CISA Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

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

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

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

 Impact assessment is an activity that occurs during the issues management process for a system development project. Issues management is a process of identifying, analyzing, resolving, and monitoring issues that may affect the project scope, schedule, budget, or quality. Impact assessment is a technique of evaluating the severity and priority of an issue, as well as its implications for the project objectives and deliverables. The other options are not activities that occur during the issues management process, but rather related to other processes such as contingency planning, configuration management, or help desk management. References:

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

CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID 217

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

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

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

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

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

 The type of firewall that provides the greatest degree of control against hacker intrusion is an application level gateway. A firewall is a device or software that filters or blocks network traffic based on predefined rules or policies. A firewall can help protect an information system or networkfrom unauthorized access or attack by hackers or other malicious entities. An application level gateway is a type of firewall that operates at the application layer of the network model (layer 7), which is where user applications communicate with each other over the network. An application level gateway provides the greatest degree of control against hacker intrusion, by inspecting and analyzing the content and context of each network packet at the application level, such as protocols, commands, requests, responses, etc., and allowing or denying access based on specific criteria or conditions. An application level gateway can also perform additional functions such as authentication, encryption, caching, logging, etc., to enhance the security and performance of network traffic. A circuit gateway is a type of firewall that operates at the transport layer of the network model (layer 4), which is where data are transferred between end points over the network. A circuit gateway provides a moderate degree of control against hacker intrusion by establishing a secure connection between two end points (such as client and server) and relaying network packets between them without inspecting or analyzing their content. A circuit gateway can also perform functions such as encryption, authentication, or address translation to improve the security and privacy of network traffic. A packet filtering router is a type of firewall that operates at the network layer of the network model (layer 3), which is where data are routed between different networks or subnets. A packet filtering router provides a low degree of control against hacker intrusion by examining the header of each network packet and allowing or denying access based on basic criteria such as source address, destination address, port number, protocol, etc. A packet filtering router can also perform functions such as routing, forwarding, or address translation tooptimize the delivery and efficiency of network traffic. A screening router is a type of firewall that operates at the network layer of the network model (layer 3), which is where data are routed between different networks or subnets. A screening router provides a low degree of control against hacker intrusion by examining the header of each network packet and allowing or denying access based on basic criteria such as source address, destination address, port number, protocol, etc. A screening router can also perform functions such as routing, forwarding, or address translation to optimize the delivery and efficiency of network traffic. 

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

 The IS quality assurance (QA) group is responsible for ensuring that program changes adhere to established standards. Program changes are modifications made to software applications or systems to fix errors, improve performance, add functionality, or meet changing requirements. Program changes should follow established standards for documentation, authorization, testing, implementation, and review. The IS QA group is responsible for verifying that program changes comply with these standards and meet the expected quality criteria. Designing procedures to protect dataagainst accidental disclosure; ensuring that the output received from system processing is complete; and monitoring the execution of computer processing tasks are not responsibilities of the IS QA group. References: [ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition], page 304.

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

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

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

The 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 & Implementation, Section 3.4: System Implementation.

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

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

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

 The chain of custody has not been documented is a finding that should be of greatest concern for an IS auditor reviewing a forensic analysis process of an organization that has suffered a cyber attack. The chain of custody is a record of who handled, accessed, or modified the evidence during a forensic investigation. Documenting the chain of custody is essential to preserve the integrity, authenticity, and admissibility of the evidence in a court of law. The other options are less concerning findings that may not affect the validity or reliability of the forensic analysis process. References:

