privacy regulations may impose various requirements and obligations on the organization, such as obtaining consent from the data subjects, implementing appropriate security measures, notifying data breaches, and ensuring data quality and accuracy. Privacy regulations may also grant various rights to the data subjects, such as accessing, correcting, deleting, or transferring their data. Failing to comply with privacy regulations may expose the organization to significant risks and consequences, such as legal actions, fines, sanctions, reputational damage, or loss of trust.

Some examples of privacy regulations affecting the organization are:

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which is a comprehensive and strict privacy regulation that applies to any organization that processes personal data of individuals in the European Union (EU) or offers goods or services to them, regardless of where the organization or the data is located1.

The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which is a broad and influential privacy regulation that applies to any organization that collects personal information of California residents and meets certain thresholds of revenue, data volume, or data sharing2.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which is a sector-specific privacy regulation that applies to any organization that handles protected health information (PHI) of individuals in the United States, such as health care providers, health plans, or health care clearinghouses3.

Therefore, before using an audit management application hosted by a third party in a different country, the internal audit team should conduct a thorough assessment of the privacy regulations affecting the organization and ensure that they have adequate policies, procedures, and controls in place to comply with them.

The greatest indicator that the cybersecurity policy may need to be revised is a significant increase in approved exceptions. This implies that the policy is not aligned with the current business needs and risks, and that it may be too restrictive or outdated. The other options are not necessarily indicators of a need for policy revision, as they may be due to other factors such as changes in the external environment, audit scope or methodology. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.21

 A configuration management system is a process that establishes and maintains the consistency of a product’s attributes throughout its life cycle. It helps to identify and control the functional and physical characteristics of a product, and to record and report any changes to those characteristics. A configuration management system also supports the audit of the product to verify its conformance to requirements.

One of the key activities of a configuration management system is to define baselines for software. A baseline is a fixed reference point that serves as a basis for comparison and measurement. A baseline can be established for any configuration item, such as a requirement, a design document, a test plan, or a software component. A baseline helps to ensure that the software product meets its intended purpose and quality standards, and that any changes to the software are controlled and documented.

A configuration management system also supports other activities, such as tracking software updates, supporting the release procedure, and standardizing change approval, but these are not its primary purpose. Therefore, the other options are incorrect.

References: : What is configuration management - Red Hat : Configuration Management | Definition, Importance & Benefits - ServerWatch

 The advantage of using agile software development methodology over the waterfall methodology is that it allows for quicker deliverables. Agile software development is an iterative and incremental approach that emphasizes customer feedback, collaboration, and adaptation. Agile software development delivers working software in short cycles, called sprints, that typically last from two to four weeks. This enables the development team to respond to changing requirements, deliver value faster, and improve quality. Waterfall software development is a linear and sequential approach that follows a predefined set of phases, such as planning, analysis, design, implementation, testing, and maintenance. Waterfall software development requires a clear and stable definition of the project scope, deliverables, and expectations before starting the development process. Waterfall software development can be slow, rigid, and costly, especially if changes occur during the later stages of the project. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: Information Systems Acquisition, Development & Implementation, Section 3.1: Project Management Practices

Stress testing is a type of performance testing that evaluates how a system behaves under extreme load conditions, such as high user traffic, large data volumes, or limited resources. It is useful for identifying potential bottlenecks, errors, or failures that may affect the system’s functionality or availability. Stress testing during the quality assurance (QA) phase would have identified the concern of users complaining that a newly released ERP system is functioning too slowly. The other options are not as relevant for this concern, as they relate to different aspects of testing, such as regression testing (verifying that existing functionality is not affected by new changes), interface testing (verifying that the system interacts correctly with other systems or components), or integration testing (verifying that the system works as a whole after combining different modules or units). References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Domain 5: Protection of Information Assets, Section 5.4 Testing Techniques1

The primary benefit of automating application testing is to provide test consistency. Automated testing can ensure that the same test cases are executed in the same manner and order every time, which can improve the reliability and accuracy of the test results. Providing more flexibility, replacing all manual test processes, and reducing the time to review code are possible benefits of automating application testing, but they are not the primary benefit. References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2020, p. 3091

ISACA, CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription

The most appropriate population to sample from when testing for remediation of findings identified in an organization’s user provisioning process is all users provisioned after the final audit report was issued. This is because the final audit report is the official document that communicates the audit findings, recommendations, and action plans to the management and other stakeholders. It also establishes a baseline for measuring the progress and effectiveness of the remediation efforts. Therefore, sampling from the users provisioned after the final audit report was issued would provide the most relevant and reliable evidence of whether the audit issues have been resolved or not.

The other options are not as appropriate as option C, as they may not reflect the actual status of the remediation efforts. All users provisioned after the finding was originally identified may include users who were provisioned before the final audit report was issued, which may not capture the full impact of the remediation actions. All users provisioned after management resolved the audit issue may not be accurate, as management’s resolution may not be verified or validated by an independent party. All users who have followed user provisioning processes provided by management may not be representative, as there may be exceptions or deviations from the processes that could affect the remediation results.

References:

6: What Is User Provisioning? Definition, Process and Best Practices - Spiceworks

7: What Is User Provisioning? All You Need to Know in One Place - G2

8: What is User Account Provisioning? - Tools4ever

9: What Is Provisioning and Deprovisioning? | Okta

Segregation of duties is a key internal control that aims to prevent fraud and errors by ensuring that no single individual has the authority to execute two or more conflicting sensitive transactions or functions. In the accounts payable vendor payment cycle, segregation of duties involves separating the tasks of vendor setup, procurement, invoice approval, and payment processing1. This way, an employee cannot create a fictitious vendor and issue a payment to themselves or their accomplices without being detected by another person. Therefore, the best way to prevent fraudulent payments is to implement segregation of duties between the vendor setup and payment processing. References: 1: Segregation of Duties in the Accounts Payable Vendor Payment Cycle for SMBs - Now With a Podcast! - Debra R Richardson : What is Separation of duties - University of California, Berkeley

 Internet Protocol (IP) address restrictions are used in a firewall to protect the entity’s internal resources by allowing or denying access to specific IP addresses or ranges of IP addresses based on predefined rules. Remote access servers, Secure Sockets Layers (SSLs), and failover services are not directly related to firewall protection, but rather to other aspects of network security, such as authentication, encryption, and availability. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5: Protection of Information Assets, Section 5.2: Network Security Devices and Technologies

The most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program is whether the system’s performance poses a significant risk to the organization. IT capacity management is a process that ensures that IT resources are sufficient to meet current and future business needs, and that they are optimized for cost and performance. A poor IT capacity management can result in system slowdowns, outages, failures, or breaches, which can affect the availability, reliability, security, and efficiency of IT services and business processes. Therefore, before conducting an audit of IT capacity management, the auditor should assess the potential impact and likelihood of these risks on the organization’s objectives, reputation, compliance, and customer satisfaction.

Whether system delays result in more frequent use of manual processing (option A) is not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is only one possible consequence of poor IT capacity management. Manual processing can introduce errors, delays, inefficiencies, and inconsistencies in the data and reports, which can affect the quality and accuracy of financial information. However, manual processing is not the only or the worst outcome of poor IT capacity management; there may be other more severe or frequent risks that need to be considered.

Whether stakeholders are committed to assisting with the audit (option C) is also not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is a factor that affects the feasibility and effectiveness of the audit, not the necessity or priority of it. Stakeholder commitment is important for ensuring that the auditor has access to relevant information, documents, data, and personnel, as well as for facilitating communication, collaboration, and feedback during the audit process. However, stakeholder commitment is not a sufficient reason to conduct an audit of IT capacity management; there must be a clear risk-based rationale for selecting this area for audit.

Whether internal auditors have the required skills to perform the audit (option D) is also not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is a factor that affects the quality and credibility of the audit, not the urgency or importance of it. Internal auditors should have the appropriate knowledge, skills, and experience to perform an audit of IT capacity management, which may include technical, business, analytical, and communication skills. However, internal auditors can also acquire or supplement these skills through training, coaching, consulting, or outsourcing. Therefore, internal auditors’ skills are not a decisive factor for choosing this area for audit.

Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

References:

Guide to IT Capacity Management | Smartsheet

ISO 27001 capacity management: How to implement control A.12.1.3 - Advisera

ISO 27002:2022 – Control 8.6 – Capacity Management

The answer B is correct because Software as a Service (SaaS) provider is the most efficient solution for a multi-location healthcare organization that wants to be able to access patient data wherever patients present themselves for care. SaaS is a cloud computing model that allows users to access software applications over the internet, without having to install, maintain, or update them on their own devices or servers. SaaS providers host and manage the software applications and the underlying infrastructure, and handle any issues such as security, availability, and performance.

SaaS can offer several benefits for a multi-location healthcare organization, such as:

Accessibility: SaaS applications can be accessed from any device and location that has an internet connection, which enables the healthcare organization to access patient data across different facilities and regions, and provide seamless and coordinated care to the patients.

Scalability: SaaS applications can scale up or down according to the demand and usage of the healthcare organization, which allows the organization to accommodate fluctuations in patient volume, data volume, or service requirements.

Cost-effectiveness: SaaS applications are usually offered on a subscription or pay-per-use basis, which reduces the upfront and ongoing costs of purchasing, installing, and maintaining software licenses, hardware, and IT staff.

Security: SaaS providers are responsible for ensuring the security and privacy of the software applications and the data they store, which can help the healthcare organization comply with the relevant regulations and standards, such as HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) or GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation).

Some examples of SaaS providers that offer solutions for healthcare organizations are:

Epic: Epic is a leading provider of electronic health record (EHR) systems that enable healthcare organizations to store, manage, and share patient data across different settings and specialties. Epic also offers cloud-based solutions that allow healthcare organizations to access Epic’s software applications over the internet, without having to host them on their own servers.

Salesforce Health Cloud: Salesforce Health Cloud is a cloud-based platform that helps healthcare organizations connect with patients, providers, payers, and partners. Salesforce Health Cloud enables healthcare organizations to manage patient relationships, coordinate care teams, engage patients through personalized journeys, and leverage data and analytics to improve outcomes and efficiency.

DocuSign: DocuSign is a cloud-based platform that enables users to sign, send, and manage documents electronically. DocuSign can help healthcare organizations streamline workflows, reduce errors, and enhance compliance by automating the process of obtaining signatures for consent forms, contracts, prescriptions, referrals, and other documents.

The other options are not as efficient as option B. Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) provider (option A) is a cloud computing model that provides users with access to computing resources such as servers, storage, network, and operating systems over the internet. IaaS can offer some benefits such as flexibility, scalability, and cost-effectiveness for a multi-location healthcare organization, but it also requires more technical expertise and management from the organization than SaaS. The organization would still need to install, configure, update, and secure the software applications that run on the IaaS infrastructure. Network segmentation (option C) is a technique that divides a network into smaller subnetworks based on criteria such as function, location, or security level. Network segmentation can improve the performance, security, and manageability of a network by reducing congestion, isolating threats, and enforcing policies. However, network segmentation alone does not enable a multi-location healthcare organization to access patient data wherever patients present themselves for care. The organization would still need a software solution that can store, manage, and share patient data across different segments of the network. Dynamic localization (option D) is a process that adapts the content and functionality of a software application to suit the preferences and needs of users in different locations or regions. Dynamic localization can enhance the user experience and satisfaction by providing relevant information in local languages, currencies, formats, and regulations. However, dynamic localization does not address the core issue of accessing patient data wherever patients present themselves for care. The organization would still need a software solution that can store, manage, and share patient data across different locations or regions.

References:

Epic

Salesforce Health Cloud

DocuSign

The best way for an IS auditor to understand the software benefits to the organization would be to review the business case, which is a document that provides the justification and rationale for acquiring a software solution based on its expected costs, benefits, risks, and alignment with the organization’s goals and strategies. The business case helps to evaluate the feasibility and viability of the software acquisition and to support the decision-making process. A feasibility study is a document that analyzes the technical, operational, economic, legal, and social aspects of a software solution to determine its feasibility and suitability for the organization’s needs, but it does not necessarily provide a clear indication of the software benefits to the organization. A request for proposal (RFP) is a document that solicits proposals from potential vendors or suppliers for a software solution based on the organization’s requirements and specifications, but it does not necessarily provide a clear indication of the software benefits to the organization. The alignment with IT strategy is a factor that influences the software acquisition process and ensures that the software solution supports and enables the organization’s IT strategy, but it is not a document that can be reviewed by an IS auditor to understand the software benefits to the organization. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: Information Systems Acquisition, Development & Implementation, Section 3.1: Business Case Development

 The first step for the security incident response team after an IS security attack is reported is to perform a damage assessment. This involves identifying the scope, impact and root cause of the incident, as well as collecting and preserving evidence for further analysis and investigation. Reporting results to management, documenting lessons learned and prioritizing resources for corrective action are important steps, but they should be done after the damage assessment is completed. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 6, Section 6.31

 The best way to reduce the immediate risk associated with using an unsupported version of the software is to segregate the outdated software system from the main network. This will limit the exposure of the system to potential attacks and prevent it from compromising other systems on the network. Segregating the system will also reduce the impact of any security incidents that may occur on the system.

Monitoring network traffic attempting to reach the outdated software system (option C) is not the best way to reduce the risk, as it will not prevent or stop any attacks on the system. It will only provide visibility into the network activity and alert the auditee of any suspicious or malicious traffic.

Verifying all patches have been applied to the software system’s outdated version (option A) and closing all unused ports on the outdated software system (option B) are also not the best ways to reduce the risk, as they will not address the underlying issue of using an unsupported version of the software. Patches and ports may still have vulnerabilities that are not fixed by the vendor, and attackers may exploit them to gain access to the system.

Therefore, option D is the correct answer.

References:

Introduction (Part 1 of 7: Mitigating Risks of Unsupported Operating Systems)

Summary (Part 7 of 7: Mitigating Risks of Unsupported Operating Systems)

Upgrade, Retire, or Replace Unsupported Software (Part 4 of 7: Mitigating Risks of Unsupported Operating Systems)

Problem management is the best way to enable the organization to resolve the issue of repeated failures of critical data processing services, as it focuses on identifying and eliminating the root causes of incidents and preventing their recurrence. Problem management involves analyzing incidents, performing root cause analysis, finding solutions, implementing changes and documenting lessons learned. Incident management is not the best way to resolve the issue, as it focuses on restoring normal service operation as quickly as possible after an incident occurs, but does not address the underlying causes or prevent future incidents. Service level management is not the best way to resolve the issue, as it focuses on defining, monitoring and reporting on the service levels agreed upon between service providers and customers, but does not address the causes or solutions of incidents. Change management is not the best way to resolve the issue, as it focuses on ensuring that changes are implemented in a controlled and coordinated manner, but does not address the identification or elimination of incidents. References:

: [Problem Management Definition]

: [Incident Management Definition]

: [Service Level Management Definition]

: [Change Management Definition]

: IT Service Management | ISACA

The best way for the auditor to address this issue is to verify management has approved a policy exception to accept the risk. A policy exception is a formal authorization that allows a deviation from the established policy requirements for a specific situation or period of time. A policy exception should be based on a risk assessment that evaluates the impact and likelihood of the potential threats and vulnerabilities, as well as the cost and benefit of the alternative controls. A policy exception should also be documented, approved, and monitored by management.

Recommending the application be patched to meet requirements is not the best way for the auditor to address this issue. Patching the application may not be feasible, cost-effective, or timely, given that the application will be decommissioned in three months. Patching the application may also introduce new risks or errors that could affect the functionality or performance of the application.

Informing the IT director of the policy noncompliance is not the best way for the auditor to address this issue. Informing the IT director of the policy noncompliance may not resolve the issue or mitigate the risk, especially if the IT director is already aware of the situation and has decided to accept it. Informing the IT director of the policy noncompliance may also create unnecessary conflict or tension between the auditor and the auditee.

Taking no action since the application will be decommissioned in three months is not the best way for the auditor to address this issue. Taking no action may expose the organization to significant risks or consequences, such as data breaches, regulatory fines, or reputational damage, if the application is compromised or exploited by malicious actors. Taking no action may also violate the auditor’s professional standards and responsibilities, such as due care, objectivity, and reporting.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019, p. 289

ISACA, CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription

Cybersecurity Engineering for Legacy Systems: 6 Recommendations - SEI Blog

How to Secure Your Company’s Legacy Applications - iCorps

The answer D is correct because the best way for the auditor to confirm the change log is complete is to take the last change from the system and trace it back to the log. A change log is a record of all the changes that have been made to a system, such as software updates, bug fixes, configuration modifications, etc. A change log should contain information such as the date and time of the change, the description and purpose of the change, the person or service who made the change, and the approval status of the change. A complete change log helps to ensure that the system is secure, reliable, and compliant with the relevant standards and regulations.

An IS auditor evaluating the change management process must select a sample from the change log to verify that the changes are properly authorized, documented, tested, and implemented. However, before selecting a sample, the auditor must ensure that the change log is complete and accurate, meaning that it contains all the changes that have been made to the system and that there are no missing, duplicated, or falsified entries. To do this, the auditor can use a technique called backward tracing, which involves taking the last change from the system and tracing it back to the log. This way, the auditor can check if the change is recorded in the log with all the relevant details and if there are any gaps or inconsistencies in the log. If the last change from the system is not found in the log or does not match with the log entry, it indicates that the change log is incomplete or inaccurate.

The other options are not as good as option D. Interviewing change management personnel about completeness (option A) is not a reliable way to confirm the change log is complete because it relies on subjective opinions and self-reported information, which may not be truthful or accurate. Taking an item from the log and tracing it back to the system (option B) is a technique called forward tracing, which can be used to verify that a specific change in the log has been implemented in the system. However, this technique does not confirm that all changes in the system are recorded in the log. Obtaining management attestation of completeness (option C) is not a sufficient way to confirm the change log is complete because it does not provide any evidence or verification of completeness. Management attestation may also be biased or influenced by conflicts of interest.

References:

IS Audit Basics: Auditing Data Privacy

Audit Logging: What It Is & How It Works | Datadog

Change Management for SOC: Risks, Controls, Audits, Guidance

Turn auditing on or off | Microsoft Learn

#118 | ITGC- System Change (Audit) Log Review - A2Q2

 An IT balanced scorecard is primarily used for measuring IT strategic performance. An IT balanced scorecard is a framework that translates the IT strategy into measurable objectives, indicators, targets, and initiatives across four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth. An IT balanced scorecard helps to monitor and evaluate how well the IT function is delivering value to the organization, achieving its strategic goals, and improving its capabilities and competencies. The other options are not the primary uses of an IT balanced scorecard, because they either focus on specific aspects of IT rather than the overall performance, or they are not directly related to the IT strategy. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.3

The area that is most likely to be overlooked when implementing a new data classification process is end-user computing (EUC) systems. EUC systems are applications or tools that are developed or customized by end users, often without formal IT involvement or approval. EUC systems may contain sensitive or confidential data that need to be classified and protected according to the organization’s policies and standards. However, EUC systems may not be subject to the same controls, oversight, or documentation as formal IT systems, and may not be included in the scope of the data classification process. Therefore, EUC systems pose a significant risk of data leakage, unauthorized access, or noncompliance. The other areas (B, C and D) are less likely to be overlooked, as they are more visible and manageable by the IT department or the data owners. References: IS Audit and Assurance Guideline 2202: Evidence Collection Techniques, CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5: Protection of Information Assets, Section 5.2: Data Classification

 The only thing that can be provided by asymmetric encryption is nonrepudiation. Nonrepudiation is the ability to prove that a message or transaction was originated or authorized by a specific party. Asymmetric encryption uses a pair of keys: a public key and a private key. The public key can be shared with anyone, while the private key is kept secret by the owner. If a message is encrypted with the sender’s private key, only the sender’s public key can decrypt it. This proves that the message was sent by the sender and not by anyone else. This is called digital signature and it provides nonrepudiation. Asymmetric encryption can also provide information privacy by encrypting a message with the receiver’s public key, so that only the receiver’s private key can decrypt it. However, information privacy can also be provided by symmetric encryption, which uses a single key to encrypt and decrypt messages. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.21

CISA Online Review Course, Domain 3, Module 2, Lesson 12

 The best way to help ensure new IT implementations align with enterprise architecture (EA) principles and requirements is to conduct EA reviews as part of the change advisory board (CAB). A CAB is a committee that evaluates and authorizes changes to IT services, such as new IT implementations. By conducting EA reviews as part of the CAB process, the organization can ensure that the proposed changes are consistent with the EA vision, goals, standards, and guidelines. This can help avoid potential conflicts, risks, or inefficiencies that may arise from misaligned IT implementations. Additionally, EA reviews can help identify opportunities for improvement, optimization, or innovation in the IT services.

