CISA Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

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

Thespeed at which security threats are mitigatedis akey indicatorof an organization ' srisk management effectiveness.

Option A (Correct):Response time to security threatsmeasures how efficiently security teams detect, analyze, and mitigate risks, providingclear insight into security operations.

Option B (Incorrect):The number of security controls auditeddoes not indicatehow well risk is being managed, only that reviews are taking place.

Option C (Incorrect):Log analysis speedis useful, but it does notdirectly measure risk mitigation effectiveness.

Option D (Incorrect):Risk register entriesindicate known risks but do not provide insight intohow well those risks are managed.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

The best approach is to establish a clear AI acceptable use policy that defines how employees may use AI tools while protecting sensitive information and intellectual property. This ensures governance while enabling safe adoption.

Option B: Reactive and punitive, not proactive governance.

Option C: Monitoring helps but is insufficient alone.

Option D: Overly restrictive and may block beneficial AI use.

Option A: Correct — policies provide structured guidance aligned with business objectives and risk management.

???? ISACA Reference: ISACA whitepapers on AI governance, risk, and compliance; CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, Domain 1, section on policy frameworks and emerging technologies.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

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

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

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

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

Theaudit charteris a formal document that definesthe purpose, authority, and responsibilitiesof the internal audit function.

Audit Charter (Correct Answer – A)

Establishesroles, reporting structure, and independenceof the audit team.

Example:TheIS audit team’s roleinrisk assessmentsis outlined in the charter.

Annual Audit Plan (Incorrect – B)

Outlinesaudit activitiesbutdoes not define roles and responsibilities.

Engagement Letter (Incorrect – C)

Used forspecific audits, not theentire audit function.

Audit Scope Letter (Incorrect – D)

Detailswhat is coveredin an audit but doesnot define responsibilities.

Enterprise architecture (EA) governance ensures that IT and business alignment is maintained and that new processes and technologies integrate well with existing structures.

Option A (Correct):The primary purpose of EA governance is to ensure that new technologies, processes, and systems align and harmonize with existing architecture to maintain operational efficiency and consistency.

Option B (Incorrect):While adaptability to emerging technology trends is important, EA governance focuses more on structure, consistency, and compliance rather than just adaptability.

Option C (Incorrect):Compliance with regulations is crucial, but it is just one component of governance. EA governance has a broader scope, including strategic alignment and process integration.

Option D (Incorrect):Ensuring ROI is an important financial consideration, but it is not themainobjective of EA governance.

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

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

Data definition standards within a database primarily support data formatting by establishing how data elements must be structured, represented, and stored. In practical terms, these standards define characteristics such as data type, field length, allowable values, precision, naming conventions, and valid formats. ISACA glossary material includes format checking as a control concept, which directly relates to verifying that data conforms to a prescribed format. That is the closest and strongest match to what data definition standards support.

Option C is correct because data definition standards are about consistency of data structure and representation. When an organization enforces common definitions for fields and attributes, it improves the consistency and usability of data across systems and applications. ISACA governance and data management material emphasizes that defining the format in which data are presented is part of giving data meaning and ensuring quality and usability.

Option A is incorrect because data disposal concerns end-of-life handling of data, such as destruction, archival expiration, and secure deletion. Those activities are governed by retention, records management, privacy, and disposal requirements, not by database data definition standards. ISACA privacy and data lifecycle guidance treats disposal as a separate lifecycle issue.

Option B is incorrect because data retention relates to how long data should be kept for business, legal, regulatory, or operational purposes. Retention policies may rely on data classification and legal obligations, but they are not what data definition standards primarily address.

Option D is incorrect because data confidentiality is mainly supported by access controls, encryption, classification, segregation of duties, and related security controls. Although well-defined data may indirectly help governance, confidentiality is not the main purpose of data definition standards.

Therefore, the best answer is C because enforcing data definition standards within a database most directly supports correct and consistent data formatting.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Glossary — Format checking.

ISACA, Unearthing and Enhancing Intelligence and Wisdom Within the COBIT 5 Governance of Information Model — discusses defining the format in which data are presented.

ISACA Journal, IS Audit Basics: Data Management Body of Knowledge—A Summary for Auditors — supports the role of data management standards and quality.

ISACA, SOC Reports for Cloud Security and Privacy — distinguishes use, retention, and disposal from data structure concerns.

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.