CISAReview Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 7, Section 7.51

CISA Review Questions, Answers &Explanations Database, Question ID 220

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

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

 The major advantage of moving from many desktop PCs to a thin client architecture is that desktop application software will never have to be upgraded. A thin client architecture is a type of client-server architecture that uses lightweight or minimal devices (thin clients) as clients that connect to a central server that provides most of the processing and storage functions. A thin client architecture can offer several benefits over a traditional desktop PC architecture, such as lower cost, higher security, easier maintenance, etc. One of these benefits is that desktop application software will never have to be upgraded on thin clients, as all the applications are installed and updated on the server, and accessed by thin clients through a network connection. This can save time and money for installing and upgrading software on individual devices, and ensure consistency and compatibility among different devices. The security of the desktop PC is enhanced is a possible advantage of moving from many desktop PCs to a thin client architecture, but it is not the major one. A thin client architecture can enhance the security of desktop PCs by reducing the exposure orvulnerability of data and applications on individual devices, and centralizing the security management and control on the server. However, this advantage may depend on other factors such as network security, server security, user authentication, etc. Administrative security can be provided for the client is a possible advantage of moving from many desktop PCs to a thin client architecture, but it is not the major one. A thin client architecture can provide administrative security for clients by allowing administrators to configure and manage client devices remotely from the server, and enforce policies and restrictions on client access or usage. However, this advantage may depend on other factors such as network reliability, server availability, user compliance, etc. System administration can be better managed is a possible advantage of moving from many desktop PCs to a thin client architecture, but it is not the major one. A thin client architecture can improve system administration by simplifying and streamlining the tasks and activities involved in maintaining and supporting client devices, such as backup, recovery, troubleshooting, etc., and consolidating them on the server. However, this advantage may depend on other factors such as network bandwidth, server capacity, user satisfaction

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

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

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

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

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 andcapabilities 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 most important determining factor when establishing appropriate timeframes for follow-up activities related to audit findings is the remediation dates included in management responses. The IS auditor should ensure that the follow-up activities are aligned with the agreed-upon action plans and deadlines that management has committed to in response to the audit findings. The follow-up activities should verify that management has implemented the corrective actions effectively and in a timely manner, and that the audit findings have been resolved or mitigated.

The other options are less important factors for establishing timeframes for follow-up activities:

Availability of IS audit resources. This is a practical factor that may affect the scheduling and execution of follow-up activities, but it should not override the priority and urgency of verifying management’s corrective actions.

Peak activity periods for the business. This is a factor that may affect the availability and cooperation of auditees during follow-up activities, but it should not delay or postpone the verification of management’s corrective actions beyond reasonable limits.

Complexity of business processes identified in the audit. This is a factor that may affect the scope and depth of follow-up activities, but it should not affect the timeframe for verifying management’s corrective actions.

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

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

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

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

The best way to determine whether programmers have permission to alter data in the production environment is by reviewing the access rights that have been granted. Access rights are permissions or privileges that define what actions or operations a user can perform on an information system or resource. By reviewing the access rights that have been granted to programmers, an IS auditor can verify whether they have been authorized to modify data in the production environment, which is where live data and applications are stored and executed. The access control system’s log settings are parameters that define what events or activities are recorded by the access control system, which is a system that enforces the access rights and policies of an information system or resource. The access control system’s log settings are not the best way to determine whether programmers have permission to alter data in the production environment, as they do not indicate what permissions or privileges have been granted to programmers. How the latest system changes were implemented is a process thatdescribes how software updates or modifications are deployed to the production environment. How the latest system changes were implemented is not the best way to determine whether programmers have permission to alter data in the production environment, as it does not indicate what permissions or privileges have been granted to programmers. The access control system’s configuration is a set of rules or parameters that define how the access control system operates and functions. The access control system’s configuration is not the best way to determine whether programmers have permission to alter data in the production environment, as it does not indicate what permissions or privileges have been granted to programmers. 

The best source of information for an IS auditor to use as a baseline to assess the adequacy of an organization’s privacy policy is the local privacy standards and regulations. Privacy standards and regulations are legal requirements that specify how personal data should be collected, processed, stored, shared, and disposed of by organizations. By using local privacy standards and regulations as a baseline, the IS auditor can ensure that the organization’s privacy policy complies with the applicable laws and protects the rights and interests of data subjects. Historical privacy breaches and related root causes, globally accepted privacy best practices, and benchmark studies of similar organizations are useful sources of information for improving an organization’s privacy policy, but they are not as authoritative and relevant as local privacy standards and regulations. References: CISAReview Manual (Digital Version): Chapter 2 - Governance and Management of Information Technology

Before sending backup drives to an offsite storage facility, the most important thing to do is to encrypt the drive with strong protection standards. This is because encryption ensures effective security where information cannot be intercepted and used to harm the organization or its customers. Encryption also protects the data from unauthorized access, modification, or deletion in case the drive is lost, stolen, or damaged during transit or storage. Encryption of backup drives is especially important for public safety organizations that handle sensitive or personally identifiable information, such as medical records, criminal records, or emergency communications12.