The other options are not the best ways to help ensure new IT implementations align with EA principles and requirements. Documenting the security view as part of the EA is important, but it does not guarantee that new IT implementations will follow the security requirements or best practices. Considering stakeholder concerns when defining the EA is also essential, but it does not ensure that new IT implementations will meet the stakeholder expectations or needs. Performing mandatory post-implementation reviews of IT implementations is a good practice, but it does not prevent potential issues or problems that may arise from misaligned IT implementations.

References:

5: Change Advisory Board Best Practices: 15+ Industry Leaders Weigh In

6: What Does the Change Advisory Board (CAB) Do?

7: How do I set up an effective change advisory board? - ServiceNow

8: ITIL Change Management - The Role of the Change Advisory Board

 A checksum is classified as a detective control. A checksum is a mathematical value that is calculated from a data set and used to verify the integrity of the data. A checksum can detect if the data has been altered or corrupted during transmission or storage. A checksum does not prevent or correct the data corruption, but it alerts the user or system of the problem. Therefore, it is a detective control. A preventive control is a control that prevents an error or incident from occurring. A corrective control is a control that restores normal operations after an error or incident has occurred. An administrative control is a control that involves policies, procedures, standards, guidelines, or organizational structures. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, page 439.

KPIs are not clearly defined is the most concerning finding for an IS auditor, because it implies that the third-party vendor does not have a clear understanding of what constitutes success or failure in their performance. This can lead to inaccurate or misleading reporting, poor decision making, and lack of accountability. KPIs should be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound) and aligned with the business objectives and expectations of the stakeholders12. References: 1: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2 2: CISA Online Review Course, Module 5, Lesson 3

A business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects of disruptions to critical business operations as a result of a disaster, accident or emergency. A BIA should include an inventory of relevant business processes that support the organization’s strategic objectives and are essential for its continuity. The inventory should also identify the dependencies, interdependencies, recovery priorities and time frames for each business process. Policies for business procurement, documentation of application configurations and results of business resumption planning efforts are not as useful as an inventory of relevant business processes for performing a BIA. References:

: Business Impact Analysis (BIA) Definition

: Business Impact Analysis (BIA) | ISACA

The concept of materiality is most important for an IS auditor to apply when planning an audit engagement, because it helps the auditor to determine the scope, objectives, procedures and resources of the audit. Materiality is the degree to which an omission or misstatement of information could affect the users’ decisions or the achievement of the audit objectives. By applying the concept of materiality, the auditor can focus on the most significant and relevant areas of the audit and avoid wasting time and effort on trivial or immaterial matters. The other options are not as important as planning an audit engagement, because they are either based on or affected by the materiality assessment done during the planning phase. References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, chapter 1, section 1.31

ISACA, IT Audit and Assurance Standards, Guidelines and Tools and Techniques for IS Audit and Assurance Professionals, section 12022

The best approach for determining the overall IT risk appetite of an organization when business units use different methods for managing IT risks is to prioritize the organization’s IT risk scenarios. IT risk appetite is the amount and type of IT risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the potential impact of IT risk events on the organization’s objectives, processes, and resources. By prioritizing the organization’s IT risk scenarios, the IS auditor can identify the most significant IT risks that affect the organization as a whole, and align them with the organization’s strategic goals, values, and culture. Prioritizing the organization’s IT risk scenarios can also help to communicate and monitor the IT risk appetite across the organization, and facilitate consistent and informed decision making. The other approaches (A, B and D) are not effective for determining the overall IT risk appetite of an organization, as they do not consider the impact and likelihood of IT risks on the organization’s objectives, nor do they account for the diversity and complexity of IT risks across different business units. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: Governance and Management of Information Technology, Section 2.3: Information Technology Risk Management

The greatest concern to an IS auditor conducting an audit of an organization that recently experienced a ransomware attack is that backups were only performed within the local network. This means that the backups could have been encrypted or deleted by the ransomware, making it impossible to restore the data and systems without paying the ransom or losing the data. Backups are a critical part of the recovery process from a ransomware attack, and they should be performed frequently, securely, and off-site or in the cloud to ensure their availability and integrity.

The other options are not as concerning as option C, although they may also indicate some security weaknesses. Antivirus software was unable to prevent the attack even though it was properly updated, but this is not surprising given that ransomware variants are constantly evolving and antivirus software may not be able to detect them all. The most recent security patches were not tested prior to implementation, but this is a trade-off between security and availability that may be justified depending on the severity and urgency of the patches. Employees were not trained on cybersecurity policies and procedures, but this is a preventive measure that may not have prevented the attack if it was initiated by other means such as phishing or exploiting vulnerabilities.

References:

10: Infrastructure-as-a-Service Security Responsibilities - CloudTweaks

5: 3 steps to prevent and recover from ransomware | Microsoft Security Blog

7: How to Recover From a Ransomware Attack - eSecurityPlanet

The best recommendation to prevent unauthorized access to a highly sensitive data center by piggybacking or tailgating is to use an airlock entrance. An airlock entrance is a type of access control system that consists of two doors that are interlocked, so that only one door can be opened at a time. This prevents an unauthorized person from following an authorized person into the data center without being detected. An airlock entrance can also be integrated with other security measures, such as biometrics, card readers, or PIN pads, to verify the identity and authorization of each person entering the data center.

Biometrics (option A) is a method of verifying the identity of a person based on their physical or behavioral characteristics, such as fingerprints, iris scans, or voice recognition. Biometrics can provide a high level of security, but they are not sufficient to prevent piggybacking or tailgating, as an unauthorized person can still follow an authorized person who has been authenticated by the biometric system.

Procedures for escorting visitors (option B) is a policy that requires all visitors to the data center to be accompanied by an authorized employee at all times. This can help prevent unauthorized access by visitors, but it does not address the risk of piggybacking or tailgating by other employees or contractors who may have legitimate access to the building but not to the data center.

Intruder alarms (option D) are devices that detect and alert when an unauthorized person enters a restricted area. Intruder alarms can provide a deterrent and a response mechanism for unauthorized access, but they are not effective in preventing piggybacking or tailgating, as they rely on the detection of the intruder after they have already entered the data center.

References: 1: CISA Certification | Certified Information Systems Auditor | ISACA 2: CISA Certified Information Systems Auditor Study Guide, 4th Edition 3: CISA - Certified Information Systems Auditor Study Guide [Book]

 The greatest benefit of adopting an international IT governance framework rather than establishing a new framework based on the actual situation of a specific organization is wide acceptance by different business and support units with IT governance objectives. An international IT governance framework, such as COBIT, provides a common language and understanding for IT governance among various stakeholders, such as management, users, auditors and regulators. This facilitates alignment, communication and collaboration among them. Readily available resources, comprehensive coverage and fewer resources expended are also benefits of adopting an international IT governance framework, but they are not the greatest benefit. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) , Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1.

The management decision that presents the greatest risk associated with data leakage is not providing security awareness training to staff. This is because staff are often the weakest link in the information security chain, and they may unintentionally or maliciously leak sensitive data through various channels, such as email, social media, cloud storage, or removable media. Security awareness training is essential to educate staff on the importance of protecting data, the policies and procedures for handling data, and the best practices for preventing and reporting data leakage incidents. Not requiring desktops to be encrypted, allowing staff to work remotely, and not updating security policies in the past year are also management decisions that may increase the risk of data leakage, but they are not as significant as not providing security awareness training to staff. Encryption, remote work, and security policies are technical or administrative controls that can be implemented or enforced by management, but they cannot fully prevent or mitigate human errors or malicious actions by staff. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), [ISACA Privacy Principles and Program Management Guide]

 The most useful analytical method when trying to identify groups with similar behavior or characteristics in a large population is classification. Classification is a technique that assigns data points to predefined categories or classes based on their features or attributes. Classification can help to discover patterns, trends, and relationships among the data and reveal the similarities or differences among the groups. Classification can also help to support decision making, prediction, or recommendation based on the data analysis. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.4.21

CISA Online Review Course, Domain 2, Module 3, Lesson 12

 Data leakage prevention (DLP) is the process of preventing unauthorized access, disclosure, or transfer of sensitive data. In a multi-tenant cloud environment, where multiple customers share the same infrastructure and resources, DLP is a critical challenge. One of the best methods to enforce DLP in such an environment is to require tenants to implement data classification policies. Data classification policies define the types and levels of sensitivity of data, and the corresponding security controls and measures to protect them. By implementing data classification policies, tenants can ensure that their data is properly labeled, encrypted, segregated, and monitored according to their specific requirements and compliance standards. This can help prevent data leakage from accidental or malicious actions by other tenants, cloud service providers, or external parties.

References:

2: How Do I Secure my Data in a Multi-Tenant Cloud Environment? | Thales

3: Protecting Sensitive Customer Data in a Cloud-Based Multi-Tenant Environment | Saturn Cloud

4: Microsoft 365 isolation controls - Microsoft Service Assurance

A concern associated with virtualization is that performance issues with the host could impact the guest operating systems, which are the operating systems that run on virtual machines within the host. For example, if the host has insufficient memory, CPU, disk space, or network bandwidth, it could affect the performance and availability of the guest operating systems and the applications running on them. The physical footprint of servers could decrease within the data center, processing capacity may be shared across multiple operating systems, and one host may have multiple versions of the same operating system are not concerns associated with virtualization, but rather benefits or features of virtualization that can help reduce costs, improve efficiency, and enhance flexibility. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience, Section 4.2: IT Service Delivery and Support

The primary advantage of this approach is that it improves audit efficiency. Audit efficiency is the measure of how well the audit resources are used to achieve the audit objectives. Audit efficiency can be enhanced by using methods or techniques that can save time, cost, or effort without compromising the quality or scope of the audit. By requesting direct access to data required to perform audit procedures instead of asking management to provide the data, the auditor can reduce the dependency on management’s cooperation, availability, or timeliness. The auditor can also avoid potential delays, errors, or biases that may occur when management provides the data. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.41

CISA Online Review Course, Domain 1, Module 1, Lesson 42

 When auditing the closing stages of a system development project, the most important consideration should be the user acceptance test (UAT) results. The UAT is a critical phase of the system development life cycle (SDLC) that ensures that the system meets the functional requirements and expectations of the end users. The UAT results provide evidence of the system’s quality, performance, usability, and reliability. Control requirements, rollback procedures, and functional requirements documentation are also important considerations, but they are not as crucial as the UAT results in determining if the system is ready for deployment. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, page 325.

The auditor’s best action is to re-perform the audit before changing the conclusion, because the auditor needs to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence to support the audit opinion. The evidence provided by IT management may not be reliable or relevant, and it may not reflect the actual effectiveness of the control during the audit period. Therefore, the auditor should verify the evidence independently and test the control again to ensure that it meets the audit criteria and objectives. The other options are not appropriate, because they either ignore or accept the evidence provided by IT management without verification, which may compromise the quality and integrity of the audit. References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, chapter 1, section 1.51

ISACA, IT Audit and Assurance Standards, Guidelines and Tools and Techniques for IS Audit and Assurance Professionals, section 12062

The best situation that justifies the use of a smaller sample size when testing the accuracy of transaction data is B. It is expected that the population is error-free. The sample size is the number of items selected from the population for testing. The sample size depends on various factors, such as the level of confidence, the tolerable error rate, the expected error rate, and the variability of the population. A smaller sample size means that fewer items are tested, which reduces the cost and time of testing, but also increases the sampling risk (the risk that the sample is not representative of the population).

One of the factors that affects the sample size is the expected error rate, which is the auditor’s best estimate of the proportion of errors in the population before testing. A higher expected error rate means that more errors are likely to be found in the population, which requires a larger sample size to provide sufficient evidence for the auditor’s conclusion. A lower expected error rate means that fewer errors are likely to be found in the population, which allows a smaller sample size to provide sufficient evidence for the auditor’s conclusion. Therefore, if it is expected that the population is error-free (i.e., the expected error rate is zero or very low), a smaller sample size can be justified.

The other situations do not justify the use of a smaller sample size when testing the accuracy of transaction data. A. The IS audit staff has a high level of experience. The IS audit staff’s level of experience does not affect the sample size, but rather their ability to design and execute the sampling procedures and evaluate the results. The IS audit staff’s level of experience may affect their judgment in selecting and applying sampling methods, but it does not change the statistical or mathematical principles that determine the sample size. B. Proper segregation of duties is in place. Proper segregation of duties is an internal control that helps prevent or detect errors or fraud in transaction processing, but it does not affect the sample size. The sample size is based on the characteristics of the population and the objectives of testing, not on the controls in place. Proper segregation of duties may reduce the likelihood or impact of errors or fraud in transaction processing, but it does not eliminate them completely. Therefore, proper segregation of duties does not justify a smaller sample size when testing the accuracy of transaction data. C. The data can be directly changed by users. The data’s ability to be directly changed by users does not justify a smaller sample size, but rather a larger one. The data’s ability to be directly changed by users increases the risk of errors or fraud in transaction processing, which requires a larger sample size to provide sufficient evidence for the auditor’s conclusion. The data’s ability to be directly changed by users also increases the variability of the population, which affects the sample size.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019, p. 2471

ISACA, CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription2

Audit Sampling - AICPA3

How to choose a sample size (for the statistically challenged)

The audit finding that should be of greatest concern is that tasks defined on the critical path do not have resources allocated, as this means that the project is likely to face significant delays and cost overruns, since the critical path is the sequence of activities that determines the minimum time required to complete the project. The actual start times of some activities being later than originally scheduled may indicate some minor deviations from the project plan, but they may not necessarily affect the overall project completion time if they are not on the critical path. The project manager lacking formal certification may affect the quality and efficiency of the project management process, but it does not necessarily imply that the project manager is incompetent or unqualified. Milestones have been defined for all project products, but they may not be realistic or achievable if they do not take into account the resource constraints and dependencies of the critical path tasks. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: Governance and Management of IT, Section 2.3: IT Project Management

The best way to prevent the misconfiguration from recurring is to grant user access using a role-based model. A role-based access control (RBAC) model is an access control method that assigns permissions to end-users based on their role within the organization1. RBAC provides fine-grained control, offering a simple, manageable approach to access management that is less error-prone than individually assigning permissions1. RBAC also enforces the principle of least privilege, which means that users only have the minimum access required to perform their tasks2.

A role-based model can help prevent segregation of duties (SoD) issues in an ERP system by restricting user access to conflicting activities within the application. SoD is a central issue for enterprises to ensure compliance with laws and regulations, and to reduce the risk of fraud and unauthorized transactions3. SoD requires that no single individual or group of individuals should have control over two or more parts of a process or an asset3. For example, a user who can create and approve purchase orders should not be able to process payments or modify vendor records.

By using a role-based model, user access provisioning is based on the needs of a group (e.g., accounting department) based on common responsibilities and needs1. This means each role has a given set of permissions, and individuals can be assigned to one or more roles. For example, you may designate a user as an accounts payable clerk, an accounts receivable clerk, or a financial manager, and limit access to specific resources or tasks. The user-role and role-permissions relationships make it easy to perform role assignment because individual users no longer have unique access rights, rather they have privileges that conform to the permissions assigned to their specific role or job function1.

The other options are not the best way to prevent the misconfiguration from recurring. Monitoring access rights on a regular basis (option A) is a detective control that can help identify SoD issues after they occur, but it does not prevent them from happening in the first place. Referencing a standard user-access matrix (option B) is a tool that can help document and analyze user access rights, but it does not ensure that the user access rights are configured correctly or consistently. Correcting the segregation of duties conflicts (option D) is a corrective action that can resolve SoD issues once they are detected, but it does not prevent them from happening again.

References: 3: Implementing Segregation of Duties: A Practical Experience Based on Best Practices 1: What is Role-Based Access Control (RBAC)? Examples, Benefits, and More 2: What is Azure role-based access control (Azure RBAC)?

The best criteria for monitoring an IT vendor’s service levels are the performance metrics, as they provide quantifiable and measurable indicators of how well the vendor is delivering the agreed-upon services, such as availability, reliability, quality, timeliness, and customer satisfaction. A service auditor’s report is a document that provides an independent opinion on the vendor’s controls and processes, but it may not reflect the actual service levels or performance. A surprise visit to the vendor may help to verify the vendor’s compliance and operations, but it may not be feasible or effective for monitoring the service levels on a regular basis. An interview with the vendor may help to obtain feedback and insights from the vendor’s perspective, but it may not be objective or reliable for monitoring the service levels. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: Governance and Management of IT, Section 2.4: IT Service Delivery and Support

The greatest concern to an IS auditor reviewing an organization’s method to transport sensitive data between offices is that the method relies exclusively on the use of public key infrastructure (PKI). PKI is a set of tools and procedures that are used to create, manage, and revoke digital certificates and public keys for encryption and authentication1. PKI can provide secure and trustworthy communication over the internet, but it also has some limitations and risks that need to be considered.

One of the main limitations of PKI is that it depends on the trustworthiness and security of the certificate authority (CA), which is the entity that issues and verifies the digital certificates2. If the CA is compromised or malicious, it can issue fake or fraudulent certificates that can be used to impersonate legitimate parties or intercept sensitive data. For example, in 2011, a hacker breached the CA DigiNotar and issued hundreds of rogue certificates for domains such as Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft3. This allowed the hacker to conduct man-in-the-middle attacks and spy on the online activities of users in Iran3.

Another limitation of PKI is that it requires a complex and costly infrastructure to maintain and operate. PKI involves multiple components, such as servers, software, hardware, policies, and procedures, that need to be configured, updated, and monitored regularly1. PKI also requires a high level of technical expertise and coordination among different parties, such as users, administrators, CAs, and registration authorities (RAs)1. PKI can be vulnerable to human errors or negligence that can compromise its security or functionality. For example, in 2018, a software bug in Apple’s macOS High Sierra caused the system to accept any certificate as valid without checking its validity period. This could have allowed attackers to use expired or revoked certificates to bypass security checks.

Therefore, an IS auditor should be concerned if an organization relies exclusively on PKI for transporting sensitive data between offices. PKI can provide a high level of security and trust, but it also has some inherent risks and challenges that need to be addressed. An IS auditor should evaluate whether the organization has implemented adequate controls and measures to ensure the reliability and integrity of its PKI system. An IS auditor should also consider whether the organization has alternative or complementary methods for securing its data transmission, such as using symmetric encryption algorithms or digital signatures. Symmetric encryption algorithms use the same key for both encryption and decryption, which can offer faster performance and lower overhead than asymmetric encryption algorithms used by PKI4. Digital signatures use cryptographic techniques to verify the identity and authenticity of the sender and the integrity of the data5.

The best way to verify the effectiveness of a data restoration process is to perform periodic complete data restorations. This is the process of transferring backup data to the primary system or data center and verifying that the restored data is accurate, complete, and functional. By performing periodic complete data restorations, the auditee can test the reliability and validity of the backup data, the functionality and performance of the restoration tools and procedures, and the compatibility and integrity of the restored data with the primary system. This will also help identify and resolve any issues or errors that may occur during the restoration process, such as corrupted or missing files, incompatible formats, or configuration problems.

Performing periodic reviews of physical access to backup media (option A) is not the best way to verify the effectiveness of a data restoration process, as it only ensures the security and availability of the backup media, not the quality or usability of the backup data. Physical access reviews are important for preventing unauthorized access, theft, damage, or loss of backup media, but they do not test the actual restoration process or verify that the backup data can be successfully restored.

Validating offline backups using software utilities (option C) is also not the best way to verify the effectiveness of a data restoration process, as it only checks the integrity and consistency of the backup data, not the functionality or compatibility of the restored data. Software utilities can help detect and correct any errors or inconsistencies in the backup data, such as checksum errors, duplicate files, or incomplete backups, but they do not test the actual restoration process or verify that the restored data can work with the primary system.

Reviewing and updating data restoration policies annually (option D) is also not the best way to verify the effectiveness of a data restoration process, as it only ensures that the policies are current and relevant, not that they are implemented and followed. Data restoration policies are important for defining roles and responsibilities, objectives and scope, standards and procedures, and metrics and reporting for the restoration process, but they do not test the actual restoration process or verify that it meets the expected outcomes.

Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

References:

What is backup and disaster recovery? | IBM

Backup and Recovery of Data: The Essential Guide | Veritas

Database Backup and Recovery Best Practices - ISACA

The best way to determine whether unauthorized changes have been made to production programs is to use source code comparison software to compare the current version of the programs with the previous version or the approved version. This will identify any changes that have been made without proper authorization or documentation. Tracing PCRs to logs or vice versa will only verify that the authorized changes have been recorded, but not detect any unauthorized changes. References: Standards, Guidelines, Tools and Techniques - ISACA, section “IS Audit and Assurance Tools and Techniques”

An IS auditor reviewing the threat assessment for a data center would be most concerned if all identified threats relate to external entities. This indicates that the threat assessment is incomplete and biased, as it ignores the potential threats from internal sources, such as employees, contractors, vendors, or authorized visitors. Internal threats can pose significant risks to the data center, as they may have access to sensitive information, systems, or facilities, and may exploit their privileges for malicious or fraudulent purposes. According to a study by IBM, 60% of cyberattacks in 2015 were carried out by insiders1

Some of the identified threats are unlikely to occur is not a cause for concern, as it shows that the threat assessment is comprehensive and realistic, and considers all possible scenarios, regardless of their probability. A threat assessment should not exclude any potential threats based on subjective judgments or assumptions, as they may still have a high impact if they materialize.

The exercise was completed by local management is not a cause for concern, as it shows that the threat assessment is conducted by the people who are most familiar with the data center’s operations, environment, and risks. Local management may have more relevant and accurate information and insights than external parties, and may be more invested in the outcome of the threat assessment.

Neighboring organizations’ operations have been included is not a cause for concern, as it shows that the threat assessment is holistic and contextual, and considers the interdependencies and influences of external factors on the data center’s security. Neighboring organizations’ operations may pose direct or indirect threats to the data center, such as physical damage, network interference, or shared vulnerabilities.

References:

IBM Security Services 2016 Cyber Security Intelligence Index 1

 The best method to reduce the risk associated with the transition to a new system using technologies that are not compatible with the old system is parallel changeover. Parallel changeover is a method of system conversion that involves running both the old and the new systems simultaneously for a period of time, until the new system is verified to be working correctly and completely. Parallel changeover can help reduce the risk of data loss, errors, or disruptions that may occur due to the incompatibility of the technologies, as well as provide a backup option in case of failure or malfunction of the new system. Parallel changeover can also help users compare and validate the results of both systems, and facilitate their training and adaptation to the new system.

Modular changeover is a method of system conversion that involves replacing one module or component of the old system with a corresponding module or component of the new system at a time, until the entire system is replaced. Modular changeover can help reduce the complexity and scope of the conversion, as well as minimize the impact on the users and operations. However, modular changeover may not be feasible or effective when the technologies of the old and new systems are not compatible, as it may create integration or interoperability issues among the modules.

Phased operation is a method of system conversion that involves implementing the new system in stages or increments, each with a subset of functions or features, until the entire system is operational. Phased operation can help reduce the risk and cost of implementing a large and complex system, as well as allow for testing and feedback at each stage. However, phased operation may not be suitable or efficient when the technologies of the old and new systems are not compatible, as it may require extensive modifications or adaptations to enable partial functionality.

Pilot operation is a method of system conversion that involves implementing the new system in a limited or controlled environment, such as a department or a location, before rolling it out to the entire organization. Pilot operation can help test and evaluate the performance and usability of the new system, as well as identify and resolve any issues or problems before full-scale implementation. However, pilot operation may not be relevant or reliable when the technologies of the old and new systems are not compatible, as it may not reflect the actual conditions or challenges of operating both systems concurrently.

References:

TRANSITION TO THE NEW SYSTEM - O’Reilly Media 1

10 Challenges To Think About When Upgrading From Legacy Systems - Forbes 

A database conflict occurs when the same data is modified at two separate servers, such as a customer database and a remote call center database, and the changes are not consistent with each other. For example, if a customer updates their phone number at the customer database, and a call center agent updates the same customer’s address at the remote call center database, there is a conflict between the two updates. Database conflicts can cause data inconsistency, corruption, or loss if they are not detected and resolved properly.

Two-way replication is a process of synchronizing data between two databases, so that any changes made in one database are reflected in the other database, and vice versa. Two-way replication can improve data availability, performance, and scalability, but it also increases the risk of database conflicts. Therefore, when assessing a proposed project for the two-way replication of a customer database with a remote call center, the IS auditor should ensure that database conflicts are managed during replication. This means that the project should have a clear and effective strategy for:

Preventing or minimizing database conflicts by using techniques such as locking, timestamping, or partitioning.

Detecting or identifying database conflicts by using tools such as triggers, logs, or alerts.

Resolving or handling database conflicts by using methods such as priority-based, rule-based, or user-based resolution.

The other possible options are:

B. end users are trained in the replication process: This is not a relevant or important factor for the IS auditor to ensure when assessing a proposed project for the two-way replication of a customer database with a remote call center. End users are not directly involved in the replication process, and they do not need to have detailed knowledge or skills about how replication works. The replication process should be transparent and seamless to the end users, and they should only interact with the data through their applications or interfaces.

C. the source database is backed up on both sites: This is not a sufficient or necessary factor for the IS auditor to ensure when assessing a proposed project for the two-way replication of a customer database with a remote call center. Backing up the source database on both sites can provide some level of data protection and recovery, but it does not address the issue of database conflicts that can occur during replication. Moreover, backing up the source database on both sites may not be feasible or efficient, as it may consume more storage space and network bandwidth, and introduce more complexity and overhead to the replication process.

D. user rights are identical on both databases: This is not a critical or relevant factor for the IS auditor to ensure when assessing a proposed project for the two-way replication of a customer database with a remote call center. User rights are the permissions or privileges that users have to access or modify data in a database. User rights do not directly affect the occurrence or resolution of database conflicts during replication. User rights may vary depending on the role or function of the users in different databases, and they should be defined and enforced according to the security policies and requirements of each database.

 The most important thing for an IS auditor to verify when evaluating an organization’s data conversion and infrastructure migration plan is that a rollback plan is included. A rollback plan is a contingency plan that describes the steps and actions to be taken in case the data conversion or infrastructure migration fails or causes unacceptable problems or risks. A rollback plan can help to restore the original data and infrastructure, minimize the impact on the business operations and functions, and ensure the continuity and availability of the IT services. The IS auditor should verify that the rollback plan is feasible, tested, documented, and approved, and that it covers all the possible scenarios and outcomes of the data conversion or infrastructure migration. The other options are not as important as verifying the rollback plan, because they either do not address the potential failure or disruption of the data conversion or infrastructure migration, or they are part of the normal planning and execution process rather than a contingency plan. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.3

The most important responsibility of user departments associated with program changes is approving changes before implementation. This is because user departments are the primary stakeholders and beneficiaries of the program changes, and they need to ensure that the changes meet their requirements, expectations, and objectives. User departments also need to approve the changes before implementation to avoid unauthorized, unnecessary, or erroneous changes that could affect the functionality, performance, or security of the program.

Providing unit test data is a responsibility of user departments associated with program changes, but it is not the most important one. Unit test data is used to verify that the individual components of the program work as expected after the changes. However, unit test data alone cannot guarantee that the program as a whole works correctly, or that the changes are aligned with the user departments’ needs.

Analyzing change requests is a responsibility of user departments associated with program changes, but it is not the most important one. Analyzing change requests is the process of evaluating the feasibility, necessity, and impact of the proposed changes. However, analyzing change requests does not ensure that the changes are implemented correctly, or that they are acceptable to the user departments.

Updating documentation to reflect latest changes is a responsibility of user departments associated with program changes, but it is not the most important one. Updating documentation is the process of maintaining accurate and complete records of the program’s specifications, features, and functions after the changes. However, updating documentation does not ensure that the changes are effective, or that they are approved by the user departments.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019, p. 281

ISACA, CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription

The best way to track organizational data in a BYOD environment is to enroll the personal devices in the organization’s mobile device management (MDM) program. This will allow the organization to monitor, control, and secure the data on the devices remotely. Employees must also report lost or stolen devices and sign the acceptable use policy, but these are not sufficient to enable tracking of data. References: Info Technology & Systems Resources | COBIT, Risk, Governance … - ISACA, section “Book IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley, 4th Edition | Digital | English”

Regression testing is the most appropriate testing method for assessing whether system integrity has been maintained after changes have been made. Regression testing is a type of software testing that ensures that previously developed and tested software still performs as expected after a change1 Regression testing helps to detect any defects or errors that may have been introduced or uncovered due to the change2 Regression testing can be performed at different levels of testing, such as unit, integration, system, and acceptance3

Unit testing is a type of software testing that verifies the functionality of individual components or units of code. Unit testing is usually performed by developers before integrating the code with other components. Unit testing helps to identify and fix errors at an early stage of development, but it does not ensure that the system as a whole works as expected after a change.

Integration testing is a type of software testing that verifies the functionality, performance, and reliability of the interactions between different components or units of code. Integration testing is usually performed after unit testing and before system testing. Integration testing helps to identify and fix errors that may occur when different components are integrated, but it does not ensure that the system as a whole works as expected after a change.

Acceptance testing is a type of software testing that verifies whether the system meets the user requirements and expectations. Acceptance testing is usually performed by end-users or customers after system testing and before deploying the system to production. Acceptance testing helps to ensure that the system delivers the desired value and quality to the users, but it does not ensure that the system as a whole works as expected after a change.

References: 1: What is Regression Testing? Test Cases (Example) - Guru99 2: What is Regression Testing? Definition, Tools, Examples - Katalon 3: Regression testing - Wikipedia : What is Unit Testing? Definition, Types, Tools & Examples - Guru99 : What is Integration Testing? Definition, Types, Tools & Examples - Guru99 : What is Acceptance Testing? Definition, Types, Tools & Examples - Guru99

Imaging the affected system is the best way to protect evidence in a forensic investigation, because it creates a bit-by-bit copy of the original data that can be analyzed without altering or compromising the original source. Imaging preserves the integrity and authenticity of the evidence and allows for verification and validation of the results34. Powering down or rebooting the affected system can cause data loss or corruption, while protecting the hardware does not prevent unauthorized access or tampering with the software or data. References: 3: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 6, Section 6.4.1 4: CISA Online Review Course, Module 6, Lesson 4

The answer D is correct because the number of reopened tickets is the best indicator for measuring the performance of IT help desk function. Reopened tickets are tickets that have been marked as resolved by the help desk agents, but the customers are not satisfied with the resolution and reopen them for further assistance. Reopened tickets reflect the quality and effectiveness of the help desk service, as well as the customer satisfaction level. A high number of reopened tickets indicates that the help desk agents are not resolving the issues properly, or that they are not communicating well with the customers. This can lead to customer frustration, dissatisfaction, and churn. Therefore, minimizing the number of reopened tickets is a key goal for any help desk function.

The other options are not as good as option D. Percentage of problems raised from incidents (option A) is a metric that shows how many incidents are escalated to problems, which are more complex and require root cause analysis and long-term solutions. This metric reflects the complexity and severity of the issues faced by the customers, but it does not directly measure the performance of the help desk function. Mean time to categorize tickets (option B) is a metric that shows how long it takes for the help desk agents to assign a category to each ticket, such as technical, billing, or feedback. This metric reflects the efficiency and accuracy of the help desk agents, but it does not measure the quality or effectiveness of the resolution. Number of incidents reported (option C) is a metric that shows how many issues are reported by the customers to the help desk function. This metric reflects the demand and workload of the help desk function, but it does not measure how well the issues are resolved or how satisfied the customers are.

References:

Key Metrics to Measure Help Desk Performance

8 service desk KPIs and performance metrics for IT support

13 Most Important Help Desk KPIs to Track and Measure Help Desk Performance

 Fine tuning the intrusion detection system (IDS) is the best recommendation to reduce the number of false positive alerts that overwhelm the log management system, because it can help adjust the sensitivity and accuracy of the IDS rules and signatures to match the network environment and traffic patterns. Establishing criteria for reviewing alerts, recruiting more monitoring personnel, and reducing the firewall rules are not effective solutions to address the root cause of the false positive alerts, but rather ways to cope with the consequences. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.4.3

 A black box penetration test is a type of security assessment that simulates an attack on a system or network without any prior knowledge of its configuration or architecture. The main objective of this test is to identify vulnerabilities and weaknesses that can be exploited by external or internal threat actors. To plan a black box penetration test, it is most important to ensure that the environment and penetration test scope have been determined. This means that the tester and the client organization have agreed on the boundaries, objectives, methods, and deliverables of the test, as well as the legal and ethical aspects of the engagement. Without a clear definition of the environment and scope, the test may not be effective, efficient, or compliant with relevant standards and regulations. Additionally, the tester may cause unintended damage or disruption to the client’s systems or networks, or violate their privacy or security policies.

References:

What are black box, grey box, and white box penetration testing?

What Is Black-Box Penetration Testing and Why Should You Choose It?

 A weakness in change management is the most likely cause of an incorrect version of source code being amended by a development team. Change management is the process of controlling and documenting changes to IT systems and software. It ensures that changes are authorized, tested, and implemented in a controlled manner. If change management is weak, there is a risk of using outdated or incorrect versions of source code, which can lead to errors, defects, or security vulnerabilities in the software. 

 The primary basis for selecting which IS audits to perform in the coming year is the organizational risk assessment. An organizational risk assessment is a formal process for identifying, evaluating, and controlling risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s goals and objectives3. An organizational risk assessment can help IS auditors prioritize and plan their audit activities based on the level of risk exposure and impact of each area or process within the organization. An organizational risk assessment can also help IS auditors align their audit objectives and criteria with the organization’s strategy and performance indicators. Senior management’s request, prior year’s audit findings, and previous audit coverage and scope are also possible bases for selecting which IS audits to perform in the coming year, but not as primary as the organizational risk assessment. These factors are more secondary or supplementary sources of information that can help IS auditors refine or adjust their audit plan based on specific needs or issues identified by management or previous audits. However, these factors may not reflect the current or emerging risks that may affect the organization’s operations or performance. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 295

The best document for an IS auditor to use in detecting a weakness in segregation of duties is a process flowchart. A process flowchart is a diagram that illustrates the sequence of steps, activities, tasks, or decisions involved in a business process. A process flowchart can help detect a weakness in segregation of duties by showing who performs what actions or roles in a process, and whether there is any overlap or conflict of interest among them. The other options are not as useful as a process flowchart in detecting a weakness in segregation of duties, as they do not show who performs what actions or roles in a process. A system flowchart is a diagram that illustrates the components, functions, interactions, or logic of an information system. A data flow diagram is a diagram that illustrates how data flows from sources to destinations through processes, stores, or external entities. An entity-relationship diagram is a diagram that illustrates how entities (such as tables) are related to each other through attributes (such as keys) in a database. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

The role within the RACI chart that would provide information on who has oversight of staff performing a specific task is accountable. A RACI chart is a matrix that defines and assigns the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders for a project, process, or activity. RACI stands for responsible, accountable, consulted, and informed. Accountable is the role that has the authority and oversight to approve or reject the work done by the responsible role. The other options are not the roles that provide information on who has oversight of staff performing a specific task, as they have different meanings and functions. Consulted is the role that provides input or advice to the responsible or accountable roles. Informed is the role that receives updates or reports from the responsible or accountable roles. Responsible is the role that performs or executes the work or task. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

 To confirm integrity for a hashed message, the receiver should use the same hashing algorithm as the sender’s to create a binary image of the file. A hashing algorithm is a mathematical function that transforms an input data into a fixed-length output value, called a hash or a digest. A hashing algorithm has two main properties: it is one-way, meaning that it is easy to compute the hash from the input, but hard to recover the input from the hash; and it is collision-resistant, meaning that it is very unlikely to find two different inputs that produce the same hash. These properties make hashing algorithms useful for verifying the integrity of data, as any change in the input data will result in a different hash value. Therefore, to confirm integrity for a hashed message, the receiver should use the same hashing algorithm as the sender’s to create a binary image of the file, which is a representation of the file in bits (0s and 1s). The receiver should then compare this binary image with the hash value sent by the sender. If they match, then the message has not been altered in transit. If they do not match, then the message has been corrupted or tampered with.

References:

Ensuring Data Integrity with Hash Codes

Message Integrity

Reconciliation of total amounts by project is the best control to ensure that data is accurately entered into the job-costing system from spreadsheets. Reconciliation is a process of comparing two sets of data to identify any differences or discrepancies between them. By reconciling the total amounts by project from spreadsheets with those from the job-costing system, any errors or omissions in data entry can be detected and corrected. Validity checks are controls that verify that data conforms to predefined formats or ranges. They can prevent entry of character data into numeric fields, but they cannot ensure that the numeric data is correct or complete. Reasonableness checks are controls that verify that data is within expected or acceptable limits. They can detect outliers or anomalies in data, but they cannot ensure that the data matches the source. Display back of project detail after entry is a control that allows the user to review and confirm the data entered into the system. It can help reduce human errors, but it cannot guarantee that the data is accurate or consistent with the source. References: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience, CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

The best recommendation to prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers by accounts payable employees is dual control. Dual control is a segregation of duties control that requires two or more individuals to perform or authorize a transaction or activity. Dual control can prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers by requiring independent verification and approval of payment requests, amounts, and recipients by different accounts payable employees. The other options are not as effective as dual control in preventing fraudulent electronic funds transfers, as they do not involve independent checks or approvals. Periodic vendor reviews are detective controls that can help identify any irregularities or anomalies in vendor payments, but they do not prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers from occurring. Independent reconciliation is a detective control that can help compare and confirm payment records with bank statements, but it does not prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers from occurring. Re-keying of monetary amounts is an input control that can help detect any errors or discrepancies in payment amounts, but it does not prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers from occurring. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

 The most important thing for an IS auditor to examine when reviewing an organization’s privacy policy is its legitimate purpose for collecting personal data. A legitimate purpose is a clear and specific reason for collecting personal data that is necessary for the organization’s business operations or legal obligations, and that respects the rights and interests of the data subjects. A legitimate purpose is the basis for establishing a lawful and fair processing of personal data, and it should be communicated to the data subjects in the privacy policy. The other options are not as important as the legitimate purpose in reviewing the privacy policy. Explicit permission from regulators to collect personal data is not always required, as there may be other lawful bases for data collection, such as consent, contract, or public interest. Sharing of personal information with third-party service providers is not prohibited, as long as there are adequate safeguards and agreements in place to protect the data. The encryption mechanism selected by the organization for protecting personal data is a technical control that can enhance data security, but it does not determine the legality or fairness of data collection. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2

The primary area of focus when an organization decides to outsource technical support for its external customers is to align service level agreements (SLAs) with current needs. SLAs are contracts that define the scope, quality, and expectations of the services provided by the vendor, as well as the remedies or penalties for non-compliance. SLAs are essential for ensuring that the outsourced technical support meets the customer’s requirements and satisfaction, as well as the organization’s objectives and standards. By aligning SLAs with current needs, the organization can specify the key performance indicators (KPIs), metrics, and targets that reflect the desired outcomes and value of the technical support. This can also help to monitor and evaluate the vendor’s performance, identify gaps or issues, and implement corrective actions or improvements.

References:

Service Level Agreement (SLA) Examples and Template

What is an SLA? Best practices for service-level agreements

 The best detective control for a job scheduling process involving data transmission is job failure alerts that are automatically generated and routed to support personnel. Job failure alerts are notifications that indicate when a scheduled job or task fails to execute or complete successfully, such as due to errors, interruptions, or delays. Job failure alerts can help detect and correct any issues or anomalies in the job scheduling process involving data transmission by informing and alerting the support personnel who can investigate and resolve the problem. The other options are not as effective as job failure alerts in detecting issues or anomalies in the job scheduling process involving data transmission, as they do not provide timely or specific information or feedback. Metrics denoting the volume of monthly job failures are reported and reviewed by senior management is a reporting technique that can help measure and improve the performance and reliability of the job scheduling process, but it does not provide immediate or detailed information on individual job failures. Jobs are scheduled to be completed daily and data is transmitted using a Secure File Transfer Protocol (SFTP) is a preventive control that can help ensure the timeliness and security of the job scheduling process involving data transmission, but it does not detect any issues or anomalies that may occur during the process. Jobs are scheduled and a log of this activity is retained for subsequent review is a logging technique that can help record and track the status and results of the job scheduling process involving data transmission, but it does not provide real-time or proactive information on job failures. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

Network topology diagrams are the most important for an IS auditor to review when evaluating the design of controls related to network monitoring, because they show how the network components are connected and configured, and what security measures are in place to protect the network from unauthorized access or attacks. Incident monitoring logs, the ISP service level agreement, and reports of network traffic analysis are useful for evaluating the effectiveness and performance of network monitoring, but not the design of controls. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.3.3

 A post-implementation review is a process of evaluating the outcome and benefits of a project or a system after it has been implemented. The main purpose of a post-implementation review is to determine to what extent the business requirements are being met by the new system. Therefore, the most likely aspect to be assessed is the results of line processing, which refers to the actual performance and functionality of the system in the operational environment.

