Isaca CISA Certified Information Systems Auditor Exam Practice Test

Understanding the specific agile methodology that will be followed is the first step that an IS auditor should do to ensure the effectiveness of the project audit. An IS auditor should familiarize themselves with the agile approach, principles, practices, and tools that will be used by the project team, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the project stakeholders. This will help the IS auditor to identify and assess the relevant risks and controls for the project audit. The other options are not the first steps that an IS auditor should do, but rather possible subsequent actions that may depend on the specific agile methodology. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.3.21

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 211

The most important input during the planning phase for an audit on the implementation of a bring your own device (BYOD) program is policies including BYOD acceptable user statements. Policies are documents that define the organization’s objectives, requirements, expectations, and responsibilities regarding a specific topic or area. BYOD policies should include acceptable user statements that specify what types of personal devices are allowed to connect to the corporate network, what security measures must be implemented on those devices, what data can be accessed or stored on those devices, what actions must be taken in case of device loss or theft, and what consequences will apply for non-compliance. Policies including BYOD acceptable user statements can provide an IS auditor with a clearunderstanding of the scope, criteria, and objectivesof the BYOD program audit. Findings from prior audits, results of a risk assessment, and an inventory of personal devices to be connected to the corporate network are also useful inputs for planning a BYOD program audit, but they are not as important as policies including BYOD acceptable user statements. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 381.

A change log is a record of all changes made to a system or application, including the date, time, description, and approval of each change. A change log can help an IS auditor to trace the source and authorization of a modification to a system’s security settings. A system event correlation report is a tool that analyzes data from multiple sources to identify patterns and anomalies that indicate potential security incidents. A database log is a record of all transactions and activities performed on a database,such as queries, updates, and backups. A security incident and event management (SIEM) report is a tool that collects, analyzes, and reports on data from various sources to detect and respond to security incidents. 

 Following a configuration management process to maintain applications is the primary reason for ensuring proper change control. Configuration management is a process of identifying, documenting, controlling, and verifying the configuration items and their interrelationships within an IT system or environment. Following a configuration management process can help to ensure that any changes to the applications are authorized, tested, documented, and tracked throughout their lifecycle. This will help to prevent unauthorized or improper changes that could affect the functionality, performance, or security of the applications. The other options are not the primary reasons for following a configuration management process, but rather possible benefits or outcomes of doing so. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.3.31

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 225

The greatest concern for an IS auditor when an international organization intends to roll out a global data privacy policy is that local regulations may contradict the policy. Data privacy regulations vary across different countries and regions, and they may impose different or conflicting requirements on how personal data can be collected, processed, stored, transferred, and disclosed. The organization should ensure that its global data privacy policy complies with the applicable local regulations in each jurisdiction where it operates, or risk facing legal sanctions or reputational damage. Requirements may become unreasonable, but this is not a major concern for an IS auditor, as it is a business decision that should be based on a cost-benefit analysis. The policy may conflict with existing application requirements, but this is not a serious concern for an IS auditor, as it can be resolved by modifying or updating the applications to align with the policy. Local management may not accept the policy, but this is not a critical concern for an IS auditor, as it can be mitigated by providing adequate training and awareness on the policy and its benefits. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, pages 406-4071

CISA Review Questions, Answers & ExplanationsDatabase, Question ID: 2592

The most important task for an IS auditor to perform after the merger of two organizations is to verify that access privileges have been reviewed. Access privileges are the permissions granted to users, groups, or roles to access, modify, or manage IT resources, such as systems, applications, data, or networks. After a merger, the IS auditor should ensure that the access privileges of both organizations are aligned with the new business objectives, policies, and processes, and that there are no conflicts, overlaps, or gaps in the access rights. The IS auditor should also verify that the access privileges are based on the principle of least privilege, which means that users are granted only the minimum level of access required to perform their tasks.

The other options are not as important as verifying that access privileges have been reviewed:

Investigating access rights for expiration dates is a useful task, but it is not the most important one. Expiration dates are the dates when access rights are automatically revoked or suspended after a certain period of time or after a specific event. The IS auditor should check that the expiration dates are set appropriately and enforced consistently, but this is not as critical as reviewing the access privileges themselves.

Updating the continuity plan for critical resources is a necessary task, but it is not the most urgent one. A continuity plan is a document that outlines the procedures and actions to be taken in the event of a disruption or disaster that affects the availability of IT resources. The IS auditor should update the continuity plan to reflect the changes and dependencies introduced by the merger, but this can be done after verifying that the access privileges are secure and compliant.

Updating the security policy is an essential task, but it is not the most immediate one. A security policy is a document that defines the rules and guidelines for securing IT resources and protecting information assets. The IS auditor should update the security policy to incorporate the best practices and standards of both organizations, and to address any new risks or threats posed by the merger, but this can be done after verifying that the access privileges are aligned with the policy.

The most effective way to ensure the integrity of data transmitted over a network is to use a message digest. A message digest is a cryptographic function that generates a unique and fixed-length value (also known as a hash or checksum) from any input data. The message digest can be used to verify that the data has not been altered or corrupted during transmission by comparing it with the message digest generated at the destination. Message encryption is a method of protecting the confidentiality of data transmitted over a network by transforming it into an unreadable format using a secret key. Message encryption does not ensure the integrity of data, as it does not prevent or detect unauthorized modifications. Certificate authority (CA) is an entity that issues and manages digital certificates that bind public keys to identities. CA does not ensure the integrity of data, as it does not prevent or detect unauthorized modifications. Steganography is a technique of hiding data within other data, such as images or audio files. Steganography does not ensure the integrity of data, as it does not prevent or detect unauthorized modifications. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, pages 383-3841

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 258

 Discovery sampling is an appropriate sampling method for an IS auditor who intends to launch an intensive investigation if one exception is found. Discovery sampling is a type of attribute sampling that determines the sample size based on an acceptable risk of not finding at least one occurrence of an attribute when a given rate of occurrence exists in a population. Discovery sampling can be used by an IS auditor who wants to detect fraud or errors that have a low probability but high impacton an audit objective. The other options are not appropriate sampling methods for this purpose, as they may involve judgmental sampling, variable sampling, or stratified sampling. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.31

CISA ReviewQuestions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 230

 Validating that assets are protected according to assigned classification is the primary role of the IS auditor in an organization’s information classification process. An IS auditor should evaluate whether the information security controls are adequate and effective in safeguarding the information assets based on their classification levels. The other options are not the primary role of the IS auditor, but rather the responsibilities of the information owners, custodians, or security managers. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 6, Section 6.2.31

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 206

 Control self-assessment (CSA) is a technique that enables business managers and staff to assess and improve the effectiveness of their own controls and risk management processes. CSA can best enable the timely identification of risk exposure, as it allows for continuous monitoring and reporting of risks by those who are closest to the business processes and activities. External audit review, internal audit review, and stress testing are also useful methods for identifying risk exposure, but they are not as timely as CSA, as they are performed periodically or on demand by external or internal parties whomay not have as much insight into the business operations and environment. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 95.

 This should be the IS auditor’s greatest concern, because it means that the organization has not considered the potential impact of the cloud document storage solution on its ability to continue its operations in the event of a disruption or disaster. A BCP is a document that outlines the procedures and actions to be taken in order to maintain or resume critical business functions during and after a crisis. A BCP should be updated whenever there is a significant change in the organization’s IT infrastructure, systems, processes, or dependencies, such as implementing a cloud document storage solution. The IS auditor should verify that the BCP reflects the current state of the organization’s IT environment, and that it addresses the risks, challenges, and opportunities associated with the cloud document storage solution.

The other options are not as concerning as the BCP not being updated:

Users are not required to sign updated acceptable use agreements. This is a minor concern, but it does not pose a major threat to the organization’s business continuity. Acceptable use agreements are documents that define the rules and guidelines for using IT resources, such as the cloud document storage solution. Users should sign updated acceptable use agreements to acknowledge their responsibilities and obligations, and to comply with the organization’spolicies and standards. However, this does not affect the organization’s ability to continue its operations in a crisis.

Users have not been trained on the new system. This is a moderate concern, but it does not jeopardize the organization’s business continuity. Training users on the new system is important to ensure that they can use it effectively and efficiently, and to avoid errors or misuse that could compromise the security or performance of the system. However, this does not prevent the organization from accessing or restoring its data in a crisis.

Mobile devices are not encrypted. This is a serious concern, but it does not directly impact the organization’s business continuity. Encrypting mobile devices is a security measure thatprotects the data stored on them from unauthorized access or disclosure in case of loss or theft. However, this does not affect the availability or integrity of the data stored in the cloud document storage solution, which should have its own encryption mechanisms.

The evidence collected during a digital forensic investigation would not be admissible in court if the logs failed to identify the person handling the evidence. This would violate the chain of custody principle, which requires that the evidence be properly documented, secured, and tracked throughout the investigation process. The chain of custody ensures that the evidence is authentic, reliable, andtrustworthy, and that it has not been tampered with or altered. The person who collected the evidence, whether qualified or not, is not relevant to the admissibility of the evidence, as long as they followed the proper procedures and protocols. The evidence collected by the internal forensics team can be admissible in court, as long as they are independent, objective, and competent. The evidence does not need to be fully backed up using a cloud-based solution prior to the trial, as long as it is preserved and protected from damage or loss. References: ISACA Journal Article: Digital Forensics: Chain of Custody

The best way to prevent accepting bad data from a third-party service provider is to implement business rules to reject invalid data. Business rules are logical statements that define the data quality requirements and standards for the organization. By implementing business rules, the organization can ensure that only data that meets the predefined criteria is accepted into the enterprise data warehouse. Obtaining error codes indicating failed data feeds, purchasing data cleansing tools from a reputable vendor, and appointing data quality champions across the organization are useful measures to improve data quality, but they do not prevent accepting bad data in the first place. References: ISACA Journal Article: Data Quality Management

Mapping IT processes to roles is an activity that provides an IS auditor with the most insight regarding potential single person dependencies that might exist within the organization. Single person dependencies occur when only one person has the knowledge, skills, or access rights to perform a critical IT function. Mapping IT processes to roles can help to identify such dependencies and assess their impact on the continuity and security of IT operations. The other activities do not provide as much insight into single person dependencies, as they do not show the relationship between IT processes and roles. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 94

 The IS auditor should be most concerned about the lack of follow-up education for staff members who failed the phishing simulation test. Phishing simulation tests are designed to assess the level of awareness and susceptibility of staff members to phishing attacks, and to provide feedback and training to improve their security behavior. If staff members who failed the test do not receive follow-up education, they will not learn from their mistakes and may continue to fall victim to real phishing attacks, which could compromise the security of the organization.

The other options are less concerning for the IS auditor:

Test results were not communicated to staff members. This is not ideal, as staff members should receive feedback on their performance and learn from the test results. However, this does not necessarily mean that they did not receive any training or education on how to avoid phishing attacks.

Staff members were not notified about the test beforehand. This is a common practice for phishing simulation tests, as it mimics the real-world scenario where staff members do not know when they will receive a phishing email. The purpose of the test is to measure their spontaneous reaction and awareness, not their preparedness or compliance.

Security awareness training was not provided prior to the test. This is not a major concern, as the test can serve as a baseline measurement of the current level of awareness and susceptibility of staff members, and as a starting point for providing tailored training and education based on the test results.

The most important factor for the organization to ensure when reducing the retention period for media containing completed low-value transactions is that the retention period complies with data owner responsibilities. Data owners are accountable for defining the retention and disposal requirements for the data under their custody, based on business, legal, regulatory, and contractual obligations. The policy should reflect the data owner’s decisions and obtain their approval. The policy should also include a risk-based approach, but this is not as important as complying with data owner responsibilities. The retention period should allow for review during the year-end audit, but this may not be necessary for low-value transactions that have minimal impact on financial reporting. The total transaction amount may have some impact on financial reporting, but this is not a direct consequence of reducing the retention period. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, pages 414-4151

CISA Review Questions, Answers & ExplanationsDatabase, Question ID: 255

The observation that should be of most concern to the auditor when reviewing security controls related to collaboration tools for a business unit responsible for intellectual property and patents is that employees can share files with users outside the company through collaboration tools. Collaboration tools are software or hardware devices that enable users to communicate, cooperate, and coordinate with each other on a common task or project. Collaboration tools can facilitate information sharing and knowledge exchange among users, but they can also pose security risks if not properly controlled or managed. Employees can share files with users outside the company through collaboration tools, as this can compromise the security and confidentiality of intellectual property and patents, which are valuable and sensitive assets of the organization. Employees may share files with unauthorized or untrusted users who may misuse or disclose the intellectual property and patents, either intentionally or unintentionally. This can cause harm or damage to the organization, such as loss of competitive advantage, reputation, revenue, or legal rights. Training was not provided to the department that handles intellectual property and patents is a possible observation that could indicate a security issue related to collaboration tools for a business unit responsible for intellectual property and patents, but it is not the most concerning one. Training is anactivity that educates and instructs users on how to use collaboration tools effectively and securely, such as how to access, share, store, and protect information using collaboration tools. Training was not provided to the department that handles intellectual property and patents, as this can affect the awareness and competence of users on collaboration tools, and increase the likelihood of errors or mistakes that may compromise the security or quality of information. However, this observation may not be directly related to collaboration tools, as it may apply to any information system or resource used by the department. Logging and monitoring for content filtering is not enabled is a possible observation that could indicate a security issue related to collaboration tools for a business unit responsible for intellectual property and patents, but it is not the most concerning one. Logging and monitoring are processes that record and analyze the events or activities that occur on an information system or network, such as user actions, system operations, data changes, errors, alerts, etc. Content filtering is a technique that blocks or allows access to certain types of information based on predefined criteria or rules, such as keywords, categories, sources, etc. Logging and monitoring for content filtering is not enabled, as this can affect the auditability, accountability, and visibility of collaboration tools, and prevent detection or investigation of security incidents or violations related to information sharing using collaboration tools. However, this observation may not be specific to collaboration tools, as it may affect any information system or network that uses content filtering. The collaboration tool is hosted and can only be accessed via anInternet browser is a possible observation that could indicate a security issue related to collaboration tools for a business unit responsible for intellectual property and patents, but it is not the most concerning one. A hosted collaboration tool is a type of cloud-based service that provides collaboration functionality over the Internet without requiring installation or maintenance on local devices. An Internet browser is a software application that enables users to access and interact with web-based content or services. The collaboration tool is hosted and can only be accessed via an Internet browser, as this can affect the availability and reliability of collaboration tools, and introduce security or privacy risks for information sharing using collaboration tools. However, this observation may not be unique to collaboration tools, as it may apply to any cloud-based service that uses an Internet browser. 

 The results of the previous audit are an important source of information for an IS auditor to consider when performing the risk assessment prior to an audit engagement, as they can provide insights into the current state and performance of the auditee, identify any issues or gaps that need to be followed up or addressed, and highlight any areas that require special attention or focus. The designof controls is an important factor to evaluate during an audit engagement, but it is not the most important thing to consider when performing the risk assessment prior to an audit engagement, as it does not reflect the actual implementation or effectiveness of the controls. Industry standards and best practices are useful benchmarks or guidelines for an IS auditor to compare or measure against during an audit engagement, but they are not the most important thing to consider when performing the risk assessment prior to an audit engagement, as they may not be applicable or relevant to the specific context or objectives of the auditee. The amount of time since the previous audit is a relevant criterion to determine the frequency or timing of an audit engagement, but it is not the most important thing to consider when performing the risk assessment prior to an audit engagement, as it does not indicate the level or nature of risk associated with the auditee. 

Asking management why the regulatory changes have not been included is the first thing that an IS auditor should do during the planning stage of a compliance audit. An IS auditor should inquire about the reasons for not updating the inventory of compliance requirements with recent regulatory changes related to managing data risk. This will help the IS auditor to understand whether there is a gap in awareness, communication, or implementation of compliance obligations within the organization. The other options are not the first things that an IS auditor should do, but rather possible subsequent actions that may depend on management’s response. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.31

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 214

Analyzing risks posed by new regulations is an appropriate role of internal audit in helping to establish an organization’s privacy program. An internal auditor can provide assurance and advisory services on the compliance and effectiveness of the privacy program, as well as identify and assess the potential risks and impacts of new or changing privacy regulations. The other options are not appropriate roles of internal audit, but rather the responsibilities of the management, the information security officer, or the privacy officer. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 7, Section 7.4.21

CISA Review Questions, Answers & ExplanationsDatabase, Question ID 216

 Providing security certification for a new system should include an evaluation of the configuration management practices prior to the system’s implementation. Configuration management is a process that ensures that the system’s components are identified, controlled, and tracked throughout the system’s lifecycle. Configuration management helps to maintain the security and integrity of the system by preventing unauthorized or unintended changes. End-user authorization to use the system in production is not part of security certification, but rather a post-implementation activity that grants access rights to authorized users. External audit sign-off on financial controls is not part of security certification, but rather a verification activity that ensures that the system complies with financial reporting standards. Testing of the system within the production environment is not part of securitycertification, but rather a validation activity that ensures that the system meets the functional and performance requirements. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, pages 449-4501

CISA Review Questions, Answers& Explanations Database, Question ID: 2572

 The audit charter is the document that defines the purpose, authority and responsibility of the IS audit function. It provides IS audit professionals with the best source of direction for performing audit functions, as it establishes the scope, objectives, reporting lines, independence, accountability and resources of the IS audit function. The IT steering committee is a governance body that oversees the strategic alignment, prioritization and direction of IT initiatives, but it does not provide specific guidance for IS audit functions. The information security policy is a document that defines the rules and principles for protecting information assets in the organization, but it does not cover all aspects of IS audit functions. Audit best practices are general guidelines and recommendations for conducting effective and efficient audits, but they are not binding or authoritative sources of direction for IS audit functions. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) 1, Chapter 1: Information Systems Auditing Process, Section 1.1: Audit Charter.

This is the most helpful method for measuring benefits realization for a new system, because it involves evaluating the actual outcomes and impacts of the system after it has been implemented and used for a certain period of time. A post-implementation review can compare the actual benefits with the expected benefits that were defined in the business case or the benefits realization plan, and identify any gaps, issues, or opportunities for improvement. A post-implementation review can also assess theeffectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction of the system’s users, stakeholders, and customers, and provide feedback and recommendations for future enhancements or changes.

The other options are not as helpful as post-implementation review for measuring benefits realization for a new system:

Function point analysis. This is a technique that measures the size and complexity of a software system based on the number and types of functions it provides. Function point analysiscan help estimate the cost, effort, and time required to develop, maintain, or enhance a software system, but it does not measure the actual benefits or value that the system delivers to the organization or its users.

Balanced scorecard review. This is a strategic management tool that measures the performance of an organization or a business unit based on four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth. A balanced scorecard review can help align the organization’s vision, mission, and goals with its activities and outcomes, but it does not measure the specific benefits or impacts of a new system.

Business impact analysis (BIA). This is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects of a disruption or disaster on the organization’s critical business functions and processes. A BIA can help determine the recovery priorities, objectives, and strategies for the organization in case of an emergency, but it does not measure the benefits or value of a new system.