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

The programmer having access to the production programs is a control weakness that would have contributed most to the problem of unauthorized changes to key fields in a payroll system report. This is because it violates the principle of segregation of duties, which requires that different individuals or groups perform different functions related to system development, testing, implementation, and operation. Allowing programmers to access production programs increases the risk of errors, fraud, or malicious actions that may compromise the integrity, availability, or confidentiality of the system or its data. The other options are not as significant as having access to production programs, as they relate to other aspects of system development or maintenance, such as user involvement in testing (which affects user satisfaction and acceptance), user requirements documentation (which affects system functionalityand quality), and payroll files control (which affects data security and accuracy). References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Domain 3: Information Systems Acquisition, Development and Implementation, Section 3.2 Project Management Practices

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

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

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

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

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

The greatest concern is if the vendor is excluded from the organization’s third-party due diligence process. Without proper due diligence, the organization has no assurance that the vendor meets minimum security and privacy requirements, exposing PII to significant risk.

Option A: External-facing services carry risk but can be mitigated by proper controls.

Option B: Lack of dedicated privacy staff may increase risk, but controls may still exist.

Option C: Fourth-party hosting adds risk but is acceptable if included in due diligence.

Option D: Correct — exclusion from due diligence represents a fundamental breakdown in vendor risk management.

???? ISACA Reference: CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, Domain 5, section on third-party/vendor risk management and data privacy.

The greatest concern with the lack of structure for technology risk governance is C. Key decision-making entities for technology risk have not been identified. Technology risk governance is the process of establishing and maintaining the policies, roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities for managing technology risks within an organization1. Technology risk governance requires a clear organizational structure that defines who has the authority and responsibility to make decisions, set objectives, allocate resources, monitor performance, and ensure compliance for technology risk management2. Without such a structure, an organization may face the following challenges:

Lack of alignment and integration between technology and business strategies, leading to suboptimal outcomes and missed opportunities.

Lack of clarity and consistency in technology risk identification, assessment, mitigation, and reporting, leading to gaps and overlaps in risk coverage and exposure.

Lack of communication and collaboration among different stakeholders involved in technology risk management, leading to conflicts and inefficiencies.

Lack of oversight and accountability for technology risk management activities and results, leading to poor quality and reliability.

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.

Transposition and transcription errors occur when characters or numbers are accidentally swapped or misentered during data entry.

Option A (Incorrect):Duplicate checks ensure that the same record is not entered twice but do not specifically detect transposition or transcription errors.

Option B (Incorrect):Completeness checks ensure that all required data is entered but do not validate data accuracy.

Option C (Incorrect):Sequence checks verify that records follow a logical sequence but do not catch errors within individual data entries.

Option D (Correct):Acheck digitis an additional number generated through an algorithm (e.g., Luhn algorithm for credit cards) that helps detect errors such as transpositions (e.g., swapping digits 45 → 54) and transcriptions (e.g., mistyping 8 as 3).

The effectiveness of an organization’s security awareness program can be measured by capturing data on changes in the way people react to threats, such as the ability to recognize and avoid social engineering attacks1. An increase in the number of phishing emails reported by employees indicates that they are more aware of the signs and risks of phishing, and are more likely to take appropriate actions to prevent or mitigate the impact of such attacks23.

References

1: The Importance Of Measuring Security Awareness 2: Measuring the effectiveness of your security awareness program 3: How effective is security awareness training?

The effectiveness of an organization’s security awareness program can be measured by capturing data on changes in the way people react to threats, such as the ability to recognize and avoid social engineering attacks1. An increase in the number of phishing emails reported by employees indicates that they are more aware of the signs and risks of phishing, and are more likely to take appropriate actions to prevent or mitigate the impact of such attacks23.

References

1: The Importance Of Measuring Security Awareness 2: Measuring the effectiveness of your security awareness program 3: How effective is security awareness training?

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

 Validation controls are used to check the input data from the user before processing it on the server. If the validation controls are moved from the server side to the browser, it means that the user can modify or bypass them using tools such as browser developer tools, JavaScript console, or proxy tools. This would increase the risk of a successful attack by structured query language (SQL) injection, which is a technique that exploits a security vulnerability in an application’s software layer that allows an attacker to execute arbitrary SQL commands on the underlying database. SQL injection can result in data theft, data corruption, or unauthorized access to the system.

Buffer overflow, denial of service (DoS), and phishing are not directly related to the validation controls in a web application. Buffer overflow is a type of attack that exploits a memory management flaw in an application or system that allows an attacker to write data beyond the allocated buffer size and overwrite adjacent memory locations. DoS is a type of attack that prevents legitimate users from accessing a service or resource by overwhelming it with requests or traffic. Phishing is a type of attack that uses fraudulent emails or websites to trick users into revealing sensitive information or installing malware.