 Data analytics can be used to compare data from different sources and identify any discrepancies or anomalies. In this case, comparing a population of loans input in the origination system to loans booked on the servicing system can help detect any errors or frauds in the loan origination process. The other options are not examples of data analytics, but rather controls for data integrity, reconciliation, and error handling. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2

The best method to prevent wire transfer fraud by bank employees is system-enforced dual control. System-enforced dual control is a segregation of duties control that requires two or more individuals to perform or authorize a transaction or activity using a system that enforces this requirement. System-enforced dual control can prevent wire transfer fraud by requiring independent verification and approval of payment requests, amounts, and recipients by different bank employees using a system that does not allow any single employee to complete the transaction alone. The other options are not as effective as system-enforced dual control in preventing wire transfer fraud, as they do not involve independent checks or approvals using a system. Independent reconciliation is a detective control that can help compare and confirm payment records with bank statements, but it does not prevent wire transfer fraud from occurring. Re-keying of wire dollar amounts is an input control that can help detect any errors or discrepancies in payment amounts, but it does not prevent wire transfer fraud from occurring. Two-factor authentication control is an access control that can help verify the identity and authorization of bank employees, but it does not prevent wire transfer fraud from occurring. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

The best recommendation to address the risk of privileged application accounts with passwords set to never expire in a 24/7 processing environment is to introduce database access monitoring into the environment. Database access monitoring is a security control that tracks and records all activities and transactions performed on a database, especially by privileged users or accounts. Database access monitoring can help address the risk of privileged application accounts with passwords set to never expire by detecting and alerting any unauthorized or abnormal access or actions on the database. The other options are not as effective as database access monitoring in addressing the risk, as they may cause disruption to the business or violate the access management policy. Modifying applications to no longer require direct access to the database is a complex and costly solution that may affect the functionality or performance of the applications, and it may not be feasible or practical in a 24/7 processing environment. Modifying the access management policy to make allowances for application accounts is a risky solution that may create exceptions or loopholes in the policy, and it may not comply with the best practices or standards for password management. Scheduling downtime to implement password changes is a disruptive solution that may affect the availability or continuity of the systems or applications, and it may not be acceptable or possible in a 24/7 processing environment. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.2.4

A post-implementation review (PIR) is an assessment conducted at the end of a project cycle to determine if the project was indeed successful and to identify any existing flaws in the project1. One of the main objectives of a PIR is to evaluate the outcome and functional value of a project1. Therefore, an IS auditor should be most concerned with whether the system meets the intended requirements and delivers the expected benefits to the stakeholders. A system that does not have a maintenance plan is a major risk, as it may not be able to cope with changing needs, fix errors, or prevent security breaches. A maintenance plan is essential for ensuring the system’s reliability, availability, and performance in the long term2.

The other options are less critical for a PIR, as they are more related to the project management aspects than the system quality aspects. The system may contain several minor defects that do not affect its functionality or usability, and these can be resolved in future updates. The system deployment may be delayed by three weeks due to unforeseen circumstances or dependencies, but this does not necessarily mean that the system is faulty or ineffective. The system may be over budget by 15% due to various factors such as scope creep, resource constraints, or market fluctuations, but this does not imply that the system is not valuable or beneficial.

References: 1: Post-Implementation Review Best Practices - MetaPM 2: What is Post-Implementation Review in Project Management?

The primary factor to determine system criticality within an organization is the maximum allowable downtime (MAD). MAD is the maximum time frame during which recovery must become effective before an outage compromises the ability of an organization to achieve its business objectives and/or survival. MAD reflects the business impact of a system outage on the organization’s operations, reputation, compliance, and finances. MAD can help to prioritize system recovery efforts, allocate resources, and establish recovery objectives.

 An employee is induced to reveal confidential IP addresses and passwords by answering questions over the phone. This is a social engineering attack method that exploits the trust or curiosity of the employee to obtain sensitive information that can be used to access or compromise the network. According to the web search results, social engineering is a technique that uses psychological manipulation to trick users into making security mistakes or giving away sensitive information1. Phishing, whaling, baiting, and pretexting are some of the common forms of social engineering attacks2. Social engineering attacks are often more effective and profitable than purely technical attacks, as they rely on human error rather than system vulnerabilities

 The IS auditor’s first action after discovering an option in a database that allows the administrator to directly modify any table should be to determine whether the audit trail is secured and reviewed. This is because direct modification of database tables can pose a significant risk to data integrity, security, and accountability. An audit trail is a record of all changes made to database tables, including who made them, when they were made, and what was changed. An audit trail can help to detect unauthorized or erroneous changes, provide evidence for investigations or audits, and support data recovery or restoration. The IS auditor should assess whether the audit trail is protected from tampering or deletion, and whether it is regularly reviewed for anomalies or exceptions.

The best way to address segregation of duties issues in an organization with budget constraints is to implement compensating controls, which are alternative controls that reduce or eliminate the risk of errors or fraud due to inadequate segregation of duties. Compensating controls may include independent reviews, reconciliations, approvals, or supervisions. Rotating job duties periodically may reduce the risk of collusion or abuse of privileges, but it may also affect operational efficiency and continuity. Performing an independent audit may detect segregation of duties issues, but it does not prevent them. Hiring temporary staff may increase operational costs and introduce new risks. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.4

The primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project is to evaluate the controls incorporated into the system specifications. Controls are mechanisms or procedures that aim to ensure the security, reliability, or performance of a system or process. System specifications are documents that define and describe the requirements, features, functions, or components of a system or software. Evaluating the controls incorporated into the system specifications is a key responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project, as it helps ensure that the system or software meets the organization’s objectives, standards, and expectations for security, reliability, or performance. The other options are not primary responsibilities of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project, as they do not directly relate to evaluating the controls incorporated into the system specifications. Future compatibility of the application is a possible factor that may affect the functionality or usability of the application in different environments or platforms, but it is not a primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project. Proposed functionality of the application is a possible factor that may affect the suitability or value of the application for meeting user needs or expectations, but it is not a primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project. Development methodology employed is a possible factor that may affect the quality or consistency of the software development process, but it is not a primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

The best way to ensure the quality and integrity of test procedures used in audit analytics is to centralize procedures and implement change control. Centralizing procedures means storing them in a common repository that can be accessed and updated by authorized users. Change control means implementing a process for tracking, reviewing, approving, and documenting any changes made to the procedures. This ensures that the procedures are consistent, accurate, reliable, and secure. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 401

Reviewing input and output control reports to verify the accuracy of the system decisions is the most important procedure for the IS auditor to perform during the post-implementation review of intelligent-agent software for granting loans to customers, because it can help identify any errors or anomalies in the system logic or data that may affect the quality and reliability of the system outcomes. Reviewing system and error logs, signed approvals, and system documentation are also important procedures, but they are not as critical as verifying the accuracy of the system decisions. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.21

 The auditor’s best action when IT management provides suitable evidence for a control that had been concluded as ineffective is to re-perform the audit before changing the conclusion. This means that the auditor should verify the validity, completeness, and timeliness of the evidence provided by IT management and test the effectiveness of the new control in meeting the audit objectives. The auditor should not change the conclusion based on evidence provided by IT management without re-performing the audit, as this could compromise the auditor’s independence and objectivity. The auditor should also not explain to IT management that the new control will be evaluated during follow-up or add comments about the action taken by IT management in the report, as these actions do not address the original audit finding. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 439

 Input validation is the best control to address SQL injection vulnerabilities, because it can prevent malicious users from entering SQL commands or statements into input fields that are intended for data entry, such as usernames or passwords. SQL injection is a technique that exploits a security vulnerability in an application’s software by inserting SQL code into a query string that can execute commands on a database server. Unicode translation, SSL encryption, and digital signatures are not effective controls against SQL injection, because they do not prevent or detect SQL code injection into input fields. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.4.2

 A proper audit trail of changes to server start-up procedures would include evidence of operator overrides, which are actions taken by the system operator to bypass or modify the normal execution of the server start-up process. Operator overrides may indicate unauthorized or improper changes that could affect the security, availability, or performance of the server. Therefore, an audit trail should capture and document any operator overrides that occur during the server start-up process.

Evidence of subsystem structure, program execution, and security control options are not directly related to changes to server start-up procedures. Subsystem structure refers to the components and relationships of a subsystem within a larger system. Program execution refers to the process of running a software program on a computer. Security control options refer to the settings and parameters that define the security level and access rights for a system or application. These are all important aspects of auditing a server, but they do not provide evidence of changes to server start-up procedures.

 The project manager should be accountable for managing the risks to project benefits. Project benefits are the expected outcomes or value that a project delivers to its stakeholders, such as improved efficiency, quality, customer satisfaction, or revenue. Project risks are uncertain events or conditions that may affect the project objectives, scope, budget, schedule, or quality. The project manager is responsible for identifying, analyzing, prioritizing, responding to, and monitoring project risks throughout the project life cycle. The other options are not accountable for managing project risks, as they have different roles and responsibilities. The enterprise risk manager is responsible for overseeing the organization’s overall risk management framework and strategy, but not for managing specific project risks. The project sponsor is responsible for initiating, approving, and supporting the project, but not for managing project risks. The information security officer is responsible for ensuring that the project complies with the organization’s information security policies and standards, but not for managing project risks. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

 Secure code reviews as part of a continuous deployment program are preventive controls. Preventive controls are controls that aim to prevent or avoid undesirable events or outcomes from occurring, such as errors, defects, or incidents. Secure code reviews are activities that examine and evaluate the source code of a software or application to identify and eliminate any vulnerabilities, flaws, or weaknesses that may compromise its security, functionality, or performance. Secure code reviews as part of a continuous deployment program can help prevent or avoid security issues or incidents from occurring by ensuring that the code is secure and compliant before it is deployed to production. The other options are not correct types of controls for secure code reviews as part of a continuous deployment program, as they have different meanings and functions. Detective controls are controls that aim to detect or discover undesirable events or outcomes that have occurred, such as errors, defects, or incidents. Logical controls are controls that use software or hardware mechanisms to regulate or restrict access to IT resources, such as data, systems, or networks. Corrective controls are controls that aim to correct or rectify undesirable events or outcomes that have occurred, such as errors, defects, or incidents. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

 When an IS audit reveals that a firewall was unable to recognize a number of attack attempts, the auditor’s best recommendation is to place an intrusion detection system (IDS) between the firewall and the Internet, as this would provide an additional layer of security and alert the organization of any malicious traffic that bypasses or penetrates the firewall. Placing an IDS between the firewall and the demilitarized zone (DMZ), the organization’s web server, or the organization’s network would not be as effective, as it would only monitor the traffic that has already passed through the firewall. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.4.3

One benefit of return on investment (ROI) analysis in IT decision making is that it provides the basis for allocating financial resources. ROI analysis is a method of evaluating the profitability or cost-effectiveness of an IT project or investment by comparing the expected benefits with the required costs. ROI analysis can help IT decision makers prioritize and justify their IT initiatives, allocate their financial resources optimally, and demonstrate the value contribution of IT to the organization’s goals and objectives. Basis for allocating indirect costs, cost of replacing equipment, and estimated cost of ownership are not benefits of ROI analysis in IT decision making. These are more inputs or outputs of ROI analysis that could be used to calculate or estimate the costs or benefits of an IT project or investment. References: [ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition], page 307

 Substantive testing provides the most reliable audit evidence on the validity of transactions in a financial application. Substantive testing is an audit procedure that examines the financial statements and supporting documentation to see if they contain errors or misstatements. Substantive testing can help to verify that the transactions recorded in the financial application are authorized, complete, accurate, and properly classified. Substantive testing can include methods such as vouching, confirmation, analytical procedures, or physical examination. 

 The most important consideration for an IS auditor when scheduling follow-up activities for agreed-upon management responses to remediate audit observations is the risk rating of original findings. The risk rating of original findings is an assessment of the potential impact or likelihood of an audit issue or observation on the organization’s objectives, operations, or reputation. The risk rating of original findings can help determine the priority and urgency of follow-up activities for agreed-upon management responses to remediate audit observations by ensuring that high-risk issues are addressed first and more frequently than low-risk issues. The other options are not as important as the risk rating of original findings in scheduling follow-up activities for agreed-upon management responses to remediate audit observations, as they do not reflect the significance or severity of audit issues or observations. Business interruption due to remediation is a possible consequence of implementing corrective actions to address audit issues or observations, but it does not indicate the priority or urgency of follow-up activities. IT budgeting constraints is a possible factor that may affect the availability or feasibility of resources for implementing corrective actions to address audit issues or observations, but it does not indicate the priority or urgency of follow-up activities. Availability of responsible IT personnel is a possible factor that may affect the accountability or responsiveness of staff for implementing corrective actions to address audit issues or observations, but it does not indicate the priority or urgency of follow-up activities. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.4

 The first step that an IS auditor should take when finding that a business impact analysis (BIA) has not been performed is to evaluate the impact on current disaster recovery capability. A BIA is a process that identifies and analyzes the potential effects of disruptions to critical business functions and processes. A BIA helps determine the recovery priorities, objectives, and strategies for the organization. Without a BIA, the disaster recovery plan may not be aligned with the business needs and expectations, and may not provide adequate protection and recovery for the most critical assets and activities. Therefore, an IS auditor should assess how the lack of a BIA affects the current disaster recovery capability and identify any gaps or risks that need to be addressed.

Performing a BIA, issuing an intermediate report to management, and conducting additional compliance testing are not the first steps that an IS auditor should take when finding that a BIA has not been performed. These steps may be done later in the audit process, after evaluating the impact on current disaster recovery capability. Performing a BIA is not the responsibility of the IS auditor, but of the business owners and managers. Issuing an intermediate report to management may be premature without sufficient evidence and analysis. Conducting additional compliance testing may not be relevant or necessary without a clear understanding of the disaster recovery requirements and objectives.

 The greatest concern for an IS auditor if there are flaws in the mapping of accounts between a front-end subledger and a main ledger is the inaccuracy of financial reporting. A subledger is a detailed record of transactions for a specific account, such as accounts receivable, accounts payable, inventory, or fixed assets. A main ledger is a summary record of all transactions for all accounts in an accounting system. The mapping of accounts between a subledger and a main ledger is the process of linking or reconciling the transactions in the subledger with the corresponding entries in the main ledger. If there are flaws in the mapping of accounts, such as missing, duplicated, or incorrect transactions, the main ledger may not reflect the true financial position and performance of the organization. This may lead to inaccurate financial reporting, which may affect decision making, compliance, auditing, taxation, and stakeholder confidence.

Double-posting of a single journal entry, inability to support new business transactions, and unauthorized alteration of account attributes are not the greatest concerns for an IS auditor if there are flaws in the mapping of accounts between a front-end subledger and a main ledger. These are possible consequences or causes of flaws in the mapping of accounts, but they do not have as significant an impact as inaccuracy of financial reporting. Double-posting of a single journal entry may result in errors or discrepancies in the main ledger balances. Inability to support new business transactions may indicate limitations or inefficiencies in the accounting system design or configuration. Unauthorized alteration of account attributes may suggest weaknesses or breaches in access control or segregation of duties.

The best recommendation for an organization that is unable to add new servers on demand in a cost-efficient manner is to build a virtual environment. A virtual environment is a technology that allows multiple virtual machines to run on a single physical server, sharing its resources and capabilities. A virtual environment can help the organization add new servers on demand in a cost-efficient manner by reducing the need for hardware acquisition, maintenance, and power consumption. The other options are not as effective as building a virtual environment, as they do not address the root cause of the problem or provide the same benefits. Increasing the capacity of existing systems is a short-term solution that can help improve the performance and availability of the current servers, but it does not enable the organization to add new servers on demand in a cost-efficient manner. Upgrading hardware to newer technology is a costly solution that can help enhance the functionality and reliability of the servers, but it does not enable the organization to add new servers on demand in a cost-efficient manner. Hiring temporary contract workers for the IT function is an irrelevant solution that can help supplement the IT staff’s skills and knowledge, but it does not enable the organization to add new servers on demand in a cost-efficient manner. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1

The most important thing for an IS auditor to review when evaluating the accuracy of a spreadsheet that contains several macros is the formulas within macros. Macros are sequences of commands or instructions that can automate tasks or calculations in a spreadsheet. Formulas are expressions that perform calculations on values or data in a spreadsheet. The accuracy of a spreadsheet depends largely on whether the formulas within macros are correct, consistent, and complete. The IS auditor should review the formulas within macros to verify that they produce the expected results and do not contain any errors or inconsistencies. The other options are not as important as formulas within macros, as they do not directly affect the accuracy of a spreadsheet. Encryption of the spreadsheet is a security control that can protect the confidentiality and integrity of the spreadsheet, but it does not ensure its accuracy. Version history is a document control feature that can track and manage changes to the spreadsheet, but it does not verify its accuracy. Reconciliation of key calculations is a validation technique that can compare and confirm the results of calculations with other sources, but it does not evaluate the accuracy of formulas within macros. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

 An organization’s audit charter primarily describes the auditors’ authority to conduct audits. The audit charter is a formal document that defines the purpose, scope, responsibilities, and reporting relationships of the internal audit function. It also establishes the auditors’ right of access to information, records, personnel, and physical properties relevant to their work. The audit charter provides the basis for the auditors’ independence and accountability to the governing body and senior management. 

The most important aspect of an application development acceptance test is that user management approves the test design before the test is started, as this ensures that the test objectives, criteria, and procedures are aligned with the user requirements and expectations. The programming team’s involvement in the testing process, the testing of data files for valid information before conversion, and the quality assurance (QA) team’s charge of the testing process are also important, but they are not as critical as user management’s approval of the test design. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.4.2

The best recommendation to mitigate the risk of data leakage from lost or stolen devices that contain confidential data is to configure them to auto-wipe after multiple failed access attempts, as this would prevent unauthorized access and erase sensitive information from the device. Requiring employees to attend security awareness training, password protecting critical data files, or enabling device auto-lock function are also good practices, but they may not be sufficient or effective in preventing data leakage from lost or stolen devices. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.3

The most effective way to minimize downtime during system conversions is to use a parallel run. A parallel run is a method of system conversion where both the old and new systems operate simultaneously for a period of time until the new system is verified to be functioning correctly. This reduces the risk of errors, data loss, or system failure during conversion and allows for a smooth transition from one system to another. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 467

 The IS auditor’s best course of action in this situation is to determine whether the alternative controls sufficiently mitigate the risk. Alternative controls are different from those originally discussed and agreed with the audit function, but they may still achieve the same objective of addressing the audit issue or reducing the risk to an acceptable level. The IS auditor should evaluate whether the alternative controls are appropriate, effective, and sustainable before closing the audit finding or escalating it to senior management. The other options are not appropriate for resolving this situation, as they do not consider whether the alternative controls are adequate or reasonable. Re-prioritizing the original issue as high risk and escalating to senior management is a drastic step that may undermine the relationship between the auditor and management, and it should be done only after exhausting other means of resolving the issue. Scheduling a follow-up audit in the next audit cycle is unnecessary, as follow-up activities should be performed as soon as possible after management has implemented corrective actions. Postponing follow-up activities and escalating the alternative controls to senior audit management is premature, as follow-up activities should be completed before reporting any findings or recommendations to senior audit management. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.4

The IS auditor’s best course of action in this situation is to present observations for discussion only. Observations are factual statements or findings that are based on the audit evidence collected and analyzed during the audit. Observations can be presented to management for discussion and feedback, but they should not be considered as final conclusions or recommendations until the audit is completed and the audit report is issued. The other options are not appropriate for presenting the findings to date, as they may compromise the audit quality or integrity. Reviewing working papers with the auditee is not advisable, as working papers are confidential documents that contain the auditor’s notes, calculations, and opinions that may not be relevant or accurate for management’s review. Requesting the auditee provide management responses is premature, as management responses should be obtained after the audit report is issued and the audit findings and recommendations are finalized. Requesting management wait until a final report is ready for discussion is impractical, as management may have a legitimate interest or need to know the audit progress and results as soon as possible. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.3

 The best compensating control when segregation of duties is lacking in a small IS department is transaction log review. Transaction log review can help detect any unauthorized or fraudulent activities performed by IS staff who have access to multiple functions or systems. Transaction log review can also provide an audit trail for accountability and investigation purposes. The other options are not as effective as transaction log review in compensating for the lack of segregation of duties. Background checks are preventive controls that can help screen potential employees for any criminal records or dishonest behavior, but they do not prevent existing employees from abusing their access privileges. User awareness training is a detective control that can help educate users on how to report any suspicious or abnormal activities in the IS environment, but it does not monitor or verify the actions of IS staff. Mandatory holidays are deterrent controls that can discourage IS staff from engaging in fraudulent activities by requiring them to take periodic leave, but they do not prevent or detect such activities when they occur. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

Understanding the business process is the most important factor for an effective control self-assessment (CSA) program. A CSA program is a technique that allows managers and work teams directly involved in business units, functions or processes to participate in assessing the organization’s risk management and control processes1. A CSA program can help identify risks and potential exposures to achieving strategic business objectives, evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of controls, and implement remediation plans to address any gaps or weaknesses2. To conduct a successful CSA, it is essential to have a clear and comprehensive understanding of the business process under review, including its objectives, inputs, outputs, activities, resources, dependencies, stakeholders, performance indicators, etc. This will help to identify the relevant risks and controls associated with the process, as well as to evaluate their impact and likelihood. Determining the scope of the assessment, performing detailed test procedures, and evaluating changes to the risk environment are also important factors for an effective CSA program, but not as important as understanding the business process. These factors are more related to the execution and monitoring phases of the CSA program, while understanding the business process is related to the planning and preparation phase. Without a solid understanding of the business process, the scope, testing, and evaluation of the CSA may not be accurate or complete. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 310

The most important consideration for an IS auditor when assessing the adequacy of an organization’s information security policy is its alignment with the business objectives. The information security policy is a high-level document that defines the organization’s vision, goals, principles, and responsibilities for protecting its information assets. The information security policy should support and enable the achievement of the business objectives, such as increasing customer satisfaction, enhancing competitive advantage, or complying with legal requirements. The information security policy should also be consistent with other relevant policies, standards, and frameworks that guide the organization’s governance, risk management, and compliance activities. 

