CISA Certified Information Systems Auditor Questions and Answers

 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.

 The best recommendation to address the situation of inconsistencies in privacy requirements across third-party service provider contracts is to prioritize contract amendments for third-party providers. This is because:

Privacy requirements are essential to ensure the protection of personal information and compliance with relevant laws and regulations, such as the GDPR and the CCPA123.

Inconsistencies in privacy requirements can create risks of data breaches, legal liabilities, reputational damage, and consumer distrust for the organization that outsources its data processing to third-party providers123.

Suspending contracts with third-party providers that handle sensitive data (option A) is not a feasible or effective solution, as it may disrupt the business operations and cause contractual penalties or disputes4.

Reviewing privacy requirements when contracts come up for renewal (option C) is not a proactive or timely approach, as it may leave the organization exposed to privacy risks for a long period of time until the contracts expire4.

Requiring third-party providers to sign nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) (option D) is not a sufficient measure, as NDAs only cover the confidentiality of information, but not other aspects of privacy, such as data minimization, retention, access, deletion, and security4.

Therefore, the best recommendation is to prioritize contract amendments for third-party providers (option B), as this would allow the organization to align the privacy requirements with its own policies and standards, as well as with the applicable laws and regulations. This would also enable the organization to monitor and audit the compliance of third-party providers with the privacy requirements and enforce appropriate remedies or sanctions in case of noncompliance45.

The most important thing to determine next after concluding that an organization has a quality security policy is whether the policy is well understood by all employees. A security policy is a document that defines the objectives, scope, roles, responsibilities, and rules for information security within an organization. A quality security policy is one that is clear, concise, consistent, comprehensive, and aligned with business goals and requirements. However, a quality security policy is useless if it is not well understood by all employees who are expected to comply with it.Therefore, the IS auditor should assess the level of awareness and understanding of the security policy among employees and identify any gaps or issues that need to be addressed. The other options are not as important as ensuring that the security policy is well understood by all employees, as they do not directly affect the implementation and effectiveness of the security policy. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 317

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 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

The most important consideration when planning the next audit after many findings is to follow up on the status of all recommendations, as this will ensure that the audit findings are addressed in a timely and effective manner, and that the root causes of the issues are resolved12. Following up on the status of all recommendations will also help to assess the progress and performance of the IT department, and to identify any new or emerging risks or challenges34.

References

1: What to consider when resolving internal audit findings3 2: A brief guide to follow up4 3: Guidance on auditing planning for Internal Audit2 4: Corrective Action Plan (CAP): How to Manage Audit Findings1

 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.

 A transaction processing system (TPS) is a system that captures, processes, and stores data related to business transactions1. A general ledger is a system that records the financial transactions of an organization in different accounts2. An interface is a connection point between two systems that allows data exchange3. A system fix is a change or update to a system that resolves a problem or improves its functionality4.

The IS auditor should recommend to perform periodic reconciliations to validate the interface between the TPS and the general ledger is working in the future. A reconciliation is a process of comparing and verifying the data in two systems to ensure accuracy and consistency1. By performing periodic reconciliations, the IS auditor can detect and correct any errors or discrepancies in the data, such as duplicate transactions, missing transactions, or incorrect amounts. This way, the IS auditor can ensure the reliability and integrity of the financial data in both systems.

The other options are not as effective as periodic reconciliations to validate the interface. System owner sign-off for the system fix is a form of approval that indicates the system owner agrees with the change and its expected outcome4. However, this does not guarantee that the system fix will work as intended or prevent future errors. Conducting functional testing is a process of verifying that the system performs its intended functions correctly and meets its requirements4. However, this is usually done before or after the system fix is implemented, not on an ongoing basis. Improving user acceptance testing (UAT) is a process of evaluating whether the system meets the needs and expectations of the end users4. However, this is also done before or after the system fix is implemented, not on an ongoing basis. Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

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

The best answer is C. Operate in fail-secure mode.

If the goal is to prevent unauthorized entry during a power outage, the doors should remain locked when power fails. That is exactly what fail-secure operation is intended to do. Alarming and monitoring may detect an issue, but they do not themselves prevent entry. Physical key backup may help authorized access, but it does not address the primary requirement of staying secure during loss of power.

So the strongest answer is fail-secure, because it directly preserves physical access control during an outage.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA physical security and access-control terminology resources support layered protection of facilities.

The primary reason for an IS auditor to perform a risk assessment is to help identify areas with a relatively high probability of material problems. A risk assessment is a systematic process of evaluating the potential risks that may be involved in an activity or undertaking. It involves identifying the sources of risk, analyzing the likelihood and impact of the risk, and prioritizing the risks based on their significance. A risk assessment helps the IS auditor to focus on the areas that are most vulnerable to errors, fraud, or inefficiencies, and to design appropriate audit procedures to address those risks. A risk assessment also helps the IS auditor to allocate audit resources efficiently and effectively.

A risk assessment does not provide a basis for the formulation of corrective action plans, as this is a responsibility of management, not the IS auditor. A risk assessment does not increase awareness of the types of management actions that may be inappropriate, as this is a matter of professional ethicsand judgment. A risk assessment does not help to identify areas that are most sensitive to fraudulent or inaccurate practices, as this is a result of the risk assessment, not its purpose.

An acceptable use policy (AUP) is a preventive control that sets out rules and guidelines for using an organization’s IT resources, including networks, devices, and software1. It defines acceptable and prohibited behaviors, aiming to protect assets, ensure security, and maintain a productive work environment1. By agreeing to and documenting an AUP for the equipment, both organizations can prevent potential misuse of IT resources2345.

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

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

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

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

The auditor’s primary course of action is to evaluate the impact of the partial compliance. When a control is only partially operating as designed, the auditor must first assess significance: what risk remains, what objectives are affected, and whether the deviation is material enough to become a reportable finding. ISACA audit and follow-up guidance emphasizes capturing and following up on significant issues and deficiencies, which implies the need for impact evaluation before deciding on reporting or recommendations.

Option B is correct because evaluating impact is what determines the seriousness of the deficiency and the appropriate audit response. Without understanding the effect of the deviation, the auditor cannot appropriately decide whether to escalate it, report it, or recommend redesign.

Option C is important and usually happens during audit communication, but discussion with control owners is not the primary analytical step. The auditor must first understand the risk and significance of the partial compliance.

Option D is incorrect because not every partial deviation should automatically become a final-report finding. The auditor should first evaluate whether the issue is significant and reportable. ISACA follow-up guidance specifically refers to significant issues/findings.

Option A is also incorrect because recommending redesign may be appropriate later, but only after the auditor understands the impact and whether the problem is design-related, operating-related, or user-adoption-related.

Therefore, B is the best answer because impact evaluation comes before escalation, formal reporting, or redesign recommendations.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, Enhancing the Audit Follow-up Process Using COBIT 5 — significant issues/findings should be captured and followed up.

ISACA Journal, An Approach Toward Sarbanes-Oxley ITGC Risk Assessment — supports a risk-based evaluation approach focused on control process areas.

ISACA, How Effective Is Your Cybersecurity Audit — effectiveness depends on evaluating gaps and their implications.

Job scheduling is a core operational control that ensures workloads are executed in an orderly and efficient manner, balancing demands across processing resources. Its primary benefit is optimization of system resources—CPU, memory, I/O, and network bandwidth—leading to improved throughput and consistent service levels. While scheduling may indirectly reduce downtime (A) or support scalability (B), its direct impact is ensuring resources are allocated efficiently. Decreasing complexity (D) is not the key purpose of scheduling. ISACA’s DSS01 (Managed Operations) recognizes workload and job scheduling as crucial practices for sustaining reliable, high-performance IT services.

References (ISACA): COBIT® 2019, DSS01 Managed Operations.

Internal firewalls are highly effective for isolating Internet of Things (IoT) devices from corporate network traffic. By segmenting the network and restricting communication between devices and the main corporate infrastructure, internal firewalls help mitigate the risk of lateral movement and data breaches caused by compromised IoT devices.

Blockchain Technology (Option B):This is useful for ensuring data integrity but not for network isolation.

Content Filtering Proxy (Option C):This is designed to manage web traffic and does not provide network segmentation.

Zero Trust Architecture (Option D):While Zero Trust provides robust access controls, internal firewalls are more directly suited for traffic isolation.

The best way to enforce the principle of least privilege on a server containing data with different security classifications is to apply access controls determined by the data owner. The principle of least privilege states that users should only have the minimum level of access required to perform their tasks. The data owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility to classify, label, and protect the data according to its sensitivity and value. The data owner can define the access rightsand permissions for each user or role based on the data classification policy and the business needs. This will ensure that only authorized and appropriate users can access the data and prevent unauthorized or excessive access that could compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the data. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers and Explanations Database

When storage space is limited,incremental backupsare the most efficient because they store only the changes made since the last backup, reducing storage requirements.

Option A (Correct):Incremental backupsonly store data that has changed since the last backup, significantly reducing storage usage while maintaining a historical record of changes.

Option B (Incorrect):Mirror backupscreate an exact copy of the entire system, consuming significant storage space andnot retaining historical versions.

Option C (Incorrect):Full backupscapture everything and require large amounts of storage, making them impractical for space-constrained environments.

Option D (Incorrect):Annual backupsrefer to frequency rather than method. They do not inherently optimize storage usage.

A digital signature is a mathematical algorithm that validates the authenticity and integrity of a message or document by generating a unique hash of the message or document and encrypting it using the sender’s private key1. The primary reason for using a digital signature is to authenticate the sender of a message, as only the sender has access to their private key and can produce a valid signature2. A digital signature also verifies the integrity of the data, as any modification to the message or document will result in a different hash value and invalidate the signature1. However, a digital signature does not provide availability or confidentiality to the transmission, as it does not prevent denial-of-service attacks or encrypt the entire message or document3.

References

1: Understanding Digital Signatures | CISA

2: Signature Verification | CISA

3: SECFND: Digital Signatures from Skillsoft | NICCS

The best way to enable the effectiveness of an agile project for the rapid development of a new software application is to separate the work into sprints. Sprints are short, time-boxed iterations that deliver a potentially releasable product increment at the end of each sprint. Sprints allow agile teams to work in a flexible and adaptive manner, respond quickly to changing customer needs and feedback, and deliver value faster and more frequently. Sprints also help teams to plan, execute, review, and improve their work in a collaborative and transparent way. Project segments, phases, and milestones are not specific to agile projects and do not necessarily enable the effectiveness of an agile project. References: Agile Project Management [Whatis it and How to Start] - Atlassian, CISA Review Manual (Digital Version).

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

References

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

2: How to perform Compliance Gap Analysis? - Sprinto

The 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

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

When a data center is attempting to restore computing facilities at an alternative site following a disaster, the operating system should be restored FIRST. Here’s why:

1. Operating System (OS):

The OS is the foundation of any computing environment. It manages hardware resources, provides essential services, and allows applications to run.

Restoring the OS ensures that the infrastructure is operational and ready for further recovery steps.

Without a functional OS, applications cannot execute, and data backups cannot be effectively restored.

2. Data Backups:

While data backups are critical for recovery, they depend on a working infrastructure.

If the OS is not operational, restoring data backups becomes challenging.

Data backups should follow the OS restoration.

3. Applications:

Applications rely on the OS to function.

Restoring applications before the OS may lead to compatibility issues or incomplete functionality.

Applications should be restored after ensuring a stable OS environment.

4. Decision Support System (DSS):

DSS is an application category.

It should follow the restoration of both the OS and critical applications.

In summary, prioritize restoring the operating system, which forms the basis for subsequent recovery steps12. Once the OS is functional, proceed with data backups, applications, and other systems as needed.

The most important aspect of an incident response management program is the ability to detect incidents in a timely and accurate manner. Without effective detection, the organization cannot respond to incidents, mitigate their impact, or prevent their recurrence. The alerting tools and incident responseteam are responsible for monitoring the IT environment, identifying anomalies or threats, and notifying the appropriate stakeholders.

References

ISACA CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 255

What is an incident response plan? And why do you need one?