The IS auditor’s primary concern when an organization has recently implemented a Voice-over IP (VoIP) communication system is a single point of failure for both voice and data communications. VoIP is a technology that allows voice communication over IP networks such as the internet. VoIP can offer benefits such as lower costs, higher flexibility, and better integration with other applications. However, VoIP also introduces risks such as dependency on network availability, performance, and security. If both voice and data communications share the same network infrastructure and devices, then a single point of failure can affect both services simultaneously and cause significant disruption to business operations. Therefore, the IS auditor should evaluate the availability and redundancy of the network components and devices that support VoIP communication. The other options are not as critical as a single point of failure for both voice and data communications, as they do not pose a direct threat to business continuity. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 385

A governing body monitors IT performance most effectively when IT performance metrics are aligned with business goals. ISACA’s COBIT-based governance guidance consistently emphasizes that metrics should help leadership and governing bodies monitor the achievement of enterprise business goals and related IT goals. Metrics are useful for governance only when they are connected to what the enterprise is trying to achieve.

Option D is correct because a governing body is responsible for oversight at the strategic level. Strategic oversight depends on understanding whether IT is supporting business objectives, not just whether technical measures are being collected. ISACA states that metrics help management monitor achievements of business-related and IT-related goals.

Option A is useful at an operational or service management level, but it is narrower than business alignment. Service delivery objectives matter, yet the governing body’s concern is broader enterprise value and strategic alignment.

Option B is not the best answer because manufacturer recommendations may help establish technical asset baselines, but they do not ensure metrics support governance needs or enterprise performance oversight.

Option C is attractive because automated, quantitative data improves reliability and efficiency, but automation alone does not guarantee the metrics are the right ones. Governance requires relevant metrics tied to business outcomes, not just easily measured data.

Therefore, D is the best answer because proper alignment between business goals and IT performance metrics is what most enables a governing body to monitor IT performance meaningfully.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, Performance Measurement Metrics for IT Governance — metrics help management monitor achievement of business-related and IT-related goals.

ISACA Journal, How to Construct a Governance System From the Board Level to the Code Level — enterprise goals are cascaded into IT alignment goals, metrics and results.

ISACA, Charting the Course of IT Governance — performance measurement involves defining and monitoring KPIs for IT and communicating performance to stakeholders.

ISACA, Seven Key Features, Lessons and Tips From a COBIT Journey of 27 Years — COBIT uses goals, metrics and capabilities at enterprise and IT levels.

The best way to facilitate the legal process in the event of an incident is to preserve the chain of custody of the evidence. The chain of custody is a record of who handled, accessed, or modified the evidence, when, where, how, and why. The chain of custody helps to ensure the integrity, authenticity, and admissibility of the evidence in a court of law. The chain of custody also helps to prevent tampering, alteration, or loss of evidence that could compromise the investigation or the prosecution. References:

CISAReview Manual (Digital Version)

CISA Questions, Answers and Explanations Database

Business stakeholders being involved in approving the IT strategy best demonstrates that IT strategy is aligned with organizational goals and objectives. IT strategy is a plan that defines how IT resources and capabilities will support and enable the achievement of business goals and objectives. Business stakeholders are the individuals or groups who have an interest or influence in the organization’s activities and outcomes. By involving business stakeholders in approving the IT strategy, the organization can ensure that the IT strategy reflects and supports the business needs, expectations, and priorities. The other options do not necessarily indicate that IT strategy is aligned with organizational goals and objectives, as they do not involve the participation or feedback of business stakeholders. References: CISAReview Manual, 27th Edition, page 97

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

The first step is to identify at-risk assets. Before an organization can assess impact, estimate damage, or evaluate likelihood, it must first determine which assets are exposed to the zero-day vulnerability. ISACA risk guidance emphasizes asset identification and security categorization as foundational steps in risk assessment. In other words, you cannot meaningfully assess risk until you know what systems, applications, or services are affected.

Option A is correct because scoping the exposure comes first. Once at-risk assets are identified, the organization can prioritize remediation and then evaluate impact and likelihood in a focused way. ISACA’s vulnerability and risk-related material supports risk-based prioritization built on asset visibility and understanding which systems are exposed.

Option B is not first because impact assessment depends on knowing which assets are vulnerable and how critical they are. Without that scope, impact analysis is incomplete.

Option C is also not first. Likelihood matters in risk analysis, but it comes after identifying the vulnerable environment and relevant exposure. ISACA’s risk discussions place likelihood estimation after identifying assets, threats, and vulnerabilities.

Option D is similar to impact assessment and likewise depends on first knowing which assets are in scope. Estimating damage without scoping exposure would be premature.