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.

References:

What Is The Software Development Life Cycle? | PagerDuty

Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) Policy | StrongDM

What Is SDLC? Best Phases, Methodologies, and Benefits Revealed - Kellton

Communicating Audit Findings

When identifying which servers are no longer required, reviewing server CPU usage trends is the most helpful approach. Monitoring the CPU usage over time provides insights into how actively a server is being utilized. Servers with consistently low CPU usage may be candidates for consolidation or decommissioning. By analyzing CPU utilization patterns, IT management can make informed decisions about which servers can be retired without impacting performance or availability1.

References:

1. ISACA. “Technical Guide on IT Migration Audit.” 1(http://kb.icai.org/pdfs/PDFFile5b278a12a66758.27269499.pdf)

2. Zapier. “IT audit: The ultimate guide [with checklist].” 2(https://zapier.com/blog/it-audit/)

3. ISACA. “CISA Certification | Certified Information Systems Auditor.” 3(https://www.isaca.org/credentialing/cisa)

The best indicator of the performance of a web application is the average response time. This metric measures how long it takes for the web server to process and deliver a request from the client. It reflects the user’s perception of how fast or slow the web application is, and it affects the user’s satisfaction, engagement, and conversion. A low average response time means that the web application is responsive and efficient, while a high average response time means that the web application is sluggish and unreliable.

HTTP server error rate, server thread count, and server uptime are not as good indicators of the performance of a web application as the average response time. HTTP server error rate measures how often the web server fails to handle a request and returns an error code, such as 404 (Not Found) or 500 (Internal Server Error). This metric indicates the reliability and availability of the web application, but it does not capture how fast or slow the web application is. Server thread count measures how many concurrent requests the web server can handle at a given time. This metric indicates the scalability andcapacity of the web application, but it does not capture how long each request takes to process. Server uptime measures how long the web server has been running without interruption. This metric indicates the stability and resilience of the web application, but it does not capture how well the web application performs during that time.

References:

10 Key Application Performance Metrics & How to Measure Them - Stackify1

Measuring performance - Learn web development | MDN2

Understanding the Basics of Web Performance | BrowserStack3

14 Important Website Performance Metrics You Should Be Analyzing4

Top 8 Web Application Performance Metrics | MetricFire Blog5

Web Performance Monitoring: A How to Guide for Developers - Stackify6

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

References:

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

Functions in the Purchasing Process and how to Segregate Purchasing Duties

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.

References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 1: The Process of Auditing Information Systems, Section 1.4: Audit Evidence, p. 31-32.

CISA Review Manual (Print Version), Chapter 1: The Process of Auditing Information Systems, Section 1.4: Audit Evidence, p. 31-32.

CISA Online Review Course2, Module 1: The Process of Auditing Information Systems, Lesson 4: Audit Evidence, slide 9-10.

CISA Questions, Answers & Explanations Database3, Question ID: QAE_CISA_710.

Audit planning is the process of developing an overall strategy and approach for conducting an audit. Audit planning involves identifying the objectives, scope, criteria, and methodology of the audit, as well as the resources, schedule, and reporting requirements. Audit planning also involves performing a risk assessment to identify and prioritize the areas of highest risk and significance for the audit1.

Risk assessment is a systematic process of evaluating the potential risks that may be involved in a projected activity or undertaking. Risk assessment involves identifying the sources and causes of risk, analyzing the likelihood and impact of risk, and determining the level of risk and the appropriate response2.

During audit planning, the IS audit manager is considering whether to budget for audits of entities regarded by the business as having low risk. The best course of action in this situation is C. Validate the low-risk entity ratings and apply professional judgment.

This is because validating the low-risk entity ratings can help to ensure that the risk assessment is accurate, reliable, and consistent with the business objectives and expectations. Validating the low-risk entity ratings can also help to identify any changes or developments that may affect the risk profile of the entities since the last assessment. Applying professional judgment can help to determine whether the low-risk entities should be included or excluded from the audit plan, based on factors such as materiality, relevance, significance, and assurance needs3.