A firewall is a device or software that monitors and controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules. A firewall can help protect an organization’s network and information systems from unauthorized or malicious access, by filtering or blocking unwanted or harmful packets. The most important thing for an IS auditor to verify when evaluating an organization’s firewall is that the logs are being collected in a separate protected host. Logs are records of events or activities that occur on a system or network, such as connections, requests, responses, errors, and alerts. Logs can provide valuable information for auditing, monitoring, troubleshooting, and investigating security incidents. However, logs can also be tampered with, deleted, or corrupted by attackers or insiders who want to hide their tracks or evidence of their actions. Therefore, it is essential that logs are stored in a separate host that is isolated and secured from the network and the firewall itself, to prevent unauthorized access or modification of the logs. Automated alerts are being sent when a risk is detected is a good practice for enhancing the security and efficiency of a firewall, but it is not the most important thing for an IS auditor to verify, as alerts may not always be accurate, timely, or actionable. Insider attacks are being controlled is a desirable outcome for a firewall, but it is not the most important thing for an IS auditor to verify, as insider attacks may involve other factors or methods that bypass or compromise the firewall, such as social engineering, credential theft, or physical access. Access to configuration files is restricted is a critical control for ensuring the security and integrity of a firewall, but it is not the most important thing for an IS auditor to verify, as configuration files may not reflect the actual state or performance of the firewall. 

 The business process supported by the system is the most important factor for an IS auditor to understand when planning an audit to assess application controls of a cloud-based system. An IS auditor should have a clear understanding of the business objectives, requirements, and risks of the process, as well as the expected outputs and outcomes of the system. This will help the IS auditor to determine the scope, objectives, and criteria of the audit, as well as to identify and evaluate the key application controls that ensure the effectiveness, efficiency, and reliability of the process. The other options are less important factors that may provide additional information or context for the audit, but not its primary focus. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5,Section 5.31

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 212

The best source of information for an IS auditor to use when determining whether an organization’s information security policy is adequate is the risk assessment results. The risk assessment results provide the auditor with an overview of the organization’s risk profile, including the identification, analysis, and evaluation of the risks that affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information assets. The auditor can use the risk assessment results to compare the organization’s information security policy with the risk appetite, risk tolerance, and risk treatment strategies of the organization. The auditor can also use the risk assessment results to evaluate if the information security policy is aligned with the organization’s objectives, requirements, and regulations.

Some of the web sources that support this answer are:

Performance Measurement Guide for Information Security

ISO 27001 Annex A.5 - Information Security Policies

[CISA Certified Information Systems Auditor – Question0551]

 A service level agreement (SLA) is a contract between a service provider and a customer that defines the expected level of performance, risks, and capabilities of an IT infrastructure. An IS auditor can use an SLA to measure how well the IT infrastructure meets the business needs and objectives, as well as to identify any gaps or issues that need to be addressed. The other options are not directly related to measuring the performance, risks, and capabilities of an IT infrastructure. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.2.11

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 203

This should be the first thing that an IS auditor considers when evaluating firewall rules, because it defines the objectives, standards, and guidelines for securing the organization’s network andinformation assets. The firewall rules should be aligned with the organization’s security policy, and reflect the level of risk and protection required for each type of network traffic, system, or data. The IS auditor should compare the firewall rules with the security policy, and identify any discrepancies, gaps, or conflicts that could compromise the security or performance of the network.

The other options are not as important as the organization’s security policy when evaluating firewall rules:

The number of remote nodes. This is a factor that may affect the complexity and scalability of the firewall rules, but it is not a primary consideration for the IS auditor. Remote nodes are devices or systems that connect to the network from outside locations, such as teleworkers, mobile users, or branch offices. The IS auditor should ensure that the firewall rules provide adequate security and access control for remote nodes, but this depends on the organization’s security policy and business needs.

The firewalls’ default settings. These are the predefined configurations that come with the firewall devices or software, and that determine how they handle network traffic by default. The IS auditor should review the firewalls’ default settings, and verify that they are appropriate and secure for the organization’s network environment. However, the firewalls’ default settings may not match the organization’s security policy or specific requirements, and may need to be customized or overridden by firewall rules.

The physical location of the firewalls. This is a factor that may affect the placement and design of the firewall rules, but it is not a critical consideration for the IS auditor. The physical location of the firewalls refers to where they are installed or deployed in relation to the network topology, such as at the network perimeter, between network segments, or on individual hosts. The IS auditor should ensure that the firewall rules are consistent and coordinated across different locations, but this depends on the organization’s security policy and network architecture.

The IS auditor’s next step after determining that many terminated users’ accounts were not disabled is to perform a review of terminated users’ account activity. This means that the IS auditor should check whether any of the terminated users’ accounts were accessed or used after their termination date, which could indicate unauthorized or fraudulent activity. The IS auditor should also assess the impact and risk of such activity on the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of IT resources and data. The other options are not as appropriate as performing a review of terminated users’ account activity, as they do not provide sufficient evidence or assurance of the extent and effect of the problem. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 240

The most information about the transaction audit trail in an online application can be obtained by reviewing the system/process flowchart. A system/process flowchart is a diagram that illustrates the sequence of steps, activities, or events that occur within or affect a system or process. A system/process flowchart can provide the most information about the transaction audit trail in an online application, by showing how transactions are initiated, processed, recorded, and completed, and identifying the inputs, outputs, controls, and dependencies involved in each transaction. File layouts are specifications that define how data are structured or organized on a file or database. File layouts can provide some information about the transaction audit trail in an online application, by showing what data elements are stored or retrieved for each transaction, but they do not provide information about how transactions are executed or tracked. Data architecture is a framework that defines how data are collected, stored, managed, and used within an organization or system. Data architecture can provide some information about the transaction audit trail in an online application, by showing what data sources, models, standards, and policies are used for each transaction, but they do not provide information about how transactions are performed or monitored. Source code documentation is a description or explanation of the source code of a software program or application. Source code documentation can provide some information about the transaction audit trail in an online application, by showing what logic, algorithms, or functions are used for each transaction, but they do not provide information about how transactions are handled or audited. 

The best recommendation is to place an intrusion detection system (IDS) between the firewall and the Internet. An IDS is a device or software that monitors network traffic for malicious activity and alerts the network administrator or takes preventive action. By placing an IDS between the firewall and theInternet, the IS auditor can enhance the security of the network perimeter and detect any attack attempts that the firewall was unable to recognize.

The other options are not as effective as placing an IDS between the firewall and the Internet:

Placing an IDS between the firewall and the organization’s web server would not protect the web server from external attacks that bypass the firewall. The web server should be placed in a demilitarized zone (DMZ), which is a separate network segment that isolates public-facing servers from the internal network.

Placing an IDS between the firewall and the demilitarized zone (DMZ) would not protect the DMZ from external attacks that bypass the firewall. The DMZ should be protected by twofirewalls, one facing the Internet and one facing the internal network, with an IDS monitoring both sides of each firewall.

Placing an IDS between the firewall and the organization’s network would not protect the organization’s network from external attacks that bypass the firewall. The organization’s network should be protected by a firewall that blocks unauthorized traffic from entering or leaving the network, with an IDS monitoring both sides of the firewall.

The best source of information for IT management to estimate resource requirements for future projects is the records of actual time spent on projects. This data can provide a realistic and reliable basis for forecasting future resource needs based on historical trends and patterns. The records of actual time spent on projects can also help IT management to identify any gaps or inefficiencies in resource allocation and utilization. The human resources (HR) sourcing strategy is not a good source of information for estimating resource requirements for future projects, as it may not reflect the actual demand and availability of IT resources. The peer organization staffing benchmarks are not a good source of information for estimating resource requirements for future projects, as they may not account for the specific characteristics and needs of each organization. The budgeted forecast for the next financial year is not a good source of information for estimating resource requirements for future projects, as it may not be based on accurate or realistic assumptions. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, pages 465-4661

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database,Question ID: 263

 Developing the CSA questionnaire is an activity that would allow an IS auditor to maintain independence while facilitating a control self-assessment (CSA). An IS auditor can design and provide a CSA questionnaire to help the business units or process owners to evaluate their own controls and identify any issues or improvement opportunities. This will enable an IS auditor to support and guide the CSA process without compromising their objectivity or independence. The other options are activities that would impair an IS auditor’s independence while facilitating a CSA, as they involve implementing, completing, or developing remediation actions for control issues. References:

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

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 215

The primary reason for an IS auditor to use data analytics techniques is to reduce detection risk. Detection risk is the risk that an IS auditor will fail to detect material errors or irregularities in the information systems environment. By using data analytics techniques, such as data extraction, analysis, visualization, and reporting, an IS auditor can enhance the audit scope, coverage, efficiency, and effectiveness. Data analytics techniques can help an IS auditor to identify anomalies, patterns, trends, correlations, and outliers in large volumes of data that may indicate potential issues or risks. Technology risk, control risk, and inherent risk are types of audit risk that are not directly affected by the use of data analytics techniques by an IS auditor. References: [ISACA Journal Article: Data Analytics for Auditors]

 Incremental backups are backups that only copy the data that has changed since the last backup, whether it was a full or incremental backup. The main reason to use incremental backups is to minimize the backup time and resources, as they require less storage space and network bandwidth than full backups. Incremental backups can also improve key availability metrics, such as recovery point objective (RPO) and recovery time objective (RTO), but that is not their primary purpose. Reducing costs associated with backups and increasing backup resiliency and redundancy are possible benefits of incremental backups, but they depend on other factors, such as the backup frequency, retention policy, and media type. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version): Chapter 5 - Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience

In a RAO model, which stands for Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed, the accountable role must be assigned to only one individual. The accountable role is the person who has the ultimate authority and responsibility for the outcome of the project or task, and who approves or rejects the work done by the responsible role. The accountable role cannot be delegated or shared, as it is essential to have a clear and single point of accountability for each project or task.

The other roles can be assigned to more than one individual:

Responsible. This is the person who does the work or performs the task. There can be multiple responsible roles for different aspects or phases of a project or task, as long as they are coordinated and supervised by the accountable role.

Informed. This is the person who needs to be notified or updated about the progress or results of the project or task. There can be multiple informed roles who have an interest or stake in the project or task, but who do not need to be consulted or involved in the decision-making process.

Consulted. This is the person who provides input, feedback, or advice on the project or task. There can be multiple consulted roles who have expertise or experience relevant to the project or task, but who do not have the authority or responsibility to approve or reject the work done by the responsible role.

 Risk assessment is a mandatory part of the annual audit planning process, as it helps to identify and prioritize the areas that pose the highest risk to the organization’s objectives and operations. Risk assessment involves analyzing the internal and external factors that affect the organization’s risk profile, evaluating the likelihood and impact of potential events or scenarios, assessing the existing controls and mitigation strategies, and determining the residual risk level. Based on the risk assessment results, the IS auditor can allocate resources and schedule audits accordingly. A business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that identifies and evaluates the critical business functions and processes that could be disrupted by a disaster or incident, and estimates the potential impact on the organization’s operations, reputation and finances. A BIA is not a mandatory part of the annual audit planning process, but it can be used as an input for risk assessment or as a subject for audit. Fieldwork is the phase of an audit where the IS auditor collects evidence to support the audit objectives andconclusions. Fieldwork is not part of the annual audit planning process, but it is part of each individual audit engagement. A risk control matrix is a tool that maps the risks identified in a risk assessment to the controls that mitigate them. A risk control matrix is not a mandatory part of the annual audit planning process, but it can be used as an output of risk assessment or as a tool for audit testing. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) 1, Chapter 1: Information Systems Auditing Process, Section 1.2: Audit Planning.

 The most significant concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an industrial control system (ICS) that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit is that there is a greater risk of system exploitation. System exploitation is an attack that occurs when an unauthorized entity or individual takes advantage of a vulnerability or weakness in a system to compromise its security or functionality. System exploitation can cause harm or damage to the system or its users, such as data loss, corruption, theft, manipulation, denial of service (DoS), etc. An ICS that uses older unsupported technology poses a high risk of system exploitation, as older technology may have known or unknown vulnerabilities or defects that have not been patched or fixed by the vendor or manufacturer, and unsupported technology may not receive any updates or support from the vendor or manufacturer in case of issues or incidents. Attack vectors are evolving for industrial control systems is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. Attack vectors are methods or pathways that attackers use to gain access to or attack a system. Attack vectors are evolving for industrial control systems, as attackers are developing new techniques or tools to target ICSs that are increasingly connected and complex. However, this concern may not be specific to older unsupported technology, as it may affect any ICS regardless of its technology level. Disaster recovery plans (DRPs) are not in place is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. DRPs are documents that outline the technical and operational steps for restoring the IT systems and infrastructure that support critical functions or processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. DRPs are not in place, as they may affect the availability and continuity of the ICS and its functions or processes in case of a failure or incident. However, this concern may not be related to older unsupported technology, as it may apply to any ICS regardless of its technology level. Technical specifications are not documented is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. Technical specifications are documents that describe the technical characteristics or requirements of a system or component, such as functionality, performance, design, etc. Technical specifications are not documented, as they may affect the understanding, maintenance, and improvement of the ICS and its components. However, this concern may not beassociated with older unsupported technology, as it may affect any ICS regardless of its technology level. 

 The best environment for copying data and transforming it into a compatible data warehouse format is the staging environment. The staging environment is a temporary area where data from various sources are extracted, transformed, and loaded (ETL) before being moved to the data warehouse. The staging environment allows for data cleansing, validation, integration, and standardization without affecting the source or target systems. The testing environment is not suitable for copying data and transforming it into a compatible data warehouse format, as it is used for verifying and validating the functionality and performance of applications or systems. The replication environment is not suitable for copying data and transforming it into a compatible data warehouse format, as it is used for creating identical copies of data or systems for backup or recovery purposes. The development environment is not suitable for copying data and transforming it into a compatible data warehouse format, as it is used for creating or modifying applications or systems. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, pages 475-4761

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 2642

Clustering is a technique that groups multiple servers or nodes together to act as one system, providing high availability, scalability, and load balancing for applications or services. Clustering can improve system resiliency, which is the ability of a system to withstand or recover from failures or disruptions without compromising its functionality or performance. Clustering can achieve this by providing redundancy and fault tolerance for critical components or processes, enabling automatic failover and recovery in case of node failures, distributing workload among multiple nodes to avoid overloading or bottlenecks, and allowing dynamic addition or removal of nodes to meet changingdemand or capacity needs. Clustering may also decrease system response time by improving performance and efficiency through load balancing and parallel processing, but this is not its primary purpose. Clustering may facilitate faster backups by enabling concurrent backup operations across multiple nodes, but this is not its main benefit. Clustering may improve the recovery time objective (RTO), which is the maximum acceptable time for restoring a system or service after a disruption, by reducing the downtime and data loss caused by failures, but this is not the best reason for using clustering, as there may be other factors that affect the RTO, such as backup frequency, recovery procedures, and testing methods. 

 IT value analysis has not been completed is a finding from an IT governance review that should be of greatest concern. IT value analysis is a process of measuring and demonstrating the contribution of IT to the organization’s goals and objectives. An IS auditor should be concerned about the lack of IT value analysis, as it may indicate that the IT investments and resources are not aligned with the business needs and expectations, or that the IT performance and outcomes are not monitored and evaluated. The other options are less critical findings that may not have a significant impact on the IT governance. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.11

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 218

Continuous auditing is a method of performing audit-related activities on a real-time or near real-time basis. Continuous auditing is best suited for real-time transactions, such as online banking, e-commerce, or electronic funds transfer, that require immediate verification and assurance. Low-value transactions are not necessarily suitable for continuous auditing, as they may not pose significant risks or require frequent monitoring. Irregular transactions are not suitable for continuous auditing, as they may not occur frequently or consistently enough to justify the use of continuous auditing techniques.Manual transactions are not suitable for continuous auditing, as they may not be captured or processed by automated systems that enable continuous auditing. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, pages 307-3081

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 253

Determining accountability of data owners is the most important activity in the data classification process. Data classification is a process that assigns categories or labels to data based on their value, sensitivity, criticality and risk to the organization. Data classification helps to determine the appropriate level of protection, access and retention for data. Determining accountability of data owners is an activity that identifies and assigns roles and responsibilities for data classification, protection and management to individuals or functions within the organization. Data owners are individuals or functions who have authority and responsibility for defining, classifying, protecting and managing data throughout their lifecycle. Determining accountability of data owners is essential for ensuring that data are classified correctly and consistently, and that data classification policies and procedures are followed and enforced. The other options are not as important as option C, as they are dependent on or derived from the accountability of data owners. Labeling the data appropriately is an activity that applies the categories or labels assigned by data owners to data based on their classification criteria. Identifying risk associated with the data is an activity that assesses the potential impact and likelihood of loss, disclosure, modification or destruction of data based on their classification level. Determining the adequacy of privacy controls is an activity that evaluates whether the controls implemented to protect personal or sensitive data are sufficient and effective based on their classification level. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) , Chapter 5: Protection of Information Assets, Section 5.3: Data Classification.

The first action that an IS auditor should take when finding a high-risk vulnerability in a public-facing web server used to process online customer payments is to identify compensating controls. Compensating controls are alternative or additional controls that provide reasonable assurance of mitigating the risk of exploiting the vulnerability. The IS auditor should assess the effectiveness of the compensating controls and determine whether they reduce the risk to an acceptable level. If not, the ISauditor should recommend remediation actions to address the vulnerability. Documenting the exception in an audit report is an important action, but it should not be the first action, as it does not address the urgency of the situation. Reviewing security incident reports is a useful action, but it should not be the first action, as it does not provide assurance of preventing future incidents. Notifying the audit committee is a necessary action, but it should not be the first action, as it does not involve taking any corrective measures. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, pages 295-2961

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 260

he design of an incident management process should include prioritization criteria to ensure that incidents are handled according to their impact and urgency. Without prioritization criteria, the organization may not be able to allocate resources effectively and respond to incidents in a timely manner. Expected time to resolve incidents, service management standards, and metrics reporting are important aspects of incident management, but they are not as critical as prioritization criteria for thedesign of the process. References: ISACA Journal Article: Incident Management: A Practical Approach

 The auditor’s best course of action when senior management disagrees with some of the facts presented in the draft audit report is to gather evidence to analyze senior management’s objections. The auditor should not revise the assessment, escalate the issue, or finalize the report without changes until they have evaluated the validity and relevance of senior management’s objections and resolved any discrepancies or misunderstandings. The auditor should maintain a professional and objective attitude and seek to present a fair and accurate audit report based on sufficient and appropriate evidence. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), page 372

CISA Questions,Answers & Explanations Database, question ID 3338

 The IS auditor’s primary concern when auditing the proposed acquisition of new computer hardware is that a clear business case has been established. A business case is a document that justifies the need, feasibility, and benefits of a proposed project or investment. A clear business case can help to ensure that the acquisition of new computer hardware is aligned with the organization’s goals, objectives, and requirements, and that it provides value for money and return on investment. The other options are not as important as establishing a clear business case, as they do not address the rationale or justification for acquiring new computer hardware. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 467

The system only allows payments to vendors who are included in the system’s master vendor list is an example of a preventative control in an accounts payable system. A preventative control is a control that aims to prevent errors or irregularities from occurring in the first place. By restricting payments to vendors who are authorized and verified in the master vendor list, the system prevents unauthorized or fraudulent payments from being made. The other options are examples of other types of controls, such as backup (recovery), reconciliation (detective), and communication (directive) controls. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 223

Recent third-party IS audit reports would be most helpful in determining the effectiveness of the IT governance framework of the target company. IT governance is a framework that defines the roles, responsibilities, and processes for aligning IT strategy with business strategy. A third-party IS audit is an independent and objective examination of an organization’s IT governance framework by an external auditor. Recent third-party IS audit reports can provide reliable and unbiased evidence of the strengths, weaknesses, and maturity of the IT governance framework of the target company. The other options are not as helpful as recent third-party IS audit reports, as they may not be as comprehensive, accurate, or current as external audits. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 94

According to the ISACA’s Information Security Governance Guidance for Boards of Directors and Executive Management, the highest level of maturity of an information security program is Level 5: Optimized, which means that the program is aligned with the business objectives and strategy, and continuously monitors and improves its performance and effectiveness. A framework is in place to measure risks and track effectiveness, and the program is proactive, adaptive, and innovative.