ISACA CISA Certified Information Systems Auditor Exam … - PUPUWEB

 The most important thing to include in forensic data collection and preservation procedures is preserving data integrity. Data integrity is the property that ensures that data is accurate, complete, and consistent throughout its lifecycle. Preserving data integrity is essential for forensic data collection and preservation procedures because it ensures that the data can be used as valid and reliable evidence in legal proceedings or investigations. Preserving data integrity can be achieved by using methods such as hashing, checksums, digital signatures, write blockers, tamper-evident seals, or timestamps. The other options are not as important as preserving data integrity in forensic data collection and preservation procedures, as they do not affect the validity or reliability of the data. Assuring the physical security of devices is a security measure that protects devices from unauthorized access, theft, damage, or destruction, but it does not ensure that the data on the devices is accurate, complete, and consistent. Maintaining chain of custody is a documentation technique that records and tracks the handling and transfer of devices or data among different parties involved in forensic activities, but it does not ensure that the data on the devices is accurate, complete, and consistent. Determining tools to be used is a planning activity that selects and prepares the appropriate tools for forensic data collection and preservation procedures, but it does not ensure that the data collected and preserved by the tools is accurate, complete, and consistent. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.4

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

An IT metrics dashboard provides real-time monitoring and reporting on key IT performance indicators (KPIs), allowing auditors and management to evaluate the effectiveness of IT strategy implementation and execution.

Option A (Benchmarking): Useful for comparisons with peers but not for ongoing execution.

Option B (Maturity models): Assess long-term process maturity, not direct strategy execution.

Option C (Six Sigma): Focuses on process improvement, not IT strategy monitoring.

Option D: Correct — dashboards link strategy to measurable outcomes.

???? ISACA Reference: CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, Domain 1, section on IT strategy, governance metrics, and performance dashboards.

The effectiveness of a security awareness training program is best indicated by a reduction in unintentional violations. When employees are well-trained and aware of security practices, they are less likely to inadvertently violate security policies or make mistakes that could lead to breaches. While other factors (such as third-party social engineering tests, employee satisfaction, and completion rates) provide valuable insights, the ultimate goal of security awareness training is to minimize unintentional errors and improve overall security posture12. References: 1(https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2023/volume-2/considerations-for-developing-cybersecurity-awareness-training) 2(https://www.isaca.org/resources/news-and-trends/isaca-now-blog/2023/security-awareness-training-a-critical-success-factor-for-organizations)

This should result in a finding because it violates the best practice of setting rules for groups rather than users. According to one of the web search results1, using group permissions instead of individual permissions can simplify the management and maintenance of ACLs, reduce the risk of human errors, and ensure consistency and compliance. Individual permissions can create conflicts, confusion, and security gaps in the ACLs. Therefore, the IS auditor should report this as a finding and recommend using group permissions instead.

 Limiting the use of logs to only those purposes for which they were collected is the best way to address potential data privacy concerns associated with inadvertent disclosure of machine identifier information contained within security logs, because it minimizes the risk of unauthorized access, misuse, or leakage of personal data that may be embedded in the logs. Logs should be collected and processed in accordance with the data protection principles and regulations, such as theGeneral Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)12. Restricting the transfer of log files from host machine to online storage, only collecting logs from servers classified as business critical, and limiting log collection toonly periods of increased security activity are not effective ways to address data privacy concerns, because they do not prevent or mitigate the potential disclosure of personal datain the logs. References: 1: CISA Review Manual (DigitalVersion), Chapter 5, Section 5.4.4 2: CISA Online Review Course, Module 5, Lesson 4

 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.

The best answer is B. To establish the organization’s accountability for the use and protection of personal information.

ISACA privacy guidance emphasizes accountability as a core privacy principle and describes privacy notices as documents that explain how personal information is collected, used, shared, retained, and protected. A privacy notice is fundamentally about transparency and accountability to data subjects regarding the organization’s handling of personal information.

Option A is incorrect because a privacy notice is not primarily a liability shield. Option C is incorrect because a privacy notice may disclose sharing practices, but it is not primarily to obtain blanket approval for sale of personal information. Option D is also incorrect because compliance of controls is a broader privacy governance objective; the notice itself is mainly for transparent disclosure and accountability.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA, Privacy Notice.

ISACA Privacy Resource Center.

ISACA Journal, Creating a Compliant and Accountable Data Culture.

ISACA, Using ISACA Privacy Principles for GDPR Compliance.

 Reviewing a sample of system-generated backup logs is the best step to verify that regularly scheduled backups are timely and run to completion. Backup logs are records that document the details and results of backup operations, such as the date, time, duration, status, errors, and exceptions. By reviewing a sample of backup logs, the IS auditor can check whether the backups are performed according to the schedule and whether they are completed successfully or not. The other steps do not provide as much evidence or assurance as reviewing backup logs, as they do not show the actual outcome or performance of backup operations. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 247

The auditor’s greatest concern when reviewing data inputs from spreadsheets into the core finance system would be undocumented code that formats data and transmits directly to the database. This is because undocumented code can introduce errors, inconsistencies, and security risks in the data processing and reporting. Undocumented code can also make it difficult to verify the accuracy, completeness, and validity of the data inputs and outputs, as well as to trace the source and destination of the data. Undocumented code can also violate the principles of segregation of duties, as the same person who creates the code may also have access to the data and the database.

The other options are not as concerning as undocumented code, although they may also pose some risks. A lack of complete inventory of spreadsheets and inconsistent file naming may make it challenging to identify and locate the relevant spreadsheets, but they do not directly affect the quality or integrity of the data inputs. The department data protection policy not being reviewed or updated for two years may indicate a lack of awareness or compliance with the current data protection regulations, but it does not necessarily imply that the data inputs are compromised or inaccurate. Spreadsheets being accessible by all members of the finance department may increase the risk of unauthorized or accidental changes to the data, but it can be mitigated by implementing access controls, password protection, and audit trails.

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

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

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

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

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

Created and authorized by a security administrator or manager

Assigned to a specific user and purpose

Limited in scope and time

Logged and audited

Revoked and deleted after use

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

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

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

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

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

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

 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

The best way to provide assurance of the integrity of a firewall log is to ensure that the log cannot be modified. A firewall log is a record of the traffic and events that occur at the firewall, which is a device or software that controls and filters the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules and policies. The integrity of a firewall log means that the log is accurate, complete, consistent, and valid, and that it has not been altered, deleted, or corrupted by unauthorized or malicious parties. The IS auditor should verify that the firewall log has adequate controls to prevent or detect any modification of the log, such as encryption, hashing, digital signatures, write-once media, or tamper-evident seals. The other options are not as effective as ensuring that the log cannot be modified, because they either do not address the integrity of the log data, or they are monitoring or retention measures rather than preventive or detective controls. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.4

The best answer is D. Feasibility study.

ISACA guidance notes that, in projects, an auditor reviews the feasibility of projects based on resources, time, and other factors, and evaluates whether projects are aligned with the organization’s strategic goals. That is exactly the stage where internal audit’s advisory involvement is most appropriate during development of the business case.

Option A, B, and C occur later in the system development lifecycle and are more operational or project-delivery focused. The question is specifically about the development of a business case, and feasibility analysis is the phase most directly tied to whether the initiative is practical, justified, and aligned with business goals.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, Innovation and the Auditor.

ISACA, An Appropriate Approach for Program and Project Management.

A mesh configuration provides the greatest fault tolerance. ISACA’s glossary explicitly defines mesh topology as “a fault-tolerant topology in which network nodes and endpoints are mostly, if not fully, interconnected.” That directly answers the question.

Option D is correct because a mesh topology provides multiple alternate communication paths. If one link or node fails, traffic can often be rerouted through other paths, making the network more resilient than star, ring, or bus topologies.

Option A is less fault tolerant because the central hub or switch can become a single point of failure.

Option B is less fault tolerant because failure in the ring can disrupt communication unless specialized redundancy exists.

Option C is the least fault tolerant among these common topologies because the shared backbone can become a major single point of failure.

Therefore, D is the best answer, and ISACA’s glossary directly supports it.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Glossary, Mesh topology — “A fault-tolerant topology...”

Before issuing the final audit report, the auditor should confirm factual findings with the auditee. ISACA audit guidance emphasizes that findings should be vetted, communicated, and reviewed with client management prior to final publication so that the report is factually accurate and misunderstandings are resolved.

Option B is correct because confirming factual findings with the auditee is a key step just before final issuance. ISACA guidance notes that findings may be discussed with auditees as they are gathered and should be verified with them where possible. ISACA also stresses that draft reports should be reviewed by client management before publication to ensure factual accuracy.

Option A is incorrect because the audit committee is generally a report recipient or governance body, not the party with whom the auditor first validates factual accuracy of detailed findings. The auditee is in the best position to confirm whether the facts, context, and operational details are accurate before the report becomes final.

Option C is an important audit responsibility, but it should already have been completed during fieldwork and evidence-gathering. By the conclusion of the audit, the auditor should already possess sufficient, appropriate evidence to support findings. The question asks what should be done at the conclusion of the audit, but before issuing the final report, which points to factual confirmation with the auditee.

Option D is not the best answer because management is responsible for developing action plans. While auditors may discuss recommendations, they should not take ownership of management’s corrective action plan in a way that compromises independence. The more immediate and proper pre-issuance step is confirming the factual accuracy of findings.

Thus, in classic CISA logic, the auditor should first ensure that the report is factually correct by validating findings with the auditee before the final report is issued. That makes B the correct answer.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA, The Top-Five Audit Essentials for Driving Efficiency and Value — findings should be vetted and communicated with the client; draft report reviewed by client management prior to final publication.

ISACA Journal, Agile Audit — findings may be shared and verified with auditees before the final report.

ISACA Journal, Future Ready: Toward a Sound Agile Audit Framework — auditee feedback at the final reporting stage is important.

ISACA Journal case study — draft report sent to auditee and comments/amendments accepted before issuing report.

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

Threat modeling is an approach that enables IS auditors to identify, analyze, and mitigate potential security vulnerabilities within an application by understanding the threats, attacks, vulnerabilities, and countermeasures. This proactive technique helps in designing secure applications.

References

ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, Page 276-277 (Threat Modeling)

This is because the auditor’s primary objective is to evaluate the adequacy and performance of the business continuity plan (BCP) in ensuring the continuity and resilience of the organization’s critical functions and processesduring a disruption. The auditor should review the actual results and outcomes of the business response, such as the recovery time, recovery point, service level, customer satisfaction, and incident management, and compare them with the predefined objectives and criteria of the BCP. The auditor should also identify and analyze any gaps, issues, or lessons learned from the business response, and provide recommendations for improvement12.

Answer A. Confirm the BCP has been recently updated. is not the best answer, because it is not directly related to the auditor’s course of action. Confirming the BCP has been recently updated is a part of the audit planning and scoping process, not the audit execution or reporting process. The auditor should confirm the BCP has been recently updated before conducting the audit, not after revealing that a simulation test has not been performed. Moreover, confirming the BCP has been recently updated does not provide sufficient evidence of the effectiveness of the business response12.

Answer C. Raise an audit issue for the lack of simulated testing. is not the best answer, because it is not relevant to the auditor’s course of action. Raising an audit issue for the lack of simulated testing is a part of the audit reporting and follow-up process, not the audit execution or evaluation process. The auditor should raise an audit issue for the lack of simulated testing after reviewing the effectiveness of the business response, not before or instead of doing so. Furthermore, raising an audit issue for the lack of simulated testing does not address the root cause or impact of the problem, nor does it provide any constructive feedback or guidance for improvement12.

Answer D. Interview staff members to obtain commentary on the BCP’s effectiveness. is not the best answer, because it is not sufficient to guide the auditor’s course of action. Interviewing staff members to obtain commentary on the BCP’s effectiveness is a part of the audit evidence collection and analysis process, not the audit evaluation or conclusion process. The auditor should interview staff members to obtain commentary on the BCP’s effectiveness as one of the sources of information, not as the only or main source of information. Additionally, interviewing staff members to obtain commentary on the BCP’s effectiveness may be subjective, biased, or incomplete, and may not reflect the actual performance or outcomes of the business response12.

An IT framework for alignment between IT and business objectives is a set of principles, guidelines, and practices that help an organization to ensure that its IT investments support its strategic goals, deliver value, manage risks, and optimize resources. One of the benefits of implementing such a framework is that it enables an effective IT portfolio management, which is the process of selecting, prioritizing, monitoring, and evaluating the IT projects and services that comprise the IT portfolio. An IT portfolio is a collection of IT assets, such as applications, infrastructure, data, and capabilities, that are aligned with the business needs and objectives. An IT portfolio management helps an organization to achieve the following outcomes:

Align the IT portfolio with the business strategy and vision

Balance the IT portfolio among different types of investments, such as innovation, growth, maintenance, and compliance

Optimize the IT portfolio performance, value, and risk

Enhance the IT portfolio decision-making and governance

Improve the IT portfolio communication and transparency

Therefore, an inadequate IT portfolio management is a major concern that can be addressed by implementing an IT framework for alignment between IT and business objectives. An inadequate IT portfolio management can result in the following issues:

Misalignment of the IT portfolio with the business needs and expectations

Imbalance of the IT portfolio among competing demands and priorities

Suboptimal use of the IT resources and capabilities

Lack of visibility and accountability of the IT portfolio outcomes and impacts

Poor communication and collaboration among the IT portfolio stakeholders

The other possible options are:

Inaccurate business impact analysis (BIA): A BIA is a process of identifying and assessing the potential effects of a disruption or disaster on the critical business functions and processes. A BIA helps an organization to determine the recovery priorities, objectives, and strategies for its business continuity plan. A BIA is not directly related to an IT framework for alignment between IT and business objectives, although it may use some inputs from the IT portfolio management. Therefore, an inaccurate BIA is not a concern that can be effectively addressed by implementing an IT framework for alignment between IT and business objectives.