 An IS auditor would be most concerned if process ownership has not been established for the information asset management process, as this would indicate a lack of accountability, responsibility, and authority for managing the assets throughout their lifecycle. The process owner should also ensure that the process is aligned with the organization’s objectives, policies, and standards. The process should require specifying the physical locations of assets, include asset review, and identify asset value, but these are less critical than establishing process ownership. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

 During an audit of a reciprocal disaster recovery agreement between two companies, the IS auditor would be most concerned with the allocation of resources during an emergency. A reciprocal disaster recovery agreement is an arrangement by which one organization agrees to use another’s resources in the event of a business continuity event or incident. The IS auditor would need to ensure that both parties have clearly defined their roles and responsibilities, their resource requirements, their priority levels, their communication channels, and their escalation procedures in case of a disaster. The IS auditor would also need to verify that both parties have tested their agreement and have updated it regularly to reflect any changes in their business environments. The frequency of system testing is not as critical as the allocation of resources during an emergency, because system testing can be performed periodically or on demand, while resource allocation is a dynamic and complex process that requires careful planning and coordination. The differences in IS policies and procedures are not as critical as the allocation of resources during an emergency, because both parties can agree on common standards and protocols for their disaster recovery operations, or they can adapt their policies and procedures to suit each other’s needs. The maintenance of hardware and software compatibility is not as critical as the allocation of resources during an emergency, because both parties can use compatible or interoperable systems, or they can use virtualization or cloud computing technologies to overcome any compatibility issues. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 281

 The primary advantage of object-oriented technology is enhanced efficiency due to the re-use of elements of logic. Object-oriented technology is a software design model that uses objects, which contain both data and code, to create modular and reusable programs. Objects can be inherited from other objects, which reduces duplication and improves maintainability. Grouping objects into methods for data access, managing sequential program execution for data access, and managing a restricted variety of data types for a data object are not advantages of object-oriented technology. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 304

 The greatest concern for an IS auditor when evaluating an organization’s IT strategy and plans is that IT is not engaged in business strategic planning, as this indicates a lack of alignment between IT and business objectives, which could result in inefficient and ineffective use of IT resources and capabilities. The absence of a defined IT security policy, the nondistribution of business strategy meeting minutes, and the inadequate documentation of IT strategic planning are also issues that should be addressed by an IS auditor, but they are not as significant as IT’s noninvolvement in business strategic planning. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.1

 The effectiveness of a risk management program can be measured by how well it reduces the residual risk, which is the risk that remains after applying controls, to an acceptable level. Inherent risk is the risk that exists before applying any controls, and it cannot be eliminated completely. Control risk is the risk that the controls fail to prevent or detect a risk event, and it is a component of residual risk. Overall risk is not a meaningful metric for assessing the effectiveness of a risk management program, as it does not account for the impact and likelihood of different risk events. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2

 The most important consideration for a go-live decision when implementing an upgraded enterprise resource planning (ERP) system is the business case. The business case is the document that defines and justifies the need, value, feasibility, and risks of the project. It also outlines the expected costs, benefits, outcomes, and impacts of the project. The business case provides the basis for measuring and evaluating the success of the project. Therefore, before deciding to go live with an upgraded ERP system, it is essential to review and validate the business case to ensure that it is still relevant, accurate, realistic, and achievable.

A rollback strategy, test cases, and post-implementation review objectives are not the most important considerations for a go-live decision when implementing an upgraded ERP system. These are important elements of project planning, execution, and evaluation, but they are not sufficient to determine whether the project is worth pursuing or delivering. These elements should be aligned with and derived from the business case.

 The IS auditor’s independence would be most likely impaired if they implemented a specific control during the development of an application system. This is because the IS auditor would be auditing their own work, which creates a self-review threat that could compromise their objectivity and impartiality. The IS auditor should avoid participating in any operational or management activities that could affect their ability to perform an unbiased audit. The other options do not pose a significant threat to the IS auditor’s independence, as long as they follow the ethical standards and guidelines of the profession.

A disaster recovery plan (DRP) is a set of procedures and resources that enable an organization to restore its critical operations, data, and applications in the event of a disaster1. A DRP should be aligned with the organization’s business continuity plan (BCP), which defines the strategies and objectives for maintaining business functions during and after a disaster1.

To ensure that a DRP is effective, it should be tested regularly and thoroughly to identify and resolve any issues or gaps that might hinder its execution2345. Testing a DRP can help evaluate its feasibility, validity, reliability, and compatibility with the organization’s environment and needs4. Testing can also help prepare the staff, stakeholders, and vendors involved in the DRP for their roles and responsibilities during a disaster3.

There are different methods and levels of testing a DRP, depending on the scope, complexity, and objectives of the test4. Some of the common testing methods are:

Walkthrough testing: This is a step-by-step review of the DRP by the disaster recovery team and relevant stakeholders. It aims to verify the completeness and accuracy of the plan, as well as to clarify any doubts or questions among the participants45.

Simulation testing: This is a mock exercise of the DRP in a simulated disaster scenario. It aims to assess the readiness and effectiveness of the plan, as well as to identify any challenges or weaknesses that might arise during a real disaster45.

Checklist testing: This is a verification of the availability and functionality of the resources and equipment required for the DRP. It aims to ensure that the backup systems, data, and documentation are accessible and up-to-date45.

Full interruption testing: This is the most realistic and rigorous method of testing a DRP. It involves shutting down the primary site and activating the backup site for a certain period of time. It aims to measure the actual impact and performance of the DRP under real conditions45.

Parallel testing: This is a less disruptive method of testing a DRP. It involves running the backup site in parallel with the primary site without affecting the normal operations. It aims to compare and validate the results and outputs of both sites45.

Among these methods, full interruption testing would best demonstrate that an effective DRP is in place, as it provides the most accurate and comprehensive evaluation of the plan’s capabilities and limitations4. Full interruption testing can reveal any hidden or unforeseen issues or risks that might affect the recovery process, such as data loss, system failure, compatibility problems, or human errors4. Full interruption testing can also verify that the backup site can support the critical operations and services of the organization without compromising its quality or security4.

However, full interruption testing also has some drawbacks, such as being costly, time-consuming, risky, and disruptive to the normal operations4. Therefore, it should be planned carefully and conducted periodically with proper coordination and communication among all parties involved4.

The other options are not as effective as full interruption testing in demonstrating that an effective DRP is in place. Frequent testing of backups is only one aspect of checklist testing, which does not cover other components or scenarios of the DRP4. Annual walk-through testing is only a theoretical review of the DRP, which does not test its practical implementation or outcomes4. Periodic risk assessment is only a preparatory step for developing or updating the DRP, which does not test its functionality or performance4.

References: 2: Best Practices For Disaster Recovery Testing | Snyk 3: Disaster Recovery Plan (DR) Testing — Methods and Must-haves - US Signal 4: Disaster Recovery Testing: What You Need to Know - Enterprise Storage Forum 5: Disaster Recovery Testing Best Practices - MSP360 1: How to Test a Disaster Recovery Plan - Abacus

The most important prerequisite for the protection of physical information assets in a data center is a complete and accurate list of information assets that have been deployed. Information assets are any data, devices, systems, or software that have value for the organization and need to be protected from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction4. A data center is a facility that houses various information assets such as servers, storage devices, network equipment, etc., that support the organization’s IT operations and services5. A complete and accurate list of information assets that have been deployed in a data center can help to identify and classify the assets based on their importance, sensitivity, or criticality for the organization. This can help to determine the appropriate level of protection and security measures that need to be applied to each asset. A complete and accurate list of information assets can also help to track and monitor the location, status, ownership, usage, configuration, maintenance, etc., of each asset. This can help to prevent or detect any unauthorized or inappropriate changes or movements of assets that may compromise their security or integrity. Segregation of duties between staff ordering and staff receiving information assets, availability and testing of onsite backup generators, and knowledge of the IT staff regarding data protection requirements are also important prerequisites for the protection of physical information assets in a data center, but not as important as a complete and accurate list of information assets that have been deployed. These factors are more related to the implementation and maintenance of security controls and procedures that depend on having a complete and accurate list of information assets as a starting point. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 308

The best source of information for assessing the effectiveness of IT process monitoring is performance data. Performance data is a type of information that measures and reports on the results or outcomes of IT processes, such as availability, reliability, throughput, response time, or error rate. Performance data can help assess the effectiveness of IT process monitoring by providing quantitative and qualitative indicators of whether IT processes are meeting their objectives, standards, or expectations. The other options are not as good as performance data in assessing the effectiveness of IT process monitoring, as they do not provide direct or objective evidence of IT process results or outcomes. Real-time audit software is a type of tool that can help automate and facilitate audit activities, such as data collection, analysis, or reporting, but it does not provide information on IT process performance. Quality assurance (QA) reviews are a type of activity that can help evaluate and improve the quality of IT processes, products, or services, but they do not provide information on IT process performance. Participative management techniques are a type of method that can help involve and motivate IT staff in decision-making and problem-solving processes, but they do not provide information on IT process performance. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

The greatest concern for an IS auditor reviewing a network printer disposal process is that evidence is not available to verify printer hard drives have been sanitized prior to disposal. This can expose sensitive data to unauthorized parties and cause data breaches. Disposal policies and procedures not being consistently implemented or business units being allowed to dispose printers directly to vendors are compliance issues, but not as critical as data protection. Inoperable printers being stored in an unsecured area is a physical security issue, but not as severe as data leakage. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page 387

Integration testing is the best way to ensure that an application is performing according to its specifications, because it tests the interaction and compatibility of different modules or components of the application. Unit testing, pilot testing and system testing are also important, but they do not cover the whole functionality and integration of the application as well as integration testing does. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.3

The best recommendation by the IS auditor for finding that application servers had inconsistent security settings leading to potential vulnerabilities is to perform a configuration review. A configuration review is an audit procedure that involves examining and verifying the security settings and parameters of application servers against predefined standards or best practices. A configuration review can help to identify and remediate any deviations, inconsistencies, or misconfigurations that may expose the application servers to unauthorized access, exploitation, or compromise6. A configuration review can also help to ensure compliance with security policies and regulations, as well as enhance the performance and availability of application servers. The other options are less effective or incorrect because:

A. Improving the change management process is not the best recommendation by the IS auditor for finding that application servers had inconsistent security settings leading to potential vulnerabilities, as it does not address the root cause of the problem or provide a specific solution. While improving the change management process may help to prevent future inconsistencies or misconfigurations in application server settings, it does not ensure that the existing ones are detected and corrected.

B. Establishing security metrics is not the best recommendation by the IS auditor for finding that application servers had inconsistent security settings leading to potential vulnerabilities, as it does not address the root cause of the problem or provide a specific solution. While establishing security metrics may help to measure and monitor the security performance and posture of application servers, it does not ensure that the existing inconsistencies or misconfigurations in application server settings are detected and corrected.

C. Performing a penetration test is not the best recommendation by the IS auditor for finding that application servers had inconsistent security settings leading to potential vulnerabilities, as it does not address the root cause of the problem or provide a specific solution. While performing a penetration test may help to simulate and evaluate the impact of an attack on application servers, it does not ensure that the existing inconsistencies or misconfigurations in application server settings are detected and corrected. References: Configuring system to use application server security - IBM, Application Security Risk: Assessment and Modeling - ISACA, Five Key Components of an Application Security Program - ISACA, ISACA Practitioner Guidelines for Auditors - SSH, SCADA Cybersecurity Framework - ISACA

 The greatest concern for an IS auditor reviewing an organization’s disaster recovery plan (DRP) is that the DRP has not been updated since an IT infrastructure upgrade. This could render the DRP obsolete or ineffective, as it may not reflect the current configuration, dependencies or recovery requirements of the IT systems. The IS auditor should ensure that the DRP is reviewed and updated regularly to align with any changes in the IT environment. The DRP has not been formally approved by senior management is a concern for an IS auditor reviewing an organization’s DRP, but it is not as critical as ensuring that the DRP is up to date and valid. The DRP has not been distributed to end users or the DRP contains recovery procedures for critical servers only are issues that relate to the communication or scope of the DRP, but not to its validity or effectiveness. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page 389

The greatest concern for an IS auditor reviewing an organization’s business continuity plan (BCP) is that the BCP has not been tested since it was first issued. A BCP is a document that describes how an organization will continue its critical business functions in the event of a disruption or disaster. A BCP should include information such as roles and responsibilities, recovery strategies, resources, procedures, communication plans, and backup arrangements3. Testing the BCP is a vital step in ensuring its validity, effectiveness, and readiness. Testing the BCP involves simulating various scenarios and executing the BCP to verify whether it meets its objectives and requirements. Testing the BCP can also help to identify and correct any gaps, errors, or weaknesses in the BCP before they become issues during a real incident4. Therefore, an IS auditor should be concerned if the BCP has not been tested since it was first issued, as it may indicate that the BCP is outdated, inaccurate, incomplete, or ineffective. The other options are less concerning or incorrect because:

A. The BCP’s contact information needs to be updated is not a great concern for an IS auditor reviewing an organization’s BCP, as it is a minor issue that can be easily fixed. Contact information refers to the names, phone numbers, email addresses, or other details of the people involved in the BCP execution or communication. Contact information needs to be updated regularly to reflect any changes in personnel or roles. While having outdated contact information may cause some delays or confusion during a BCP activation, it does not affect the overall validity or effectiveness of the BCP.

B. The BCP is not version controlled is not a great concern for an IS auditor reviewing an organization’s BCP, as it is a moderate issue that can be improved. Version control refers to the process of tracking and managing changes made to the BCP over time. Version control helps to ensure that only authorized changes are made to the BCP and that there is a clear record of who made what changes when and why. Version control also helps to avoid conflicts or inconsistencies among different versions of the BCP. While having no version control may cause some difficulties or risks in maintaining and updating the BCP, it does not affect the overall validity or effectiveness of the BCP.

C. The BCP has not been approved by senior management is not a great concern for an IS auditor reviewing an organization’s BCP, as it is a high-level issue that can be resolved. Approval by senior management refers to the formal endorsement and support of the BCP by the top executives or leaders of the organization. Approval by senior management helps to ensure that the BCP is aligned with the organization’s strategy, objectives, and priorities, and that it has sufficient resources and authority to be implemented. Approval by senior management also helps to increase the awareness and commitment of the organization’s stakeholders to the BCP. While having no approval by senior management may affect the credibility and acceptance of the BCP, it does not affect the overall validity or effectiveness of the BCP. References: Working Toward a Managed, Mature Business Continuity Plan - ISACA, ISACA Introduces New Audit Programs for Business Continuity/Disaster …, Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity Preparedness for Cloud-based …

The best recommendation for an IS auditor when finding that a third-party IT service provider hosts the organization’s HR system in a foreign country is to conduct a privacy impact analysis. A privacy impact analysis is a systematic process that identifies and evaluates the potential risks and impacts of collecting, using, disclosing, and storing personal information. A privacy impact analysis will help the IS auditor to assess the legal, regulatory, contractual, and ethical obligations of the organization and the service provider regarding the protection of personal information. A privacy impact analysis will also help to identify and mitigate any privacy risks and gaps in the service level agreement. References:

CISA Certification | Certified Information Systems Auditor | ISACA

CISA Questions, Answers & Explanations Database

 In a controlled application development environment, the most important segregation of duties should be between the person who implements changes into the production environment and the application programmer. This segregation of duties ensures that no one person can create and deploy code without proper review, testing, and approval. This reduces the risk of errors, fraud, or malicious code being introduced into the production environment.

The other options are not as important as the segregation between the application programmer and the person who implements changes into production, but they are still relevant for achieving a secure and reliable application development environment. The segregation of duties between the person who implements changes into production and the systems programmer is important to prevent unauthorized or untested changes to system software or configuration. The segregation of duties between the person who implements changes into production and the computer operator is important to prevent unauthorized or uncontrolled access to production data or resources. The segregation of duties between the person who implements changes into production and the quality assurance (QA) personnel is important to ensure independent verification and validation of code quality and functionality.

References:

ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition (2019), page 247

Segregation of Duties in an Agile Environment | AKF Partners3

Separation of Duties: How to Conform in a DevOps World4

 The type of risk associated with the potential for the auditor to miss a sequence of logged events that could indicate an error in the IPS configuration is detection risk. Detection risk is the risk that the auditor’s procedures will not detect a material misstatement or error that exists in an assertion or a control. Detection risk can be affected by factors such as the nature, timing, and extent of the audit procedures, the quality and sufficiency of the audit evidence, and the auditor’s professional judgment and competence. Detection risk can be reduced by applying appropriate audit techniques, such as sampling, testing, observation, inquiry, and analysis. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers & Explanations Database

 The best way to detect that a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack is occurring is to use automated monitoring of logs. A DDoS attack disrupts the operations of a server, service, or network by flooding it with unwanted Internet traffic2. Automated monitoring of logs can help pinpoint potential DDoS attacks by analyzing network traffic patterns, monitoring traffic spikes or other unusual activity, and alerting administrators or security teams of any anomalies or malicious requests, protocols, or IP blocks3. Automated monitoring of logs can also help identify the source, type, and impact of the DDoS attack, and provide evidence for further investigation or mitigation.

The other options are not as effective as automated monitoring of logs for detecting DDoS attacks. Customer service complaints are an indirect and delayed indicator of a DDoS attack, as they rely on users reporting problems with accessing a website or service. Customer service complaints may also be caused by other factors unrelated to DDoS attacks, such as server errors or network issues. Server crashes are an extreme and undesirable indicator of a DDoS attack, as they indicate that the server has already been overwhelmed by the attack and has stopped functioning. Server crashes may also result in data loss or corruption, service disruption, or reputational damage. Penetration testing is a proactive and preventive measure for assessing the security posture of a system or network, but it does not detect ongoing DDoS attacks. Penetration testing may involve simulating DDoS attacks to test the resilience or vulnerability of a system or network, but it does not monitor real-time traffic or identify actual attackers.

References:

ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition (2019), page 254

How to prevent DDoS attacks | Methods and tools | Cloudflare2

Understanding Denial-of-Service Attacks | CISA3

The best evidence that an organization’s IT strategy is aligned to its business objectives is that the IT strategy is approved by executive management. This implies that the IT strategy has been reviewed and validated by the senior leaders of the organization, who are responsible for setting and overseeing the business objectives. The IT strategy may be modified in response to organizational change, based on IT operational best practices, or have significant impact on the business strategy, but these are not sufficient indicators of alignment without executive approval. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1

 A system electronic log is the most useful source of information for an IS auditor to review all access attempts to a video-monitored and proximity card-controlled communications room. A system electronic log can provide accurate and detailed records of the date, time, card number, and status (success or failure) of each access attempt. A system electronic log can also be easily searched, filtered, and analyzed by the auditor to identify any unauthorized or suspicious access attempts.