Obtaining management’s consent to the testing scope in writing is the most important step prior to finalizing the scope of testing, as it ensures that the penetration testers have the authorization and approval to perform the testing activities. It also protects them from any legal liabilities or accusations of unauthorized access or damage. The other options are not as important as obtaining management’s consent, and they may vary depending on the specific situation and agreement. For example, some systems may not be excluded from the testing scope, and some tests may not be restricted to the test environment. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) 1, page 381-382.

 The IS audit manager should specifically review the detailed evidence of the successes and weaknesses of all contingency testing to substantiate the conclusions of the audit of the corporate disaster recovery test. This is because the detailed evidence can provide the audit manager with a clear and objective picture of how well the disaster recovery plan was executed, what issues or gaps were encountered, and what recommendations or actions were taken to address them. The detailed evidence can also help the audit manager to verify the accuracy, completeness, and validity of the audit findings, as well as to evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the disaster recovery controls.

The other options are not as specific or relevant as the detailed evidence of all contingency testing. Overviews of interviews between data center personnel and the auditor may provide some useful information, but they are not sufficient to substantiate the conclusions without supporting evidence from the actual testing. Prior audit reports involving other corporate disaster recovery audits may provide some benchmarking or comparison data, but they are not directly related to the current audit scope and objectives. Summary memos reflecting audit opinions regarding noted weaknesses may provide some high-level insights, but they are not enough to substantiate the conclusions without detailed evidence to back them up.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019, p. 2411

Disaster Recovery Audit Work Program2

Machine shredding is the process of using a shredding machine to physically destroy the media and make the data unrecoverable. This is more effective than software formatting, which only erases the data logically and may leave traces that can be recovered by special tools1. Encrypting and destroying keys may prevent unauthorized access to the data, but it does not erase the data from the media. Wipingand rewriting three times is unnecessary and may reduce the lifespan of the media, especially for solid state drives2. Machine shredding is also recommended by various security standards and guidelines for media disposal345.

 The greatest concern to an IS auditor reviewing an organization’s method to transport sensitive data between offices is that the method relies exclusively on the use of asymmetric encryption algorithms. Asymmetric encryption algorithms, also known as public key encryption, use two different keys for encryption and decryption: a public key that is shared with anyone who wants to communicate with the sender, and a private key that is kept secret by the sender. Asymmetric encryption algorithms are more secure than symmetric encryption algorithms, which use the same key for both encryption and decryption, but they are also slower and more computationally intensive. Therefore, relying exclusively on asymmetric encryption algorithms may not be efficient or practical for transporting large amounts of sensitive data between offices. A better method would be to use a combination of symmetric and asymmetric encryption algorithms, such as using asymmetric encryption to exchange a symmetric key and then using symmetric encryption to encrypt and decrypt the data.

The other options are not as concerning as option C. The method relying exclusively on the use of public key infrastructure (PKI) is not a concern, because PKI is a system that provides the services and mechanisms for creating, managing, distributing, using, storing, and revoking digital certificates that are based on asymmetric encryption algorithms. PKI enables secure and authenticated communication between parties who do not have a prior trust relationship. The method relying exclusively on the use of digital signatures is not a concern, because digital signatures are a way of verifying the authenticity and integrity of a message or document by using asymmetric encryption algorithms. Digital signatures ensure that the sender cannot deny sending the message or document, and that the receiver can detect any tampering or alteration of the message or document. The method relying exclusively on the use of128-bit encryption is not a concern, because 128-bit encryption is a level of encryption that uses a 128-bit key to encrypt and decrypt data. 128-bit encryption is considered to be strong enough to resist brute-force attacks by modern computers. References: Asymmetric vs Symmetric Encryption: What are differences?, Public Key Infrastructure (PKI), Digital Signature, What is 128-bit Encryption?