Inadequate IT change management practices: IT change management is a process of controlling and managing the changes to the IT environment, such as hardware, software, configuration, or documentation. IT change management helps an organization to minimize the risks and disruptions caused by the changes, ensure the quality and consistency of the changes, and align the changes with the business requirements. IT change management is not directly related to an IT framework for alignment between IT and business objectives, although it may support some aspects of the IT portfolio management. Therefore, inadequate IT change management practices are not a concern that can be effectively addressed by implementing an IT framework for alignment between IT and business objectives.

Lack of a benchmark analysis: A benchmark analysis is a process of comparing an organization’s performance, processes, or practices with those of other organizations or industry standards. A benchmark analysis helps an organization to identify its strengths and weaknesses, set realistic goals and targets, and implement best practices for improvement. A benchmark analysis is not directly related to an IT framework for alignment between IT and business objectives, although it may provide some insights for the IT portfolio management. Therefore, lack of a benchmark analysis is not a concern that can be effectively addressed by implementing an IT framework for alignment between IT and business objectives. References: 1: What is Portfolio Management? | Smartsheet 2: What Is Portfolio Management? - Definition from Techopedia 3: What Is Project Portfolio Management (PPM)? |ProjectManager.com 4: What Is Business Impact Analysis? | Smartsheet 5: What Is Change Management? - Definition from Techopedia 6: Benchmarking - Wikipedia

Multi-tenancy within the same database (B) presents the greatest risk of data leakage in the cloud environment, because it means that multiple customers share the same physical database and resources. This can lead to data isolation and security issues, such as unauthorized access, cross-tenant attacks, or data leakage due to misconfiguration or human error. To prevent data leakage in a multi-tenant database, cloud providers need to implement strict access control policies, encryption, isolation mechanisms, and auditing tools.

Lack of data retention policy (A) is not the greatest risk of data leakage in the cloud environment, because it mainly affects the availability and compliance of data, not its confidentiality or integrity. Data retention policy defines how long data should be stored and when it should be deleted or archived. Without a data retention policy, cloud customers may face legal or regulatory issues, storage costs, or performance degradation.

Lack of role-based access © is not the greatest risk of data leakage in the cloud environment, because it can be mitigated by implementing proper authentication and authorization mechanisms. Role-based access control (RBAC) is a security model that assigns permissions and privileges to users based on their roles and responsibilities. Without RBAC, cloud customers may face unauthorized access, privilege escalation, or data misuse.

Expiration of security certificate (D) is not the greatest risk of data leakage in the cloud environment, because it can be easily detected and renewed. A security certificate is a digital document that verifies the identity and authenticity of a website or service. It also enables secure communication using encryption. If a security certificate expires, it may cause trust issues, warning messages, or connection errors, but not necessarily data leakage.

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 rules to validate employee data entry. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1

The best way to prevent data leakage from a lost mobile device is data encryption on the mobile device. Data encryption is a technique that transforms data into an unreadable format using a secret key or algorithm. Data encryption protects data from unauthorized access or disclosure in case of loss or theft of a mobile device. Complex password policy for mobile devices, triggering of remote data wipe capabilities, and awareness training for mobile device users are useful measures to enhance data security on mobile devices, but they do not prevent data leakage as effectively as data encryption. A complex password policy can be bypassed by brute force attacks or password cracking tools. Remote data wipe capabilities depend on network connectivity and device power availability. Awareness training for mobile device users can reduce human errors or negligence, but it cannot guarantee compliance or behavior change. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version): Chapter 5 - Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience

AChange Approval Board (CAB)ensures thatall necessary testing and rollback planshave been reviewed before deployment.

Option A (Correct):ACABensures thatchanges are reviewed, tested, and approved, minimizing risks before an application is deployed. This includes confirming thatrollback plans are in place.

Option B (Incorrect):Standardized change requestsare important but donot guarantee review and approvalby management and stakeholders.

Option C (Incorrect):Third-party approvalmay be useful, but internalgovernance and control via a CABis more comprehensive.

Option D (Incorrect):Secure code reviewshelp identify vulnerabilities, but they donot confirm proper deployment and rollback procedures.

During a pre-deployment assessment, the best indication that a business case will lead to the achievement of business objectives is that the business case reflects stakeholder requirements. A business case is a document that explains the rationale, benefits, costs, and risks of a proposed project or initiative. A business case should align with the strategic goals and vision of the organization and address the needs and expectations of the stakeholders who are involved in or affected by the project12.

Stakeholder requirements are the conditions or capabilities that stakeholders expect from a project or its outcomes. Stakeholders can include customers, users, employees, managers, suppliers, regulators, and others who have an interest or stake in the project. Stakeholder requirements should be identified, analyzed, prioritized, validated, and documented throughout the project lifecycle34.

The business case should reflect stakeholder requirements because they provide the basis for defining the project scope, objectives, deliverables, quality standards, success criteria, and benefits realization. By reflecting stakeholder requirements, the business case can demonstrate how the project will add value to the organization and its stakeholders, justify the investment and resources required for the project, and facilitate the decision-making and approval process for the project5 .

Therefore, during a pre-deployment assessment, an IS auditor should look for evidence that the business case reflects stakeholder requirements as the best indication that the business case will lead to the achievement of business objectives.

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

 The best way to ensure payment transaction data is restricted to the appropriate users is implementing role-based access at the application level. Role-based access is a method of access control that assigns permissions or privileges to users based on their roles or functions within an organization or system. Role-based access can help ensure that payment transaction data is restricted to the appropriate users, by allowing only authorized users who have a legitimate need orpurpose to access or use the payment transaction data, and preventing unauthorized or unnecessary access or use by other users. Implementing two-factor authentication is a possible way to enhance the security and verification of user identities, but it is not the best way to ensure payment transaction data is restricted to the appropriate users, as it does not define what permissions or privileges users have on the payment transaction data. Restricting access to transactions using network security software is a possible way to protect the network communication and transmission of payment transaction data, but it is not the best way to ensure payment transaction data is restricted to the appropriate users, as it does not specify what actions or operations users can perform on the payment transaction data. Using a single menu for sensitive application transactions is a possible way to simplify the user interface and navigation of payment transaction data, but it is not the best way to ensure payment transaction data is restricted to the appropriate users, as it does not limit what users can access or use the payment transaction data. 

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 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.

Normalizationis the process ofstructuring log datainto a standard format for easy analysis and correlation across multiple systems.

Normalization (Correct Answer – D)

Ensures consistency in log file formats.

Helps security analysts detect patterns and anomalies.

Example:Converting log timestamps into a standardized format (UTC).

Extraction (Incorrect – A)

Retrieves data but does not format it for analysis.

Data Acquisition (Incorrect – B)

Refers to collecting data, not structuring it.

Imaging (Incorrect – C)

Creates copies of disk storage but is unrelated to log analysis.

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

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

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

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

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

A strongQA functionrequires anindependentreview of changes toavoid biasandensure objectivity.

Option A (Correct):Ifdevelopers review their own changes, there is ahigh risk of biasand overlooking issues, making this the greatest concern. This violatesseparation of dutiesandbest practices for quality assurance.

Option B (Incorrect):Peer reviews within the same teamreduce risksincefresh eyesreview the changes, though it is not as strong as an external review.

Option C (Incorrect):Havingdevelopers from a separate teamreview the code providesbetter objectivityand reduces risks associated withself-review.

Option D (Incorrect):Whilenon-developers may lack technical expertise, their review ensuresindependence, making it a stronger control than self-review.

The best indication to an IS auditor that management’s post-implementation review was effective is that lessons learned were documented and applied, as this shows that the management has identified and addressed the issues and gaps that arose during the implementation, and has improved the processes and practices for future projects. Business and IT stakeholders participating in the post-implementation review is a good practice, but it does not guarantee that the review was effective or that the outcomes were implemented. Post-implementation review being a formal phase in the system development life cycle (SDLC) is a requirement, but it does not ensure that the review was effective or that the outcomes were implemented. Internal audit follow-up being completed without any findings is a desirable result, but it does not indicate that the management’s post-implementation review was effectiveorthat the outcomes were implemented. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: Information Systems Acquisition, Development andImplementation, Section 3.2: Project Management Practices1

The greatest concern for an IS auditor in this scenario is that the user department will manage access rights to the new accounting system. This could pose a significant risk of unauthorized access, segregation of duties violations, data tampering and fraud. The IS auditor should ensure that access rights are defined, approved and monitored by an independent function, such as IT security or internal audit. The other options are not as concerning as option C, as they can be mitigated by other controls or procedures. Data migration is an important part of the system replacement project, but it can be performed by another party or verified by the IS auditor. The timing of the replacement near year-end reporting is a challenge, but it can be managed by proper planning, testing and contingency plans. Testing performed by the third-party consultant is acceptable, as long as it is reviewed and validated by the IS auditor or another independent party. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) 1, Chapter 3: Information Systems Acquisition, Development and Implementation, Section 3.4: System Implementation.

The best recommendation is database segmentation. If liability depends on the number of individuals whose PII is exposed, the organization should reduce the amount of data that could be compromised in any single breach event. Segmenting databases or separating sensitive data domains limits blast radius and can reduce the number of records exposed in a single incident. ISACA guidance supports isolating high-value assets and tightening internal controls as a way to reduce exposure and improve resilience.

Option A is correct because segmentation limits concentration risk. Instead of keeping all customer data in one broadly exposed logical store, segmentation helps confine access and reduce how many records a single compromise can reach. This directly supports limiting breach impact and, in this case, potential liability tied to the number of affected individuals. This conclusion is an inference from ISACA’s risk-reduction principles around isolation, exposure control, and documenting exposure.

Option B is incorrect because database normalization improves data structure and reduces redundancy; it is not primarily a breach-liability reduction control.

Option C is incorrect because database harmonization is about consistency or integration across datasets, not limiting exposure in a breach.

Option D is incorrect because database optimization focuses on performance and efficiency, not on minimizing the number of PII records exposed in a security incident.

Therefore, A is the best answer because segmentation is the option that most directly reduces the scope of exposure in a breach and therefore helps limit liability based on affected individuals.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA, Best Practices for Setting Up a Cybersecurity Operations Center — recommends prioritizing assets and isolating high-value asset networks.

ISACA Journal, Reporting on GDPR Compliance to the Board — emphasizes documenting exposure and relevant risk controls for privacy risk reporting.

ISACA Journal, Practical Data Security and Privacy for GDPR and CCPA — supports governance approaches to limiting privacy exposure. (Referenced conceptually from prior ISACA privacy guidance.)

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 random or 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.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

When verifying the integrity of a bit-for-bit copy of digital evidence, hashing algorithms are used. The primary factors in selecting a hashing algorithm are speed and collision resistance.

MD5 (Message Digest 5): While not cryptographically secure for all modern applications due to collision vulnerabilities, it is very fast and still acceptable in forensic integrity verification where speed is critical and the probability of collision is negligible for one-time checks.

SHA-1 / SHA-2: Provide stronger cryptographic assurance but are slower than MD5. They are preferred for long-term integrity assurance but not when processing speed is the top priority.

AES (Advanced Encryption Standard): AES is an encryption algorithm, not a hashing algorithm, and therefore is not appropriate for integrity verification.

???? ISACA Reference: CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, Domain 5 (Protection of Information Assets), section on cryptographic controls for evidence integrity.

 Problem management is an IT service management activity that is most likely to help with identifying the root cause of repeated instances of network latency. Problem management involves analyzing incidents that affect IT services and finding solutions to prevent them from recurring or minimize their impact. Change management is an IT service management activity that involves controlling and documenting any modifications to IT services or infrastructure. Incident management is an IT service management activity that involves restoring normal service operation as quickly as possible after an incident has occurred. Configuration management is an IT service management activity that involves identifying and maintaining records of IT assets and their relationships. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page 334

The necessary condition for effective risk management in IT governance is that risk evaluation is embedded in management processes. Risk evaluation is the process of comparing the results of risk analysis with risk criteria to determine whether the risk and/or its magnitude is acceptable or tolerable. Risk evaluation should be integrated into the management processes of planning, implementing, monitoring, and reviewing the IT activities and resources. This will ensure that risk management is aligned with the business objectives, strategies, and values, and that risk responses are timely, appropriate, and effective. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers and ExplanationsDatabase

 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.