A manual sign-in and sign-out log is not as reliable or useful as a system electronic log, because it depends on the honesty and compliance of the users. A manual log can be easily manipulated, forged, or omitted by the users or intruders. A manual log also does not capture the status of each access attempt, and it can be difficult to verify the identity of the users based on their signatures.

An alarm system with CCTV is not as useful as a system electronic log, because it only captures the events that trigger the alarm, such as unauthorized or forced entry. An alarm system with CCTV does not provide a complete record of all access attempts, and it can be affected by factors such as camera angle, lighting, and resolution. An alarm system with CCTV also requires more time and effort to review the video footage by the auditor.

A security incident log is not as useful as a system electronic log, because it only records the incidents that are reported by the users or detected by the security staff. A security incident log does not provide a comprehensive record of all access attempts, and it can be incomplete or inaccurate depending on the reporting and detection mechanisms. A security incident log also does not capture the details of each access attempt, such as the card number and status.

References:

ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition (2019), page 247

ISACA CISA Certified Information Systems Auditor Exam … - PUPUWEB

 The most important thing for an IS auditor to confirm when reviewing an organization’s plans to implement robotic process automation (RPA) to automate routine business tasks is that the end-to-end process is understood and documented. This is because RPA involves the use of software robots or digital workers to mimic human actions and execute predefined rules and workflows. Therefore, it is essential that the IS auditor verifies that the organization has a clear and accurate understanding of the current state of the process, the desired state of the process, the inputs and outputs, the exceptions and errors, the roles and responsibilities, and the performance measures12. Without a proper documentation of the end-to-end process, the organization may face challenges in designing, developing, testing, deploying, and monitoring the RPA solution3. References: 1: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience, Section 4.2: IT Service Delivery and Support, page 211 2: CISA Online Review Course, Module 4: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience, Lesson 4.2: IT Service Delivery and Support 3: ISACA Journal Volume 5, 2019, Article: Robotic Process Automation: Benefits, Risks and Controls

The most important factor when planning a network audit is to identify the existing nodes on the network. Nodes are devices or systems that are connected to the network and can communicate with each other. Nodes can include servers, workstations, routers, switches, firewalls, printers, scanners, cameras, etc. Identifying the existing nodes on the network will help the auditor to determine the scope, objectives, and methodology of the audit. It will also help the auditor to assess the network topology, architecture, performance, security, and compliance. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers & Explanations Database

The most helpful tool in matching demand for projects and services with available resources in a way that supports business objectives is portfolio management. Portfolio management is the process of selecting, prioritizing, balancing and aligning IT projects and services with the strategic goals and value proposition of the organization3. Portfolio management helps the IT organization to allocate resources efficiently and effectively, to deliver value to the business units, and to align IT initiatives with business strategies. Project management, risk assessment results and IT governance framework are also important tools, but they are not as helpful as portfolio management in matching demand and supply of IT projects and services. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 721

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription

Visualization technology is the use of software and hardware to create graphical representations of data, such as charts, graphs, maps, images, etc. Visualization technology can help users to understand, analyze, and communicate complex and large amounts of data in an intuitive and engaging way1.

One of the primary advantages of using visualization technology for corporate applications is that it can improve the utilization of resources, such as time, money, human capital, and physical assets. Some of the ways that visualization technology can achieve this are:

Visualization technology can help users to quickly and easily explore, filter, and interact with data, reducing the need for manual data processing and analysis1. This can save time and effort for both data producers and consumers, and allow them to focus on more value-added tasks.

Visualization technology can help users to discover patterns, trends, outliers, correlations, and causations in data that may otherwise be hidden or overlooked in traditional reports or tables1. This can enable users to make better and faster decisions based on data-driven insights, and optimize their strategies and actions accordingly.

Visualization technology can help users to communicate and share data more effectively and persuasively with different audiences, such as customers, partners, investors, regulators, etc1. This can enhance the reputation and credibility of the organization, and foster collaboration and innovation among stakeholders.

Visualization technology can help users to monitor and measure the performance and impact of their activities, products, services, or processes1. This can help users to identify problems or opportunities for improvement, and adjust their plans or actions accordingly.

Visualization technology can help users to create engaging and interactive experiences for their customers or end-users1. This can increase customer satisfaction and loyalty, and generate more revenue or value for the organization.

Therefore, using visualization technology for corporate applications can help organizations to better utilize their resources and achieve their goals.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019

ISACA, CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription

TechRadar Blog, Best data visualization tools of 20232

IBM Blog, What is Data Visualization?3

TDWI Blog, Data Visualization Technology4

Tableau Blog, What are the advantages and disadvantages of data visualization?

 The greatest concern for an IS auditor when a post-implementation review was conducted by issuing a survey to users is that the survey questions did not address the scope of the business case. A post-implementation review is a process of evaluating the outcomes and benefits of a project after it has been completed and implemented. A post-implementation review can help to assess whether the project met its objectives, delivered its expected value, and satisfied its stakeholders1. A survey is a method of collecting feedback and opinions from users or other stakeholders about their experience and satisfaction with the project. A survey can help to measure the user acceptance, usability, and functionality of the project deliverables2. A business case is a document that justifies the need for a project based on its expected benefits, costs, risks, and alternatives. A business case defines the scope, objectives, and requirements of the project and provides a basis for its approval and initiation3. Therefore, an IS auditor should be concerned if the survey questions did not address the scope of the business case, as it may indicate that the post-implementation review was not comprehensive, relevant, or aligned with the project goals. The other options are less concerning or incorrect because:

A. The survey results were not presented in detail to management is not a great concern for an IS auditor when a post-implementation review was conducted by issuing a survey to users, as it is more of a communication or reporting issue than an audit issue. While presenting the survey results in detail to management may help to inform them about the project performance and outcomes, it does not affect the validity or quality of the post-implementation review itself.

C. The survey form template did not allow additional feedback to be provided is not a great concern for an IS auditor when a post-implementation review was conducted by issuing a survey to users, as it is more of a design or format issue than an audit issue. While allowing additional feedback to be provided may help to capture more insights or suggestions from users, it does not affect the validity or quality of the post-implementation review itself.

D. The survey was issued to employees a month after implementation is not a great concern for an IS auditor when a post-implementation review was conducted by issuing a survey to users, as it is more of a timing or scheduling issue than an audit issue. While issuing the survey to employees sooner after implementation may help to collect more accurate and timely feedback from users, it does not affect the validity or quality of the post-implementation review itself. References: Post Implementation Review - ISACA, Survey - ISACA, Business Case - ISACA

The best way to ensure data integrity across system interfaces is to perform reconciliation. Reconciliation is the process of comparing and verifying the data from different sources or systems to ensure that they are consistent, accurate, and complete. Reconciliation can help to identify and resolve any discrepancies, errors, or anomalies in the data that could affect the quality, reliability, or validity of the information. Reconciliation can also help to detect and prevent any unauthorized or fraudulent data manipulation or modification. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers & Explanations Database

 Digital watermarks are hidden marks or codes that can be embedded into digital files, such as images, videos, audio, or documents. They can be used to identify the source, owner, or authorized user of the data, as well as to track any unauthorized copying or distribution of the data. Digital watermarks can help prevent data leakage by deterring potential leakers from sharing sensitive data or by providing evidence of data leakage if it occurs.

The other options are not as effective as digital watermarks in preventing data leakage. Ensuring that paper documents are disposed securely can reduce the risk of physical data leakage, but it does not address the digital data leakage that is more prevalent in today’s environment. Implementing an intrusion detection system (IDS) can help detect and respond to cyberattacks that may cause data leakage, but it does not prevent data leakage from insiders or authorized users who have legitimate access to the data. Verifying that application logs capture any changes made can help audit and investigate data leakage incidents, but it does not prevent them from happening in the first place.

References:

What is Data Leakage?

What is Digital Watermarking?

The first thing that should be performed before key performance indicators (KPIs) can be implemented is the identification of organizational goals. This is because KPIs are measurable values that demonstrate how effectively an organization is achieving its key business objectives4. Therefore, it is necessary that the organization defines its goals clearly and aligns them with its vision, mission, and strategy. By identifying its goals, the organization can then determine what KPIs are relevant and meaningful to measure its progress and performance . References: 4: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: Governance and Management of IT, Section 2.3: Benefits Realization, page 77 : CISA Online Review Course, Module 2: Governance and Management of IT, Lesson 2.3: Benefits Realization : ISACA Journal Volume 1, 2020, Article: How to Measure Anything in IT Governance

 The most effective way for an organization to help ensure agreed-upon action plans from an IS audit will be implemented is to ensure ownership is assigned. This means that the management of the audited area should accept responsibility for implementing the action plans and report on their progress and completion to the audit committee or senior management. This will ensure accountability, commitment, and follow-up for the audit recommendations34. References: 3: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: The Process of Auditing Information Systems, Section 1.6: Reporting, page 41 4: CISA Online Review Course, Module 1: The Process of Auditing Information Systems, Lesson 1.6: Reporting

The major concern with the situation where security incidents are resolved and closed, but root causes are not investigated, is that vulnerabilities have not been properly addressed. Vulnerabilities are weaknesses or gaps in the security posture of an organization that can be exploited by threat actors to compromise its systems, data, or operations. If root causes are not investigated, vulnerabilities may remain undetected or unresolved, allowing attackers to exploit them again or use them as entry points for further attacks. This can result in repeated or escalated security incidents that can cause more damage or disruption to the organization.

The other options are not as major as the concern about vulnerabilities, but rather secondary or related issues that may arise from the lack of root cause analysis. Abuses by employees have not been reported is a concern that may indicate a lack of awareness, accountability, or monitoring of insider threats. Lessons learned have not been properly documented is a concern that may indicate a lack of improvement, learning, or feedback from security incidents. Security incident policies are out of date is a concern that may indicate a lack of alignment, review, or update of security incident processes.

References:

ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition (2019), page 254

Why Root Cause Analysis is Crucial to Incident Response (IR) - Avertium3

Root Cause Analysis Steps and How it Helps Incident Response …

Linking incidents to problem management activities would most effectively help to reduce the number of repeated incidents in an organization, because problem management aims to identify and eliminate the root causes of incidents and prevent their recurrence. Testing incident response plans, prioritizing incidents, and training incident management teams are all good practices, but they do not directly address the issue of repeated incidents. References: ISACA ITAF 3rd Edition Section 3600

The greatest concern for an IS auditor reviewing contracts for licensed software that executes a critical business process is that software escrow was not negotiated. Software escrow is an arrangement where a third-party holds a copy of the source code and documentation of a licensed software in a secure location. The software escrow agreement specifies the conditions under which the licensee can access the escrowed materials, such as in case of bankruptcy, termination, or breach of contract by the licensor. Software escrow is important for ensuring the continuity and availability of a critical business process that depends on a licensed software. Without software escrow, the licensee may face significant risks and challenges in maintaining, modifying, or recovering the software in case of any disruption or dispute with the licensor. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers & Explanations Database

The most important thing to determine during the planning phase of a cloud-based messaging and collaboration platform acquisition is the types of data that can be uploaded to the platform. This is because different types of data may have different security, privacy, and compliance requirements, depending on the nature, sensitivity, and value of the data. For example, personal data, financial data, health data, or intellectual property data may be subject to various laws and regulations that govern how they can be collected, stored, processed, and shared in the cloud. Therefore, it is essential to identify and classify the types of data that will be uploaded to the platform, and ensure that the platform meets the organization’s policies and standards for data protection1.

The other options are not as important as the types of data that can be uploaded to the platform during the planning phase of a cloud-based messaging and collaboration platform acquisition. Option A, role-based access control policies, is a mechanism that defines who can access what data and resources on the platform based on their roles and responsibilities. Role-based access control policies are important for ensuring data security and accountability, but they can be designed and implemented after the platform is acquired2. Option C, processes for on-boarding and off-boarding users to the platform, are procedures that enable or disable user accounts and access rights on the platform. Processes for on-boarding and off-boarding users are important for managing user identities and lifecycles, but they can be developed and executed after the platform is acquired3. Option D, processes for reviewing administrator activity, are methods that monitor and audit the actions and events performed by administrators on the platform. Processes for reviewing administrator activity are important for detecting and preventing unauthorized or malicious activities, but they can be established and performed after the platform is acquired4.

References:

Cloud Messaging and Collaboration Services - Maryland.gov DoIT4

MessageBird acquires real-time notifications and in-app messaging platform Pusher for $35M | TechCrunch2

Symphony to lead financial market communications with the acquisition of Cloud9 Technologies3

Cloud messaging and collaboration | Sumo Logic

The best method to determine if IT resource spending is aligned with planned project spending is earned value analysis (EVA). EVA is a technique that compares the actual cost, schedule, and scope of a project with the planned or budgeted values. EVA can help to measure the project progress and performance, and identify any variances or deviations from the baseline plan1.

EVA uses three basic values to calculate the project status: planned value (PV), earned value (EV), and actual cost (AC). PV is the amount of work that was expected to be completed by a certain date, according to the project plan. EV is the amount of work that was actually completed by that date, measured in terms of the budgeted cost. AC is the amount of money that was actually spent to complete the work by that date1.

By comparing these values, EVA can determine if the project is on track, ahead, or behind schedule and budget. EVA can also calculate various indicators, such as cost variance (CV), schedule variance (SV), cost performance index (CPI), and schedule performance index (SPI), to quantify the magnitude and direction of the variances. EVA can also forecast the future performance and completion of the project, based on the current trends and assumptions1.

The other options are not as effective as EVA in determining if IT resource spending is aligned with planned project spending. Option B, return on investment (ROI) analysis, is a technique that evaluates the profitability or efficiency of an investment, by comparing the benefits or revenues with the costs. ROI analysis can help to justify or prioritize a project, but it does not measure the actual progress or performance of the project against the plan2. Option C, Gantt chart, is a tool that displays the tasks, durations, dependencies, and milestones of a project in a graphical format. Gantt chart can help to plan and monitor a project schedule, but it does not show the actual cost or scope of the project3. Option D, critical path analysis, is a technique that identifies the longest sequence of tasks or activities that must be completed on time for the project to finish on schedule. Critical path analysis can help to optimize and control a project schedule, but it does not account for the actual cost or scope of the project4.

References:

Earned Value Analysis & Management (EVA/EVM) – Definition & Formulae1

Return on Investment (ROI) Formula2

What Is a Gantt Chart?3

Critical Path Method for Project Management

Segregation of duties (SOD) is a core internal control and an essential component of an effective risk management strategy. SOD emphasizes sharing the responsibilities of key business processes by distributing the discrete functions of these processes to multiple people and departments, helping to reduce the risk of possible errors and fraud1.

SOD is especially important in IT security, where granting excessive system access to one person or group can lead to harmful consequences, such as data breaches, identity theft, or bypassing security controls2. SOD breaks IT-related tasks into four separate function categories: authorization, custody, recordkeeping, and reconciliation1. Ideally, no one person or department holds responsibility in multiple categories.

In a role-based environment, where access privileges are granted based on predefined roles, it is important to ensure that the roles are designed and assigned in a way that supports SOD. For example, the person who develops an application should not also be the one who tests it, deploys it, or maintains it.

Therefore, an application developer should not be assigned the roles of IT operator, system administration, or database administration, as these roles may conflict with their development role and create opportunities for misuse or abuse of the system. The only role that may be assigned to an application developer without violating SOD is emergency support, which is a temporary role that allows the developer to access the system in case of a critical issue that requires immediate resolution3. However, even this role should be granted with caution and monitored closely to ensure compliance with SOD policies.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019, page 2824

ISACA, CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription, QID 1066692

Hyperproof Blog, Segregation of Duties: What it is and Why it’s Important1

Advisera Blog, Segregation of duties in your ISMS according to ISO 27001 A.6.1.23

 The finding that should be the IS auditor’s greatest concern is that the data model is not clearly documented. A data model is a representation of the structure, relationships, and constraints of the data used by an application. It is a vital component of the software development process, as it helps to ensure the accuracy, consistency, and quality of the data1. A clear and comprehensive documentation of the data model is essential for the maintenance and support of the application, as it facilitates the understanding, modification, and troubleshooting of the data and the application logic2.

If the organization plans to bring the support and future maintenance of the application back in-house, it will need to have access to the data model documentation from the vendor. Without it, the organization may face difficulties in transferring the knowledge and skills from the vendor to the in-house team, as well as in adapting and enhancing the application to meet changing business needs and requirements3. The lack of data model documentation may also increase the risk of errors, inconsistencies, and inefficiencies in the data and the application performance2.

The other findings are not as concerning as the lack of data model documentation, because they do not directly affect the quality and maintainability of the application. The cost of outsourcing is lower than in-house development is a benefit rather than a risk for the organization, as it implies that outsourcing has helped to save time and money for the organization4. The vendor development team is located overseas is a common practice in outsourcing, and it does not necessarily imply a lower quality or a higher risk of the application. However, it may pose some challenges in terms of communication, coordination, and cultural differences, which can be managed by establishing clear expectations, roles, and responsibilities, as well as using effective tools and methods for communication and collaboration5. A training plan for business users has not been developed is a gap that should be addressed by the organization before deploying the application, as it may affect the user acceptance and satisfaction of the application. However, it does not directly impact the quality or maintainability of the application itself. References:

What is Data Modeling? Definition & Types | Informatica1

Data Modeling Best Practices: Documentation | erwin2

Data Model Documentation - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics3

Outsourcing App Development Pros and Cons – Droids On Roids4

8 Risks of Software Development Outsourcing & Their Solutions - Acropolium5

Software Training Plan: How to Create One for Your Business - Elinext

A mobile device awareness program would best enable an organization to address the security risks associated with a recently implemented bring your own device (BYOD) strategy. A mobile device awareness program is a set of activities that aim to educate and inform the employees about the benefits, challenges, and best practices of using their personal mobile devices for work purposes. A mobile device awareness program can help the organization to:

Communicate the organization’s policies and expectations regarding BYOD, such as which devices are allowed, what data can be accessed or stored, and what security measures are required.

Raise the employees’ awareness of the potential threats and vulnerabilities that affect their mobile devices, such as malware, phishing, data leakage, or device loss.

Provide the employees with guidance and tips on how to protect their mobile devices and the organization’s data, such as using strong passwords, encryption, antivirus software, remote wipe, or VPN.

Encourage the employees to report any incidents or issues related to their mobile devices, such as suspicious messages, unauthorized access, or device damage.

A mobile device awareness program can help the organization to reduce the security risks associated with BYOD by enhancing the employees’ knowledge, skills, and behavior in using their mobile devices securely and responsibly. A mobile device awareness program can also help the organization to comply with relevant regulations and standards that govern data privacy and security in the cloud1.

The other options are not as effective as a mobile device awareness program in enabling an organization to address the security risks associated with BYOD. Option A, mobile device tracking program, is a tool that allows the organization to monitor and locate the employees’ mobile devices in case of loss or theft. However, this tool may not prevent or detect other types of security risks, such as malware infection or data breach. Option B, mobile device upgrade program, is a process that ensures that the employees’ mobile devices are running the latest versions of operating systems and applications. However, this process may not address other aspects of security, such as user behavior or data protection. Option C, mobile device testing program, is a method that verifies the functionality and compatibility of the employees’ mobile devices with the organization’s systems and networks. However, this method may not cover all the scenarios or factors that may affect the security of the mobile devices or the organization’s data2.