The other options represent lower levels of maturity:

A training program is in place to promote information security awareness. This is Level 2: Repeatable, which means that the program has some basic policies and procedures, and provides awareness training to employees.

Information security policies and procedures are established. This is Level 3: Defined, which means that the program has formalized policies and procedures, and assigns roles and responsibilities for information security.

The program meets regulatory and compliance requirements. This is Level 4: Managed, which means that the program has established metrics and reporting mechanisms, and complies with relevant laws and regulations.

References: : ISACA. (2001). Information Security Governance Guidance for B

The best recommendation for the IS auditor to facilitate compliance with the new regulation is to include the requirement in the incident management response plan. An incident management response plan is a document that defines the roles, responsibilities, processes, and procedures for responding to security incidents. By including the new regulation in the plan, the IS auditor can ensure that the organization is aware of the reporting obligation, has a clear workflow for notifying the regulator within 24 hours, and has the necessary documentation and evidence to support the report.

The other options are not as effective as including the requirement in the incident management response plan:

Establishing key performance indicators (KPIs) for timely identification of security incidents is a good practice, but it does not guarantee compliance with the regulation. KPIs are metrics that measure the performance of a process or activity, but they do not specify how to perform it. The IS auditor should also provide guidance on how to identify and report security incidents within 24 hours.

Engaging an external security incident response expert for incident handling is a possible option, but it may not be feasible or cost-effective. The organization may not have the budget or time to hire an external expert, or may prefer to handle the incidents internally. The IS auditor should also evaluate the qualifications and trustworthiness of the external expert, and ensure that they comply with the regulation and other contractual or legal obligations.

Enhancing the alert functionality of the intrusion detection system (IDS) is a useful measure, but it is not sufficient to comply with the regulation. An IDS is a tool that monitors network traffic for malicious activity and alerts the network administrator or takes preventive action. However, an IDS may not detect all types of security incidents, or may generate false positivesor negatives. The IS auditor should also consider other sources of incident detection, such as logs, reports, audits, or user feedback.

 Antivirus software has been implemented on the guest operating system only is the observation that an IS auditor would consider the greatest risk when conducting an audit of a virtual server farm for potential software vulnerabilities. A virtual server farm is a collection of servers that run multiple virtual machines (VMs) on a single physical host using a software layer called a hypervisor. A guest operating system is the operating system installed on each VM. Antivirus software is a softwareprogram that detects and removes malicious software from a computer system. If antivirus software has been implemented on the guest operating system only, it means that the hypervisor and the host operating system are not protected from malware attacks, which could compromise the security and availability of all VMs running on the same host. Therefore, antivirus software should be implemented on both the guest and host operating systems as well as on the hypervisor. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 378

 Changes to the job scheduler application’s parameters are not approved and reviewed by an operations supervisor. This is a serious control weakness that could compromise the integrity, availability, and security of the IT operations. An IS auditor should be concerned about the lack of oversight and accountability for such changes, which could result in unauthorized, erroneous, or malicious modifications that affect the processing environment. The other options are less critical issues that may not have a significant impact on the IT operations. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.3.11

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 202

 Social engineering is a technique that exploits human weaknesses, such as trust, curiosity, or greed, to obtain information or access from a target. An employee is induced to reveal confidential IP addresses and passwords by answering questions over the phone is an example of a social engineering attack method, as it involves manipulating the employee into divulging sensitive information that can be used to compromise the network or system. A hacker walks around an office building using scanning tools to search for a wireless network to gain access, an intruder eavesdrops and collects sensitive information flowing through the network and sells it to third parties, and an unauthorized person attempts to gain access to secure premises by following an authorized person through a secure door are not examples of social engineering attack methods, as they do not involve human interaction or deception. References: [ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition], page 361.

 Capacity management is a process that ensures that the IT resources of an organization are sufficient to meet the current and future demands of the business. Capacity management enables organizations toidentify the extent to which components need to be upgraded, by monitoring and analyzing the performance, utilization, and availability of the IT components, such as servers, networks, storage, applications, etc., and identifying any bottlenecks, gaps, or risks that may affect the service level agreements (SLAs) or quality of service (QoS). Capacity management also helps organizations to plan and optimize the use of IT resources, by forecasting the future demand and growth of the business, and aligning the IT capacity with the business needs and objectives. Forecasting technology trends is a possible outcome of capacity management, but it is not its main purpose. Establishing the capacity of network communication links is a part of capacity management, but it is not its main goal. Determining business transaction volumes is an input for capacity management, but it is not its main objective.

 Ensuring that the facts presented in the report are correct is the most important thing for an IS auditor to do during an exit meeting with an auditee. An IS auditor should confirm that the audit findings and observations are accurate, complete, and supported by sufficient evidence, as well as that the auditee understands and agrees with them. This will help to avoid any misunderstandings or disputes later on, as well as to enhance the credibility and quality of the audit report. The other options are less important things for an IS auditor to do during an exit meeting, as they may involve communicating the recommendations to senior management, specifying implementation dates for the recommendations, or requesting input in determining corrective action. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.5.21

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 222

 The auditor’s next course of action should be to evaluate the appropriateness of the remedial action taken by the auditee. The auditor should assess whether the alternative approach taken by the auditee is effective, efficient, and aligned with the audit objectives and recommendations. The auditor should also consider the impact of the change on the audit scope, criteria, and risk assessment. Conducting a risk analysis incorporating the change, reporting results of the follow-up to the audit committee, and informing senior management of the change in approach are possible subsequent actions that the auditor may take after evaluating the appropriateness of the remedial action taken. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version): Chapter 1 - Information Systems Auditing Process

The greatest security risk associated with data migration from a legacy human resources (HR) system to a cloud-based system is data from the source and target system may be intercepted. Data interception is an attack that occurs when an unauthorized entity or individual captures or accesses data that are being transmitted or stored on an information system or network. Data interception can compromise the confidentiality and integrity of data, and cause harm or damage to data owners or users. Data migration from a legacy HR system to a cloud-based system involves transferring data from one system or location to another system or location over a network connection. This poses a high risk of data interception, as data may be exposed or vulnerable during transit or storage on unsecured or untrusted networks or systems. Data from the source and target system may have different data formats is a possible challenge associated with data migration from a legacy HR system to a cloud-based system, but it is not a security risk. Data formats are specifications that define how data are structured or encoded on an information system or network. Data formats may vary depending on different systems or platforms. Data migration may require converting data from one format to another format to ensure compatibility and interoperability between systems. Records past their retention period may not be migrated to the new system is a possible outcome associated with data migration from a legacy HR system to a cloud-based system, but it is not a security risk. Retention period is a duration that defines how long data should be kept or stored on an information system or network before being deleted or destroyed. Retention period may depend on various factors such as legal requirements, business needs, storage capacity, etc. Data migration may involve deleting or destroying data that are past their retention period to reduce the volume or complexity of data to be transferred or to comply with regulations or policies. System performance may be impacted by the migration is a possible impact associated with data migration from a legacy HR system to a cloud-based system, but it is not asecurity risk. System performance is a measure of how well an information system or network functions or operates, such as speed, reliability, availability, etc. System performance may be affected by data migration, as data migration mayconsume significant resources or bandwidth, cause interruptions or delays, or introduce errors or inconsistencies. 

The most assurance over the completeness and accuracy of loan application processing with respect to the implementation of a new system can be obtained by running historical transactions through the new system. Historical transactions are transactions that have been processed and recorded by the old system in the past. Running historical transactions through the new system can provide the most assurance over the completeness and accuracy of loan application processing, bycomparing the results and outputs of the new system with those of the old system, and verifying whether they match or differ. This can help identify and resolve any errors or issues that may arise from the new system, such as data conversion, functionality, compatibility, etc. Comparing code between old and new systems is a possible way to obtain some assurance over the completeness and accuracy of loan application processing with respect to the implementation of a new system, but it is not the most effective one. Code is a set of instructions or commands that define how a system operates or functions. Comparing code between old and new systems can provide some assurance over the completeness and accuracy of loan application processing, by checking whether the logic, algorithms, or functions of the new system are consistent or equivalent with those of the old system. However, this may not be sufficient or reliable, as code may not reflect the actual performance or outcomes of the system, and may not detect any errors or issues that may occur at the data or user level. Reviewing quality assurance (QA) procedures is a possible way to obtain some assurance over the completeness and accuracy of loan application processing with respect to the implementation of a new system, but it is not the most effective one. QA procedures are steps or activities that ensure that a system meets its quality standards and requirements, such as testing, verification, validation, etc. Reviewing QA procedures can provide some assurance over the completeness and accuracy of loan application processing, by evaluating whether the new system has been properly tested and verified before implementation. However, this may not be adequate or accurate, as QA procedures may not cover all aspects or scenarios of loan application processing, and may not reveal any errors or issues that may arise after implementation. Loading balance and transaction data to the new system is a possible way to obtain some assurance over the completeness and accuracy of loan application processing with respect to the implementation of a new system, but it is not the most effective one. Balance and transaction data are data that reflect the status and history of loan applications in a system, such as amounts, dates, payments, etc. Loading balance and transaction data to the new system can provide some assurance over the completeness andaccuracy of loan application processing, by transferring data from the old system to the new system and ensuring that they are consistent and correct. However, this may not be enough or valid, as balance and transaction data may not represent all aspects or features of loan application processing, and may not indicate any errors or issues that may arise

 Decreased time for incident resolution is the best indicator that an incident management process is effective. Incident management is a process that aims to restore normal service operation as quickly as possible after an incident, which is an unplanned interruption or reduction in quality of an IT service. Decreased time for incident resolution means that the incident management process is able to identify, analyze, respond to, and resolve incidents efficiently and effectively. The other indicatorsdo not necessarily reflect the effectiveness of the incident management process, as they may depend on other factors such as the nature, frequency, and severity of incidents. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 372

IT disaster recovery time objectives (RTOs) are the maximum acceptable time that an IT system can be unavailable after a disaster before it causes unacceptable consequences for the business. IT RTOs should be based on the business-defined criticality of the systems, which reflects how important they are for supporting the business processes and functions. The maximum tolerable loss of data, the nature of the outage, and the maximum tolerable downtime (MTD) are also factors that affect the IT RTOs, but they are not the primary basis for determining them. 

 A business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects or consequences of disruptions or disasters on an organization’s critical business functions or processes. A BIA can help prioritize the recovery of critical functions by assessing their importance and urgency for the organization’s operations, objectives, and stakeholders, and determining their recovery time objectives (RTOs), which are the maximum acceptable time for restoring a functionafter a disruption. A business continuity plan (BCP) testing is a process that verifies and validates the effectiveness and readiness of a BCP, which is a document that outlines the strategies and procedures for ensuring the continuity of critical business functions in the event of a disruption or disaster. A BCP testing does not prioritize the recovery of critical functions, but rather evaluates how well they are recovered according to the BCP. A disaster recovery plan (DRP) testing is a process that verifies and validates the effectiveness and readiness of a DRP, which is a document that outlines the technical and operational steps for restoring the IT systems and infrastructure that support critical business functions in the event of a disruption or disaster. A DRP testing does not prioritize the recovery of critical functions, but rather evaluates how well they are supported by the IT systems and infrastructure according to the DRP. A risk assessment is a process that identifies and analyzes the potential threats and vulnerabilities that could affect an organization’s critical business functions or processes. A risk assessment does not prioritize the recovery of critical functions, but rather estimates their likelihood and impact of being disrupted by various risk scenarios. 

Ensuring access rules agree with policies is an information systems security officer’s primary responsibility for business process applications. An information systems security officer should verifythat the access controls implemented for the business process applications are consistent with the organization’s security policy and objectives. The other options are not the primary responsibility of an information systems security officer, but rather the tasks of an application owner, a senior management, or a business analyst. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 7, Section 7.3.11

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 208

 Access rights provisioned according to scheme would best help to support an auditor’s conclusion about the effectiveness of an implemented data classification program. This would indicate that the data classification program has been properly implemented and enforced, and that the data is protected according to its sensitivity and value. The other options are not sufficient to demonstrate the effectiveness of a data classification program, as they do not show how the data is actually accessed and used by authorized users. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 6, Section 6.2.31

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 2042

 Requiring documentation that the finding will be addressed within the new system is the best course of action for a follow-up audit. An IS auditor should obtain evidence that the complex security vulnerability of low risk will be resolved in the new system and that there is a reasonable timeline for its implementation. The other options are not appropriate courses of action, as they may be too costly, time-consuming, or impractical for a low-risk finding. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.5.31

CISA Review Questions, Answers& Explanations Database, Question ID 209

 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 best indicator of whether a PIR performed by the PMO was effective is whether project outcomes have been realized. Project outcomes are the benefits or value that a project delivers to its stakeholders, such as improved efficiency, quality, customer satisfaction, or revenue. A PIR should evaluate whether project outcomes have been achieved in accordance with project objectives, scope, budget, and schedule. The other options are not as good as project outcomes in determining the effectiveness of a PIR. Lessons learned are valuable inputs for improving future projects, but they do not measure whether project outcomes have been realized. Management approval of the PIR report is a sign of acceptance and support for the PIR findings and recommendations, but it does not reflect whether project outcomes have been achieved. The review performed by an external provider is a way of ensuring objectivity and independence for the PIR, but it does not guarantee whether project outcomes have been realized. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

 The first course of action when a data breach has occurred due to malware is to quarantine the impacted systems. This means isolating the infected systems from the rest of the network and preventing any further communication or data transfer with them. This can help contain the spread of the malware, limit the damage and exposure of sensitive data, and facilitate the investigation and remediation of the incident. Quarantining the impacted systems can also help preserve the evidence and logs that may be needed for forensic analysis or legal action.

References:

[1] provides a guide on how to respond to a data breach caused by malware and recommends quarantining the impacted systems as the first step.

[2] explains what is malware and how it can cause data breaches, and suggests quarantining the infected devices as a best practice.

[3] describes the steps involved in quarantining a system infected by malware and the benefits of doing so.

The best recommendation to facilitate compliance with the regulation that requires organizations to report significant security incidents to the regulator within 24 hours of identification is to include the requirement in the incident management response plan. An incident management response plan is a document that defines the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and tools for managing security incidents effectively and efficiently. Including the requirement in the incident management response plan can help ensure that security incidents are identified, classified, reported, and escalated in accordance with the regulation. The other options are not as effective as including the requirement in the incident management response plan, as they do not address all aspects of incident management or compliance. Establishing key performance indicators (KPIs) for timely identification of security incidents is a monitoring technique that can help measure and improve the performance of incident management processes, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation. Enhancing the alert functionality of the intrusion detection system (IDS) is a technical control that can help detect and notify security incidents faster, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation. Engaging an external security incident response expert for incident handling is a contingency measure that can help augment the organization’s internal capabilities and resources for managing security incidents, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2

Moving validation controls from the server side into the browser would most likely increase the risk of a successful attack by structured query language (SQL) injection. SQL injection is a technique that exploits a security vulnerability in an application’s database layer by inserting malicious SQL statements into user input fields. Validation controls are used to check and filter user input before sending it to the database. If these controls are moved to the browser, they can be easily bypassed or modified by an attacker, who can then execute arbitrary SQL commands on the database. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 361

 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 first thing that should be done when an intrusion into an organization network is detected is to identify nodes that have been compromised. Identifying nodes that have been compromised is a critical step in responding to an intrusion, as it helps determine the scope, impact, and source of the attack, and enables the implementation of appropriate containment and recovery measures. The other options are not the first things that should be done when an intrusion into an organization network is detected, as they may be premature or ineffective without identifying nodes that have been compromised. Blocking all compromised network nodes is a containment measure that can help isolate and prevent the spread of the attack, but it may not be possible or feasible without identifying nodes that have been compromised. Contacting law enforcement is a reporting measure that can help seek external assistance and comply with legal obligations, but it may not be necessary or appropriate without identifying nodes that have been compromised. Notifying senior management is a communication measure that can helpinform and escalate the incident, but it may not be urgent or accurate without identifying nodes that have been compromised. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2

 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 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 fraudulentelectronic funds transfers from occurring. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

The security architecture of an online application is a design that describes how various security components and controls are integrated and configured to protect the application from internal and external threats. When auditing the security architecture of an online application, an IS auditor should first review the location of the firewall within the network, as this determines how effectively the firewall can filter and monitor the traffic between different network segments and zones. The firewall standards, configuration, and firmware version are also important aspects to review, but they are secondary to the location of the firewall.

 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. 

 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 testmay 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 ShouldYou Choose It?

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. Thisreduces 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 best method to safeguard data on an organization’s laptop computers is full disk encryption. Full disk encryption is a technique that encrypts all the data stored on a harddrive, including the operating system, applications, files, and folders. This means that if the laptop is lost, stolen, or accessed by an unauthorized person, they will not be able to read or modify any data without knowing the encryption key or password. Full disk encryption provides a strong level of protection for data at rest, as it prevents data leakage or exposure in case of physical theft or loss of the device.

References:

How to Protect theData on Your Laptop

6 Steps to Practice Strong Laptop Security

The expected costs for recovering the business would be used when performing a business impact analysis (BIA). A BIA is a process of identifying and evaluating the potential effects ofdisruptions to critical business functions or processes. A BIA helps to determine the recovery priorities, strategies, and resources needed to resume normal operations after a disruption. One of the key outputs of a BIA is an estimate of the financial losses or costs associated with different types of disruptions, such as lost revenue, increased expenses, contractual penalties, or regulatory fines.

The greatest risk associated with an incomplete inventory of deployed software in an organization is the inability to deploy updated security patches. Security patches are updates that fix vulnerabilities or bugs in software that could be exploited by attackers. Without an accurate inventory of software versions and configurations, it is difficult to identify and apply the relevant patches in a timely manner, which exposes the organization to increased security risks. Inability to close unused ports on critical servers, inability to identify unused licenses within the organization, and inability to determine the cost of deployed software are not as critical as security risks. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 308

 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 most effective way to detect an intrusion attempt is to periodically review log files, which record the activities and events on a system or network. Log files can provide evidence of unauthorized access attempts, malicious activities, or system errors. Configuring the router as a firewall, using smart cards with one-time passwords, and installing biometrics-basedauthentication are preventive controls that can reduce the likelihood of an intrusion, but they do not detect it. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 301

The best way to determine whether a test of a disaster recovery plan (DRP) was successful is to analyze whether predetermined test objectives were met. Test objectives are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that define what the test aims to accomplish and how it will be evaluated. Test objectives should be aligned with the DRP objectives and scope, and should cover aspects such as recovery time objectives (RTOs), recovery point objectives (RPOs), critical business functions, roles and responsibilities, communication channels, backup systems, and contingency procedures. By comparing the actual test results with the expected test objectives, the IS auditor can measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the DRP and identify any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. 