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 payable process, 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.

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

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

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

The 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.

 The most efficient way to identify segregation of duties violations in a new system is to review a report of security rights in the system. Segregation of duties is a control principle that aims to prevent or detect errors, fraud, or abuse by ensuring that no single individual has the ability to perform incompatible or conflicting functions or activities within a system or process. A report of security rights in the system can provide a comprehensive and accurate overview of the roles, responsibilities, and access levels assigned to different users or groups in the system, and can help to identify any potential segregation of duties violations or risks. The other options are not as efficient as reviewing a report of security rights in the system, because they either rely on observation or testing rather than analysis, or they focus on existing rather than potential violations. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.2

Unauthorized modifications to scripts (D) pose the greatest risk because they can lead to unintended processing errors, security vulnerabilities, or fraudulent activities. Change management controls should be in place to prevent unauthorized script changes.

Other options:

Minor overrides not authorized (A) is a concern but does not pose as much risk as unauthorized script changes.

Bots incapable of learning (B) is a limitation but not a security risk.

Recording user interactions (C) raises privacy concerns but is not as critical as unauthorized script modifications.

The best assurance is obtained by verifying a sample of critical fields. If the question is specifically about encryption at the database level, the auditor should test the actual data elements in the database that are expected to be encrypted. ISACA privacy and data-protection guidance discusses encryption of sensitive data fields as a protection mechanism, which supports validating field-level protection directly.

Option C is correct because it provides direct evidence that sensitive database fields are actually encrypted. This is stronger than reviewing policies or peripheral settings because it tests the implemented control itself.

Option A is incorrect because drive settings usually relate to disk or full-volume encryption on the host server, not necessarily to database-level encryption of specific sensitive fields.

Option B is incorrect because checking network traffic for clear text transmissions only helps verify encryption in transit, not whether the data is encrypted within the database.

Option D is incorrect because a policy only states intent or requirement. It does not prove the database is actually encrypting sensitive fields.

Therefore, C is the best answer because direct verification of sensitive fields provides the strongest assurance that encryption is implemented at the database level.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, Practical Data Security and Privacy for GDPR and CCPA — discusses encryption of sensitive client data fields.

ISACA Journal, Privacy-Preserving Analytics and Secure Multiparty Computation — discusses encryption of sensitive data fields throughout the data life cycle.

ISACA, Cloud Data Sovereignty: Governance and Risk Implications of Cross-Border Cloud Storage — distinguishes encryption at rest and in transit, supporting why network checks alone are insufficient for database-level assurance.

A hardware-based media write blocker (Option A) ensures that forensic investigators can acquire digital evidence without altering the original data, maintaining its integrity for legal proceedings.

ISACA CISA Reference: Digital forensics best practices emphasize write-blocking devices to prevent contamination of evidence.

Risk Implication: Without a write blocker, evidence may be tampered with, compromising its admissibility in court.

 Backup procedures for an organization’s critical data are considered to be corrective controls, as they are designed to restore normal operations after a disruption or failure. Corrective controls aim to minimize the impact of an incident and prevent recurrence. Directive, detective and compensating controls are not related to backup procedures. Directive controls are intended to guide or instruct users to follow policies and procedures. Detective controls are intended to identify and report incidents or violations. Compensating controls are intended to mitigate the risk of a missing or ineffective primary control. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.11

The first step when planning a penetration test is to obtain management consent for the testing. This is because a penetration test involves simulating a cyberattack against theorganization’s systems and networks, which may have legal, ethical, and operational implications. Without proper authorization from management, a penetration test may violate laws, policies, contracts, or service level agreements. Management consent also helps define the objectives, scope, and boundaries of the test, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the testers and the stakeholders. Obtaining management consent for the testing also demonstrates due care and due diligence on the part of the testers and the organization.

Executing nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), determining reporting requirements for vulnerabilities, and defining the testing scope are important steps when planning a penetration test, but they are not the first step. These steps should be done after obtaining management consent for the testing, as they depend on the approval and involvement of management and other parties.

A monitored mantrap at entrance and exit points would be the most effective compensating control in this scenario. A mantrap is a physical security access control system comprising a small space having two sets of interlockingdoors such that the first set of doors must close before the second set opens. By implementing a monitored mantrap, unauthorized access can be prevented and it can ensure that all individuals are logged when they enter and exit the server room12.

Monitoring systems rely heavily on thresholds to detect anomalies or incidents. If thresholds can be changed without proper change management controls, the entire system’s reliability is compromised because unauthorized or improper changes could either suppress critical alerts or generate excessive false positives. While senior management review (A) is important for governance, it does not directly affect the accuracy of monitoring results. Periodic threshold updates (B) are actually good practice as long as they are controlled. Third-party configuration (D) can be acceptable if properly governed. ISACA’s COBIT BAI06 (Managed IT Changes) stresses that all changes to production systems—including monitoring thresholds—must follow formal change control processes to maintain integrity and reliability.

References (ISACA): COBIT® 2019, BAI06 Managed IT Changes.

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 best option that facilitates strategic program management is aligning projects with business portfolios (option C). This is because:

Strategic program management is the coordinated planning, management, and execution of multiple related projects that are directed toward the same strategic goals12.

Aligning projects with business portfolios means ensuring that the projects within a program are aligned with the organization’s strategic objectives, vision, and mission .

Aligning projects with business portfolios helps to prioritize the most valuable and impactful projects, optimize the allocation of resources, monitor the progress and performance of the program, and deliver the expected benefits and outcomes .

Implementing stage gates (option A) is a process of reviewing and approving projects at predefined points in their lifecycle to ensure that they meet the quality, scope, time, and cost criteria. While this can help to control and improve the project management process, it does not necessarily facilitate strategic program management, as it does not address the alignment of projects with business portfolios.

Establishing a quality assurance (QA) process (option B) is a process of ensuring that the project deliverables meet the quality standards and requirements of the stakeholders. While this can help to enhance the quality and satisfaction of the project outcomes, it does not necessarily facilitate strategic program management, as it does not address the alignment of projects with business portfolios.

Tracking key project milestones (option D) is a process of monitoring and reporting the completion of significant events or deliverables in a project. While this can help to measure and communicate the progress and status of the project, it does not necessarily facilitate strategic program management, as it does not address the alignment of projects with business portfolios.

Therefore, the best option that facilitates strategic program management is aligning projects with business portfolios (option C), as this ensures that the projects within a program are consistent with the organization’s strategic goals and objectives.

 Carbon dioxide fire suppression systems need to be combined with an automatic switch to shut down the electricity supply in the event of activation. This is because carbon dioxide displaces oxygen in the air and can create a suffocation hazard for people in the protected area. Therefore, it is essential to cut off the power source before releasing carbon dioxide to avoid electrical shocks and sparks that could ignite the fire again. Carbon dioxide systems are typically used for total flooding applications in spaces that are not habitable, such as server rooms or data centers. 

Shadow IT often arises when approved software does not meet user requirements (Option D), leading employees to seek alternative solutions.

ISACA CISA Reference: IT governance frameworks stress the need for user-centric IT policies to mitigate shadow IT risks.

Risk Implication: Shadow IT introduces security vulnerabilities, compliance risks, and potential data breaches.

The audit procedure that would have most likely identified the exception of critical servers not included in the central log repository is to compare a list of all servers from the directory server against a list of all servers present in the central log repository. This would allow the IS auditor to detect any discrepancies or omissions in the central log repository. The other audit procedures (A, C and D) would not be effective in identifying this exception, as they would only focus on the alerts generated, the alert settings configured, or the servers included in the previous year’s audit, which may not reflect the current state of the central log repository. References: IS Audit and Assurance Guideline 2202: Evidence Collection Techniques, CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5: Protection of Information Assets, Section 5.3: Logging and Monitoring

A BCP must stay current with organizational changes to ensure its effectiveness during a disruption. Personnel changes and environmental updates are directly relevant to how the BCP would be executed.

References

ISACA CISA Review Manual (Current Edition) - Chapter on Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery

Industry Standards (e.g., ISO 22301, NIST SP 800-34) - Guidelines for maintaining and updating a Business Continuity Plan

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

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

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

The best answer is B. Senior management.

The culture that supports an effective internal control system is set from the top. ISACA’s governance and culture guidance consistently treats culture as a management and leadership responsibility. Senior leadership establishes tone, values, expectations, accountability, and behavioral norms that shape how controls are designed, followed, and enforced across the enterprise. A strong control culture depends on visible commitment from leadership, not just procedural ownership by operational teams.

Option A. HR supports the culture through hiring, training, and policy reinforcement, but HR does not have primary accountability for the overall control environment.

Option C. Line management plays an important role in day-to-day control execution, but enterprise culture is primarily driven by senior leadership.

Option D. Internal audit evaluates and provides assurance over the control system; it does not own or establish the control culture because doing so would impair independence.

Therefore, B is the correct answer because senior management is primarily accountable for establishing the tone and culture that enable an effective and efficient internal control system.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, Auditing Your Organizational Culture.

ISACA Now Blog, Culture as a Corporate Asset.

ISACA Digital Video/Podcast, Understanding and Assessing Organization Culture.

ISACA Journal, Auditing Culture.

 The most reliable way for an IS auditor to evaluate the operational effectiveness of an organization’s data loss prevention (DLP) controls is to verify that confidential files cannot be transmitted to a personal USB device. This is because DLP controls are designed to prevent the loss, leakage or misuse of sensitive data through breaches, ex-filtration transmissions and unauthorized use1. A personal USB device is a common way for data to be stolen or compromised, as it can bypass network security measures and allow unauthorized access to confidential files. Therefore, testing the DLP controls by attempting to copy or transfer confidential files to a personal USB device can provide a direct and objective evidence of whether the DLP controls are working as intended or not.

The other options are less reliable ways for an IS auditor to evaluate the operational effectiveness of an organization’s DLP controls. Reviewing data classification levels based on industry best practice is a way to assess the adequacy of the organization’s data protection policies, but it does not measure how well the DLP controls are implemented or enforced in practice. Verifying that current DLP software is installed on all computer systems is a way to check the technical configuration of the DLP solution, but it does not test how well the DLP software detects and prevents data loss incidents in real scenarios. Conducting interviews to identify possible data protection vulnerabilities is a way to gather qualitative information from stakeholders, but it does not provide quantitative or empirical data on the actual performance of the DLP controls.

The greatest concern for an IS auditor reviewing an online security awareness program is that metrics have not been established to assess training results. Without metrics, it is difficult to measure the effectiveness of the program and identify areas for improvement. The other findings are alsoissues that need to be addressed, but they are not as significant as the lack of metrics. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.3.11

Before selecting a SaaS vendor, the most important action is to complete a risk assessment. A risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the potential risks associated with outsourcing software and IT infrastructure to a third-party provider. A risk assessment helps to determine the impact and likelihood of various threats, such as data breaches, service disruptions, vendor lock-in, compliance issues, and legal disputes. A risk assessment also helps to identify the mitigation strategies and controls that can reduce or eliminate the risks.

A risk assessment is more important than determining service level requirements, performing a business impact analysis (BIA), or conducting a vendor audit because it provides the basis for these other actions. Service level requirements are the expectations and obligations that define the quality and quantity of service that the vendor must provide to the customer. A BIA is a process of assessing the potential effects of an interruption or disruption of critical business functions or processes due to an incident or disaster. A vendor audit is a process of verifying the vendor’s compliance with the contract terms, service levels, security policies, and best practices.

Service level requirements, BIA, and vendor audit are all important actions for selecting a SaaS vendor, but they depend on the results of the risk assessment. For example, service level requirements should reflect the risk appetite and tolerance of the customer, which are determined by the risk assessment. A BIA should prioritize the recovery of the most critical and vulnerable business functions or processes, which are identified by the risk assessment. A vendor audit should focus on the areas of highest risk and concern, which are highlighted by the risk assessment.

Therefore, an IS auditor should recommend to management that completing a risk assessment is the most important action before selecting a SaaS vendor.