References:

Mobile Device Security Awareness Topics3

Security Awareness Top Ten Topics - #8 Mobile Devices

The most significant risk that IS auditors are required to consider for each engagement is the misalignment with business objectives. This is because IS audit engagements are intended to provide assurance that the IT systems and processes support the achievement of the business objectives and strategies. If there is a misalignment, it could result in wasted resources, missed opportunities, inefficiencies, errors, or failures that could adversely affect the organization’s performance and reputation12. References: 1: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: The Process of Auditing Information Systems, Section 1.3: Audit Risk, page 28 2: CISA Online Review Course, Module 1: The Process of Auditing Information Systems, Lesson 1.3: Audit Risk

An appropriate role of internal audit in helping to establish an organization’s privacy program is analyzing risks posed by new regulations. A privacy program is a set of policies, procedures, and controls that aim to protect the personal data of individuals from unauthorized or unlawful collection, use, disclosure, or disposal. A privacy program should comply with the applicable laws and regulations that govern the privacy rights and obligations of individuals and organizations, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). New regulations may introduce new requirements or changes that affect the organization’s privacy program and expose it to potential compliance risks or penalties. Therefore, internal audit can help to establish an organization’s privacy program by analyzing the risks posed by new regulations and providing assurance, advice, or recommendations on how to address them1. The other options are less appropriate or incorrect because:

B. Developing procedures to monitor the use of personal data is not an appropriate role of internal audit in helping to establish an organization’s privacy program, as it is more of a management or operational role. Internal audit should not be involved in designing or implementing the organization’s privacy program, as it would compromise its independence and objectivity. Internal audit should provide assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s privacy program, but not create or execute it2.

C. Defining roles within the organization related to privacy is not an appropriate role of internal audit in helping to establish an organization’s privacy program, as it is more of a governance or strategic role. Internal audit should not be involved in setting or approving the organization’s privacy strategy, objectives, or policies, as it would compromise its independence and objectivity. Internal audit should provide assurance on the alignment and compliance of the organization’s privacy program with its strategy, objectives, and policies, but not define or approve them2.

D. Designing controls to protect personal data is not an appropriate role of internal audit in helping to establish an organization’s privacy program, as it is more of a management or operational role. Internal audit should not be involved in designing or implementing the organization’s privacy program, as it would compromise its independence and objectivity. Internal audit should provide assurance on the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s privacy program, but not design or implement it2. References: ISACA Introduces New Audit Programs for Business Continuity/Disaster …, Best Practices for Privacy Audits - ISACA, ISACA Produces New Audit and Assurance Programs for Data Privacy and …

When verifying the accuracy and completeness of migrated data for a new application system replacing a legacy system, it is most effective for an IS auditor to review data analytics findings. Data analytics is a technique that uses software tools and statistical methods to analyze large volumes of data and identify patterns, anomalies, errors or inconsistencies. Data analytics can help to compare the source and target data sets, validate the data quality and integrity, and detect any data loss or corruption during the migration process. The other options are not as effective, because audit trails only record the actions performed on the data, acceptance testing results only verify the functionality of the new system, and rollback plans only provide contingency measures in case of migration failure. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.6

 A corrective control is a control that aims to restore normal operations after a disruption or incident has occurred. Executing emergency response plans is an example of a corrective control, as it helps to mitigate the impact of an incident and resume business functions. Separating equipment development testing and production is a preventive control, as it helps to avoid errors or unauthorized changes in production systems. Verifying duplicate calculations in data processing is a detective control, as it helps to identify errors or anomalies in data processing. Reviewing user access rights for segregation is also a detective control, as it helps to detect any violations of segregation of duties principles. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page 64

The first thing that an IS auditor should do when management responses to an in-person internal control questionnaire indicate a key internal control is no longer effective is to ascertain the existence of other compensating controls. Compensating controls are alternative controls that provide reasonable assurance of achieving the same objective as the original control. The IS auditor should verify whether there are any compensating controls in place that can mitigate the risk of the key control being ineffective, and evaluate their adequacy and effectiveness. The other options are not the first steps, because they either require more information about the compensating controls, or they are actions to be taken after identifying and assessing the compensating controls. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.3

The primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates is that it establishes accountability for the action plans. Accountability means that the individuals or groups who are responsible for implementing the action plans are clearly identified and held liable for their completion within the specified time frame. Accountability also implies that the action plans are monitored and evaluated to ensure that they are effective and efficient in addressing the audit findings and mitigating the associated risks1. Accountability helps to ensure that the audit recommendations are taken seriously and implemented properly, and that the audit value is realized by the organization2. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:

A. It facilitates easier audit follow-up is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of a secondary or indirect benefit. Audit follow-up is the process of verifying whether the action plans have been implemented and whether they have resolved the audit findings3. While having clear action plans, owners, and target dates may facilitate easier audit follow-up by providing a basis for tracking and reporting the progress and status of the action plans, it does not necessarily guarantee that the action plans will be implemented or effective.

B. It enforces action plan consensus between auditors and auditees is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of a prerequisite or condition for such an approach. Action plan consensus means that the auditors and auditees agree on the audit findings and recommendations, and on the action plans to address them4. While having action plan consensus may enhance the credibility and acceptance of the audit approach, it does not necessarily ensure that the action plans will be implemented or effective.

D. It helps to ensure factual accuracy of findings is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of an outcome or result of such an approach. Factual accuracy of findings means that the audit findings are based on sufficient, reliable, relevant, and useful evidence5. While having factual accuracy of findings may increase the confidence and trust in the audit approach, it does not necessarily ensure that the action plans will be implemented or effective. References: Accountability - ISACA, Audit Value - ISACA, Audit Follow-up - ISACA, Action Plan Consensus - ISACA, Factual Accuracy of Findings - ISACA

 The best way to ensure that a proper cutoff has been established to reinstate transactions and records to their condition just prior to a computer system failure is to use a database management system (DBMS) to dynamically back-out partially processed transactions. A DBMS is a software system that manages the creation, manipulation, retrieval, and security of data stored in a database. A DBMS can provide features such as transaction management, concurrency control, recovery management, and integrity management. A DBMS can dynamically back-out partially processed transactions by using mechanisms such as rollback segments, undo logs, or write-ahead logs. These mechanisms allow the DBMS to restore the database to a consistent state before the failure occurred. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers & Explanations Database

The most significant risk from not testing patches before putting them into production is the lack of system integrity. Patches are software updates that fix bugs, vulnerabilities or performance issues in an application system. However, patches may also introduce new errors, conflicts or compatibility issues that could affect the functionality, reliability or security of the system4. By not testing patches before putting them into production, the organization exposes itself to the risk of system failures, data corruption or unauthorized access. Loss of application support, outdated system documentation and developer access to production are also risks from not testing patches, but they are not as significant as the lack of system integrity. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 2951

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription

 An IS auditor should be concerned because deleting the files logically does not overwrite the files’ physical data. Deleting a file from a hard disk only removes the reference or pointer to the file from the file system, but does not erase the actual data stored on the disk sectors. The deleted data can still be recovered using special tools or techniques until it is overwritten by new data. This poses a risk of data leakage, theft, or misuse if the hard disk falls into the wrong hands. To securely dispose of a system containing sensitive data, the hard disk should be wiped or sanitized using methods that overwrite or destroy the physical data beyond recovery. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers & Explanations Database

The most significant risk from this observation is that access rights may not be removed in a timely manner. If the process for removing access for terminated employees is not documented, there is no clear guidance or accountability for who, how, when, and what actions should be taken to revoke the access rights of the employees who leave the organization. This could result in delays, inconsistencies, or omissions in removing access rights, which could allow terminated employees to retain unauthorized access to the organization’s systems and data. This could compromise the security, confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information assets. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers & Explanations Database

The best way to ensure that business continuity plans (BCPs) will work effectively in the event of a major disaster is to involve staff at all levels in periodic paper walk-through exercises. This means that the BCPs are tested and validated by the people who will execute them in a real situation, and any gaps, errors, or inconsistencies can be identified and corrected. Paper walk-through exercises are also a good way to raise awareness and train staff on their roles and responsibilities in a BCP scenario, as well as to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of the recovery strategies1.

The other options are not the best ways to ensure that BCPs will work effectively, because they do not involve testing or validating the plans. Preparing detailed plans for each business function is important, but it does not guarantee that the plans are realistic, practical, or aligned with the overall business objectives and priorities2. Regularly updating business impact assessments is also essential, but it does not ensure that the BCPs are aligned with the current business environment and risks2. Making senior managers responsible for their plan sections is a good way to assign accountability and authority, but it does not ensure that the plan sections are coordinated and integrated with each other2. References:

Best Practice Guide: Business Continuity Planning (BCP)3

Best Practices for Creating a Business Continuity Plan1

Business Continuity Plan Best Practices

The IS auditor should notify audit management of the finding first, as this is a significant issue that may affect the audit scope and objectives. The IS auditor should not notify law enforcement or require the third party to notify customers without consulting audit management first. The audit report with a significant finding should be issued after the audit is completed and the findings are validated. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page 247

 The greatest risk of using a reciprocal site for disaster recovery is the inability to utilize the site when required. A reciprocal site is an agreement between two organizations to provide backup facilities for each other in case of a disaster. However, this arrangement may not be reliable or enforceable, especially if both organizations are affected by the same disaster or have conflicting priorities. Therefore, the IS auditor should recommend that management consider alternative options for disaster recovery, such as dedicated sites or cloud services12. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 3381

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription

 Adequate action taken for noncompliance with the service level agreement (SLA) provides the best evidence that outsourced provider services are being properly managed. This shows that the organization is monitoring the performance of the provider and enforcing the terms of the SLA.

The other options are not as convincing as evidence of proper management. Option A, the SLA includes penalties for non-performance, is a good practice but does not guarantee that the penalties are actually applied or that the performance is satisfactory. Option C, the vendor provides historical data to demonstrate its performance, is not reliable because the data may be biased or inaccurate. Option D, internal performance standards align with corporate strategy, is irrelevant to the question of outsourced provider management.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019, page 2821

ISACA, CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription, QID 1066692

Access controls for source libraries are the features of a library control software package that would protect against unauthorized updating of source code. Access controls are the mechanisms that regulate who can access, modify, or delete the source code stored in the source libraries. Source libraries are the repositories that contain the source code files and their versions. By implementing access controls for source libraries, the library control software package can prevent unauthorized or malicious users from tampering with the source code and compromising its integrity, security, or functionality1.

The other options are not as effective as access controls for source libraries in protecting against unauthorized updating of source code. Option A, required approvals at each life cycle step, is a good practice but may not be sufficient to prevent unauthorized updates if the approval process is bypassed or compromised. Option B, date and time stamping of source and object code, is a useful feature but may not prevent unauthorized updates if the date and time stamps are altered or ignored. Option D, release-to-release comparison of source code, is a helpful feature but may not prevent unauthorized updates if the comparison results are not reviewed or acted upon.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019

ISACA, CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription

How to protect your source code from attackers2

How to Stop Unauthorized Use of Open Source Code

The primary objective of an IS auditor when reviewing the installation of a new server is to ensure that security parameters are set in accordance with the organization’s policies. Security parameters are settings or options that control the security level and behavior of the server, such as authentication methods, encryption algorithms, access rights, audit logs, firewall rules, or password policies7. The organization’s policies are documents that define the security goals, requirements, standards, and guidelines for the organization’s information systems. An IS auditor should verify that security parameters are set in accordance with the organization’s policies to ensure that the new server complies with the organization’s security expectations and regulations. The other options are less important or incorrect because:

A. Security parameters should not be set in accordance with the manufacturer’s standards alone, as they may not reflect the organization’s specific security needs and environment. The manufacturer’s standards are general recommendations or best practices for configuring the server’s security parameters based on common scenarios and threats. An IS auditor should compare the manufacturer’s standards with the organization’s policies and identify any gaps or conflicts that need to be resolved.

B. A detailed business case should have been formally approved prior to the purchase of a new server rather than during its installation. A business case is a document that justifies the need for a new server based on its expected benefits, costs, risks, and alternatives. A business case should be approved by senior management before initiating a project to acquire a new server.

D. The procurement project should have invited tenders from at least three different suppliers before purchasing a new server rather than during its installation. A tender is a formal offer or proposal to provide a product or service at a specified price and quality. Inviting tenders from multiple suppliers helps to ensure a fair and competitive procurement process that can result in the best value for money and quality for the organization. References: Server Security - ISACA, [Information Security Policy - ISACA], [Server Hardening - ISACA], [Business Case - ISACA], [Tender - ISACA], [Procurement Management - ISACA]

The finding that should be ranked as the highest risk is that network penetration tests are not performed. Network penetration tests are simulated cyberattacks that aim to identify and exploit the vulnerabilities and weaknesses of the network security controls, such as firewalls, routers, switches, servers, and devices. Network penetration tests are essential for assessing the effectiveness and resilience of the network security posture, and for providing recommendations for improvement and remediation. If network penetration tests are not performed, the organization may not be aware of the existing or potential threats and risks to its network, and may not be able to prevent or respond to real cyberattacks, which can result in data breaches, service disruptions, financial losses, reputational damage, and legal or regulatory penalties. The other findings are also important, but not as risky as the lack of network penetration tests, because they either do not directly affect the network security controls, or they can be addressed by documentation or approval processes. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.4

The best approach to optimize resources when both internal and external audit teams are reviewing the same IT general controls area is to leverage the work performed by external audit for the internal audit testing. This can avoid duplication of efforts, reduce audit costs and enhance coordination between the audit teams. The internal audit team should evaluate the quality and reliability of the external audit work before relying on it. Ensuring both the internal and external auditors perform the work simultaneously is not an efficient use of resources, as it would create redundancy and possible interference. Requesting that the external audit team leverage the internal audit work may not be feasible or acceptable, as the external audit team may have different objectives, standards and independence requirements. Rolling forward the general controls audit to the subsequent audit year is not a good practice, as it would delay the identification and remediation of any control weaknesses in a high-risk area. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page 247

The most useful metric for management to consider when reviewing a project portfolio is the net present value (NPV) of the portfolio. NPV is a measure of the profitability and value of a project or a portfolio of projects, taking into account the time value of money and the expected cash flows. NPV compares the present value of the future cash inflows with the present value of the initial investment and shows how much value is created or lost by undertaking a project or a portfolio of projects1. A positive NPV indicates that the project or portfolio is worth more than its cost and will generate a positive return on investment. A negative NPV indicates that the project or portfolio is worth less than its cost and will result in a loss. Therefore, NPV helps management to prioritize and select the most profitable and valuable projects or portfolios that align with the organizational strategy and objectives2. The other options are less useful or incorrect because:

A. Cost of projects divided by total IT cost is not a useful metric for reviewing a project portfolio, as it does not reflect the benefits, value, or return of the projects. It only shows the proportion of IT budget allocated to the projects, which may not be indicative of their strategic importance or alignment3.

B. Expected return divided by total project cost is not a useful metric for reviewing a project portfolio, as it does not account for the time value of money and the timing of cash flows. It only shows the average return per unit of cost, which may not be comparable across different projects or portfolios with different durations, risks, and cash flow patterns4.

D. Total cost of each project is not a useful metric for reviewing a project portfolio, as it does not reflect the benefits, value, or return of the projects. It only shows the initial investment required for each project, which may not be indicative of their profitability or viability5. References: Portfolio, Program and Project Management Using COBIT 5 - ISACA, Project Portfolio Management - ISACA, CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Standards, Guidelines, Tools and Techniques

One of the challenges in developing a SLA for network services is finding performance metrics that can be measured properly and reflect the quality of service expected by the customer. Establishing a well-designed framework for network services is not a challenge, but a good practice. Ensuring that network components are not modified by the client or reducing the number of entry points into the network are security issues, not SLA issues. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page 333

 The IS auditor should ensure that penetration test results are classified at the highest level of sensitivity, because they contain detailed information about the vulnerabilities and weaknesses of the IT systems and networks, as well as the methods and tools used by the testers to exploit them. Penetration test results can be used by malicious actors to launch cyberattacks or cause damage to the organization if they are disclosed or accessed without authorization. Therefore, they should be protected with the highest level of confidentiality, integrity and availability. The other options are not as sensitive as penetration test results, because they either do not reveal as much information about the IT security posture, or they are already known or reported by the organization. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.4

The best way to evaluate the effectiveness of a new automated control is to review the written procedures that define the processes and controls. This will help the IS auditor to understand the objectives, scope, roles, responsibilities, and expected outcomes of the control. The written procedures will also provide a basis for testing the control and verifying its compliance with the audit finding recommendations. References:

ISACA Frameworks: Blueprints for Success

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

The mitigating factor that would most significantly minimize the impact of not renewing IT risk acceptances in a timely manner is having documented compensating controls over the business processes. Compensating controls are alternative controls that reduce or eliminate the risk when the primary control is not feasible or cost-effective. The other factors, such as previous approval by senior management, unchanged business environment, and small percentage of issues, do not mitigate the risk as effectively as compensating controls. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition Chapter 1

When reviewing a data classification scheme, it is most important for an IS auditor to determine if the security criteria are clearly documented for each classification. This will help the IS auditor to evaluate if the data classification scheme is consistent, comprehensive, and aligned with the organizational objectives and regulatory requirements. The security criteria should define the level of confidentiality, integrity, and availability for each data classification, as well as the corresponding controls such as access control, rights management, and cryptographic protection1. The other options are less important or incorrect because:

A. Each information asset is not necessarily assigned to a different classification. Data classification schemes usually have a limited number of categories, such as “Sensitive,” “Confidential,” and “Public,” and multiple information assets can belong to the same category2.

C. Senior IT managers are not necessarily identified as information owners. Information owners are typically the business units or functions that create, use, or maintain the information assets, and they may or may not be senior IT managers3.

D. The information owner is not required to approve access to the asset. The information owner is responsible for defining the access requirements and rules for the asset, but the actual approval of access requests may be delegated to other roles, such as data custodians or administrators3. References: Simplify and Contextualize Your Data Classification Efforts - ISACA, 3.7: Establish and Maintain a Data Classification Scheme, Data Classification and Practices - NIST, CISA Exam Content Outline | CISA Certification | ISACA

The approach adopted by management in this scenario is risk avoidance. Risk avoidance is the elimination of a risk by discontinuing or not undertaking an activity that poses a threat to the organization3. By moving data center operations to another facility on higher ground, management is avoiding the potential flooding risk that could disrupt or damage the data center. Risk transfer, risk acceptance and risk reduction are other possible approaches for dealing with risks, but they do not apply in this case. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 641

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription

The primary purpose of documenting audit objectives when preparing for an engagement is to identify areas with relatively high probability of material problems. Audit objectives are statements that describe what the audit intends to accomplish or verify during the engagement. Audit objectives help the IS auditor to focus on the key areas of risk or concern, to design appropriate audit procedures and tests, and to evaluate audit evidence and results. By documenting audit objectives, the IS auditor can identify areas with relatively high probability of material problems that may affect the achievement of audit goals or business objectives. Addressing the overall risk associated with the activity under review, ensuring maximum use of audit resources during the engagement and prioritizing and scheduling auditee meetings are also purposes of documenting audit objectives, but they are not as primary as identifying areas with high probability of material problems. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 1111

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription

The most critical factor for the effective implementation of IT governance is a supportive corporate culture. A supportive corporate culture is one that fosters collaboration, communication and commitment among all stakeholders involved in IT governance processes. A supportive corporate culture also promotes a shared vision, values and goals for IT governance across the organization. Strong risk management practices, internal auditor commitment or documented policies are important elements for IT governance implementation, but they are not sufficient without a supportive corporate culture. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page 41

The most appropriate control to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system is to enforce an internal data access policy. A data access policy defines who can access what data, under what conditions and for what purposes. It also specifies the roles and responsibilities of data owners, custodians and users, as well as the security measures and controls to protect data confidentiality, integrity and availability. By enforcing a data access policy, the organization can ensure that only authorized personnel can retrieve confidential information from the business application system. Applying single sign-on for access control, implementing segregation of duties and enforcing the use of digital signatures are also useful controls, but they are not sufficient to prevent unauthorized data retrieval without a clear and comprehensive data access policy. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 2301

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription2

 Data classification is the process of organizing data into categories based on its sensitivity, value, and risk to the organization. Data classification helps to ensure that data is protected according to its importance and regulatory requirements. Data classification also enables data owners to make informed decisions about data access, retention, and disposal.

To implement a data classification program, it is most important to formalize data ownership. Data owners are the individuals or business units that have the authority and responsibility for the data they create or use. Data owners should be involved in defining the data classification levels, assigning the appropriate classification to their data, and ensuring that the data is handled according to the established policies and procedures. Data owners should also review and update the data classification periodically or when there are changes in the data or its usage.

The other options are not as important as formalizing data ownership when implementing a data classification program. Understanding the data classification levels is necessary, but it is not sufficient without identifying the data owners who will apply them. Developing a privacy policy is a good practice, but it is not specific to data classification. Planning for secure storage capacity is a technical consideration, but it does not address the business and legal aspects of data classification.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2020, page 247

Data Classification: What It Is and How to Implement It

The greatest risk associated with the situation of business units purchasing cloud-based applications without IT support is that the applications may not reasonably protect data. Cloud-based applications are software applications that run on the internet, rather than on a local device or network. Cloud-based applications offer many benefits, such as scalability, accessibility, and cost-effectiveness, but they also pose many challenges and risks, especially for data security1.