 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 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 orobservations. 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 strategy that would provide the greatest assurance of system quality at implementation is delivering only the core functionality on the initial target date. This strategy can help avoid compromising the quality of the system by focusing on the essential features that meet the user needs and expectations. Delivering only the core functionality can also help reduce the scope creep, complexity, and testing efforts of the system development project.

Implementing overtime pay and bonuses for all development staff, utilizing new system development tools to improve productivity, and recruiting IS staff to expedite system development are not strategiesthat would provide the greatest assurance of system quality at implementation. These strategies may help speed up the system development process, but they may also introduce new risks or challenges such as burnout, learning curve, integration issues, or communication gaps. These risks or challenges may adversely affect the quality of the system.

 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 (DigitalVersion), Chapter 5, Section 5.4.3

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. 

Prior to a follow-up engagement, if an IS auditor learns that management has decided to accept a level of residual risk related to an audit finding without remediation, the IS auditor should report the issue to IS audit management. This is because IS audit management is responsible for ensuring that audit findings are properly communicated and resolved. Accepting management’s decision and continuing the follow-up would not address the IS auditor’s concern. Reporting the disagreement to the board or executive management would be premature and inappropriate without consulting IS audit management first. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1, Section 1.6

 The most important task before implementing any associated email controls to prevent sensitive information from being emailed outside the organization by employees is to develop an information classification scheme. An information classification scheme is a framework that defines the categories and levels of sensitivity for different types of information, such as public, internal, confidential, or secret. An information classification scheme can help implement email controls by providing criteria and guidelines for identifying, labeling, handling, and protecting sensitive information in email attachments. The other options are not as important as developing an information classification scheme, as they do not address the root cause of the problem or provide the same benefits. Requiring all employees to sign nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) is a legal control that can help deter or penalize employees from disclosing sensitive information, but it does not prevent them from emailing it outside the organization. Developing an acceptable use policy for end-user computing (EUC) is a governance control that can help define and communicate the rules and expectations for using IT resources, such as email, but it does not prevent employees from emailing sensitive information outside the organization. Providing notification to employees about possible email monitoring is a transparency control that can help inform and warn employees about the potential consequences of emailing sensitive information outside the organization, but it does not prevent them from doing so. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2

 If an IS auditor finds that management did not address a prior period audit finding, the next course of action should be to interview management to determine why the finding was not addressed, as this would help to understand the root cause, the impact, and the risk level of the issue. Noting the exception in a new report, recommending alternative solutions, or conducting a risk assessment arepossible subsequent steps, but they should not precede interviewing management. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1, Section 1.6

Ransomwareis a type of malicious software that encrypts the victim’s data and demands a ransom for its decryption1. Ransomware attacks can cause significant damage to an organization’s operations, reputation, andfinances1. Therefore, it is important to mitigate the impact of ransomware attacks by implementing effective prevention and recovery strategies.

One of the best ways to mitigate the impact of ransomware attacks is to back up data frequently12345. Data backups are copies of the organization’s data that are stored in a separate location or medium, such as an external harddrive, cloud storage, or tape2. Data backupscan help the organization restore its data in case of a ransomware attack, without paying the ransom or losing valuable information2. Data backups shouldbe performed regularly, preferably daily or weekly, depending on the criticality and volume of the data2. Data backups should also be tested periodically to ensure their integrity and usability2.

The other options are not as effective as backing up data frequently in mitigating the impact of ransomware attacks. Invoking the disaster recovery plan (DRP) is a reactive measure that can help the organization resume its operations after a ransomware attack, but it does not prevent or reduce the damage caused by the attack3. Paying the ransom is not a recommended option, as it does not guarantee the decryption of the data or the deletion of the stolen data by the attackers. Paying the ransom also encourages further attacks and funds criminal activities14. Requiring password changes for administrative accounts is a good security practice, but it is not sufficient to prevent or recover from ransomware attacks. Ransomware attacks can exploit other vulnerabilities, such as phishing emails, outdated software, or weak network security15.

References: 1: How to Mitigatethe Risk of Ransomware Attacks: The Definitive Guide 2: Mitigating malwareand ransomware attacks - The National Cyber Security Centre 3: 3 steps to prevent and recover from ransomware 4: Ransomware Epidemic: Use these 8 Strategies to Mitigate Risk 5: Practical Steps to Mitigate Ransomware Attacks - ITSecurityWire

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

Deferring remediation testing until the next audit is justified only when there are significant changes in the audit environment that affect the relevance or validity of the audit observations and recommendations. For example, if there are changes in the business processes, systems, regulations, or risks that require a new audit scope or approach. The other options are not valid justifications for deferring remediation testing, as they do not address the timeliness or quality of the audit follow-up process. The auditor who conducted the audit and agreed with the timeline has left the organization does not affect the responsibility of the audit function to ensure that remediation testing is performed as planned. Management’s planned actions are sufficient given the relative importance of the observations does not guarantee that management will actually implement those actions or that they will be effective in addressing the audit issues. Auditee management has accepted all observations reported by the auditor does not eliminate the need for verification of remediation actions by an independent party. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.4

The IS auditor’s best recommendation is to ensure that programmers cannot access code after the completion of program edits. This is because programmers who have access to code after editing may introduce unauthorized or malicious changes that could compromise the security, functionality, or performance of the application. By restricting access to code after editing, the organization can ensurethat only authorized and tested code is released into production, and prevent any tampering or reoccurrence of the same issue.

References:

1 discusses the importance of controlling access to code after editing and testing, and provides some best practices for doing so.

2 explains how programmers can introduce malicious code into applications, and how to prevent and detect such attacks.

3 describes the role of IS auditors in reviewing and assessing the security and quality of application code.

 The greatest concern for an IS auditor reviewing data conversion and migration during the implementation of a new application system is unauthorized data modifications occurred during conversion. Unauthorized data modifications are changes or alterations to data that are not authorized, intended, or expected, such as due to errors, fraud, or sabotage. Unauthorized data modifications occurred during conversion can compromise the accuracy, completeness, andintegrity of the data being converted and migrated to the new application system, and may result in data loss, corruption, or inconsistency. The other options are not as concerning as unauthorized data modifications occurred during conversion in reviewing data conversion and migration during the implementation of a new application system, as they do not affect the accuracy, completeness, or integrity of the data being converted and migrated. Data conversion was performed using manual processes is a possible factor that may increase the risk or complexity of data conversion and migration, but it does not necessarily imply that unauthorized data modifications occurred during conversion. Backups of the old system and data are not available online is a possible factor that may affect the availability or accessibility of the old system and data for backup or recovery purposes, but it does not imply that unauthorized data modifications occurred during conversion. The change management process was not formally documented is a possible factor that may affect the quality or consistency of the change management process for implementing the new application system, but it does not imply that unauthorized data modifications occurred during conversion. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

The IS auditor should inform audit management of the earlier involvement in designing the application. This is to ensure that there is no conflict of interest or bias that may affect the objectivity or independence of the audit. Audit management can then decide whether to assign a different auditor or to proceed with the same auditor with appropriate safeguards. The other options are not appropriate for the IS auditor to do in this situation. Refusing the assignment to avoid conflict of interest is an extrememeasure that may not be necessary or feasible, especially if there are no other qualified auditors available. Using the knowledge of the application to carry out the audit is risky, as it may lead to overlooking or ignoring potential issues or errors in the application. Modifying the scope of the audit is not advisable, as it may compromise the quality or completeness of the audit. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.1

 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’sgoals 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, andprevious 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, thesefactors 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 recommendation for a small IT web development company where developers must have write access to production is to remove production access from the developers. Production access is theability to modify or update the live systems or applications that are used by customers or end users. Production access should be restricted to authorized and qualified personnel only, as any changes or errors in production can affect the functionality, performance, or security of the systems or applications. Developers should not have write access to production, as they may introduce bugs,vulnerabilities, or inconsistencies in the code that can compromise the quality or reliability of the systems or applications. The other options are not as effective as removing production access from the developers, as they do not address the root cause of the problem or provide the same benefits. Hiring another person to perform migration to production is a costly solution that can help segregate the roles and responsibilities of developers and migrators, but it does not remove production access from the developers. Implementing continuous monitoring controls is a good practice that can help detect and correct any issues or anomalies in production, but it does not remove production access from the developers. Performing a user access review for the development team is a detective control that can help verify and validate the access rights and privileges of developers, but it does not remove production access from the developers. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

If an IS audit reveals that an organization is not proactively addressing known vulnerabilities, the IS auditor should recommend that the organization assess the security risks to the business first, as this would help to prioritize the vulnerabilities based on their impact and likelihood, and determine the appropriate mitigation strategies. Verifying the disaster recovery plan (DRP) has been tested, ensuring the intrusion prevention system (IPS) is effective, and confirming the incident response team understands the issue are important steps, but they are not as urgent as assessing the security risks to the business. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.6

The IS auditor’s best course of action if they suspect an organization’s computer may have been used to commit a crime is to contact the incident response team to conduct an investigation. The incident response team is a group of experts who are responsible for responding to security incidents, such as data breaches, ransomware attacks, or cybercrimes. The incident response team can help to preserve and collect digital evidence, determine the scope and impact of the incident, contain and eradicate the threat, and restore normal operations. The IS auditor should not examine the computer themselves, as they may inadvertently alter or destroy potential evidence, or compromise the chain of custody. The IS auditor should also not notify local law enforcement before further investigation, as this may escalatethe situation unnecessarily or interfere with the internal investigation process. The IS auditor should advise management of the crime after the investigation, or as soon as possible if there is an imminent risk or legal obligation to do so.

The most effective way to maintain network integrity when using mobile devices is to implement network access control. Network access control is a security control that regulates and restricts access to network resources based on predefined policies and criteria, such as device type, identity, location, or security posture. Network access control can help maintain network integrity when using mobile devices by preventing unauthorized or compromised devices from accessing or affecting networksystems or data. The other options are not as effective as network access control in maintaining network integrity when using mobile devices, as they do not address all aspects of network access or security. Implementing outbound firewall rules is a security control that filters and blocks network traffic based on source, destination, protocol, or port, but it does not regulate or restrict network access based on device characteristics or conditions. Performing network reviews is a monitoring activity that evaluates and reports on the performance, availability, or security of network resources, but it does not regulate or restrict network access based on device characteristics or conditions. Reviewing access control lists is a verification activity that validates and confirms the access rights and privileges of network users or devices, but it does not regulate or restrict network access based on device characteristics or conditions. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.2.2

 The best metric to assure compliance with the policy of providing security awareness training to all new employees is the percentage of new hires that have completed the training, as this directly measures the extent to which the policy is implemented and enforced. The number of new hires who have violated enterprise security policies, the number of reported incidents by new hires, and the percentage of new hires who report incidents are not directly related to the policy, as they may depend on other factors such as the nature and frequency of threats, the effectiveness of security controls, and the reporting culture of the organization. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.7

 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 manipulationto 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 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 foroverseeing 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

 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 requirescareful 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: ISACACISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 281

The most important control to assess in an audit of an organization’s accounts payable processes is segregation of duties between issuing purchase orders and making payments. Segregation of duties is a principle that requires different individuals or departments to perform different tasks or functions within a process, in order to prevent fraud, errors, or conflicts of interest. In the accounts payableprocess, segregation of duties between issuing purchase orders and making payments ensures that no one person can initiate and complete a transaction without proper authorization and verification. This reduces the risk of duplicate payments, overpayments, unauthorized payments, or payments to fictitious vendors.

References:

Accounts payable controls

Accounts Payable Internal Controls: A Simple Checklist

 Data integrity is the property that ensures that data is accurate, complete, consistent, and reliable throughout its lifecycle. The best data integrity check is tracing data back to the point of origin, which is the source where the data was originally created or captured. This check can verify that data has not been altered or corrupted during transmission, processing, or storage. It can also identify any errors or discrepancies in data entry or conversion. Counting the transactions processed per day is a performance measure that does not directly assess data integrity. Performing a sequence check is a validity check that ensures that data follows a predefined order or pattern. It can detect missing or out-of-order data elements, but it cannot verify their accuracy or completeness. Preparing and running test data is a testing technique that simulates real data to evaluate how a system handles different scenarios. It can help identify errors or bugs in the system logic or functionality, but it cannot ensure data integrity in production environments. References: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience, CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

Application level firewalls are the best control to prevent the transfer of files to external parties through instant messaging (IM) applications, because they can inspect and filter network traffic based on application-specific protocols and commands, such as IM file transfer commands. Application levelfirewalls can block or allow IM file transfers based on predefined rules or policies. File level encryption, file transfer protocol (FTP), and instant messaging policy are not effective controls to prevent IM file transfers, because they donot restrict or monitor IM network traffic. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1

The primary benefit of using a dry-pipe fire-suppression system rather than a wet-pipe system is that a dry-pipe system has a decreased risk of leakage, as the pipes are filled with pressurized air or nitrogen instead of water until the system is activated. A wet-pipe system has a higher risk of leakage, corrosion, and freezing. A dry-pipe system is not more effective at suppressing flames, as it uses the same water-based suppressant as a wet-pipe system. A dry-pipe system does not allow more time to abort release of the suppressant, as it has a delay of only a few seconds before the water is released. A dry-pipe systemdoes not disperse dry chemical suppressants exclusively, as it uses water as the primary suppressant. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.2.3

 The auditor’s best course of action in this situation is to notify the audit manager. The audit manager is responsible for overseeing the audit follow-up process and ensuring that audit issues are resolved in a timely and satisfactory manner. The audit manager can then decide whether to escalate the matter to higher authorities, such as the chair of the audit committee, or to accept management’s decision and close the audit finding. The other options are not appropriate for the auditor to do without consulting with the audit manager first. Notifying the chair of the audit committee 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. Retesting the control is not necessary, as management has already decided not to implement therecommendations. Closing the audit finding is premature, as management’s decision may not be aligned with the audit objectives or risk appetite. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.4

 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 physicallocations 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

Parallel processing is a system implementation approach that involves running the new system and the old system simultaneously for a period of time until the new system is verified and accepted. The primary advantage of parallel processing is that it provides assurance that the new system meets performance requirements and produces the same or better results as the old system. Parallel processing also minimizes the risk of system failure and data loss, as the old system can be used as a backup or fallback option in case of any problems with the new system.

The IS auditor’s first course of action should be to verify the results of the critical automatic calculations made by the system to determine the validity of user concerns. This is because the IS auditor needs to obtain sufficient and appropriate audit evidence to support the audit findings and conclusions. By verifying the results, the IS auditor can assess whether there are any errors or discrepancies in the system’s calculations that could affect the accuracy and reliability of the financial data. The IS auditor can use various techniques to verify the results, such as re-performing the calculations, comparing them with expected values, or tracing them to source documents. 

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-lockfunction are also good practices, but they may not be sufficient oreffective in preventing data leakage from lost or stolen devices. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.3

 The first thing that an IS auditor should review when finding that transaction processing times in an order processing system have significantly increased after a major release is stress testing results. Stress testing is a type of testing that evaluates how a system performs under extreme or abnormal conditions, such as high volume, load, or concurrency of transactions. Stress testing results can help explain why transaction processing times in an order processing system have significantly increased after a major release by revealing any bottlenecks, limitations, or errors in the system’s capacity, performance, or functionality under stress. The other options are not as relevant as stress testing results in explaining why transaction processing times in an order processing system have significantly increased after a major release, as they do not directly measure how the systemperforms under extreme or abnormal conditions. Capacity management plan is a document that defines and implements the processes and activities for ensuring that the system has adequate resources and capabilities to meet current and future demands. Training plans are documents that define and implement the processes and activities for ensuring that the system users have adequate skills and knowledge to use the system effectively and efficiently. Database conversion results are outcomes or outputs of transforming data from one format or structure to another to suit the system’s requirements or specifications. References: CISA Review Manual (DigitalVersion), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

 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 thefirewall rules are not effective solutions to address theroot cause of the false positive alerts, but rather ways to cope with the consequences. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section5.4.3

Risk-based auditing is an audit approach that focuses on the analysis and management of risk within an organization. Risk-based auditing helps identify and prioritize the areas or processes that pose the highest risk to the organization’s objectives and allocate audit resources accordingly. Risk-based auditing also helps provide assurance and advisory services related to the organization’s risk management processes and controls. By using risk-based auditing, internal auditors can optimize the use of their audit resources and add value to the organization.

Agile auditing, continuous auditing, and outsourced auditing are not audit approaches that are most helpful in optimizing the use of IS audit resources. Agile auditing is a flexible and iterative audit methodology that adapts to changing circumstances and stakeholder needs. Continuous auditing is a method of performing audit activities on a real-time or near-real-time basis using automated tools and techniques. Outsourced auditing is a practice of contracting external auditors to perform some or all of the internal audit functions. These audit methods may have some advantages or disadvantages depending on the context and objectives of the audit, but they do not necessarily optimize the use of IS audit resources.

Implementing business rules to validate employee data entry is the best way to reduce the likelihood of future occurrences of poor data quality that cause customer complaints about receiving different items from what they ordered on the organization’s website. Business rules are logical statements that define the conditions and actions for data validation, such as checking for data completeness, accuracy, consistency, and integrity. Assigning responsibility for improving data quality, investing in additional employee training for data entry, and outsourcing data cleansing activities to reliable third parties are also possible ways to improve data quality, but they are not as effective as implementing business rulesto validate employee data entry. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1

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 andstandards. 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

Data loss can occur due to various reasons, such as accidental deletion, hardware failure, malware infection, theft, or unauthorized access. Data classification procedures can help to identify and protect sensitive data, but they are not sufficient to prevent data loss. The most effective way to protect against data loss is to conduct periodic security awareness training for employees, which can educate them on the importance of data security, the best practices for data handling and storage, and the common threats and risks to data. 

The best guard against the risk of attack by hackers is encryption. Encryption is the process of transforming data into an unreadable format using a secret key or algorithm. Encryption can protect data in transit and at rest from unauthorized access, modification, or disclosure by hackers. Encryption can also ensure the authenticity and integrity of data by using digital signatures or hashes.

Tunneling, message validation, and firewalls are not the best guards against the risk of attack by hackers. Tunneling is a technique that encapsulates one network protocol within another to create a secure connection between two endpoints. Message validation is a process that verifies the format, content, and origin of a message before accepting it. Firewalls are devices or software that filter network traffic based on predefined rules. These controls may help reduce the exposure or impact of hacker attacks, but they do not provide the same level of protection as encryption.

The executive management concern that could be addressed by the implementation of a security metrics dashboard is the effectiveness of the security program. A security metrics dashboard is a tool that provides a visual representation of key performance indicators (KPIs) and key risk indicators (KRIs) related to the organization’s information security objectives and activities. A security metrics dashboard can help executive management monitor and evaluate the performance and value delivery of the security program, identify strengths and weaknesses, assess compliance with policies and standards, and support decision making and improvement initiatives. Security incidents vs. industry benchmarks, total number of hours budgeted to security, and total number of false positives are not executive management concerns that could be addressed by the implementation of a security metrics dashboard. These are more operational or technical aspects of information security that could be measured and reported by other means, such as incident reports, budget reports, or log analysis. References: [ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition], page 302

 The IS auditor’s next course of action after finding that firewalls are outdated and not supported by vendors should be to determine the risk of not replacing the firewall. Outdated firewalls may have known vulnerabilities that can be exploited by attackers to bypass security controls and access the network. They may also lack compatibility with newer technologies or standards that are required for optimal network performance and protection. Not replacing the firewall could expose the organization to various threats, such as data breaches, denial-of-service attacks, malware infections, or regulatory non-compliance. The IS auditor should assess the likelihood and impact of these threats and quantify the risk level for management to make informed decisions.