Allowing only corporate IM solutions is the best control to mitigate the malware risk associated with an IM system, because it can prevent unauthorized or malicious IM applications from accessing the network and infecting the system with malware. Corporate IM solutions can also enforce security policies and standards, such as encryption, authentication, and logging, to protect the IM system from malware attacks. Blocking attachments in IM, blocking external IMtraffic, and encrypting IM traffic are also possible controls to mitigate the malware risk, but they are not as effective as allowing only corporate IM solutions. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.4.4

An incident response team has been notified of a virus outbreak in a network subnet. The next step should be to focus on limiting the damage by containing the virus and preventing it from spreading further. This may involve isolating the affected systems, disconnecting them from the network, blocking malicious traffic or applying patches or antivirus updates. Verifying that the compromised systems are fully functional, documenting the incident and removing and restoring the affected systems are possible steps that could be taken after limiting the damage. References:

[Incident Response Definition]

[Incident Response Process | ISACA]

[Virus Definition]

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 and Explanations Database, Question ID 208

Thedata owneris the individual or entity responsible for classifying, protecting, and defining access permissions to data. They ensure that only authorized personnel can access, modify, or distribute data based on business needs and regulatory requirements.

Data Owner (Correct Answer – B)

The data owner is responsible forsetting user permissionsbased on job roles and business requirements.

According toISACA’s CISA Review Manual and COBIT 2019, the data owner determines access levels while IT personnel enforce them.

Example:A finance department head (data owner) determines that only certain accountants should access sensitive payroll data.

IT Operations Manager (Incorrect – A)

Oversees IT infrastructure but does not define data access controls.

Database Administrator (DBA) (Incorrect – C)

Implements and enforces security settings but follows rules set by the data owner.

Information Security Manager (Incorrect – D)

Provides security guidance but does not decide specific access permissions.

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

 Information security governance is the subset of enterprise governance that provides strategic direction, ensures that objectives are achieved, manages risk appropriately, uses organizational resources responsibly, and monitors the success or failure of the enterprise security program. Information security governance is essential for ensuring that an organization’s information assets are protected from internal and external threats, and that the organization complies with relevant laws and standards.

Demonstrated support from which of the following roles in an organization has the most influence over information security governance? The answer is C, the board of directors. The board of directors is the highest governing body of an organization, responsible for overseeing its strategic direction, performance, and accountability. The board of directors sets the tone at the top for information security governance by:

Establishing a clear vision, mission, and values for information security

Approving and reviewing information security policies and standards

Allocating sufficient resources and budget for information security

Appointing and empowering a chief information security officer (CISO) or equivalent role

Holding management accountable for information security performance and compliance

Communicating and promoting information security awareness and culture

The board of directors has the most influence over information security governance because it has the ultimate authority and responsibility for ensuring that information security is aligned with the organization’s business objectives, risks, and stakeholder expectations.

Data analytics is the process of collecting, transforming, analyzing, and visualizing data to gain insights and support decision making1. Data analytics can be used to facilitate the testing of a new account creation process by applying various techniques and methods to evaluate the quality, functionality, performance, and security of the process. One of the approaches that would utilize data analytics to test the new account creation process is to review new account applications submitted in the past month for invalid dates of birth. This approach would involve the following steps:

Extract the data of new account applications from the source system, such as a database or a web service, using appropriate tools and methods.

Transform and clean the data to ensure its accuracy, completeness, consistency, and validity, using techniques such as data profiling, data cleansing, data mapping, and data validation2.

Analyze the data to identify any anomalies, errors, or outliers in the date of birth field, using methods such as descriptive statistics, exploratory data analysis, hypothesis testing, or anomaly detection3.

Visualize the data to present the findings and insights in a clear and understandable way, using tools and techniques such as charts, graphs, dashboards, or reports.

By reviewing new account applications submitted in the past month for invalid dates of birth, the tester can use data analytics to:

Verify if the new account creation process is working as expected and meets the business requirements and specifications for the date of birth field.

Detect any defects or issues in the new account creation process that may cause invalid dates of birth to be accepted or rejected incorrectly.

Measure and monitor the performance and reliability of the new account creation process in terms of data quality, accuracy, and completeness.

Evaluate and improve the test coverage and effectiveness of the new account creation process by identifying any gaps or risks in the test cases or scenarios.

Therefore, option C is the correct answer.

Option A is not correct because attempting to submit new account applications with invalid dates of birth is not a data analytics approach, but a functional testing approach that involves executing test cases or scenarios manually or automatically to validate the behavior and functionality of the new account creation process. Option B is not correct because reviewing the business requirements document for date of birth field requirements is not a data analytics approach, but a requirements analysis approach that involves examining and understanding the needs and expectations of the stakeholders for the new account creation process. Option D is not correct because evaluating configuration settings for date of birth field requirements is not a data analytics approach, but a configuration testing approach that involves verifying if the settings and parameters of the new account creation process are correct and consistent with the requirements.

The IS auditor’s next course of action should be to report this control process weakness to senior management, as it may indicate a lack of oversight and accountability for the reporting system. Read-only users may have access to sensitive or confidential information that should be restricted or monitored. Periodic reviews of read-only users are a good practice to ensure that the access rights are still valid and appropriate for the users’ roles and responsibilities. Reporting this weakness to senior management will also allow them to take corrective actions or implement compensating controls if needed.

Option A is incorrect because reviewing the list of end users and evaluating for authorization is not the IS auditor’s responsibility, but rather the system owner’s or administrator’s. The IS auditor should only verify that such reviews are performed and documented by the responsible parties.

Option C is incorrect because verifying management’s approval for this exemption is not sufficient to address the control process weakness. Even if there is a valid reason for not performing periodic reviews of read-only users, the IS auditor should still report this as a potential risk and recommend mitigating controls.

Option D is incorrect because obtaining a verbal confirmation from IT for this exemption is not adequate evidence or documentation. The IS auditor should obtain written approval from management and verify that it is aligned with the organization’s policies and standards.

Astress testevaluates system performance under extreme conditions, such as high user loads, to determine how the system behaves under peak traffic or resource exhaustion.

Stress Testing (Correct Answer – A)

Identifies performance bottlenecks in software applications.

Helps ensure the ERP system can handle expected workloads.

Example:Simulating thousands of concurrent users accessing the ERP system to test response times and server load capacity.

Parallel Testing (Incorrect – B)

Compares a new system with an old one but does not test system performance under load.

Regression Testing (Incorrect – C)

Tests whether recent code changes have affected existing functionality but does not focus on performance.

Interface Testing (Incorrect – D)

Checks interactions between system components but does not measure performance.

The best answer is A. Stakeholder requirements.

ISACA’s log management guidance says an effective logging and monitoring strategy must be developed with clear scope and objectives, and that without a perceived business purpose, even the best technically designed architectures have no value. ISACA also emphasizes developing security monitoring strategy with the consumers of the service in mind, meaning stakeholder needs drive what the strategy should accomplish.

Option B may inform improvements, but audit recommendations are not the primary driver of strategy. Option C can provide context, but benchmarking is secondary to organizational needs. Option D is important once response processes are being designed, but first the organization must define the strategy around stakeholder and business requirements.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, Log Management as an Enabler for Data Protection and Automated Threat Detection.

ISACA Journal, A Framework for SIEM Implementation.

ISACA Journal, How to Build a Great SOC.

 The auditor’s best course of action after a security breach in which a hacker exploited a well-known vulnerability in the domain controller is to determine if the logs were monitored. Log monitoring is an essential control for detecting and responding to security incidents, especially when known vulnerabilities exist in the system. The auditor should assess if the logs were properly configured, collected, reviewed, analyzed, and acted upon by the responsible parties. Updating patches, monitoring network traffic, and classifying domain controllers for high availability are also important controls, but they are not directly related to the detection and response of the security breach. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), page 301

CISA Questions, Answers and Explanations Database, question ID 3340

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

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

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

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

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

The best course of action for an IS auditor who finds that some critical recommendations have not been implemented is to evaluate senior management’s acceptance of the risk. The IS auditor should understand the reasons why the recommendations have not been implemented and the implications for the organization’s risk exposure. The IS auditor should also verify that senior management has formally acknowledged and accepted the residual risk and has documented the rationale and justification for their decision. The IS auditor should communicate the findings and the risk acceptance to the audit committee and other relevant stakeholders. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers and Explanations Database

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. 

Source code synchronization is the process of ensuring that the source code and the object code (the compiled version of the source code) are consistent and up-to-date1. When program changes are implemented, the source code should be recompiled to generate a new object code that reflects the changes. However, if the source code is not recompiled, there is a risk that the object code may be outdated or incorrect. A compensating control is a measure that reduces the risk of an existing control weakness or deficiency2. A compensating control for source code synchronization is to compare the date stamping of the source and object code. Date stamping is a method of recording the date and time when a file is created or modified3. By comparing the date stamping of the source and object code, one can verify if they are synchronized or not. If the date stamping of the source code is newer than the object code, it means that the source code has been changed but not recompiled. If the date stamping of the object code is newer than the source code, it means that the object code has been compiled from a different source code. If the date stamping of both files are identical, it means that they are synchronized.

 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)

An organization relies on an external vendor that uses a cloud-based Software as a Service (SaaS) model to back up its data. SaaS is a model in which the software is centrally hosted and accessed by the user via a web browser using the internet1. The vendor owns and maintains the software and the data, and the organization pays for the use of the service on a subscription or usage basis1. The greatest risk to the organization related to data backup and retrieval is that the vendor may be unable to restore critical data.

Data backup and retrieval are essential processes for ensuring the availability, integrity, and security of data in case of loss, corruption, or damage2. Data backup is the process of creating and storing copies of data in a separate location from the original data2. Data retrieval is the process of accessing and restoring the backed-up data when needed2. Critical data are data that are vital for the operation, continuity, and recovery of the organization3.

If the vendor is unable to restore critical data, the organization may face severe consequences, such as:

Business disruption: The organization may not be able to perform its core functions, deliver its products or services, or meet its customer or stakeholder expectations3.

Revenue loss: The organization may lose income, market share, or competitive advantage due to reduced sales, customer dissatisfaction, or reputation damage3.

Legal liability: The organization may face lawsuits, fines, or penalties for breaching contractual, regulatory, or statutory obligations related to data protection, privacy, or security3.

Recovery cost: The organization may incur additional expenses for repairing or replacing the lost or corrupted data, restoring the system functionality, or compensating the affected parties3.

The other options are not as great as the vendor’s inability to restore critical data. The organization may be locked into an unfavorable contract with the vendor, which may limit its flexibility, control, or choice over the service quality, cost, or duration4. However, this risk can be mitigated by negotiating better terms and conditions, reviewing the contract periodically, or switching to another vendor if possible4. The vendor may be unable to restore data by recovery time objective (RTO) requirements, which are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring data after a disruption5. However, this risk can be reduced by setting realistic and achievable RTOs, monitoring the vendor’s performance, or implementing alternative recovery strategies if needed5. The organization may not be allowed to inspect the vendor’s data center, which may limit its visibility, transparency, or assurance over the service provider’s infrastructure, security, or compliance. However, this risk can be overcome by requesting third-party audits, certifications, or reports from the vendor that demonstrate their adherence to industry standards and best practices. Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

The most important validation point is whether the VM replication process is periodically tested to confirm that recovery will actually work. ISACA guidance on backup and recovery states that when using new backup methodologies or technologies, management should test the data afterward to ensure the process is reliably recording all required data, and auditors should ensure periodic health checks are performed.

Option B is correct because recovery adequacy is not proven by the mere existence of replication. ISACA specifically warns that replication alone can increase risk, since corruption can be replicated as well, and it emphasizes validating the reliability of the backup or replication process through testing and health checks.

Option A is important for resilience, but offsite location alone does not prove recoverability. A replica that is never tested may still fail when needed.

Option C is not the most important factor for evaluating recovery procedures. Load balancing supports performance and availability, but it is not the key evidence that replicated systems can be recovered successfully.

Option D is a useful security precaution. ISACA does note that VM backup administrators should not have Internet access to reduce ransomware exposure, but that is a security-hardening issue, not the primary validation of recovery adequacy.

Therefore, B is the best answer because periodic testing is the most important way to validate that VM replication will support actual recovery.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, IS Audit Basics: Backup and Recovery — replication can increase risk if corruption is copied; auditors should ensure backup/recovery processes are tested and health checks are performed.

ISACA Journal, A Five-Layer View of Data Center Systems Security — disaster recovery design should consider criticality and RPO/RTO.

 The most important thing to assess when conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) is the completeness of critical asset inventory. This is because the critical asset inventory is the basis for identifying and prioritizing the business processes, functions, and resources that are essential for thecontinuity of operations. The critical asset inventory should include both tangible and intangible assets, such as hardware, software, data, personnel, facilities, contracts, and reputation. The critical asset inventory should also be updated regularly to reflect any changes in the business environment or needs. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.41

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

The best answer is C. Review audit planning documents.