Therefore, A is the best answer because identifying the affected assets is the necessary first step in managing the impact of a newly discovered zero-day vulnerability.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, IT Asset Valuation, Risk Assessment and Control Implementation Model — asset identification and categorization precede likelihood and impact assessment.

ISACA, Using a Risk-Based Approach to Prioritize Vulnerability Remediation — supports risk-based prioritization after exposure is understood.

ISACA, Fortifying the Operational Technology Sector: Battle-Tested Cyber Resilience Strategies — emphasizes identifying exploitable weaknesses and exposed assets.

ISACA Journal, Understanding Cybersecurity Risk — likelihood and impact are part of the risk model after threats/vulnerabilities are established.

 The greatest impact as a result of the ongoing deterioration of a detective control is an increased number of false negatives in security logs. A detective control is a control that monitors and identifies any deviations or anomalies from the expected or normal behavior or performance of a system or process. A security log is a record of events or activities that occur within a system or network, such as user access, file changes, system errors, or security incidents. A false negative is a situation where a security log fails to detect or report an actual deviation or anomaly that has occurred, such as an unauthorized access, a malicious modification, or a security breach. An increased number of false negatives in security logs can have a significant impact on the organization’s security posture and risk management, because it can prevent timely detection and response to security threats, compromise the accuracy and reliability of security monitoring and reporting, and undermine the accountability and auditability of user actions and transactions. The other options are not as impactful as anincreased number of false negatives in security logs, because they either do not affect the detection capability of a detective control, or they have less severe consequences for security management. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1

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

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

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

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

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

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

User requirements are the foundation of any successful application. Properly defining what the application needs to do and how it should serve users is critical before moving into design or development.

A risk assessment must be completed as part of annual audit planning. ISACA’s ITAF-based guidance states that the IS audit and assurance function shall use an appropriate risk assessment approach and supporting methodology to develop the overall IS audit plan and determine priorities for effective allocation of audit resources.

Option C is correct because audit planning is fundamentally risk-based under ISACA guidance. Annual planning requires identifying and prioritizing risk areas so the audit plan focuses on the areas of greatest significance. ISACA also notes that, before creating the annual audit plan, the organizationwide risk register should be reviewed thoroughly to prioritize risk areas.

Option A may inform audit planning in some organizations, but it is not a universal required planning step.

Option B can be useful, but it is optional and supplementary, not mandatory.

Option D is typically developed at the engagement level for specific audits rather than as a mandatory organizationwide annual planning deliverable.

Therefore, C is the best answer because risk assessment is the required foundation of the annual audit plan under ISACA guidance.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, Developing the IT Audit Plan Using COBIT 2019 — ITAF requires an appropriate risk assessment approach to develop the overall IS audit plan.

ISACA Journal, Auditing and Digital Transformation Are at a Crossroads — before creating the annual audit plan, the organizationwide risk register should be reviewed thoroughly.

ISACA, Certification Exam Candidate Guide — includes evaluation of audit processes and quality programs, supporting structured audit planning.

The best recommendation to include in an organization’s bring your own device (BYOD) policy to help prevent data leakage is to require multi-factor authentication on BYOD devices. BYOD is a practice that allows employees to use their own personal devices, such as smartphones, tablets, or laptops, to access the organization’s network, data, and systems. Data leakage is a risk that involves the unauthorized or accidental disclosure or transfer of sensitive or confidential data from the organization to external parties or devices. Multi-factor authentication is a security measure that requires users to provide two or more pieces of evidence to verify their identity and access rights, such as passwords, tokens, biometrics, or codes. Multi-factor authentication can help prevent data leakage by reducing the likelihood of unauthorized access to the organization’s data and systems throughBYOD devices, especially if they are lost, stolen, or compromised. The other options are not as effective as requiring multi-factor authentication on BYOD devices, because they either do not prevent data leakage directly, or they are reactive rather than proactive measures. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.3

The primary basis on which audit objectives are established is the consideration of risks12. This involves identifying and assessing the risks that could prevent the organization from achieving its objectives12. The audit objectives are then designed to address these risks and provide assurance that the organization’s controls are effective in managing them12. While audit risk, assessment of prior audits, and business strategy are important factors in the audit process, they are secondary to the fundamental requirement of considering risks12.

The authority given to the audit function is one of the components that is found in an audit charter. According to the IIA, the audit charter is a formal document that defines internal audit’s purpose, authority, responsibility and position within the organization1. The authority given to the audit function includes the scope of its activities, the access to records, personnel and physical properties relevant to its work, and the independence and objectivity of its staff2. The authority given to the audit function helps to ensure that internal auditors can perform their duties effectively and efficiently, and that they can provide assurance and consulting services that add value and improve the organization’s operations3.