The most effective method to verify that a service vendor keeps control levels as required by the client is to conduct periodic on-site assessments using agreed-upon criteria. On-site assessments can providedirect evidence of whether the vendor’s controls are operating effectively and consistently in accordance with the client’s expectations and requirements. Agreed-upon criteria can ensure that the assessments are objective, relevant, and reliable. The other options are not as effective as on-site assessments in verifying the vendor’s control levels. Periodically reviewing the SLA with the vendor can help monitor whether the vendor meets its contractual obligations and service standards, but it does not provide assurance of whether the vendor’s controls are adequate or sufficient. Conducting an unannounced vulnerability assessment of vendor’s IT systems can help identify any weaknesses or gaps in the vendor’s security controls, but it may violate the terms and conditions of the vendor-client relationship or cause operational disruptions. Obtaining evidence of the vendor’s CSA can provide some indication of whether the vendor’s controls are self-monitored and reported, but it does not verify whether the vendor’s controls are independent or accurate. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.4

 IT governance is a framework that defines the roles, responsibilities, and processes for aligning IT strategy with business strategy. The board of directors of an organization is ultimately accountable for IT governance and has the authority to approve the IT strategy. The board of directors does not need to address technical IT issues, be informed of all IT initiatives, or have an IT strategy committee, as these tasks can be delegated to other stakeholders or committees within the organization.

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 themin 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 theprocedures. This ensures that the procedures are consistent, accurate, reliable, and secure. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 401

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 betested regularly and thoroughly to identify and resolve any issues or gaps that might hinder itsexecution2345. 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 toensure that the backup systems, data, anddocumentation 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 andperformance 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.

Amongthese methods, full interruption testing would best demonstrate that an effectiveDRP is in place, as it provides the most accurate and comprehensive evaluation ofthe 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 ofthe 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 normaloperations4. Therefore, it should be planned carefullyand 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 atheoretical 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 toKnow - Enterprise Storage Forum 5: Disaster Recovery Testing Best Practices - MSP360 1: How to Test a Disaster Recovery Plan - Abacus

Business processes should be the primary focus of an IS auditor when developing a risk-based IS audit program, because they represent the core activities and functions of the organization that support its objectives and goals. Business processes also involve the use of IT resources and systems that may pose risks to the organization’s performance and compliance. A risk-based IS audit program should identify and assess the risks associated with the business processes and determine the appropriate audit scope and procedures to provide assurance on their effectiveness and efficiency. Portfolio management, business plans, and IT strategic plans are also relevant factors for developing a risk-based IS audit program, but they are not as important as business processes. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1

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 first thing that an IS auditor should do when a follow-up audit reveals some management action plans have not been initiated is to escalate the lack of plan completion to executive management. This is because the failure to implement the agreed management action plans may indicate that the management is not taking the audit findings and recommendations seriously, or that they are accepting too much risk by not addressing the identified issues. Escalating the lack of plan completion to executive management can help to raise awareness and accountability, as well as to seek support and intervention to ensure that the management action plans are executed in a timely and effective manner12.

Confirming whether the identified risks are still valid is not the first thing to do, although it may be a useful step to reassess the current situation and the potential impact of not implementing the management action plans. However,confirming the validity of the risks does not address the rootcauseof why the management action plans have not been initiated, nor does it provide any assurance or remediation for the unresolved issues34.

Providing a report to the audit committee is not the first thing to do, although it may be a necessary step to communicate and document the results of the follow-up audit. However, providing a report to the audit committee does not guarantee that the management action plans will be initiated, nor does it resolve any conflicts or challenges that may prevent the management from implementing them34.

Requesting an additional action plan review to confirm the findings is not the first thing to do, although it may be a prudent step to verify and validate the accuracy and completeness of the follow-up audit. However, requesting an additional review may delay or defer the implementation of the management action plans, as well as consume more internalaudit resources and time

 The best option to provide an IS auditor assurance that the interface between a point-of-sale (POS) system and the general ledger is transferring sales data completely and accurately is A. Electronic copies of customer sales receipts are maintained. Electronic copies of customer sales receipts are records of the transactions that occurred at the POS system, which can be compared with the data transferred to the general ledger. This can help detect any errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the data transfer process and ensure that the sales data is complete and accurate.

The other options are not as effective as A in providing assurance that the interface between the POS system and the general ledger is transferring sales data completely and accurately. B. Monthly bank statements are reconciled without exception. Monthly bank statements are records of the cash inflowsand outflows of the organization, which may not match with the sales data recorded by the POS system and the general ledger. For example, there may be delays, discounts, returns, or refundsthat affect the cash flow but not the sales revenue. Therefore, reconciling monthly bank statements without exception does not necessarily mean that the sales data is complete and accurate. C. Nightly batch processing has been replaced with real-time processing. Nightly batch processing is a method of transferring data from the POS system to the general ledger in batches at a scheduled time, usually at night. Real-time processing is a method of transferring data from the POS system to the general ledger as soon as the transactions occur. Real-time processing may improve the timeliness and efficiency of the data transfer process, but it does not guarantee that the sales data is complete and accurate. There may still be errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the data transfer process that need to be detected and corrected. D. The data transferred over the POS interface is encrypted. Encryption is a process of transforming data into an unreadable form using a secret key or algorithm, so that only authorized parties can access the original data. Encryption protects the confidentiality and security of the data transferred over the POS interface, but it does not ensure that the sales data is complete and accurate. There may still be errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the data transfer process that need to be detected and corrected.

References:

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

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

Sales Audit Overview - Oracle3

Notes on Audit of Ledgers - Guidelines to Auditors - Accountlearning

 The most important process to help ensure the application provides accurate calculations is quality assurance (QA), which involves verifying that the application meets the specified requirements and standards, and testing the application for functionality, performance, reliability, security, and usability. QA helps to identify and correct any defects or errors in the application before it is deployed to the production environment. Key performance indicator (KPI) monitoring, change management, and configuration management are important processes for managing and maintaining the application after it is implemented, but they do not directly ensure the accuracy of the calculationsperformed by the application. References: CISA Review Manual(Digital Version), Chapter 3: Information Systems Acquisition, Development & Implementation, Section 3.3: Practices for Quality Assurance

Performing user acceptance testing (UAT) is the most important activity before implementing a new system, as it ensures that the system meets the user requirements and expectations, and that it is free of major defects. Documenting last-minute enhancements, performing a pre-implementation audit, and ensuring that code has been reviewed are also important activities, but they arenot as critical as UAT. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2

 The auditor’s best recommendation prior to go-live is to conduct a mock conversion test. This is because a mock conversion test can help to verify the accuracy, completeness, and validity of the data conversion process. A mock conversion test can also help to identify and resolve any issues or errors before the actual conversion takes place. A mock conversion test can also provide assurance that the converted data meets the business requirements and expectations. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3.21

CISAOnline Review Course, Domain 2, Module 2, Lesson 22

 A computer forensic audit is a process of collecting, preserving, analyzing, and presenting digital evidence from electronic devices in a legally admissible manner. It is most relevant in situations where data loss due to hacking of servers occurs, as it can help to identify the source, method, and extent of the attack, as well as recover the lost or damaged data. The other options are not as suitable for a computer forensic audit, as they relate to internal control issues, data quality issues, orsystem maintenance issues, which can be addressed by other types of audits or reviews. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Domain 4: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience, Section 4.5 Computer Forensics1

 A primary responsibility of an IT steering committee is prioritizing IT projects in accordance with business requirements, as this ensures that IT resources are allocated to support the strategic objectives and needs of the organization. Reviewing periodic IT risk assessments, validating and monitoring the skill sets of IT department staff, and establishing IT budgets for the business are important activities, but they are not the primary responsibility of an IT steering committee. They may be delegated to other IT governance bodies or functions within the organization. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: Information Systems Auditing Process, Section 1.2: IT Governance

Full disk encryption (FDE) is a means of protecting information by encrypting all of thedata on a disk, including temporary files, programs, and system files1. FDE is best suited for addressing the risk scenario of physical theft of media on which information is stored, as it prevents unauthorized access to the data even if the device is lost or stolen2. FDE does not prevent data leakage as a result of employees leaving to work for competitors, as they may still have access to the data while using the device or copy the data to another device before leaving. FDE does not prevent noncompliance fines related to storage of regulated information, as it does not ensure that the data is stored in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations. FDE does not prevent unauthorized logical access to information through an application interface, as it does not control the access rights and permissions of users and applications. *References: According to the ISACA IT Audit and Assurance Standards, Guidelines and Tools and Techniques for IS Audit and Assurance Professionals, section 2402 Planning, “The IS audit and assurance professional should identify and assess risk relevant to the area under review.” 3 Oneof the risk factors to consider is “the sensitivity of information processed, stored or transmitted by the system” 3. FDE is one of the possible controls to mitigate the risk of unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information due to physical theft of media.

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 greatest concern for an IS auditor evaluating the access controls for a shared customer relationship management (CRM) system is that audit logging is not enabled. Audit logging is a process that records and tracks the activities and events that occur on a system, such as who accessed what data, when, how, and why. Audit logging can help monitor and verify the compliance and effectiveness of the access controls, as well as detect and investigate any unauthorized or suspicious access or actions. Audit logging can also provide evidence and accountability for the security and integrity of the system and the data.

Without audit logging, the IS auditor would not be able to audit the access controls for the shared CRM system, as there would be no reliable or traceable records of the access history or patterns. Without audit logging, the organization would also not be able to identify or respond to any potential breaches or incidents that may compromise the confidentiality, availability, or accuracy of the CRM data. Without audit logging, the organization would also not be able to demonstrate or prove itscompliance with any applicable policies, regulations, or standards that may require audit logging for CRM systems.

Single sign-on is not enabled is not a great concern for an IS auditor evaluating the access controls for a shared CRM system, but rather a potential improvement or enhancement. Single sign-on is a process that allows users to access multiple systems or applications with one set of credentials, such as a username and password. Single sign-on can help simplify and streamline the user experience, as well as reduce the risk of password fatigue or compromise. However, single sign-on is not a mandatory or essential requirement for access controls, and it may also introduce some challenges or risks, such as dependency on a single point of failure or vulnerability.

Security baseline is not consistently applied is not a great concern for an IS auditor evaluating the access controls for a shared CRM system, but rather a minor issue or gap. Security baseline is a set of minimum security standards or requirements that apply to a system or application, such as password policies, encryption protocols, or firewall rules. Security baseline can help ensure that the system or application meets a certain level of security and compliance. However, security baseline is not a sufficient or comprehensive measure for access controls, and it may also need to be customized or adjusted according to the specific needs and risks of each system or application.

Complex passwords are not required is not a great concern for an IS auditor evaluating the access controls for a shared CRM system, but rather a common practice or recommendation. Complex passwords are passwords that are composed of a combination of different types of characters, such as letters, numbers, symbols, and cases. Complex passwords can help prevent or deter brute-force attacks or guessing attempts by making the passwords harder to crack or predict. However, complex passwords are not a guarantee or guarantee of security, and they may also have some drawbacks or limitations, such as user inconvenience, memorability issues, or reuse across multiple systems or applications.

References:

Customer Relationship Management Risks and Controls - CRM Simplified 1

Customer relationship management: A guide - Zendesk 2

How to Protect Your Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Data from Hackers 3

What is CRM? | A Definition by Salesforce 4

 The internal audit manager should have a reporting line to the audit committee, which is an independent body that oversees the internal audit function and ensures its objectivity and accountability. Reporting functionally to a senior management official may compromise the independence and clarity of the internal audit reporting process, as senior management may have a vested interest in the audit results or influence the audit scope and priorities. *References: According to the ISACA IT Audit and Assurance Standards, Guidelines and Tools and Techniques for IS Audit and Assurance Professionals, section 1002 Independence, “The chief audit executive (CAE)should report functionally to the board or its equivalent (e.g., audit committee) and administratively to executive management.” 1

 The auditor should be most concerned about the security policy documents being available on a public domain website. This is because this exposes the organization’s security posture and strategy to potential attackers, who can exploit the information to launch targeted attacks or bypass the security controls. The security policy documents should be classified as confidential and protected from unauthorized access or disclosure. The other options are less severe than exposing the security policy documents to the public, although they may also indicate some gaps or weaknesses in the security policy development, implementation, or maintenance process. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.31

CISA Online Review Course, Domain 3, Module 1, Lesson 12

 A web proxy server for corporate connections to external resources reduces organizational risk by anonymizing users through changed IP addresses. A web proxy server is an intermediarybetween the web and client devices, that can provide proxy services to a client or a group of clients1. One of the main benefits of using a web proxy server is that it allows users to change their IP address andlocation, circumventing geoblocking and hiding their identity from the target website2.

Anonymizing internal IP addresses is important for online security, as it helps protect the organization from several threats. If an attacker controls a server that employees connect to, the outgoing IP address of the organization’s router is logged on the server. This IP address can be used by the attacker to launch a denial-of-service (DoS) attack or to create more targeted attacks such as phishing2. With a web proxy server, the IP shown in web logs is the web proxy’s, which means an attacker would not have access to theorganization’s router outgoing IP address2.

Anonymizing outgoing IP addresses is also important when carrying out sensitive actions online, such as law enforcement investigations or competitive intelligence. A web proxy server can help users avoid exposing their internal IP address that leads back to their organization, and instead use a third-party web proxy that provides more anonymity2.

The other options are not directly related to reducing organizational risk by using a web proxy server. Providing multi-factor authentication for additional security (option B) is a benefit of some web proxy servers, but it is not the main purpose of using a web proxy server3. Providing faster response than direct access(option C) is a benefit of some web proxy servers that cache content forbetter data transfer speeds and less bandwidth usage, but it is not directly related to reducing organizational risk1. Load balancing traffic to optimize data pathways (option D) is a benefit of some web proxy servers that distribute traffic across multiple servers, but it is not directly related to reducing organizational risk4.

References: 1: Proxy servers and tunneling 2: Multi-factor authentication: How to enable 2FA and boost your security 3: What Is Multi-factor Authentication (MFA) Security? 4: How it works: Microsoft Entra multifactor authentication

A vendor requires privileged access to a key business application. The best recommendation to reduce the risk of data leakage is to implement real-time activity monitoring for privileged roles. This isbecause real-time activity monitoring can provide visibility and accountability for the actions performed by the vendor with privileged access, such as creating, modifying, deleting, or copying data. Real-time activity monitoring can also enable timely detection and response to any unauthorized or suspicious activities that may indicate data leakage. Including the right-to-audit in the vendor contract is a good practice, but it may not be sufficient to prevent or detect data leakage in a timely manner, as audits are usually performed periodically or on-demand. Performing a review of privileged roles and responsibilities is also a good practice, but it may not address the specific risk of data leakage by the vendor with privileged access. Requiring the vendor to implement job rotation for privileged roles may reduce the risk of collusion or fraud, but it may not prevent or detect data leakage by any individual with privileged access. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), [ISACA Privacy Principles and Program Management Guide]

A test plan for the BCP is essential to ensure that the plan is effective, updated and aligned with the current business needs and objectives. A change in organizational structure with significant impact to business processes may require a revision of the BCP and a new test plan to validate its adequacy. The lack of a test plan for the BCP for two years indicates a high risk of failure in the event ofa disaster or disruption. Therefore, this should be the auditor’s greatest concern among the given options. References:

ISACA, IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley, 4th Edition, section 5.3.21

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, chapter 5, section 5.42

 It is acceptable for an IS auditor to rely on a third-party provider’s external audit report on service level management when the scope and methodology meet audit requirements. This means that the external audit report covers the same objectives, criteria, standards and procedures that the IS auditor would use to assess the service level management. This way, the IS auditor can avoid duplication of work and reduce audit costs and efforts. The service provider’s certification and accreditation, the report’s confirmation of service levels and the report’s release date are not sufficient to justify reliance on the external audit report. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) , Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3.

Stratified mean per unit sampling is a method of audit sampling that divides the population into subgroups (strata) based on some characteristic, such as monetary value, and then selects a sample from each stratum using mean per unit sampling. Mean per unit sampling is a method of audit sampling that estimates the total value of a population by multiplying the average value of the sample items by the number of items in the population. Stratified mean per unit sampling is suitable for populations that have a high variability or a skewed distribution, such as the bank accounts in this question. By stratifying the population, the auditor can reduce the sampling error and increase the precision of the estimate.

Difference estimation sampling (option A) is not the best sampling approach for these accounts. Difference estimation sampling is a method of audit sampling that estimates the total error or misstatement in a population by multiplying the average difference between the book value and the audited value of the sample items by the number of items in the population. Difference estimation sampling is suitable for populations that have a low variability and a symmetrical distribution, which is not the case for the bank accounts in this question.

Customer unit sampling (option C) is not a sampling approach, but a type of monetary unit sampling. Monetary unit sampling is a method of audit sampling that selects sample items based on their monetary value, rather than their physical units. Customer unit sampling is a variation of monetary unit sampling that treats each customer account as a single unit, regardless of how many transactions or balances it contains. Customer unit sampling may be appropriate for testing existence or occurrence assertions, but not for estimating total values.

Unstratified mean per unit sampling (option D) is not the best sampling approach for these accounts. Unstratified mean per unit sampling is a method of audit sampling that applies mean per unit sampling to the entire population without dividing it into subgroups. Unstratified mean per unit sampling may result in a larger sample size and a lower precision than stratified mean per unit sampling, especially for populations that have a high variability or a skewed distribution, such as the bank accounts in this question.

Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

References:

Audit Sampling - AICPA

Audit Sampling: Examples and Guidance To The Sampling Methods

Audit Sampling |Audit | Financial Audit - Scribd

 The auditor should first escalate to audit management to discuss the audit plan. This is because the audit plan should be based on a risk assessment and aligned with the organization’s objectives and strategies. The auditor should not accept the CIO’s request without proper justification and approval from the audit management, who are responsible for ensuring the audit plan’s quality and independence. The auditor should also communicate the potential risks and implications of not conducting IS audits in the upcoming year, such as missing new or emerging threats, vulnerabilities, or compliance issues. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.11

CISA Online Review Course, Domain 1, Module 1, Lesson 22

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”

The design phase of the system development life cycle (SDLC) is where an IS auditor would expect to find that controlshave been incorporated into system specifications, because this is where the system requirements are translated intodetailed design specifications that include the technical, functional, and security aspects of the system34. The implementation phase iswhere the system is deployed and tested, the development phase is where the system is codedand unit tested, and thefeasibility phase is where the system objectives and scope are defined. References: 3: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2 4: CISA Online Review Course, Module 4, Lesson 2

 An IS auditor is analyzing a sample of accounts payable transactions for a specific vendor and identifies one transaction with a value five times as high as the average transaction. The next step that the auditor should do is to request an explanation of the variance from the auditee. This is because the variance may indicate an error, fraud, or an unusual but legitimate transaction that requires further investigation. The auditor should not report the variance immediately to the audit committee withoutverifying its cause and significance. The auditor should not increase the sample size to 100% of the population without considering the cost-benefit analysis and the sampling methodology. The auditor should not exclude the transaction from the sample population without justification, as itmay affect the validity and reliability of the audit results. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), [ISACA Auditing Standards]

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

The answer D is correct because the greatest concern for an IS auditor with the situation of business owners being removed from the project initiation phase is that the requirements may be incomplete. The project initiation phase is the first step in starting a new project, where the project’s purpose, scope, objectives, and deliverables are defined and documented. The project initiation phase also involves identifying and engaging the key stakeholders who have an interest or influence in the project, such as sponsors, customers, users, or business owners.