Before an audit project starts, senior audit leadership must ensure the engagement has been adequately planned. Reviewing planning documents is the control point that lets leadership confirm the objective, scope, risk focus, resourcing, timing, and methodology are appropriate before fieldwork begins. This is the broadest and most essential oversight activity among the choices.

Option A can be part of governance in some audit functions, but direct scope signoff is narrower than review of the full planning package. Option B and D may occur depending on the audit approach, but they are not mandatory leadership actions in every case. The most defensible answer is leadership review of the planning documents because it establishes readiness and oversight before the project begins.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA, CISA Exam Content Outline — audit planning and execution are structured and risk-based.

ISACA, Now Is the Time for IT Auditors to Perform Advisory Pre-Implementation Reviews — emphasizes engaging leadership and planning around risk and control deficiencies.

ISACA, An Appropriate Approach for Program and Project Management — supports structured planning and oversight before execution.

The answer A is correct because the greatest concern for an IS auditor when a data owner assigns an incorrect classification level to data is that controls to adequately safeguard the data may not be applied. Data classification is the process of categorizing data assets based on their information sensitivity and business impact. Data classification helps organizations to identify, protect, and manage their data according to their value and risk. Data owners are the individuals or entities who have the authority and responsibility to define, classify, and control the access and use of their data.

Data classification typically involves assigning labels or tags to data assets, such as public, internal, confidential, or restricted. These labels indicate the level of protection and handling required for the data. Based on the data classification, organizations can implement appropriate controls to safeguard the data, such as encryption, access control lists, audit logs, backup policies, etc. These controls help to prevent unauthorized access, disclosure, modification, or loss of data, and to ensure compliance with relevant laws and regulations.

If a data owner assigns an incorrect classification level to data, it can result in either underprotection or overprotection of the data. Underprotection means that the data is classified at a lower level than it should be, which exposes it to higher risks of compromise or breach. For example, if a data owner classifies personal health information (PHI) as public instead of confidential, it may allow anyone to access or share the data without proper authorization or consent. This can violate the privacy rights of the data subjects and the compliance requirements of regulations such as HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act). Overprotection means that the data is classified at a higher level than it should be, which limits its availability or usability. For example, if a data owner classifies marketing materials as restricted instead of public, it may prevent potential customers or partners from accessing or viewing the data. This can reduce the business value and opportunities of the data.

Therefore, an IS auditor should be concerned about the accuracy and consistency of data classification by data owners, as it affects the security and efficiency of data management. An IS auditor should review the policies and procedures for data classification, verify that the data owners have adequate knowledge and skills to classify their data, and test that the data classification labels match with the actual sensitivity and impact of the data.

Flooding the site with an excessive number of packets is an attack technique that will succeed because of an inherent security weakness in an Internet firewall. This type of attack is also known as a denial-of-service (DoS) attack or a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack if it involves multiple sources. The aim of this attack is to overwhelm the network bandwidth or the processing capacity of the firewall or the target system, rendering it unable to respond to legitimate requests or perform its normal functions. An Internet firewall is a device or software that monitors andcontrols incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules. A firewall can block or allow traffic based on various criteria, such as source address, destination address, port number, protocol type, application type, etc. However, a firewall cannot prevent traffic from reaching its interface or distinguish between legitimate and malicious traffic based on its content or behavior. Therefore, a firewall is vulnerable to flooding attacks that exploit its limited resources. Phishing is an attack technique that involves sending fraudulent emails or messages that appear to come from legitimate sources, such as banks, government agencies, online services, etc., in order to trick recipients into revealing their personal or financial information, such as passwords, credit card numbers, bank account details, etc., or into clicking on malicious links or attachments that can infect their systems with malware or ransomware. Phishing does not exploit an inherent security weakness in an Internet firewall, but rather exploits human psychology and social engineering techniques. A firewall cannot prevent phishing emails or messages from reaching their intended targets, unless they contain some identifiable features that can be filtered out by the firewall rules. However, a firewall cannot detect or prevent users from responding to phishing emails or messages or from opening malicious links or attachments. Using a dictionary attack of encrypted passwords is an attack technique that involves trying to guess or crack passwords by using a list of common or likely passwords or by using a brute-force method that tries all possible combinations of characters. This type of attack does not exploit an inherent security weakness in an Internet firewall, but rather exploits weak or poorly chosen passwords or weak encryption algorithms. A firewall cannot prevent a dictionary attack of encrypted passwords, unless it has some mechanisms to detect and block repeated or suspicious login attempts or to enforce strong password policies. However, a firewall cannot protect passwords from being stolen or intercepted by other means, such as phishing, malware, keylogging, etc. Intercepting packets and viewing passwords is an attack technique that involves capturing and analyzing network traffic that contains sensitive information, such as passwords, credit card numbers, bank account details, etc., in order to use them for malicious purposes. This type of attack does not exploit an inherent security weakness in an Internet firewall, but rather exploits insecure or unencrypted network communication protocols or channels. A firewall cannot prevent packets from being intercepted and viewed by unauthorized parties, unless it has some mechanisms to encrypt or obfuscate the network traffic or to authenticate the source and destination of the traffic. However, a firewall cannot protect packets from being modified or tampered with by other means, such as man-in-the-middle attacks, replay attacks, etc. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 300

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 and ExplanationsDatabase, Question ID: 255

A database administrator (DBA) is responsible for maintaining the integrity, security and performance of the database systems. A DBA who is also responsible for developing and executing changes into the production environment may have a conflict of interest and pose a risk to the data quality and availability. Therefore, the IS auditor should first identify whether any compensating controls exist to mitigate this risk, such as independent reviews, approvals, audits or monitoring of the changes. Determining whether another DBA could make the changes, reporting a potential segregation of duties violation and ensuring a change management process is followed prior to implementation are possible actions that the auditor could take after identifying the compensating controls or the lack thereof. References:

 DatabaseAdministrator (DBA) Definition

 Segregation of Duties | ISACA

[Compensating Control Definition]

 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

Recovery facilities providing a redundant combination of Internet connections to the local communications loop is an example of last-mile circuit protection. Last-mile circuit protection is a type of telecommunications continuity that ensures the availability and redundancy of the final segment of the network that connects the end-user to the service provider. The local communications loop, also known as the local loop or subscriber line, is the physical link between the customer premises and the nearest central office or point of presence of the service provider. Byhavingmultiple Internet connections from different providers or technologies, such as cable, DSL, fiber, wireless, or satellite, the recoveryfacilities can avoid losing connectivity in case one of the connections fails or is disrupted by a disaster5.

 An IT balanced scorecard is a strategic management tool that aligns IT objectives with business goals and measures the performance of IT processes using key performance indicators (KPIs). It is the most effective means of monitoring governance of enterprise IT, which is the process of ensuring that IT supports the organization’s strategy and objectives. Governance of enterprise IT covers aspects such as IT value delivery, IT risk management, IT resource management, and IT performance measurement. An IT balanced scorecard can help monitor these aspects and provide feedback to improve IT governance. References: ISACA Frameworks: Blueprints for Success, CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)

 Team member assignments based on individual competencies is the most important factor to meet the IS audit standard for proficiency. Proficiency is the ability to apply knowledge, skills and experience to perform audit tasks effectively and efficiently. The IS audit standard for proficiency requires that IS auditors must possess the knowledge, skills and discipline to perform audit tasks in accordance with applicable standards, guidelines and procedures. Team member assignments based on individual competencies is a way to ensure that each IS auditor is assigned to audit tasks that match their level of proficiency, and that the audit team as a whole has sufficient and appropriate proficiency to conduct the audit. The other options are not as important as option C, as they do not ensure that the IS auditors have the required proficiency to perform audit tasks. Having a globally recognized audit certification is a way to demonstrate proficiency in IS auditing, but it does not guarantee that the IS auditor has the specific knowledge, skills and experience needed for a particular audit task or system. Technical co-sourcing is a way to supplement the proficiency of the IS audit team by hiring external experts or consultants to perform certain audit tasks or functions, but it does not replace the need for internal IS auditors to have adequate proficiency. Having a supervisor review the new auditors’ work is a way to ensure quality and accuracy of the audit work, but it does not ensure that the new auditors have the necessary proficiency to perform audit tasks independently or competently. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) , Chapter 1: Information Systems Auditing Process, Section 1.4: Audit Skills and Competencies.

Theinternal audit team’s roleinControl Self-Assessment (CSA)is toindependently validatemanagement’s assessment to ensure accuracy and effectiveness.

Perform Testing to Validate Management’s Assessment (Correct Answer – A)

Ensures that self-assessments are reliable and comply with policies.

Example:Internal audit conducts sample tests to verify self-reported compliance.

Advising Management (Incorrect – B)

The audit teamreviewsrather than advises management.

Designing Testing Procedures (Incorrect – C)

Management should design CSA procedures, not auditors.

De-Scoping Business Processes (Incorrect – D)

Internal auditshould notreduce audit scope due to CSAs.

Unauthorized code deployment presents acritical security and operational risk.

Option A (Incorrect):Whiledocumentation issuescan cause confusion, they do not directlyjeopardizesecurity or system stability.

Option B (Correct):Deploying code without authorizationbypasseschange management controls, potentially leading to security vulnerabilities, system failures, or compliance violations. This is thegreatest risk.

Option C (Incorrect):Overwriting files can cause issues but isless severethan unauthorized deployment, which may introducemalware or untested features.

Option D (Incorrect):An unresolved bug may causeperformance issues, butunauthorized deploymentposes a higher security and compliance risk.

A digital signature is a cryptographic technique that uses the sender’s private key to generate a unique code for a message or document. The receiver can use the sender’s public key to verify the authenticity and integrity of the message or document. A digital signature can prevent unauthorized change, as any modification to the message or document will invalidate the signature and alert the receiver of tampering.

References

What is a digital signature?

Digital Signature - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

ISACA CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 253

Toverify the effectivenessof a third-party provider’ssecurity controls, anindependent external audit reportis thestrongestevidence.

Option A (Incorrect):Security configuration documentsare helpful butdo not confirm effectivenesswithout validation.

Option B (Incorrect):Policies and procedures outlineintent, but anaudit confirms actual implementation.

Option C (Correct):External audit reports (e.g., SOC 2, ISO 27001)provideindependent assurancethat security controls are effective.

Option D (Incorrect):Management interviews providequalitativeinsights but arenot objective evidenceof control effectiveness.

 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 and Implementation, Section 3.3: Practices for Quality Assurance

The best answer is B. The policies are not regularly reviewed and updated.

ISACA guidance notes that, when auditing policy documents, one of the quickest indicators of trouble is the absence of current reviews, changes, approvals, and alignment with actual practice. If policies are outdated, they may no longer reflect the organization’s control environment, regulatory obligations, technologies, or business processes. That creates a direct governance and compliance risk.

Option A is generally a positive sign, not a concern, because formal review and approval supports governance. Option C can matter, but lack of direct mapping to best practices is usually less serious than having stale policies that no longer reflect reality. Option D is not ideal if policies exclude broader stakeholders, but IT policies are often primarily directed toward IT staff while still being supported by wider governance documents. The most serious issue is that outdated policies may be ineffective, unenforceable, or inconsistent with current controls.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA, Do Your Policy Documents Represent Current Practices?

ISACA Journal, IS Audit Basics: The Auditors, IS/IT Policies and Compliance

The auditor’s next action after finding that there is an informal unwritten set of standards in the IS department is to document and test compliance with the informal standards. This is because the auditor’s role is to evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the existing controls, regardless of whether they are formal or informal, written or unwritten. The auditor should also assess the risks and implications of having informal standards, such as lack of consistency, accountability, or traceability. The auditor should not make recommendations, postpone the audit, or finalize the audit without performing the audit procedures. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.21

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

The use of open-source software components in IoT devices presents the greatest security risk due to potential vulnerabilities that may exist within the software. These vulnerabilities can be exploited if patches are not applied promptly, and the organization might not have direct control over the software ' s maintenance and security updates. This risk is amplified in critical manufacturing environments where compromised IoT devices can lead to operational disruptions.

Physical Security (Option A):While important, theft of IoT devices generally poses less risk compared to a system-wide compromise due to software vulnerabilities.

Firmware Storage Constraints (Option C):While a limitation, this is a secondary concern compared to exploitable software.

Devices Not Using Wireless Connectivity (Option D):Wired devices are generally more secure, reducing this as a significant concern.

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

Parallel simulation involves running the same data through two systems and comparing the results1. In this case, the bank’s data would be processed using both the modified interest calculation program and an audit software. The results from both systems would then be compared to check for discrepancies1. This technique provides strong evidence of the correctness of interest calculations as it directly tests the program’s output against a known and trusted output1. While source code review23, manual verification of a sample of results4567, and review of QA test results8910 can also provide valuable insights, they do not offer the same level of direct, comparative evidence as parallel simulation1.