Data security is the process of protecting data from unauthorized access, use, modification, disclosure, or destruction. Data security is essential for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data, as well as complying with legal and regulatory requirements. Data security is especially important for cloud-based applications, as data are stored and processed on remote servers that are owned and managed by third-party cloud service providers (CSPs)2.

When business units purchase cloud-based applications without IT support, they may not be aware of or follow the best practices and standards for data security in the cloud. They may not perform adequate risk assessments, vendor evaluations, contract reviews, or audits to ensure that the CSPs and the applications meet the organization’s data security policies and expectations. They may not implement appropriate data encryption, backup, recovery, or disposal methods to protect the data in transit and at rest. They may not monitor or control the access and usage of the data by internal or external users. They may not report or respond to any data breaches or incidents that may occur3.

These actions or inactions may expose the organization’s data to various threats and vulnerabilities in the cloud, such as cyberattacks, human errors, malicious insiders, misconfigurations, or legal disputes. These threats and vulnerabilities may result in data loss, leakage, corruption, or compromise, which may have serious consequences for the organization’s reputation, operations, performance, compliance, and liability4.

Therefore, it is essential that business units consult and collaborate with IT support before purchasing any cloud-based applications, and follow the organization’s guidelines and procedures for cloud security. IT support can help business units to select and use cloud-based applications that are suitable and secure for their needs and objectives.

References:

Top 5 Risks With Cloud Software and How to Mitigate Them4

Mitigate risks and secure your cloud-native applications3

12 Risks, Threats & Vulnerabilities in Moving to the Cloud2

Best Practices to Manage Risks in the Cloud1

The most likely application input control that would detect data input errors in the customer account number field during the processing of an accounts receivable transaction is a validity check. A validity check is a type of application control that verifies whether the data entered in an application matches a predefined set of values or criteria1. For example, a validity check can compare the customer account number entered by the user with a list of existing customer account numbers stored in a database, and reject any input that does not match any of the valid values2.

The other options are not as likely to detect data input errors in the customer account number field, because they do not compare the input with a predefined set of values or criteria. A limit check is a type of application control that verifies whether the data entered in an application falls within a specified range or limit1. For example, a limit check can ensure that the amount entered for an invoice does not exceed a certain maximum value2. A parity check is a type of application control that verifies whether the data entered in an application has an even or odd number of bits1. For example, a parity check can detect transmission errors in binary data by adding an extra bit to the data and checking whether the number of bits is consistent3. A reasonableness check is a type of application control that verifies whether the data entered in an application is logical or sensible based on other related data or information1. For example, a reasonableness check can ensure that the date entered for an order is not in the future or before the date of creation of the customer account2. References:

What are application controls? Definition, examples & best practices1

General Control Vs Application Control: Key Differences and Example …4

Parity Check - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

A biometric access device installed at the entrance to a facility is a type of preventive control. Preventive controls are designed to deter or prevent undesirable events from occurring12. They are proactive measures that aim to inhibit incidents before they happen12. In this case, the biometric access device prevents unauthorized individuals from gaining access to the facility by requiring unique biological characteristics for authentication12.

References:

Guide to Biometric Access Control & Door Lock Security - Avigilon

Biometric access control: meaning, types and implementation - Smowl

 A network vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses and exposures in a network that could be exploited by attackers to compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the network or its resources. A network vulnerability assessment typically involves scanning the network devices, such as routers, switches, firewalls, servers, and workstations, using automated tools that compare the device configurations, software versions, and patch levels against a database of known vulnerabilities. A network vulnerability assessment can also include manual testing and verification of the network architecture, design, policies, and procedures. One of the main objectives of a network vulnerability assessment is to detect and report any misconfiguration and missing updates in the network devices that could pose a security risk1. Misconfiguration refers to any deviation from the recommended or best practice settings for the network devices, such as weak passwords, open ports, unnecessary services, default accounts, or incorrect permissions. Missing updates refer to any outdated or unsupported software or firmware that has not been patched with the latest security fixes or enhancements from the vendors2. Misconfiguration and missing updates are common sources of network vulnerabilities that can be exploited by attackers to gain unauthorized access, execute malicious code, cause denial of service, or escalate privileges on the network devices3. Therefore, an IS auditor should expect to see misconfiguration and missing updates in a network vulnerability assessment. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:

B. Malicious software and spyware are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are more related to the content and behavior of the network traffic rather than the configuration and patch level of the network devices. Malicious software and spyware are programs that infect or monitor the network devices or their users for malicious purposes, such as stealing data, displaying ads, or performing remote commands. Malicious software and spyware can be detected by other security tools, such as antivirus software, firewalls, or intrusion detection systems4.

C. Zero-day vulnerabilities are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are unknown or undisclosed vulnerabilities that have not been reported or patched by the vendors or the security community. Zero-day vulnerabilities are rare and difficult to discover, as they require advanced techniques and skills to exploit them. Zero-day vulnerabilities can be detected by other security tools, such as intrusion prevention systems, anomaly detection systems, or artificial intelligence systems5.

D. Security design flaws are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are more related to the logic and functionality of the network rather than the configuration and patch level of the network devices. Security design flaws are errors or weaknesses in the network architecture, design, policies, or procedures that could compromise the security objectives of the network. Security design flaws can be detected by other security methods, such as security reviews, audits, or assessments6. References: Network Vulnerability Assessment - ISACA, Network Vulnerability Scanning - NIST, Network Vulnerabilities - SANS, Malware - ISACA, Zero-Day Attacks - ISACA, Security Design Principles - NIST

 The risk assessment process involves identifying the information assets that are at risk, analyzing the threats and vulnerabilities that could affect them, evaluating the impact and likelihood of a risk event, and determining the appropriate controls to mitigate the risk. The first step is to identify the information assets, as they are the objects of protection and the basis for the rest of the process. Without knowing what assets are at risk, it is not possible to assess their value, exposure, or protection level. References: ISACA Frameworks: Blueprints for Success

This means that the IT steering committee is responsible for ensuring that the IT strategy aligns with and supports the business strategy, vision, and goals of the organization. The IT steering committee is also responsible for overseeing and approving major IT initiatives, projects, and investments, and allocating resources and priorities accordingly12.

Developing and assessing the IT security strategy (B) is not the main responsibility of the IT steering committee, but rather a specific aspect of the IT strategy that may be delegated to a subcommittee or a dedicated security function. The IT steering committee may provide guidance and oversight for the IT security strategy, but it is not directly involved in developing and assessing it12.

Implementing processes to integrate security with business objectives © is not the main responsibility of the IT steering committee, but rather an operational task that may be performed by the IT management and staff. The IT steering committee may monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the security processes, but it is not directly involved in implementing them12.

Developing and implementing the secure system development framework (D) is not the main responsibility of the IT steering committee, but rather a technical task that may be performed by the IT developers and engineers. The IT steering committee may approve and endorse the secure system development framework, but it is not directly involved in developing and implementing it12.

The missing access control requirements should present the greatest concern to the IS auditor when reviewing a contract for the outsourcing of IT facilities. Access control requirements are essential for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the outsourced IT resources and data. They specify the roles, responsibilities, and permissions of the outsourcing vendor and its staff, as well as the client and its users, in accessing and managing the IT facilities. They also define the security policies, standards, and procedures that the outsourcing vendor must follow to protect the IT facilities from unauthorized or malicious access, use, modification, or disclosure. Without clear and comprehensive access control requirements, the outsourcing contract may expose the client to significant risks of data breaches, compliance violations, service disruptions, or reputational damage.

Hardware configurations, help desk availability, and perimeter network security diagram are important aspects of an outsourcing contract, but they are not as critical as access control requirements. Hardware configurations describe the technical specifications and performance of the IT equipment that the outsourcing vendor will provide and maintain. Help desk availability defines the service levels and support channels that the outsourcing vendor will offer to the client and its users. Perimeter network security diagram illustrates the network architecture and security measures that the outsourcing vendor will implement to protect the IT facilities from external threats. These aspects can be verified or modified during the implementation or operation phases of the outsourcing contract, but access control requirements need to be established and agreed upon before signing the contract.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 5: Protection of Information Assets, Section 5.3: Logical Access1

CIO.com, 7 tips for managing an IT outsourcing contract2

Brainhub.eu, 8 Tips for Managing an IT Outsourcing Contract

 Implementing solutions to correct defects is a responsibility of the development function, not the quality assurance (QA) function. The QA function should ensure that the development process follows the established standards and methodologies, and that the defects are identified and reported. The QA function should not be involved in fixing the defects, as this would compromise its independence and objectivity. The other options are valid responsibilities of the QA function, and they should not raise concern for an IS auditor. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) 1, page 300.

The greatest concern with the IT department and internal IS audit function both reporting to the CIO is the potential compromise of IS audit independence. Auditor independence refers to the impartiality and objectivity of an auditor in conducting an audit, free from conflicts of interest and bias1. It is crucial for ensuring the quality and reliability of financial reporting1. If the IS audit function reports to the CIO, who also oversees the IT department, it could create a conflict of interest that might compromise the impartiality and objectivity of the IS audit function.

References:

Auditor Independence - What is it, Rules, Importance, Examples

The primary objective of a control self-assessment (CSA) is to educate functional areas on risks and controls. CSA is a technique that allows managers and work teams directly involved in business units, functions or processes to participate in assessing the organization’s risk management and control processes1. CSA can help functional areas to obtain a clear and shared understanding of their major activities and objectives, to foster an improved awareness of risk and controls among management and staff, to enhance responsibility and accountability for risks and controls, and to highlight best practices and opportunities to improve business performance2.

The other options are not the primary objective of a CSA. Ensuring appropriate access controls are implemented is a specific type of control that may be assessed by a CSA, but it is not the main goal of the technique. Eliminating the audit risk by leveraging management’s analysis is not a realistic or desirable outcome of a CSA, as audit risk can never be completely eliminated, and management’s analysis may not be sufficient or reliable without independent verification. Gaining assurance for business functions that cannot be audited is not a valid reason for conducting a CSA, as all business functions should be subject to audit, and a CSA is not a substitute for an audit.

References:

Control Self Assessments - PwC

Control self-assessment - Wikipedia

Control Self Assessment - AuditNet

The first step in an incident response plan is typically preparation12. However, among the options provided, validating the incident would be the first step. This involves confirming that a security event is actually an incident3. It’s important to verify the event to avoid wasting resources on false positives.

References:

Incident Response Plan: Frameworks and Steps - CrowdStrike

What is Incident Response? Plan and Steps | Microsoft Security

What Are the Phases of an Incident Response Plan? - ISC2 Blog

Substantive testing © provides the best evidence of the validity and integrity of logs in an organization’s security information and event management (SIEM) system, because it is a type of audit testing that directly examines the accuracy, completeness, and reliability of the data and transactions recorded in the logs. Substantive testing can involve various methods, such as re-performance, inspection, observation, inquiry, or computer-assisted audit techniques (CAATs), to verify the existence, occurrence, valuation, ownership, presentation, and disclosure of the log data1. Substantive testing can also detect any errors, omissions, alterations, or manipulations of the log data that may indicate fraud or misstatement2.

Compliance testing (A) is not the best evidence of the validity and integrity of logs in an organization’s SIEM system, because it is a type of audit testing that evaluates the design and effectiveness of the internal controls that are implemented to ensure compliance with laws, regulations, policies, and procedures. Compliance testing can involve various methods, such as walkthroughs, questionnaires, checklists, or flowcharts, to assess the adequacy, consistency, and operation of the internal controls1. Compliance testing can provide assurance that the log data are generated and processed in accordance with the established rules and standards, but it does not directly verify the accuracy and reliability of the log data itself2.

Stop-or-go sampling (B) is not a type of audit testing, but a type of sampling technique that auditors use to select a sample from a population for testing. Stop-or-go sampling is a sequential sampling technique that allows auditors to stop testing before reaching the predetermined sample size if the results are satisfactory or conclusive. Stop-or-go sampling can reduce the audit cost and time by avoiding unnecessary testing, but it can also increase the sampling risk and uncertainty by relying on a smaller sample3. Stop-or-go sampling does not provide any evidence of the validity and integrity of logs in an organization’s SIEM system by itself; it depends on the type and quality of the audit tests performed on the selected sample.

Variable sampling (D) is not a type of audit testing, but a type of sampling technique that auditors use to estimate a numerical characteristic of a population for testing. Variable sampling is a statistical sampling technique that allows auditors to measure the amount or rate of error or deviation in a population by using quantitative methods. Variable sampling can provide precise and objective results by using mathematical formulas and confidence intervals4. Variable sampling does not provide any evidence of the validity and integrity of logs in an organization’s SIEM system by itself; it depends on the type and quality of the audit tests performed on the selected sample.

References:

Audit Testing Procedures - 5 Types and Their Use Cases

5 Types of Testing Methods Used During Audit Procedures | I.S. Partners

Stop-or-Go Sampling Definition

Variable Sampling Definition

The greatest segregation of duties conflict would occur if the individual who performs the related tasks also has approval authority for purchase requisitions and purchase orders. This is because these two tasks are directly related to each other and involve financial transactions. If the same person is responsible for both tasks, it could lead to potential fraud or error12. For instance, the individual could approve a purchase order for a personal need and then also approve the payment for it, leading to misuse of company funds12.

References:

Segregation of Duties: Examples of Roles, Duties & Violations - Pathlock

Functions in the Purchasing Process and how to Segregate Purchasing Duties

 Scope creep is the uncontrolled expansion of a project’s scope, which can result in delays, cost overruns, and quality issues. To mitigate the risk of scope creep, an IS auditor should look for project change management controls, which are processes and procedures for managing changes to the project’s scope, schedule, budget, and quality. Project change management controls ensure that changes are properly requested, approved, documented, communicated, and implemented. Source code version control, existence of an architecture review board, and configuration management are also important for software development, but they do not directly address the risk of scope creep. References: ISACA Frameworks: Blueprints for Success, Project Management Institute: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge

The best course of action for a security administrator who is called in the middle of the night by the on-call programmer who needs access to the live system is to give the programmer an emergency ID for temporary access and review the activity. This is because:

Requiring that a change request be completed and approved may delay the resolution of the problem and cause further damage or disruption to the system or business operations. A change request is a formal document that describes the proposed change, its rationale, impact, benefits, risks, costs, and approval process. A change request is usually required for planned or scheduled changes, not for emergency or urgent changes.

Giving the programmer read-only access to investigate the problem may not be sufficient or effective, as the programmer may need to perform actions or tests that require write or execute permissions. Read-only access means that the user can only view or copy data or files, but cannot modify or delete them.

Reviewing activity logs the following day and investigating any suspicious activity may not prevent or detect any unauthorized or malicious actions by the programmer in real time. Activity logs are records of events and actions that occur within a system or network. Activity logs can provide evidence and accountability for system activities, but they are not proactive or preventive controls.

Therefore, giving the programmer an emergency ID for temporary access and reviewing the activity is the best course of action, as it allows the programmer to access the live system and resolve the problem quickly, while also ensuring that the security administrator can monitor and verify the programmer’s activity and revoke the access when it is no longer needed. An emergency ID is a temporary account that grants a user elevated privileges or access to a system or resource for a specific purpose and duration. An emergency ID should be:

Created and authorized by a security administrator or manager

Assigned to a specific user and purpose

Limited in scope and time

Logged and audited

Revoked and deleted after use

Some of the best practices for emergency access to live systems are12:

Establish clear policies and procedures for requesting, approving, granting, monitoring, reviewing, and revoking emergency access

Define criteria and scenarios for emergency access, such as severity, impact, urgency, and risk

Implement controls to prevent unauthorized or unnecessary use of emergency access, such as multifactor authentication, approval workflows, alerts, notifications, and time restrictions

Implement controls to track and audit emergency access activities, such as logging, reporting, analysis, and investigation

Implement controls to ensure accountability and responsibility for emergency access users, such as attestation, justification, documentation, and feedback

A comprehensive asset inventory is the most important factor for the successful establishment of a security vulnerability management program. A security vulnerability management program is a systematic process of identifying, assessing, prioritizing, and remediating vulnerabilities in the organization’s IT environment1. A comprehensive asset inventory is a complete and accurate record of all the hardware, software, and network components that the organization owns or uses2. A comprehensive asset inventory helps the organization to:

Know what assets are in scope for vulnerability scanning and assessment3.

Identify the vulnerabilities that affect each asset and their severity level4.

Prioritize the remediation of vulnerabilities based on the criticality and value of each asset.

Track the status and progress of vulnerability remediation for each asset.

Measure the effectiveness and maturity of the vulnerability management program.

A robust tabletop exercise plan is a simulated scenario that tests the organization’s preparedness and response capabilities for a potential cyberattack or incident. A tabletop exercise plan is useful for validating and improving the organization’s incident response plan, but it is not essential for establishing a security vulnerability management program.

A tested incident response plan is a documented process that defines the roles, responsibilities, and actions of the organization’s personnel in the event of a cyberattack or incident. A tested incident response plan is important for minimizing the impact and restoring normal operations after a security breach, but it is not critical for establishing a security vulnerability management program.

An approved patching policy is a set of rules and guidelines that governs how the organization applies patches and updates to its IT systems and applications. An approved patching policy is a key component of the remediation phase of the vulnerability management program, but it is not sufficient for establishing a security vulnerability management program.

An insider attack poses the greatest risk to an organization’s most sensitive data. An insider attack is a type of cyberattack that is carried out by someone who has legitimate access to the organization’s network, systems, or data, such as an employee, contractor, or business partner. An insider attack can be intentional or unintentional, malicious or negligent, and can have various motives, such as financial gain, revenge, espionage, sabotage, or curiosity.

An insider attack poses the greatest risk to an organization’s most sensitive data because:

An insider has a high level of trust and privilege within the organization, which allows them to bypass security controls and access confidential or restricted data without raising suspicion or detection.

An insider has a deep knowledge of the organization’s operations, processes, policies, and vulnerabilities, which enables them to exploit them effectively and cause maximum damage or disruption.

An insider can use various techniques and tools to conceal their identity and actions, such as encryption, steganography, deletion, or alteration of logs or evidence.

An insider can cause significant harm or loss to the organization in terms of data integrity, availability, confidentiality, reputation, compliance, and profitability.

According to the 2023 Cost of Insider Threats Global Report by Ponemon Institute and ObserveIT 1, the average annual cost of insider threats for organizations worldwide was $11.45 million in 2022, a 31% increase from 2018. The report also found that the average number of incidents per organization was 77 in 2022, a 47% increase from 2018. The report classified insider threats into three categories: careless or negligent employees or contractors, criminal or malicious insiders, and credential thieves. The report revealed that careless or negligent insiders were the most common and costly type of insider threat, accounting for 62% of all incidents and $4.58 million in costs.

The other options are not the greatest risk to an organization’s most sensitive data, although they can still pose significant threats.

A password attack is a type of cyberattack that attempts to guess or crack a user’s password to gain unauthorized access to their account or system. A password attack can use various methods, such as brute force, dictionary, rainbow table, phishing, keylogging, or social engineering. A password attack can compromise the security and privacy of the user’s data and information. However, a password attack can be prevented or mitigated by using strong and unique passwords, changing passwords frequently, enabling multi-factor authentication (MFA), and avoiding clicking on suspicious links or attachments.

An eavesdropping attack is a type of cyberattack that intercepts or monitors the communication between two parties without their knowledge or consent. An eavesdropping attack can use various techniques, such as wiretapping, packet sniffing, man-in-the-middle (MITM), or side-channel. An eavesdropping attack can expose the content and metadata of the communication, such as messages, files, voice calls, emails, etc. However, an eavesdropping attack can be prevented or mitigated by using encryption, authentication, digital signatures, VPNs (virtual private networks), or secure protocols.

A spear phishing attack is a type of phishing attack that targets a specific individual or group with personalized and convincing emails that appear to come from a trusted source. A spear phishing attack aims to trick the recipient into clicking on a malicious link or attachment that can infect their device with malware or steal their credentials or data. A spear phishing attack can compromise the security and privacy of the recipient’s data and information. However, a spear phishing attack can be prevented or mitigated by verifying the sender’s identity and email address, checking the email content for spelling and grammar errors, hovering over links before clicking on them (or not clicking at all), scanning attachments for viruses before opening them (or not opening at all), and reporting suspicious emails to IT security staff.