Business owners are the individuals or entities who have the authority and responsibility to define the business needs and expectations for the project. They are also the primary beneficiaries of the project outcomes and benefits. Business owners play a crucial role in the project initiation phase, as they provide valuable input and feedback on the requirements and specifications of the project. Requirements are the statements that describe what the project should accomplish or deliver to meet the business needs and expectations. Requirements are essential for guiding the project planning, execution, monitoring, and closure phases.

If business owners are removed from the project initiation phase, it can result in incomplete or inaccurate requirements, which can have negative impacts on the project’s quality, scope, time, cost, and risk. Some of the possible consequences of incomplete requirements are:

Misalignment: The project may not align with the business strategy, vision, or goals, which can reduce its value or relevance.

Confusion: The project team may not have a clear understanding of what the project should achieve or deliver, which can affect their performance or productivity.

Rework: The project may need to undergo frequent changes or revisions to accommodate new or modified requirements, which can increase the time and cost of the project.

Dissatisfaction: The project may not meet the expectations or satisfaction of the business owners or other stakeholders, which can affect their acceptance or support of the project.

Failure: The project may not deliver the expected outcomes or benefits, which can affect its success or viability.

Therefore, an IS auditor should be concerned about the involvement and participation of business owners in the project initiation phase, as it affects the completeness and quality of requirements. An IS auditor should review the policies and procedures for stakeholder identification and engagement, verify that the business owners have adequate knowledge and skills to define their requirements, and test that the requirements are well-defined, documented, approved, and communicated.

References:

Project Initiation: The First Step to Project Management [2023] • Asana

Everything you need to know about the project initiation phase

Project Initiation Phase - The Business Professor

Project Initiation: A Guide to Starting a Project Right Way - Kissflow

The best audit evidence that a firewall is configured in compliance with the organization’s security policy is to review the rule base. The rule base is a set of rules that defines the criteria for allowing or denying network traffic through the firewall. By reviewing the rule base, the auditor can verify if the firewall configuration matches the security policy requirements and objectives. Analyzing how the configuration changes are performed, analyzing log files, and performing penetration testingare useful audit techniques, but they do not provide direct evidence of the firewall configuration compliance. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, page 383.

The recovery time objective (RTO) has a longer duration than documented in the disaster recovery plan (DRP) should be of greatest concern to the auditor when reviewing a bank’s SLA with a third-party provider that hosts the bank’s secondary data center. This is because the RTO is the maximum acceptable time for restoring a system or an application after a disaster or a disruption. A longer RTO than the DRP means that the bank maynot be able to resume its critical business operations within the expected time frame, which may result insignificant financial losses, reputational damage, customer dissatisfaction, or regulatory non-compliance12.

The SLA has not been reviewed in more than a year is not the greatest concern, although it is a good practice to review and update the SLA periodically to ensure that it reflects the current business needsand expectations, as well as any changes in the service provider’s capabilities or performance. However, a lack of review does not necessarily imply a lack of compliance or quality of service, as long as the SLA is still valid and enforceable34.

Backup data is hosted online only is not the greatest concern, although it may pose some security risks if the backup data is not encrypted or protected by adequate access controls. Online backup data means that the backup data is stored on a remote server that can be accessed via the Internet, which may offer some advantages such as faster recovery, lower cost, and higher availability than offline backup data that is stored on physical media such as tapes or disks. However, online backup data also requires reliable network connectivity and bandwidth, as well as proper security measures to prevent unauthorized access or tampering56.

The recovery point objective (RPO) has a shorter duration than documented in the DRP is not the greatest concern, although it may indicate some inconsistency or misalignment between the SLA and the DRP. The RPO is the maximum acceptable amount of data loss measured in time from a disaster or a disruption. A shorter RPO than the DRP means that the bank may lose less data than expected, which may be beneficial for its business continuity and recovery. However, a shorter RPO may also imply more frequent backups, which may increase the cost and complexity ofthe backup process

The best testing approach to facilitate rapid identification of application interface errors is automated testing. Automated testing is the use of software tools or scripts to execute predefined test cases, compare expected and actual outcomes, and report any discrepancies. Automated testing can help to speed up the testing process, increase test coverage, reduce human errors, and improve test accuracy and consistency. Automated testing can also help to detect interface errors that may occur due to incompatible data formats, communication protocols, or system configurations. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3.11

CISA OnlineReview Course, Domain 2, Module 2, Lesson 1

The primary purpose of requiring source code escrow in a contractual agreement is to ensure the source code is available. Source code escrow is a service that involves depositing the source code of a software or system with a third-party agent or escrow provider, who can release it to a designated beneficiary under specific conditions, such as bankruptcy, termination, or breach of contract by the software vendor or developer. Source code escrow can help to protect the interests and rights of the software user or licensee, who may need access to the source code for maintenance, modification, enhancement, or troubleshooting purposes. The IS auditor should verify that the contractual agreement specifies the terms and conditions for source code escrow, such as the escrow agent,the escrow fees, the deposit frequency and format,the release events and procedures, and the verification and audit requirements. References: CISA ReviewManual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2

The first step to successfully implement a corporate data classification program is to approve a data classification policy. A data classification policy is a document that defines the objectives, scope, principles, roles, responsibilities, and procedures for classifying data based on its sensitivity and value to the organization. A data classification policy is essential for establishing a common understanding and a consistent approach for data classification across the organization, as well as for ensuring compliance with relevant regulatory and contractual requirements.

Selecting a data loss prevention (DLP) product (option B) is not the first step to implement a data classification program, as it is a technical solution that supports the enforcement of the data classification policy, not the definition of it. A DLP product can help prevent unauthorized access, use, or disclosure of sensitive data by monitoring, detecting, and blocking data flows that violate the data classification policy. However, before selecting a DLP product, the organization needs to have a clear and approved data classification policy that specifies the criteria and rules for data classification.

Confirming that adequate resources are available for the project (option C) is also not the first step to implement a data classification program, as it is a project management activity that ensures the feasibility and sustainability of the project, not the design of it. Confirming that adequate resources are available for the project involves estimating and securing the necessary budget, staff, time, and tools for implementing and maintaining the data classification program. However, before confirming that adequate resources are available for the project, the organization needs to have a clear and approved data classification policy that defines the scope and objectives of the project.

Checking for the required regulatory requirements (option D) is also not the first step to implement a data classification program, as it is an input to the development of the data classification policy, not an output of it. Checking for the required regulatory requirements involves identifying and analyzing the applicable laws, regulations, standards, and contracts that govern the protection and handling of sensitive data. However, checking for the required regulatory requirements is not enough to implement a data classification program; the organization also needs to have a clear and approved data classification policy that incorporates and complies with those requirements.

Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

References:

Data Classification: What It Is and How to Implement It

Create a well-designed data classification framework

7 Steps to Effective Data Classification | CDW

Data Classification: The Basics and a 6-Step Checklist - NetApp

Private and confidential February 2021 - Deloitte US

The greatest concern to an IS auditor who is assessing an organization’s configuration and release management process is that changes and change approvals are not documented. This is because documentation is essential for ensuring the traceability, accountability, and quality of the changes made to the configuration items (CIs) and the releases deployed to the production environment. Without documentation, it would be difficult to verify the authenticity, validity, and authorization of the changes, as well as to identify and resolve any issues or incidents that may arise from the changes. Documentation also helps to maintain compliance with internal and external standards and regulations, as well as to facilitate audits and reviews.

The other options are not as concerning as option B, although they may also indicate some weaknesses in the configuration and release management process. The organization does not use an industry-recognized methodology, but this does not necessarily mean that their process is ineffective or inefficient. The organization may have developed their own methodology that suits their specific needs and context. However, using an industry-recognized methodology could help them adopt best practices and improve their process maturity. All changes require middle and senior management approval, but this may not be a problem if the organization has a clear and streamlined approval process that does not cause delays or bottlenecks in the change implementation. However, requiring too many approvals could also introduce unnecessary complexity and bureaucracy in the process. There is no centralized configuration management database (CMDB), but this does not mean that the organization does not have a way of managing their CIs and their relationships. The organization may use other tools or methods to store and access their configuration data, such as spreadsheets, documents, or repositories.However, having a centralized CMDB could help them improve their visibility, accuracy, and consistency of their configuration data.

References:

1: The Essential Guide to Release Management | Smartsheet

2: 5 steps to a successful release management process - Lucidchart

3: Configuration Management process overview - Micro Focus

4: Release and Deployment Management process overview - Micro Focus

This means that the IT investments are aligned with the strategic goals and priorities of the organization, and that they deliver value and benefits to the business. Mapping IT investments to specific business objectives can help ensure that the IT investments are relevant, justified, and measurable, and that they support the organization’s mission and vision.

IT investments are implemented and monitored following a system development life cycle (SDLC) is an indication of effective IT project management, but not necessarily of effective IT investment management. The SDLC is a framework that guides the development and implementation of IT systemsand applications, but it does not address the alignment, justification, or measurement of the IT investments.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are defined for each business requiring IT investment is an indication of effective IT performance management, but not necessarily of effective IT investment management. KPIs are metrics that measure the outcomes and results of IT activities and processes, but they do not address the alignment, justification, or value of the IT investments.

The IT investment budget is significantly below industry benchmarks is not an indication of effective IT investment management, but rather of low IT spending. The IT investment budget should be based on the organization’s needs and capabilities, and not on external comparisons. A low IT investment budget may indicate that the organization is underinvesting in IT, which could limit its potential for growth and innovation.

The most important thing for an IS auditor to validate when auditing network device management is that all devices have current security patches assessed. This is because security patches are essential for fixing known vulnerabilities and preventing unauthorized access, data breaches, or denial-of-service attacks on the network devices. If the network devices are not patched regularly, they may expose the network to various cyber threats and compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the network services and data12.

Devices cannot be accessed through service accounts is not the most important thing to validate because service accounts are typically used for automated tasks or processes that require privileged access to network devices. Service accounts can be secured by using strong passwords, limiting their permissions, and monitoring their activities. However, service accounts alone do not protect the network devices from external or internal attacks that exploit unpatched vulnerabilities3.

Backup policies include device configuration files is not the most important thing to validate because backup policies are mainly used for restoring the network devices in case of failure, disaster, or corruption. Backup policies can help with recovering the network functionality and data, but they do not prevent the network devices from being compromised or attacked in the first place. Backup policies should be complemented by security policies that ensure the network devices are patched and protected4.

All devices are located within a protected network segment is not the most important thing to validate because network segmentation is a technique that divides the network into smaller subnets or zones based on different criteria, such as function, security level, or access control. Network segmentation can help isolate and contain the impact of a potential attack on a network device, but it does not prevent the attack from happening. Network segmentation should be combined with security patching and other security measures to ensure the network devices are secure.

The best way to sanitize a hard disk for reuse to ensure the organization’s information cannot be accessed is data wiping. Data wiping is a process that overwrites the data on the hard disk with randomor meaningless patterns, making it unrecoverable by any software or hardware methods. Data wiping can provide a high level of security and assurance that the organization’s information is permanently erased from the hard disk, and that it cannot be accessed by unauthorized parties or malicious actors.

Re-partitioning is not a way to sanitize a hard disk for reuse, but rather a way to organize the hard disk into different logical sections or volumes. Re-partitioning does not erase the data on the hard disk, but only changes the structure and allocation of the disk space. Re-partitioning may make the data inaccessible to the operating system, but not to other tools or methods that can scan or recover the data from the disk sectors.

Degaussing is a way to sanitize a hard disk for reuse, but only for magnetic hard disks, not solid state drives (SSDs). Degaussing is a process that exposes the hard disk to a strong magnetic field, which disrupts and destroys the magnetic alignment of the data on the disk platters. Degaussing can effectively erase the data on magnetic hard disks, but it can also damage or render unusable the electronic components of the hard disk, such as the read/write heads or circuit boards. Degaussing also does not work on SSDs, which store data using flash memory cells, not magnetic media.

Formatting is not a way to sanitize a hard disk for reuse, but rather a way to prepare the hard disk for use by an operating system. Formatting is a process that creates a file system on the hard disk, which defines how the data is stored and accessed on the disk. Formatting does not erase the dataon the hard disk, but only deletes the file system metadata and marks the disk space as available for new data. Formatting may make the data invisible to the operating system, but not to other tools or methods that can restore or recover the data from the disk sectors.

References:

How to Wipe A Hard Drive for Reuse? Check the Quickest Way to Wipe A Hard Drive - EaseUS 1

HP PCs - Using Secure Erase or HP Disk Sanitizer 2

HOW to QUICKLY and PERMANENTLY SANITIZE ANY DRIVE (SSD, USB thumb drive …) 

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 havecontrol 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 ofa group (e.g., accountingdepartment) 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)?

A demilitarized zone (DMZ) is a network segment that is separated from the internal network and the external network, such as the internet, by firewalls or other security devices. A DMZ provides an extra layer of security for the organization’s internal network by isolating the servers and services that need to be accessible to external users, such as a file server, from the rest of the network. A DMZ also prevents external users from accessing the internal network directly, as they have to go through two firewalls to reach it. Therefore, setting up a DMZ is an IS auditor’s best recommendation to protect anorganization from attacks when its file server needs to be accessible to external users12.

The other possible options are:

Enforce a secure tunnel connection: This means that the organization requires external users to establish a secure and encrypted connection, such as a virtual private network (VPN), to access its file server. This can provide some level of security and privacy for the data transmission, but it does not protect the file server or the internal network from attacks if the connection is compromised or if the external users are malicious. Therefore, enforcing asecuretunnel connection is not an IS auditor’s best recommendation to protect an organization from attacks when its file server needs to be accessible to external users3.

Enhance internal firewalls: This means that the organization improves the security and performance of its internal firewalls, which are devices that filter and control the network traffic between different segments of the network. This can provide some level of protection for the internal network from unauthorized or malicious access, but it does not protect the file server or the external network from attacks if the file server is exposed to the internet or if the external network is compromised. Therefore, enhancing internal firewalls is not an IS auditor’s best recommendation to protect an organization from attacks when its file server needs to be accessible to external users4.

Implement a secure protocol: This means that the organization uses a secure and standardized protocol, such as Secure File Transfer Protocol (SFTP) or Secure Shell (SSH), to transfer files between its file server and external users. This can provide some level of security and integrity for the data transmission, but it does not protect the file server or the internal network from attacks if the protocol is exploited or if the external users are malicious. Therefore, implementing a secure protocol is not an IS auditor’s best recommendation to protect an organization from attacks when its file server needs to be accessible to external users5. References: 1: What Is a DMZ Network and Why Would You Use It? | Fortinet 2: Demilitarised zone (DMZ) | Cyber.gov.au 3: What Is VPN Tunneling? | Fortinet 4: Firewall - Wikipedia 5: Secure Shell - Wikipedia

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]

 Monetary unit sampling (MUS) is a statistical sampling method that is used to determine if the account balances or monetary amounts in a population contain any misstatements. MUS treats each individual dollar in the population as a separate sampling unit, so that larger balances or amounts have a higher probability of being selected than smaller ones. MUS then projects the results of testing the sample to the entire population in terms of dollar values, rather than error rates.

One advantage of MUS is that it increases the likelihood of selecting material items from the population. Material items are those that have a significant impact on the financial statements and could influence the decisions of users. By giving more weight to larger items, MUS ensures that material misstatements are more likely to be detected and reported. MUS also reduces the sample size required to achieve a desired level of confidence and precision, as compared to other sampling methods that do not consider the value of items.

References:

4: Monetary unit sampling definition — AccountingTools

5: How Does Monetary Unit Sampling Work? - dummies

6: Audit sampling | ACCA Qualification | Students | ACCA Global

The best course of action for an IS auditor when an auditee is unable to close all audit recommendations by the time of the follow-up audit is to evaluate the residual risk due to open issues. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls or mitigating actions. Evaluating the residual risk due to open issues can help the IS auditor assess the impact and likelihood of the potential threats and vulnerabilities that have not been addressed by the auditee, as well as the adequacy and effectiveness of the existing controls or mitigating actions. Evaluating the residual risk due to open issues can also help the IS auditor prioritize and communicate the open issues to the auditee and other stakeholders, such as senior management or audit committee, and recommend appropriate actions or escalation procedures.

Ensuring the open issues are retained in the audit results is a course of action for an IS auditor when an auditee is unable to close all audit recommendations by the time of the follow-up audit, but it is not the best one. Ensuring the open issues are retained in the audit results can help the IS auditor document and report the status and progress of the audit recommendations, as well as provide a basis for futurefollow-up audits. However, ensuring the open issues are retained in the audit results does not provide an analysis or evaluation of the residual risk due to open issues, which is more important for informing decision-making and action-taking.

Terminating the follow-up because open issues are not resolved is not a course of action for an IS auditor when an auditee is unable to close all audit recommendations by the time of the follow-up audit, but rather a consequence or outcome of it. Terminating the follow-up because open issues are not resolved may indicate that the auditee has failed to comply with the agreed-upon actions or deadlines, or that the IS auditor has encountered significant obstacles or resistance from the auditee. Terminating the follow-up because open issues are not resolved may also trigger further actions or sanctions from the IS auditor or other authorities, such as issuing a qualified or adverse opinion, withholding certification, or imposing penalties.

Recommending compensating controls for open issues is not a course of action for an IS auditor when an auditee is unable to close all audit recommendations by the time of the follow-up audit, but rather a possible outcome or result of it. Compensating controls are alternative or additional controls that are implemented to reduce or eliminate the risk associated with a weakness or deficiency in another control. Recommending compensating controls for open issues may be appropriate when the auditee is unable to implement the original audit recommendations due to technical, operational,financial, or other constraints, and when the compensating controls can provide a similar or equivalent level of assurance. However, recommending compensating controls for open issues requires a prior evaluation of the residual risk due to open issues, which is more important for determining whether compensating controls are necessary and feasible.

References:

Follow-up Audits - Canadian Audit and Accountability Foundation 1

Conducting The Audit Follow-Up: When To Verify - TheAuditor 2

Internal Audit Follow Ups: Are They Really Worth The Effort

 The best option to support the organization’s objectives of protecting data confidentiality while transporting data is encryption. Encryption is a process of transforming data into an unreadable form using a secret key or algorithm, so that only authorized parties can access the original data. Encryption protects the confidentiality of data in transit by preventing unauthorized interception,modification, or disclosure of the data. Encryption can also help comply with data privacy and security regulations, such as the GDPR and HIPAA.

The other options are not as effective as encryption in protecting data confidentiality while transporting data. Cryptographic hashes are mathematical functions that generate a fixed-length output from an input, but they do not encrypt the data. Hashes are used to verify the integrity and authenticity of data, but they do not prevent unauthorized access to the data. Virtual local area network (VLAN) is a logical grouping of network devices that share the same broadcast domain, but they do not encrypt the data. VLANs can improve network performance and security by isolating traffic, but they do not protect the data from being intercepted or modified by external attackers. Dedicated lines are physical connections that provide exclusive access to a network or service, but they do not encrypt the data. Dedicated lines can offer higher bandwidth and reliability, but they do not guarantee the confidentiality of the data from being compromised by physical tampering or eavesdropping.