Answer: B

The auditor should be most concerned about the information security policy not being approved by the policy owner. This is because the policy owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for ensuring that the policy is implemented and enforced. Without the policy owner’s approval, the policy may not reflect the organization’s objectives, risks, and compliance requirements. The policy owner is usually a senior executive or a board member who has a stake in the information security governance. The other options are less critical than the policy owner’s approval, although they may also indicate some weaknesses in the policy development and maintenance process. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1, Section 1.21

CISA Online Review Course, Domain 5, Module 1, Lesson 12

The best answer is D.

ISACA guidance on shadow AI and emerging technology risk highlights data breaches, privacy risk, and data leakage as major concerns when employees use unapproved public AI tools. Public cloud AI use can expose sensitive data through prompts, uploads, or output handling, making data leakage the greatest immediate concern from an audit and control perspective.

Option A is a concern because AI outputs can be inaccurate, but poor reliability usually does not create the same immediate confidentiality exposure as leaking internal data. Option B is less severe. Option C can matter in some use cases, but the most significant enterprise risk identified in ISACA’s public guidance is unauthorized disclosure of data.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA, From Shadow IT to Shadow AI: Navigating the New Frontier of Enterprise Risk.

ISACA, Navigating the Hype and Risk of Emerging Technologies.

ISACA, Collaboration and the New Triad of AI Governance.

 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 and Explanations Database, Question ID 230

Referential integrity is a property of data that ensures that all references between tables are valid and consistent. Disabling referential integrity controls can result in orphaned records, data anomalies, and inaccurate queries. The most effective way to compensate for the lack of referential integrity is to perform periodic table link checks, which verify that all foreign keys match existing primary keys in the related tables. More frequent data backups, concurrent access controls, and performance monitoring tools do not address the issue of data consistency and accuracy. References: ISACACISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 291

To ensurecompleteness of outbound transactions, alog with periodic validationis thebest control.

Option A (Incorrect):Edit checkshelp withdata accuracy, not completeness.

Option B (Incorrect):Sequential numberingdetects missing transactions but does not verifyactual transmission.

Option C (Incorrect):Recipient ID validationis important foraccuracy, not for ensuring all transactions are sent.

Option D (Correct):Maintaining and validating transaction logsensures thatall outbound transactions are properly accounted for, making it the best completeness control.

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.

The best answer is B. Implementing cryptographic hash functions.

To ensure integrity, the organization needs a control that can detect unauthorized alteration. Cryptographic hash functions are specifically designed to verify that data has not been modified. Timestamping helps with sequencing and timing, limiting access helps reduce risk of tampering, and archiving helps retention, but hashing is the strongest direct method for validating integrity. This answer is standard ISACA-aligned control reasoning based on the security objective of integrity.

ISACA’s log-management guidance emphasizes the need for trustworthy, purposeful logging and monitoring. For log data to be trusted as evidence or for operations, it must be protected against undetected modification. Among the given choices, cryptographic hashing is the most effective direct mechanism for that purpose.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, Log Management as an Enabler for Data Protection and Automated Threat Detection.

ISACA Journal, A Framework for SIEM Implementation.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

Secure code reviews identify security flaws or vulnerabilities in code before deployment. This makes them detective controls, since they help find issues but do not directly prevent or correct them.

Option A: Correct — they detect flaws.

Option B: Corrective controls are applied after issues are detected.

Option C: Monitoring is ongoing observation, not review-based.

Option D: Deterrent controls discourage actions (e.g., policies, warnings), not detect issues.

???? ISACA Reference: CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, Domain 3, section on software development controls and code review practices.

A three-way match is a process of verifying that a purchase order, a goods receipt and an invoice are consistent before making a payment1. A three-way match ensures that the organization only pays for the goods or services that it ordered and received, and that the prices and quantities are accurate. A three-way match can prevent errors, fraud and overpayments in the accounts payable process.

An IS auditor should use a purchase order when verifying a three-way match has occurred in an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. A purchase order is a document that authorizes a purchase transaction and specifies the items, quantities, prices and terms of the order2. A purchase order is the first document in the three-way match process, and it serves as the basis for comparing the goods receipt and the invoice. An IS auditor can use a purchase order to check if the ERP system has correctly recorded, matched and approved the three documents before making a payment.

The other options are not as useful for verifying a three-way match. A bank confirmation is a document that verifies the balance and activity of a bank account3. A bank confirmation can be used to confirm that a payment has been made or received, but it does not provide information about the details of the purchase transaction or the three-way match process. A goods delivery notification is a document that informs the buyer that the goods have been shipped or delivered by the seller4. A goods delivery notification can be used to track the status of the delivery, but it does not provide information about the quantity or quality of the goods or the invoice amount. A purchase requisition is a document that requests authorization to purchase goods or services from a specific supplier2. A purchase requisition can be used to initiate the purchasing process, but it does not provide information about the actual purchase order, goods receipt or invoice.

 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 IS auditor’s best course of action when reviewing the use of an outsourcer for disposal of storage media is to determine exposure to the business. Storage media, such as hard disks, tapes, flash drives, or CDs, may contain sensitive or confidential information that needs to be protected from unauthorized access, disclosure, or misuse. The IS auditor should verify that the outsourcer has a process that appropriately sanitizes the media before disposal, such as wiping, degaussing, shredding, or incinerating, and that the process is effective and compliant with the organization’s policies and standards. The IS auditor should also assess the potential impact and risk to the business if the storage media is not properly sanitized or disposed of, such as data breaches, reputational damage, legal or regulatory penalties, or loss of competitive advantage. The other options are not the best course of action, because they either do not address the root cause of the problem,or they are reactive rather than proactive measures. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.7

The greatest risk to an organization’s ability to manage QC processes is the lack of policies and procedures that define the QC objectives, standards, methods, roles, and responsibilities. Without policies and procedures, the QC processes may be inconsistent, ineffective, inefficient, or noncompliant with the relevant regulations and best practices. Policies and procedures provide the foundation and guidance for the QC processes and help to ensure their quality, reliability, and accountability.

References

ISACA CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 253

Quality Control - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Quality Control: Meaning, Importance, Definition and Objectives

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 and Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription

A virtual tape library (VTL) is a disk-based backup system that emulates a tape library. It provides faster backup and recovery than traditional tape systems, and it can be integrated with data deduplication and replication technologies to enhance disaster recovery. A VTL can also be replicated to an offsite location for additional protection. A VTL is the best disaster recovery solution for an environment where data virtualization is used, because it can handle large volumes of data, support multiple backup applications, and provide consistent performance.

Onsite disk-based backup systems (A) are not the best disaster recovery solution, because they are vulnerable to the same risks as the primary data center, such as fire, flood, power outage, or sabotage. Tape-based backup systems (B) are not the best disaster recovery solution, because they are slow, prone to errors, and require manual intervention. Redundant array of independent disks (RAID) (D) is not a backup system, but a storage technology that improves performance and fault tolerance by distributing data across multiple disks. RAID does not protect against data corruption, human error, or malicious attacks.

 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 and Explanations Database, Question ID 202

 The finding that should be of greatest concern to an IS auditor reviewing data conversion and migration during the implementation of a new application system is that unauthorized data modificationsoccurred during conversion. Data conversion and migration is a process that involves transferring data from one system to another, ensuring its accuracy, completeness, integrity, and usability. Unauthorized data modifications during conversion can result in data loss, corruption, inconsistency, or duplication, which can affect the functionality, performance, reliability, and security of the new system. Unauthorized data modifications can also have serious business implications, such as affecting decision making, reporting, compliance, customer service, and revenue. The IS auditor should verify that adequate controls are in place to prevent, detect, and correct unauthorized data modifications during conversion, such as access control, data validation, reconciliation, audit trail, and backup and recovery. The other findings (A, B and D) are less concerning, as they can be mitigated by documenting the change management process, restoring the backups of the old system and data from offline storage, or automating the data conversion process. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: Information Systems Acquisition, Development and Implementation, Section 3.4: System Implementation

 A nondisclosure agreement (NDA) is the best way to protect an organization’s proprietary code during a joint-development activity involving a third party. An NDA is a legal contract that binds the parties involved in a joint-development activity to keep confidential any information, data or materials that are shared or exchanged during the activity. An NDA specifies what constitutes confidential information, how it can be used, disclosed or protected, how long it remains confidential, what are the exceptions and remedies for breach of confidentiality, and other terms and conditions. An NDA can help to protect an organization’s proprietary code from being copied, modified, distributed or exploited by unauthorized parties without its consent or knowledge. The other options are not as effective as option B, as they do not address confidentiality issues specifically. A statement of work (SOW) is a document that defines the scope, objectives, deliverables, tasks, roles, responsibilities, timelines and costs of a joint-development activity, but it does not cover confidentiality issues explicitly. A service level agreement (SLA) is a document that defines the quality, performance and availability standards and metrics for a service provided by one party to another party in a joint-development activity, but it does not cover confidentiality issues explicitly. A privacy agreement is a document that defines how personal information collected from customers or users is collected, used, disclosed and protected by one party or both parties in a joint-development activity, but it does not cover confidentiality issues related to proprietary code. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) , Chapter 3: Information Systems Acquisition, Development and Implementation, Section 3.2: Project Management Practices.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

A tabletop exercise is the most cost-effective method to test the BCP because it simulates scenarios and walks through responses without disrupting operations.

Stress test (A): More resource-intensive and may disrupt services.

Full operational test (C): Provides the highest assurance but is costly and disruptive.

Post-implementation review (D): Evaluates after actual incidents, not proactive.

???? ISACA Reference: CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, Domain 2 (IT Operations and Business Resilience), section on BCP testing approaches.

The auditor’s best course of action after discovering instances where employees shared license keys to critical pieces of business software is to verify whether the licensing agreement allows shared use. A licensing agreement is a contract between the software provider and the user that defines the terms and conditions of using the software, including the number, type, and scope of licenses granted. Some licensing agreements may allow shared use of license keys among multiple users or devices, while others may prohibit or restrict such use. By verifying the licensing agreement, the auditor can determine whether the employees violated the contract or not, and whether there are any legal or financial risks or implications for the organization.

The other options are not as appropriate as option D, as they may not address the root cause of the issue or provide a comprehensive solution. Recommending the utilization of software licensing monitoring tools may help prevent or detect future instances of license key sharing, but it does not resolve the current situation or ensure compliance with the licensing agreement. Recommending the purchase of additional software license keys may be unnecessary or wasteful if the licensing agreement already allows shared use or if there are unused licenses available. Validating user need for shared software licenses may help identify the reasons or motivations behind license key sharing, but it does not justify or excuse such behavior if it violates the licensing agreement.

Transaction tagging is a technique by which transactions are marked with unique identifiers or headers and traced through the system using agents or sensors at each processing point1. Transaction tagging allows for continuous monitoring and analysis of transaction processing in a high-volume, real-time system by providing visibility into the performance, availability, and reliability of each transaction and its components1. Transaction tagging can also help to identify and isolate errors, bottlenecks, anomalies, and security issues in the system1.

Quality control reviews are the best way to demonstrate to senior management and the board that an audit function is compliant with standards and the code of ethics. Thesereviews assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the audit function, ensure compliance with audit standards and ethics, and identify areasfor improvement12. While audit staff interviews, control self-assessments (CSAs), and corrective action plans can provide valuable insights, they do not offer the same level of assurance as a comprehensive quality control review12.

An IT service desk is a function that provides technical support and assistance to the users of an organization’s IT systems and services. An IT service desk typically handles issues such as software installation, hardware troubleshooting, network connectivity, password reset, system configuration,and user training. An IT service desk aims to ensure that the IT systems and services are available, reliable, secure, and efficient for the users.

One of the best indications that there are potential problems within an organization’s IT service desk function is an excessive backlog of user requests. A backlog is a list of user requests that have not been resolved or completed by the IT service desk within a specified time frame. An excessive backlog means that the IT service desk is unable to meet the demand or expectations of the users, and that the users are experiencing delays, dissatisfaction, or frustration with the IT service desk.

An excessive backlog of user requests can indicate various problems within the IT service desk function, such as:

Insufficient staff, resources, or capacity to handle the volume or complexity of user requests

Ineffective processes, procedures, or tools for managing, prioritizing, or resolving user requests

Lack of skills, knowledge, or training among the IT service desk staff to deal with different types of user requests

Poor communication, collaboration, or coordination among the IT service desk staff or with other IT functions or stakeholders

Low quality, performance, or security of the IT systems or services that cause frequent or recurring user issues

Therefore, an excessive backlog of user requests is the best indication that there are potential problems within an organization’s IT service desk function.