The other options are not found in an audit charter. The process of developing the annual audit plan is not part of the audit charter, but rather a separate document that outlines the methodology, criteria and resources for selecting and prioritizing audit engagements based on a risk assessment4. Required training for audit staff is not part of the audit charter, but rather a component of the quality assurance and improvement program that evaluates the competence and performance of internal auditors and provides them with opportunities for professional development5. Audit objectives and scope are not part of the audit charter, but rather specific elements of each individual audit engagement that define the expected outcomes and the boundaries of the audit work.

Segregation of duties is a fundamental concept in cybersecurity and information security. It refers to the practice of dividing critical tasks and responsibilities among different individuals or roles within an organization to reduce the risk of fraud, error, or unauthorized activities1. Segregation of duties is designed to prevent unilateral actions within an organization’s workflow, which can result in damaging events that would exceed the organization’s risk tolerance2.

There are different types of responses to risk associated with segregation of duties, depending on the level of risk and the cost-benefit analysis. Some of the common responses are:

Risk acceptance: This means acknowledging a risk and deciding to tolerate it without taking any corrective actions. This response is usually chosen when the risk is low or the cost of mitigation is too high3.

Risk mitigation: This means taking steps ahead of time to lessen the effects of a risk and make it less likely to happen. Some examples of mitigation strategies are making backup plans, setting up early warning systems, and staying away from high-risk areas or activities4.

Risk transference: This means shifting the negative impact of a risk and/or the responsibility for managing the risk response to a third party. Some examples of transference strategies are outsourcing, insurance, or contracts5.

Risk reduction: This means reducing the probability and/or severity of the risk below a threshold of acceptability. Some examples of reduction strategies are implementing controls, policies, or procedures to prevent or detect risks6.

Based on these definitions, the response to risk associated with segregation of duties that would incur the lowest initial cost is A. Risk acceptance. This is because risk acceptance does not require any additional resources or actions to address the risk. However, risk acceptance also implies that the organization is willing to bear the consequences of the risk if it occurs, which could be costly in the long run.

Therefore, the correct answer to your question is A. Risk acceptance.

Data caching is the most likely cause of poor performance, data inconsistency and integrity issues in an IT application, because it involves storing frequently accessed data in a temporary memory location (cache) to reduce the latency and bandwidth consumption of retrieving data from the original source. However, data caching can also introduce problems such as stale data (when the cache is not updated with changes made to the original source), cache coherence (when multiple caches store copies of the same data and need to be synchronized), and cache corruption (when the cache is damaged or tampered with).

Database clustering is not a likely cause of poor performance, data inconsistency and integrity issues, because it involves distributing data across multiple servers or nodes to improve availability, scalability and load balancing of database operations. Database clustering can also enhance data consistency and integrity by using replication and synchronization mechanisms to ensure that all nodes have the same view of the data.

Reindexing of the database table is not a likely cause of poor performance, data inconsistency and integrity issues, because it involves rebuilding or reorganizing indexes on tables or views to improve query performance and reduce fragmentation of index pages. Reindexing can also improve data consistency and integrity by ensuring that indexes reflect the current state of the data in the tables or views.

Load balancing is not a likely cause of poor performance, data inconsistency and integrity issues, because it involves distributing workloads across multiple servers or resources to optimize resource utilization, throughput and response time of applications. Load balancing can also enhance data consistency and integrity by using algorithms and protocols to route requests to the most appropriate server or resource based on availability, capacity and performance.

 Changing the default configurations of a database system is a critical control for securing it from unauthorized access or exploitation. Default configurations often include weak passwords, unnecessary services, open ports, or known vulnerabilities that can be easily exploited by attackers. The other options are not as important as changing the default configurations, as they do not address the root cause of the security risks. Normalizing tables in the database is a design technique for improving data quality and performance, but it does not affect security. Changing the service port used by the database server is a form of security by obscurity, which can be easily bypassed by port scanning tools. Using the default administration account after changing the account password is still risky, as the account name may be known or guessed by attackers. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.2.4

Spreadsheets, often used in EUC, are prone to manual input errors and formula mistakes. These errors can significantly compromise the accuracy and integrity of financial reporting.

References

ISACA CISA Review Manual (Current Edition) - Chapter on End-User Computing (EUC) risks

Industry Research on Spreadsheet Errors: Multiple studies highlight the prevalence of errors in spreadsheets, especially those used for financial purposes.

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