References:

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

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

Data Security and Confidentiality Guidelines - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention3

Information Security | Confidentiality - GeeksforGeeks4

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 documentsthat 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

 Resilience is the ability of an organization to continue to operate effectively during or after a disruptive event. A business impact analysis (BIA) is a key process to identify the critical systems and processes that support the organization’s objectives and determine the impact of their disruption. Without a BIA, the organization may not be able to prioritize the recovery of the most important systems and processes, which poses the greatest risk to its resilience. The other options are not as significant as a BIA, as they relate to data quality, system monitoring, and user acceptance testing, which are important but not essential for resilience. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Domain 4: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience, Section 4.2 Business Continuity Planning1

The greatest concern for an IS auditor when auditing an organization’s IT strategy development process is that information security was not included as a key objective in the IT strategic plan. Information security is a vital component of IT strategy, as it ensures the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information assets, and supports the business objectives and regulatory compliance. The other options are not as significant as the lack of information security in the IT strategic plan. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1, Section 1.31

 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 7of 7: Mitigating Risks of Unsupported Operating Systems)

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

 A feasibility study is an assessment that determines the likelihood of a proposed project being successful, such as a new system development1. A feasibility study typically covers various aspects of the project, such as technical, economic, operational and legal feasibility2. The IS auditor’s role is to audit the feasibility study and ensure that it is objective, realistic and reliable3.

One of the most important aspects of a feasibility study is the economic feasibility, which analyzes the costs and benefits of the proposed system and compares them with alternative solutions2. Theeconomic feasibility study should include a detailed breakdown of the development, implementation and operational costs, as well as the expected revenues, savings and intangible benefits of the system3. The IS auditor should review the cost-benefit documentation for reasonableness and accuracy, and verify that the assumptions and calculations are valid and supported by evidence3.

The other options are not directly related to auditing the feasibility study of a system development project. Reviewing qualifications of key members of the project team (option A) is more relevant to auditing the project management and human resources aspects of the project. Reviewing the request for proposal (RFP) to ensure that it covers the scope of work (option B) is more relevant to auditing the procurement and vendor selection process of the project. Ensuring that vendor contracts are reviewed by legal counsel (option D) is more relevant to auditing the legal and contractual aspects of the project.

References: 3: Types of Feasibility Study in Software Project Development 2: Feasibility Analysis in System Development Process 1: What Is a Feasibility Study? Definition, Benefits and Types

Audit frameworks can assist the IS audit function by providing direction and information regarding the performance of audits. Audit frameworks are sets of standards, guidelines, and best practices that help IS auditors plan, conduct, and report on their audit engagements. Audit frameworks can help IS auditors ensure the quality, consistency, and professionalism of their audit work, as well as comply with the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders and regulators. Audit frameworks can also help IS auditors address the specific challenges and risks of auditing information systems and technology.

Defining the authority and responsibility of the IS audit function is not a way that audit frameworks can assist the IS audit function, but rather a way that the IS audit charter can assist the IS audit function. The IS audit charter is a document that defines the purpose, scope, objectives, and authority of the IS audit function within the organization. The IS audit charter can help IS auditors establish their role and position in relation to other functions and departments, as well as clarify their rights and obligations.

Providing details on how to execute the audit program is not a way that audit frameworks can assist the IS audit function, but rather a way that the audit methodology can assist the IS audit function. The audit methodology is a set of procedures and techniques that guide IS auditors in performing their audit tasks and activities. The audit methodology can help IS auditors apply a systematic and structured approach to their audit work, as well as use appropriate tools and methods to collect and analyze evidence.

Outlining the specific steps needed to complete audits is not a way that audit frameworks can assist the IS audit function, but rather a way that the audit plan can assist the IS audit function. The audit plan is a document that describes the scope, objectives, timeline, resources, and deliverables of a specific auditengagement. The audit plan can help IS auditors organize and manage their audit work, as well as communicate their expectations and responsibilities to the auditees.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019, p. 51 1

Understanding Project Audit Frameworks - Wolters Kluwer 2

How to Implement a Robust Audit Framework - Insights - Metricstream 3

What Is The Internal Audit Function? An Accurate Definition Of The

 In the development of a new financial application, the IS auditor’s first involvement should be in the feasibility study. A feasibility study is a preliminary analysis that evaluates the technical, operational, economic, and legal aspects of a proposed project or system. A feasibility study helps determine whether the project or system is viable, feasible, and desirable for the organization and its stakeholders.

The IS auditor’s role in the feasibility study is to provide an independent and objective assessment of the project or system’s risks, benefits, costs, and impacts. The IS auditor should also ensure that the feasibility study follows a structured and systematic approach, considers all relevant factors and alternatives, and complies with the organization’s policies and standards. The IS auditor should also verify that the feasibility study is documented and communicated to the appropriate decision-makers.

The IS auditor’s involvement in the feasibility study is important because it can help:

Identify and mitigate potential risks and issues that could affect the project or system’s success

Evaluate and justify the project or system’s alignment with the organization’s strategy, goals, and value proposition

Estimate and optimize the project or system’s resources, budget, schedule, and quality

Assess and enhance the project or system’s security, reliability, performance, and usability

Ensure that the project or system meets the expectations and requirements of the users and other stakeholders

The other three options are not the first involvement of the IS auditor in the development of a new financial application, although they may be part of the subsequent stages of the development process. Control design is the process of defining and implementing controls that ensure the security, integrity, availability, and efficiency of the system. Application design is the process of specifying the functional and technical features of the system. System test is the process of verifying that the system meets the specifications and requirements.

Therefore, feasibility study is the best answer.

References:

[Feasibility Study - ISACA]

[IS Auditing Guideline G13 Performing an IS Audit Engagement - ISACA]

A web-based CRM system that is directly accessed by customers via the Internet should be hosted in a secure and isolated environment to protect it from external threats and unauthorized access. A web-based CRM system should also be reliable, trusted, and backedup regularly1.

Hosting the system on an external third-party service provider’s servers (A) or a hybrid-cloud platform managed by a service provider (B) may not be a concern for the auditor if the service provider has adequate security measures and service level agreements in place. The auditor should verify the security controls and contractual terms of the service provider before trusting them with the CRM data23.

Hosting the system within a demilitarized zone (DMZ) of a corporate network © is a common practice to provide an extra layer of security to the CRM system from untrusted networks, such as the Internet. A DMZ is a perimeter network that isolates the CRM system from the internal network and filters the incoming traffic from the external network using a security gateway4567.

Hosting the system within an internal segment of a corporate network (D) is a concern for the auditor because it exposes the CRM system and the internal network to potential attacks from the Internet. The CRM system should not be directly accessible from the Internet without a DMZ or a firewall to protect it. This could compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the CRM data and the internal network78.

The primary purpose of performing a parallel run of a new system is to validate the new system against its predecessor. A parallel run is a strategy for system changeover where a new system slowly assumes the roles of the older system while both systems operate simultaneously. This allows for comparison of the results and outputs of both systems to ensure that the new system is working correctly and reliably. A parallel run can also help identify and resolve any errors, discrepancies, or inconsistencies in the new system before the old system is discontinued.

The other options are not the primary purpose of performing a parallel run of a new system. A. To train the end users and supporting staff on the new system. Training is an important part of system implementation, but it is not the main reason for doing a parallel run. Training can be done before,during, or after the parallel run, depending on the needs and preferences of the organization. B. To verify the new system provides required business functionality. Verifying the business functionality of the new system is part of user acceptance testing (UAT), which is a formal and structured process of testing whether the new system meets the specifications and expectations of the users and stakeholders. UAT is usually done before the parallel run, as a prerequisite for system changeover. C. To reduce the need for additional testing. Reducing the need for additional testing is not the primary purpose of performing a parallel run, but rather a possible benefit or outcome of doing so. A parallel run can help ensure that the new system is thoroughly tested and validated in a real-worldenvironment, which may reduce the likelihood of encountering major issues or defects later on. However, additional testing may still be needed after the parallel run, depending on the feedback and evaluation of the users and stakeholders.

References:

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

IS

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, CISAReview Questions, Answers & ExplanationsDatabase - 12 Month Subscription2

What Is Cloud Security? | Google Cloud3

5 Cloud Application Security Best Practices | Snyk4

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

A recovery point objective (RPO) is the maximum acceptable amount of data loss after an unplanned data-loss incident, expressed as an amount of time. This is generally thought of as the point in time before the event at which data can be successfully recovered– that is, the time elapsed since the most recent reliable backup1. RPOs are important to consider when reviewing an organization’s defined databackup and restoration procedures, because they determine how frequently the organization needs to perform backups, and how much data it can afford to lose in case of a disaster. RPOs are usually defined based on the business impact and criticality of the data, as well as the compliance and regulatory requirements. For example, a financial institution may have a very low RPO (such as a few minutes or seconds) for its transactional data, while a research institute may have a higher RPO (such as a few hours or days) for its experimental data.

The other possible options are:

A. Business continuity plan (BCP): A BCP is a document that outlines how an organization will continue to operate or resume its critical functions and processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. A BCP includes various elements, such as risk assessment, business impact analysis, recovery strategies, roles and responsibilities, communication plan, and testing and maintenance. A BCP is related to an organization’s defined data backup and restoration procedures, but it is not the most important factor to consider when reviewing them. A BCP defines the recovery objectives and strategies for the entire organization, while the data backup and restoration procedures are more specific and technical in nature.

C. Mean time to restore (MTTR): MTTR is a metric that measures the average time it takes to restore a system or service after a failure or outage. MTTR is an indicator of the efficiency and effectiveness of an organization’s recovery process, as well as the availability and reliability of its systems or services. MTTR is related to an organization’s defined data backup and restoration procedures, but it is not the most important factor to consider when reviewing them. MTTR reflects the actual performance of the recovery process, while the data backup and restoration procedures define the expected steps and actions for the recovery process.

D. Mean time between failures (MTBF): MTBF is a metric that measures the average time between failures or outages of a system or service. MTBF is an indicator of the quality and durability of an organization’s systems or services, as well as their susceptibility to failures or outages. MTBF is related to an organization’s defined data backup and restoration procedures, but it is not the most important factor to consider when reviewing them. MTBF reflects the potential frequency of failures or outages, while the data backup and restoration procedures define the contingency plans for failures or outages.

Validation of rules by the business is the most helpful in establishing a baseline for measuring data quality because it ensures that the rules reflect the business needs and expectations. Validation of rules by the business also helps to identify and resolve any inconsistencies or conflicts among different data sources or stakeholders. Input from customers, industry standard business definitions and built-in data error prevention application controlsare useful for improving data quality, but they are not sufficient for establishing a baseline. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) 1, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1

 Application containers are a form of operating system virtualization that share the same kernel as the host operating system. This means that any vulnerability or compromise in the kernel can affect all the containers running on the same host, as well as the host itself. Additionally, containers may have privileged access to the kernel resources and functions, which can pose a risk of unauthorized or malicious actions by the container processes. Therefore, securing the kernel is a critical aspect of application container security.

Shared registries (option A) are not an inherent risk in the application container infrastructure, but they are a potential risk that depends on how they are configured and managed. Shared registries are repositories that store and distribute container images. They can be public or private, and they can have different levels of security and access controls. Shared registries can pose a risk of exposing sensitive data, distributing malicious or vulnerable images, or allowing unauthorized access to images. However, these risks can be mitigated by using secure connections, authentication and authorization mechanisms, image signing and scanning, and encryption.

Host operating system (option B) is not an inherent risk in the application container infrastructure, but it is a potential risk that depends on how it is configured and maintained. Host operating system is the underlying platform that runs the application containers and provides them with the necessary resources and services. Host operating system can pose a risk of exposing vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, or malware that can affect the containers or the host itself. However, these risks can be mitigated by using minimal and hardened operating systems, applying patches and updates, enforcing security policies and controls, and isolating and monitoring the host.

Shared data (option C) is not an inherent risk in the application container infrastructure, but it is a potential risk that depends on how it is stored and accessed. Shared data is the information that is used or generated by the application containers and that may be shared among them or with external entities. Shared data can pose a risk of leaking confidential or sensitive data, corrupting or losing data integrity,or violating data privacy or compliance requirements. However, these risks can be mitigated by using secure storage solutions, encryption and decryption mechanisms, access control and auditing policies, and backup and recovery procedures.

Therefore, option D is the correct answer.

References:

Application Container Security Guide | NIST

CSA for a Secure Application Container Architecture

Application Container Security: Risks and Countermeasures

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 andresults 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,section12062

 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 owncountry 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 anyorganization that processes personal data of individuals in the European Union (EU) or offers goods or services to them, regardless ofwhere 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 collectspersonal information of California residentsand 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 best way to improve the visibility of end-user computing (EUC) applications that support regulatory reporting is to maintain an EUC inventory, as this provides a comprehensive and up-to-date list of all EUC applications, their owners, their locations, their purposes, and their dependencies. An EUC inventory can help identify and manage the risks associated with EUC applications, such as data quality, security, compliance, and continuity. EUC availability controls, EUC access control matrix, and EUC tests of operational effectiveness are important forensuring the reliability and security of EUC applications, but they do not improve the visibility of EUC applications as much as an EUC inventory. References: CISA Review Manual (DigitalVersion), Chapter 3: Information Systems Acquisition, Development and Implementation, Section 3.4: End-user Computing

The first thing that an IS auditor should recommend when an organization is made aware of a new regulation that is likely to impact IT security requirements is to determine which systems and IT-related processes may be impacted. This is because the impact assessment is a crucial step to understand the scope and magnitude of the changes that the new regulation may entail, as well as the potential risks and gaps that need to be addressed. The impact assessment can help the organization to prioritize and plan the necessary actions and resourcesto comply with the new regulation in a timely and effective manner12.

Updating security policies based on the new regulation is not the first thing to do, because it requires a clear understanding of the impact and implications of the new regulation, which can only be obtained after conducting an impact assessment. Updating security policies without an impact assessment may result in incomplete, inconsistent, or ineffective policies that may not meet the regulatory requirements or the organizational needs12.

Evaluating how security awareness and training content may be impacted is not the first thing to do, because it is a secondary or supporting activity that depends on the results of the impact assessment and the policy updates. Evaluating security awareness and training content without an impact assessment or policy updates may result in inaccurate, outdated, or irrelevant content that may not reflect the regulatory requirements or the organizational expectations34.

Reviewing the design and effectiveness of existing IT controls is not the first thing to do, because it is a monitoring or assurance activity that follows the implementation of the changes based on the impact assessment and the policy updates. Reviewing IT controls without an impact assessment or policy updates may result in misleading, incomplete, or invalidfindings that may not capture the regulatory requirements or the organizational performance

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:

Whatis backup and disaster recovery? | IBM

Backup and Recovery of Data: The Essential Guide | Veritas

Database Backup and Recovery Best Practices - ISACA

The first step in managing the impact of a recently discovered zero-day attack is to identify vulnerable assets. A zero-day attack is a cyberattack that exploits a previously unknown or unpatched vulnerability in a software or system, before the vendor or developer has had time to fix it. Identifying vulnerable assets is crucial for managing the impact of a zero-day attack, because it helps to determine the scope and severity of the attack, prioritize the protection and mitigation measures, and isolate or quarantine the affected assets from further damage or compromise. The other options are not the first steps in managing the impact of a zero-day attack, because they either require more informationabout the vulnerable assets, or they are part of the subsequentsteps of assessing, responding, or recovering from the attack. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.4

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 processand 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 use of control totals satisfies the control objective of processing integrity. Processing integrity refers to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and validity of data processing. Control totals are a method of verifying the correctness of data processing by comparing the total value or count of a batch of transactions before and after processing. For example, if a batch of 100 invoices is entered into an accounting system, the total amount and number of invoices should match before and after processing. If there is a discrepancy, it indicates an error in data entry, transmission, or processing. Control totals help to ensure that no transactions are lost, duplicated, or altered during processing.

References:

Control Objectives & Activities: Examples, Appropriateness

Levels and Types of Control | Principles ofManagement

CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 337

 The business process owner is the most important stakeholder to involve in the review of the processes that prevent fraud within a business expense claim system. This is because the business process owner is responsible for defining, implementing, and monitoring the business rules and policies that govern the expense claim process. The business process owner also has the authority and accountability to approve or reject expense claims, as well as to investigate and report any suspicious or fraudulent activities. The business process owner can provide valuable insights and feedback to the IS auditor on the effectiveness and efficiency of the current processes, aswell as the potential risks and controls that need to be addressed12.

The information security manager is not the most important stakeholder because their role is mainly focused on ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information systems and data that support the expense claim process. The information security manager can help the IS auditor with assessing the technical aspects of the system, such as access controls, encryption, logging, and backup, but they may not have sufficient knowledge or authority over the business rules and policies that prevent fraud1.

The quality assurance (QA) manager is not the most important stakeholder because their role is mainly focused on ensuring the quality and reliability of the software applications and systems that support the expense claim process. The QA manager can help the IS auditor with testing and verifying the functionality and performanceof the system, but they may not have sufficient knowledge or authority over the business rules and policies that prevent fraud1.

The business department executive is not the most important stakeholder because their role is mainly focused on overseeing the strategic objectives and financial performance of the business department that uses the expense claim system. The business department executive can help the IS auditor with understanding the business context and needs of the expense claim process, but they may not have sufficient knowledge or authority over the operational details and controls that prevent fraud

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 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”

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 formonitoring the service levels. References: CISA Review Manual(Digital Version), Chapter 2: Governanceand Management of IT, Section 2.4: IT Service Delivery and Support

The overall effectiveness of an organization’s disaster recovery planning process depends on how well the plan reflects the current and future needs and risks of the organization, and how well the plan is tested, communicated, and maintained. Among the four options given, the most important one for the IS auditor to verify is that management reviews and updates the plan annually or as changes occur.

A disaster recovery plan is not a static document that can be created once and forgotten. It is a dynamic and evolving process that requires regular review and update to ensure that it remains relevant, accurate, and effective. A disaster recovery plan should be reviewed and updated at least annually, or whenever there are significant changes in the organization’s structure, operations, environment, or regulations. These changes could affect the business impact analysis, risk assessment, recovery objectives, recovery strategies, roles and responsibilities, or resources of the disaster recovery plan. If the plan is not updated to reflect these changes, it could become obsolete, incomplete, or inconsistent, and fail to meet the organization’s recovery needs or expectations.

The other three options are not as important as reviewing and updating the plan, although they may also contribute to the effectiveness of the disaster recovery planning process. Contracting with a third partyfor warm site services is a possible recovery strategy that involves using a partially equipped facility that can be quickly activated in case of a disaster. However, this strategy may not be suitable or sufficient for every organization or scenario, and it does not guarantee the success of the disaster recovery plan. Scheduling an annual tabletop exercise is a good practice that involves simulating a disaster scenario and testing the plan in a hypothetical setting. However, this exercisemay not be enough to evaluate the feasibility or readiness of the plan, and it should be complemented by other types of tests, such as walkthroughs, drills, or full-scale exercises. Documenting and distributing a copy of the plan to all personnel is an essential step that ensures that everyone involved in or affected by the plan is aware of their roles and responsibilities, and has access to the relevant information and instructions. However, this step alone does not ensure that the plan is understood or followed by all personnel, and it should be accompanied by proper training, education, and awareness programs.