 File checksums are values that are calculated from the contents of a file and can detect any changes or corruption in the file. They are used to verify that the files that are transferred or processed through system interfaces are not altered in any way. File checksums are more effective than periodic audits, file counts, or IT operator monitoring, which are other types of controls that can help ensure the integrity of system interfaces, but they are not as reliable or timely as file checksums.

The answer D is correct because the most important thing to determine when conducting an audit of an organization’s data privacy practices is whether the systems inventory containing personal data is maintained. A systems inventory is a list of all the systems, applications, databases, and devices that store, process, or transmit personal data within the organization. Maintaining a systems inventory is essential for data privacy because it helps the organization to identify, classify, and protect the personal data it holds, as well as to comply with the relevant privacy laws and regulations. A systems inventory also enables the organization to perform data protection impact assessments (DPIAs), data breach notifications, data subject access requests, and data retention and disposal policies.

The other options are not as important as option D. Whether a disciplinary process is established for data privacy violations (option A) is a policy issue that may deter or sanction the employees who violate the data privacy rules, but it does not directly affect the data privacy practices of the organization. Whether strong encryption algorithms are deployed for personal data protection (option B) is a technical issue that may enhance the security and confidentiality of the personal data, but it does not address the other aspects of data privacy, such as accuracy, consent, and purpose limitation.Whether privacy technologies are implemented for personal data protection (option C) is also a technical issue that may support the data privacy practices of the organization, but it does not guarantee that the organization follows the best practices or complies with the applicable laws and regulations.

 The best point in time to conduct a post-implementation review is after a full processing cycle. A post-implementation review is a process to evaluate whether the objectives of the project were met, how effective the project was managed, what benefits were realized, and what lessons were learned. A post-implementation review should be conducted after a full processing cycle, which is the period of time required for a system or process to complete all its functions and produce its outputs. This allows for a more accurate and comprehensive assessment of the project’s performance, outcomes, impacts, and issues.

The other options are not as good as option A. Conducting a post-implementation review immediately after deployment is too soon, because it does not allow enough time for the project’s product or service to operate in the real world and generate measurable results. Conducting a post-implementation review after the warranty period is too late, because it may miss some important feedback or opportunities for improvement that could have been addressed earlier. Conducting a post-implementation review prior to the annual performance review is irrelevant, because it does not align with the project’s life cycle or objectives. References: What is Post-Implementation Review in Project Management?, What Is the Post-Implementation Review (PIR) Process?, Post-implementation review in project management?

Requirements analysis should be the best thing to compare against the business case when determining whether a project in the design phase will meet organizational objectives, because it defines the functional and non-functional specifications of the project deliverables that should satisfy the business needs and expectations. Requirements analysis can help evaluate whether the project design is aligned with the business case and whether it can achieve the desired outcomes and benefits. Implementation plan, project budget provisions, and project plan are also important aspects of a project in the design phase, but they are not as relevant asrequirements analysisfor comparing against the business case. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1

Service accountsare used by applications or systems to perform automated tasks and shouldnot be allowed for interactive login, as they present security risks if compromised.

Service Accounts (Correct Answer – D)

Used for running background tasks (e.g., database services, scheduled jobs).

Should have minimal permissions and be denied interactive logins.

Example:A compromised service account with interactive login could allow attackers to gain system access.

Local Accounts (Incorrect – A)

Local administrator accounts should be restricted but may still be required for some systems.

Administrator Accounts (Incorrect – B)

Should be restricted, but disabling them entirely could lock out system management.

Console Accounts (Incorrect – C)

Console access is sometimes needed for system recovery and troubleshooting.

The best way to mitigate risk to an organization’s network associated with devices permitted under a BYOD policy is to implement a network access control system, as this will allow the organization to monitor, authenticate, and authorize the devices that connect to the network, and to enforce security policies and compliance requirements12. A network access control system can help to prevent unauthorized or compromised devices from accessing sensitive data or resources, and to detect and isolate any potential threats or vulnerabilities34.

References

1: Network Access Control (NAC) - ISACA 2: Network Access Control (NAC) - Cisco 3: BYOD Security Risks: 6 Ways to Protect Your Organization - ReliaQuest5 4: How to Mitigate BYOD Risks and Challenges - CIOReview6

The most effective method for detecting the presence of an unauthorized wireless access point on an internal network is A. Continuous network monitoring. This is because continuous network monitoring can capture and analyze all the wireless traffic in the network and identify any rogue or spoofed devices that may be connected to the network without authorization. Continuous network monitoring can also alert the system administrator of any suspicious or anomalous activities on the network and help to locate and remove the unauthorized wireless access point quickly.

Periodic network vulnerability assessments (B) can also help to detect unauthorized wireless access points, but they are not as effective as continuous network monitoring, because they are performed at fixed intervals and may miss some devices that are added or removed between the assessments. Review of electronic access logs © can provide some information about the devices that access the network, but they may not be able to detect devices that use fake or stolen credentials or devices that do not generate any logs. Physical security reviews (D) can help to prevent unauthorized physical access to the network ports or devices, but they may not be able to detect wireless access points that are hidden or disguised as legitimate devices.

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

This is because audit trails are records of system activity and user actions that can provide evidence of the validity and integrity of transactions and data in a financial application system. Audit trails can help to ensure compliance with laws, regulations, policies, and standards, as well as to detect and prevent fraud, errors, or misuse of information. Audit trails can also facilitate auditing, monitoring, and evaluation of the financial application system’s performance and controls1.

The application should meet the organization’s requirements (A) is not the best answer, because it is a general and obvious criterion that applies to any application system acquisition, not a specific and important recommendation for a financial application system. The organization’s requirementsshould be clearly defined and documented in the RFP, but they may not necessarily include audit trails as a design feature.

Potential suppliers should have experience in the relevant area © is not the best answer, because it is a factor that affects the selection of the supplier, not the design of the financial application system. The experience and reputation of potential suppliers should be evaluated and verified during the RFP process, but they may not guarantee that the supplier will include audit trails in the design.

Vendor employee background checks should be conducted regularly (D) is not the best answer, because it is a measure that affects the security and trustworthiness of the vendor, not the design of the financial application system. Vendor employee background checks should be performed as part of the vendor management and due diligence process, but they may not ensure that the vendor will include audit trails in the design.

This means that the organization should obtain the source code from the escrow agent and compare it with the current version of the application that they are using. The organization should then identify and apply any changes or updates that are missing or different in the escrow version, so that it matches the current version. This way, the organization can ensure that they have a complete and accurate copy of the source code that reflects their current needs and requirements.

Bringing the escrow version up to date can help the organization to avoid or reduce the risks and costs associated with using an outdated or incompatible version of the source code. For example, an older version of the source code may have bugs, errors, or vulnerabilities that could affect the functionality, security, or performance of the application. An older version of the source code mayalso lack some features, enhancements, or integrations that could improve the usability, efficiency, or value of the application. An older version of the source code may also not comply with some standards, regulations, or contracts that could affect the quality, reliability, or legality of the application1.

The other options are not as good as bringing the escrow version up to date for the organization. Option A, analyzing a new application that meets the current requirements, is a possible option but it may be more time-consuming, expensive, and risky than updating the existing application. The organization may have to go through a complex and lengthy process of selecting, acquiring, implementing, testing, and migrating to a new application, which could disrupt their operations and performance. The organization may also have to deal with compatibility, interoperability, or data quality issues when switching to a new application2. Option B, performing an analysis to determine the business risk, is a necessary step but not a recommendation for the organization. The organization should already be aware of the business risk of using an application whose vendor has gone out of business and whose escrow has an older version of the source code. The organization should focus on finding and implementing a solution to mitigate or eliminate this risk3. Option D, developing a maintenance plan to support the application using the existing code, is not a feasible option because it assumes that the organization has access to the existing code. However, this is not the case because the vendor has gone out of business and the escrow has an older version of the source code. The organization cannot support or maintain an application without having a complete and accurate copy of its source code.

The correct answer is C. Be protected.

An emergency power-off switch is a critical safety mechanism, but it also creates operational risk if it can be triggered accidentally or without proper safeguards. ISACA’s official CISA practice material specifically treats a missing cover on an emergency power-off button as a significant concern, which supports the conclusion that the switch should be protected against accidental activation.

Option A is incorrect because remote accessibility could increase the risk of misuse or accidental shutdown.

Option B is incorrect because the switch should be identifiable in an emergency; hiding it would conflict with emergency response needs.

Option D is incorrect because dual control is not the primary requirement for an emergency switch intended for urgent use.

Therefore, the correct answer is C, because the switch should be protected, typically by a cover or similar safeguard, while still remaining available for emergency use.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA, CISA Practice Quiz — identifies a missing emergency power-off button cover as a significant concern.

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

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

The most useful thing to do when planning to audit an organization’s compliance with cybersecurity regulations in foreign countries is to map the different regulatory requirements to the organization’s IT governance framework. This is because an IT governance framework is a roadmap that defines the methods used by an organization to implement, manage and report on IT governance within said organization1. IT governance helps align business and IT strategies using a solid and formal framework2. By mapping the different regulatory requirements to the IT governance framework, the auditor can:

Identify the commonalities and differences among the various cybersecurity regulations that apply to the organization’s operations in different countries.

Assess the level of compliance and maturity of the organization’s IT governance practices against each regulatory requirement.

Evaluate the risks and gaps associated with non-compliance or partial compliance with any of the regulatory requirements.

Recommend appropriate actions or improvements to enhance the organization’s IT governance and cybersecurity posture.

Option D is correct because mapping the different regulatory requirements to the organization’s IT governance framework is a systematic and effective way to plan and conduct an audit of compliance with cybersecurity regulations in foreign countries.

A digital envelope combines the strengths of symmetric and asymmetric cryptography. The message itself is encrypted using a fast symmetric algorithm. The session key used for symmetric encryption is then encrypted using the recipient’s public key. This ensures efficiency (large data encrypted quickly with symmetric keys) and security (session key securely transmitted using asymmetric encryption). Options A, C, and D describe other cryptographic processes (compression, hashing, or digital signatures) but do not correctly represent a digital envelope. ISACA training materials and CISA manuals highlight this hybrid approach as the standard method for secure data transmission.

References (ISACA): CISA Review Manual – Cryptography Concepts; ISACA Glossary.

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

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

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

Enterprise Architecture (EA) documentation primarily includes strategic and operational blueprints outlining the evolution of IT infrastructure to align with business goals. Roadmaps showing the evolution from current state to future state (C) are essential for understanding how the organization’s IT environment will change over time to support business strategy.

Other options:

Contact information for key resources (A) is more of an operational or administrative document rather than an EA component.

Detailed encryption standards (B) would typically be found in security policies or system-specific documentation rather than in EA documentation.

Protocols used to communicate between systems (D) are typically documented within network or system architecture diagrams rather than high-level EA documentation.

An IS auditor has identified deficiencies within the organization’s software development life cycle (SDLC) policies. The SDLC is the process of planning, developing, testing, and deploying software applications1. SDLC policies are the guidelines and standards that govern the SDLC process and ensure its quality, security, and compliance2. Deficiencies in SDLC policies can lead to various risks, such as:

Software errors, bugs, or vulnerabilities that can affect the functionality, reliability, or security of the applications3

Software failures, delays, or overruns that can affect the delivery, performance, or customer satisfaction of the applications3

Software non-compliance that can result in legal, regulatory, or contractual violations or penalties3

The next step that the IS auditor should do after identifying deficiencies in SDLC policies is to communicate the observation to the auditee. The auditee is the person or entity that is subject to the audit and is responsible for the area being audited4. In this case, the auditee could be the software development manager, the project manager, or the senior management of the organization. Communicating the observation to the auditee is important for several reasons:

It allows the IS auditor to verify the accuracy and validity of the observation and gather additional evidence or information from the auditee4

It gives the auditee an opportunity to respond to the observation and provide their perspective, explanation, or justification for the deficiencies4

It enables the IS auditor to discuss with the auditee the potential impact, root cause, and remediation plan for the deficiencies4

It fosters a collaborative and constructive relationship between the IS auditor and the auditee and promotes transparency and accountability in the audit process4

The other options are not as appropriate as communicating the observation to the auditee. Documenting the findings in the audit report is a later stepthat should be done after communicating with the auditee and finalizing the observation. Identifying who approved the policies is not relevant for addressing the deficiencies and may imply blame or fault on a specific person or group. Escalating the situation to the lead auditor is not necessary unless there is a serious disagreement or conflict with the auditee that cannot be resolved by normal communication. Therefore, option D is the correct answer.