Therefore, reviewing and updating the plan annually or as changes occur is the best answer.

Controls related to authorized modifications to production programs are best tested by tracing modifications from the original request for change forward to the executable program, as this ensures that the change management process was followed and that the modifications were approved, documented, tested, and implemented correctly. Tracing modifications from the executable program back to the original request for change may not reveal any unauthorized or undocumented changes thatoccurred during the process. Testing only the authorizations to implement the new program or reviewing only the actual lines of source code changed in the program are not sufficient to test the controls related to authorized modifications, as they do not cover the entire change management process. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: Information Systems Operations, Maintenance and Service Management, Section 4.2: Change Management

The auditor’s best course of action is to document the finding and explain the risk of having administrator accounts with inappropriate security settings. This is because the auditor’s role is to identify and report the issues, not to fix them or request others to fix them. The auditor should also communicate the impact of the finding, such as the possibility of unauthorized access, data tampering, or denial of service attacks. The auditor should not assume the responsibility of the IT manager or the DBA, who are in charge of changing the security parameters or disabling the accounts. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.21

CISA Online Review Course, Domain 1, Module 3, Lesson 32

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 greatest challenge to the alignment of business and IT is the lack of chief information officer (CIO) involvement in board meetings. The CIO is the senior executive responsible for overseeing the IT strategy, governance, and operations of the organization, and ensuring that they support the business objectives and needs. The CIO should be involved in board meetings to communicate the value and contribution of IT to the organization, to align the IT vision and direction with the business strategy and priorities, and to advocate for the IT resources and investments required to achieve the desired outcomes. The lack of CIO involvement in board meetings can result in a disconnect between business and IT, a loss of trust and confidence in IT, and missed opportunities for innovation and value creation. The other options are not as challenging as the lack of CIO involvement in board meetings, because they either do not affect the strategic alignment of business and IT, or theycanbe addressed by other means such as collaboration, negotiation, or escalation. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1

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 andselect 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 oftheir 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 differentdurations, 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 theinitial investment required for eachproject, which may not be indicative of their profitability or viability5. References: Portfolio, Program and Project Management Using COBIT 5 - ISACA, Project PortfolioManagement - ISACA, CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Standards, Guidelines, Tools and Techniques

 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 first step in the incident response process for a suspected breach is to research the validity of the alerted breach. An incident response process is a set of procedures that defines how to handle securityincidents in a timely and effective manner. The first step in this process is to research the validity of the alerted breach, which means to verify whether the alert is genuine or false positive, to determine the scope and impact of the incident, and to gather relevant information for further analysis and action. Informing potentially affected customers of the security breach, notifying business management of the security breach, and engaging a third party to independently evaluate the alerted breach are also steps in the incident response process, but they are not the first step. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 4251

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

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, butnot as risky as the lack of network penetration tests, because they either do not directly affect the networksecurity controls, or they can be addressed by documentation or approval processes. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.4

 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

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 thefunctionality, 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, datacorruption 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

The greatest concern that the IS auditor should have when reviewing an organization’s security information and event management (SIEM) solution is that the SIEM is decentralized. This is because a decentralized SIEM can pose challenges for collecting, correlating, analyzing and reporting on security events and incidents from multiple sources and locations. A decentralized SIEM can also increase the complexity and cost of maintaining and updating the SIEM components, as well as the risk of inconsistent or incomplete security monitoring and response. The IS auditor should recommend that the organization adopts a centralized or hybrid SIEM architecture that can provide a holistic and integrated view of the security posture and activities across the organization. The other findings are not as concerning as a decentralized SIEM, because they can be addressedby implementing best practices and standards for SIEM reporting and configuration. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.4

The primary role of a control self-assessment (CSA) facilitator is to focus the team on internal controls. A CSA facilitator is a person who guides the CSA process and helps the participants to identify, assess, and improve their internal controls. The facilitator does not conduct interviews, report on weaknesses, or provide solutions, as these are the responsibilities of the participants themselves1.

The other options are incorrect because they are not the primary role of a CSA facilitator. Option A, conduct interviews to gain background information, is a preliminary step that may be done by the facilitator or the participants before the CSA session, but it is not the main purpose of the facilitator. Option C, report on the internal control weaknesses, is an outcome of the CSA process that should be done by the participants who own and operate the controls. Option D, provide solutions for control weaknesses, is also an outcome of the CSA process that should be done by the participants who are in charge of implementing the improvements.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019, page 2822

ISACA, CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription, QID 1066693

PwC, Control Self Assessments4

Workiva, 4factors of an effective control self-assessment (CSA) program5

 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 byflooding it with unwanted Internet traffic2. Automated monitoring of logs can help pinpoint potentialDDoS attacks by analyzing network traffic patterns, monitoring traffic spikes or other unusual activity, and alertingadministrators 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 onusers 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 resilienceor 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

 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 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. Asurvey 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 reviewitself. References: Post ImplementationReview - ISACA, Survey - ISACA, Business Case - ISACA

Network segmentation is the best security measure to reduce the risk of propagation when a cyberattack occurs, because it divides the network into smaller subnetworks that are isolated from each other and have different access controls and security policies. This limits the spread of malicious traffic and prevents attackers from accessing sensitive data or systems in other segments. Aperimeter firewall, a data loss prevention (DLP) system, and a web application firewall are also useful security measures,but they do not prevent propagation within the network as effectively as network segmentation does. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.3

The best recommendation for improving IT governance within the organization is to implement key performance indicators (KPIs). KPIs are measurable values that show how effectively the organization is achieving its key business objectives. KPIs can help the organization tomonitor and evaluate the performance, efficiency, and alignment of its IT processes and resources with its business goals and strategies1.

The other options are not as effective as implementing KPIs for improving IT governance. Option B, implementing annual third-party audits, is a good practice but may not be sufficient or timely to identify and address the issues or gaps in IT governance. Option C, benchmarking organizational performance against industry peers, is a useful technique but may not reflect the specific needs and expectations of the organization’s stakeholders. Option D, requiring executive management to draft IT strategy, is a necessary step but not enough to ensure that IT governance is implemented and monitored throughout the organization.

The associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a data loss prevention (DLP) audit is increased vulnerability due to anytime, anywhere accessibility. Mobile computing refers to the use of portable devices, such as laptops, tablets, smartphones, or wearable devices, that can access data and applications over wireless networks from any location6. Mobile computing enables greater flexibility, productivity, and convenience for users, but also poses significant security challenges for organizations. One of these challenges is increased vulnerability due to anytime, anywhere accessibility. This means that mobile devices are exposed to a higher risk of loss, theft, damage, or unauthorized access than stationary devices7. If mobile devices contain oraccess sensitive data withoutproper protection, such asencryption or authentication, theycould result in data leakage or breach in case of compromise8. Therefore, an IS auditor should identify this risk as part of a DLP audit. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:

A. The use of cloud negatively impacting IT availability is not an associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a DLP audit, as it is more related to cloud computing than mobile computing. Cloud computing refers to the delivery of computing services, such as data storage or processing, over the Internet from remote servers. Cloud computing may enable or support mobile computing by providing access to data and applications from any device or location, but it does not necessarily imply mobile computing. The use of cloud may negatively impact IT availability if there are disruptions or outages in the cloud service provider’s network or infrastructure, but this is not a direct consequence of mobile computing.

B. Increased need for user awareness training is not an associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a DLP audit, as it is more of a control or mitigation measure than a risk. User awareness training refers to educating users about security policies, procedures, and best practices for using mobile devices and protecting data. User awareness training may help to reduce the risk of data loss or breach due to mobile computing by increasing user knowledge and responsibility, but it does not eliminate or prevent the risk.

D. Lack of governance and oversight for IT infrastructure and applications is not an associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a DLP audit, as it is more of a general or organizational risk than a specific or technical risk. Governance and oversight refer to the establishment and implementation of policies, standards, and procedures for managing IT resources and aligning them with business objectives. Lack of governance and oversight for IT infrastructure and applications may affect the security and performance of mobile devices and data, but it is not a direct or inherent result of mobile computing. References: Mobile Computing - ISACA, Mobile Computing Device Threats, Vulnerabilities and Risk Factors Are Ubiquitous - ISACA, Data Loss Prevention—Next Steps -ISACA, [Cloud Computing - ISACA], [Cloud Computing Risk Assessment - ISACA], [User Awareness Training - ISACA], [Governance and Oversight - ISACA]

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 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

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

 Partitioning the work environment from personal space on devices. This would best maintain information security without compromising employee privacy by creating a separate and secure area on the personal mobile devices for work-related data and applications. This way, the organization can protect its information from unauthorized access, loss, or leakage, while respecting the employees’ personal data and preferences on their own devices.

The other options are not as effective as option B in balancing information security and employee privacy. Option A, installing security software on the devices, is a good practice but may not be sufficient to prevent data breaches or comply with regulatory requirements. Option C, preventing users from adding applications, is too restrictive and may interfere with the employees’ personal use of their devices. Option D, restricting the use of devices for personal purposes during working hours, is impractical and difficult to enforce.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019

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

Personal Cellphone Privacy at Work1

Protecting your personal information and privacy on a company phone2

Mobile Devices and Protected Health Information (PHI)3

Using your personal phone for work? Here’s how to separate yourapps and data4

9 Ways to Improve Mobile Security and Privacy in the Age of Remote Work5

The primary objective of value delivery in reference to IT governance is to optimize investments. Value delivery is one of the five focus areas of IT governance that aims to ensure that IT delivers expected benefits to stakeholders and enables business value creation. Value delivery involves aligning IT investments with business objectives and strategies, managing IT performance and benefits realization, optimizing IT costs and risks, and enhancing IT innovation and agility. Value delivery helps to maximize the return on investment (ROI) and value for money (VFM) of IT resources and capabilities. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers & Explanations Database

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 thatmay 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 andposture 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 useapplication server security - IBM, Application Security Risk: Assessment and Modeling - ISACA, Five Key Components of an Application SecurityProgram - ISACA, ISACA Practitioner Guidelines for Auditors - SSH, SCADA Cybersecurity Framework - ISACA

 The most effective control to protect information assets in a data center from theft by a vendor is to monitor and restrict vendor activities. A vendor may have legitimate access to the data center for maintenance or support purposes, but they may also have malicious intentions or be compromised by an attacker. By monitoring and restricting vendor activities, the organization can ensure that the vendor only performs authorized tasks and does not access or tamper with sensitive data or equipment. Issuing an access card to the vendor, concealing data devices and information labels, and restricting use of portable and wireless devices are also useful controls, but they are not as effective as monitoring and restricting vendor activities in preventing theft by a vendor. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 3381

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

The most reliable follow-up procedure to determine if management has resolved the finding of non-sequential purchase order numbers is to inspect the system settings and transaction logs to determine if sequential order numbers are generated. This will provide direct evidence of the system’s functionality and compliance with the audit recommendation. The other options are less reliable because they rely on indirect evidence or information obtained from management, which may not be accurate or complete. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Standards, Guidelines, Tools and Techniques

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. Auditfollow-up is the process of verifyingwhether 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 theaudit 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 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 plansections 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 auditor’s primary concern when capacity management for a key system is being performed by IT with no input from the business would be an unanticipated increase in business’s capacity needs. This could result in performance degradation, service disruption or customer dissatisfaction if IT is not able to provide sufficient capacity to meet the business demand. Failure to maximize the use of equipment, cost of excessive data center storage capacity or impact to future business project funding are secondary concerns that relate to resource optimization or budget allocation, but not to service delivery or customer satisfaction. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page 374

 An IS auditor reviewing the threat assessment for a data center would be most concerned if the exercise was completed by local management, because this could introduce bias, conflict of interest, or lack of expertise in the assessment process. A threat assessment is a systematic method of identifying and evaluating the potential threats that could affect the availability, integrity, or confidentiality of the data center and its assets. A threat assessmentshould be conducted by an independent and qualified team that has the necessary skills, knowledge, and experience to perform a comprehensive and objective analysis of the data center’s environment, vulnerabilities, and risks1.

The other options are not as concerning as option C for an IS auditor reviewing the threat assessment for a data center. Option A, some of the identified threats are unlikely to occur, is not a problem as long as the likelihood and impact of each threat are properly estimated and prioritized. A threat assessment should consider all possible scenarios, even if they have a low probability of occurrence, to ensure that the data center is prepared for any eventuality2. Option B, all identified threats relate to external entities, is not a flaw as long as the assessment also considers internal threats, such as human errors, malicious insiders, or equipment failures. External threats are often more visible and severe than internal threats, butthey are not the only source of risk for a data center3. Option D, neighboring organizations’ operations have been included, is not a mistake as long as the assessment also focuses on the data center’s own operations. Neighboring organizations’ operations may have an impact on the data center’s security and availability, especially if they share physical or network infrastructure or resources. A threat assessmentshould take into account the interdependencies and interactions between the data center and its external environment4.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019

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

Data Center Threats and Vulnerabilities1

Datacenter threat, vulnerability, and risk assessment2

Data Centre Risk Assessment3

 The best way to ensure that a backup copy is available for restoration of mission critical data after a disaster is to periodically test backups stored in a remote location. Testing backups is essential to verify that the backup copies are valid, complete, and recoverable. Testing backups also helps to identify any issues or errors that may affect the backup process or the restoration of data. Storing backups in a remote location is important to protect the backup copies from physical damage, theft, or unauthorized access that may occur at the primary site. Using an electronic vault for incremental backups, deploying a fully automated backup maintenance system, or using both tape and disk backup systems are not sufficient to ensure that a backup copy is available for restoration of mission critical data after a disaster, as they do not address the need for testing backups or storing them in a remote location. References: Backup and Recovery of Data: The Essential Guide | Veritas, The Truth About Data Backup for Mission-Critical Environments - DATAVERSITY.

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 verifieswhether 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 limitcheck can ensure that the amount entered for an invoice does not exceed a certainmaximum 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 applicationcontrol that verifies whether the data entered in anapplication is logical or sensible based on other related data or information1. Forexample, 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

 The most critical finding for an IS auditor following up on a recent security incident is that the security weakness facilitating the attack was not identified. This finding indicates that the root cause of the incident was not analyzed, and the vulnerability that allowed the attack to succeed was not remediated. This means that the organization is still exposed to the same or similar attacks in the future, and its security posture has not improved. Identifying and addressing the security weakness is a key step in the incident response process, as it helps to prevent recurrence, mitigate impact, and improve resilience.

The other findings are not as critical as the failure to identify the security weakness, but they are still important issues that should be addressed by the organization. The attack was not automatically blocked by the intrusion detection system (IDS) is a finding that suggests that the IDS was not configured properly, or that it did not have the latest signatures or rules to detect and prevent the attack. The attack could not be traced back to the originating person is a finding that implies that the organization did not have sufficient logging, monitoring, or forensic capabilities to identify and attribute the attacker. Appropriate response documentation was not maintained is a finding that indicates that the organization did not follow a consistent and formal incident response procedure, or that it did not document its actions, decisions, and lessons learned from the incident.

References:

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

Incident Response Process - ISACA1

Incident Response: How to Identify and Fix Security Weaknesses

The best metric to measure the alignment of IT and business strategy is the percentage of enterprise risk assessments that include IT-related risk. This metric indicates how well the organization identifies and manages the IT risks that could affect its strategic objectives and performance. A high percentage of enterprise risk assessments that include IT-related risk shows that the organization considers IT as an integral part of its business strategy and aligns its IT resources and capabilities with its business needs and goals . References: : CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: Governance and Management of IT, Section 2.2: IT Strategy, page 67 : CISA Online Review Course, Module 2: Governance and Management of IT, Lesson 2.2: IT Strategy

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 theyeither 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 IS auditor’s primary focus when evaluating an organization’s offsite storage facility should be the adequacy of physical and environmental controls. Physical and environmental controls are essential to protect the offsite storage facility from unauthorized access, theft, fire, water damage, pests or other hazards that could compromise the integrity and availability of backup media. Shared facilities is something that the IS auditor should consider when evaluating the offsite storage facility, but it is not the primary focus. Results of business continuity plan (BCP) test or retention policy and period are things that the IS auditor should review when evaluating the organization’s BCP or backup strategy, not the offsite storage facility itself. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page 388

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 coverthe 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

 Periodically reviewing log files is the most effective way to detect intrusion attempts from outside the organization, as they can provide evidence of unauthorized access attempts, source IP addresses, timestamps and other relevant information. Using smart cards with one-time passwords or installing biometrics-based authentication can prevent unauthorized access, but not detect it. Configuring the router as a firewall can block unwanted traffic, but not log it. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page 361

 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 muchinformation aboutthe 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 most conclusive audit procedure for evaluating the effectiveness of an e-commerce application system’s edit routine is to use test transactions. A test transaction is a simulated input that is processed by the system to verify its output and performance1. By using test transactions, an auditor can directly observe how the edit routine checks the validity, accuracy, and completeness of data entered by users, and how it handles incorrect or invalid data. A test transaction can also help measure the efficiency, reliability, and security of the edit routine, as well as identify any errors or weaknesses in the system.

The other options are not as conclusive as using test transactions, as they rely on indirect or secondary sources of information. Reviewing program documentation is an audit procedure that involves examining the written description of the system’s design, specifications, and functionality2. However,program documentation may not reflect the actual implementation or operation of the system, and it may not reveal any discrepancies or defects in the edit routine. Interviews with knowledgeable users is an audit procedure that involves asking questions to the people who use or manage the system3. However, interviews with knowledgeable users may not provide sufficient or objective evidence of the edit routine’s effectiveness, and they may be influenced by personal opinions or biases. Reviewing source code is an audit procedurethat involves analyzing the programming language and logic of the system4. However, reviewing source code may not be feasible or practical for complex or large systems, and it may not demonstrate how the edit routine performs in real scenarios.

Separate authorization for input of transactions. This control would have best prevented this type of fraud in a retail environment by ensuring that the warehouse employee who handles the inventory items does not have the authority to enter adjustments to the inventory system. This would create a segregation of duties that would reduce the risk of collusion and concealment of theft.

The other options are not as effective as option A in preventing this type of fraud. Option B, statistical sampling of adjustment transactions, is a detective control that may help identify fraudulent transactions after they have occurred, but it does not prevent them from happening in the first place. Option C, unscheduled audits of lost stock lines, is also a detective control that may reveal discrepancies between the physical and recorded inventory, but it does not address the root cause of the fraud. Option D, an edit check for the validity of the inventory transaction, is a preventive control that may help verify the accuracy and completeness of the transaction data, but it does not prevent unauthorized or fraudulent adjustments.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019

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

Different Types of Inventory Fraud and How to Prevent Them1

6 Ways to Prevent Inventory Fraud in Your Business2

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

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 disadvantagesof data visualization?

 The first step in assessing the controls within a newly implemented call center is to evaluate the operational risk associated with the call center. This will help the IS auditor to identify the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts that could affect the call center’s objectives, performance, andavailability. The evaluation of operational risk will also provide a basis for determining the scope, objectives, and approach of the audit. The other options are possible audit procedures, but they are not the first step in the audit process. References: ISACA Frameworks: Blueprints for Success, CISA Review Manual (DigitalVersion)