If an IS auditor suspects that independence may not have been maintained in past audits, the best course of action is to inform audit management. Audit management has the responsibility and authority to address such issues. They can review the situation, determine if there was indeed a lack of independence, and decide on the appropriate actions to take123. While informing senior management, reevaluating internal controls, and re-performing past audits might be necessary at some point, the first step should be to inform audit management.

The issue seems to stem from a breakdown in the workflow or process for handling assets that are due for destruction12. By examining the workflow, the IS auditor can identify where the process failed, such as why the vendor was not notified about the hard drives12. This could involve reviewing procedures for inventory management, communication with vendors, and tracking of assets due for destruction12. The findings can then be used to improve the workflow and prevent similar issues in the future12.

References:

How To Properly Destroy A Hard Drive - Tech News Today

How to safely and securely destroy hard disk data - iFixit

The auditor should verify whether a right-to-audit clause exists (B) next, because it is a contractual provision that grants the auditor the right to access and examine the records, systems, and processes of the SaaS provider. A right-to-audit clause is important for ensuring transparency, accountability, and compliance of the SaaS provider with the customer’s requirements and expectations. A right-to-audit clause can also help the auditor to identify and mitigate any risks or issues related to the SaaS agreement12.

Verifying whether IT management monitors the effectiveness of the environment (A) is not the next step, because it is a part of the ongoing monitoring andevaluation process, not the initial walk-through procedures. The auditor should first establish the scope, objectives, and criteria of the audit before assessing the performance and controls of the SaaS provider.

Verifying whether a third-party security attestation exists © is not the next step, because it is not a mandatory requirement for a SaaS agreement. A third-party security attestation is a report or certificate issued by an independent auditor that evaluates and validates the security controls and practices of the SaaS provider. A third-party security attestation can provide assurance and confidence to the customer, but it does not replace or eliminate the need for a right-to-audit clause3.

Verifying whether service level agreements (SLAs) are defined and monitored (D) is not the next step, because it is not directly related to the audit process. SLAs are contractual agreements that specify the quality, availability, and performance standards of the SaaS provider. SLAs are important for measuring and managing the service delivery and customer satisfaction, but they do not grant or guarantee the right to audit4.

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 concerning thing for an IS auditor reviewing an IT strategy document is that the strategic IT goals are derived solely from the latest market trends. An IT strategy document is a blueprint that defines how an organization will use technology to achieve its goals. It should be based on a thorough analysis of the organization’s internal and external factors, such as its vision, mission, values, objectives, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats, customers, competitors, regulations, and industry standards. An IT strategy document should also align with the organization’s business strategy and reflect its unique needs and capabilities. If an IT strategy document is derived solely from the latest market trends, it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization’s specific situation. It may also lack coherence, consistency, feasibility, or sustainability.

The other options are not as concerning as option C. Target architecture is defined at a technical level is not a concern for an IS auditor reviewing an IT strategy document. Target architecture is the desired state of an organization’s IT systems in terms of their structure, functionality, performance, security, interoperability, and integration. Defining target architecture at a technical level can help an IS auditor to understand how the organization plans to achieve its strategic IT goals and what technical requirements and standards it needs to follow. The previous year’s IT strategic goals were not achieved is not a concern for an IS auditor reviewing an IT strategy document. The previous year’s IT strategic goals are the outcomes that the organization intended to accomplish with its IT initiatives in the past year. Not achieving these goals may indicate some challenges or gaps in the organization’s IT performance or execution. However, this does not necessarily affect the quality or validity of the current IT strategy document. An IS auditor should focus on evaluating whether the current IT strategy document is realistic, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. Financial estimates of new initiatives are disclosed within the document is not a concern for an IS auditor reviewing an IT strategy document. Financial estimates are projections of the costs and benefits of new initiatives that are part of the IT strategy document. Disclosing financial estimates within the document can help an IS auditor to assess whether the new initiatives are aligned with the organization’s budget and resources and whether they provide value for money. References: IT Strategy Template for a Successful Strategic Plan | Gartner, Definitive Guide to Developing anIT Strategy and Roadmap - CioPages, An Example of a Well-Developed IT Strategy Plan - Resolute

Unstructured data is data that does not have a predefined model or organization, making it difficult to store, process, and analyze using traditional relational databases or spreadsheets. Unstructured data can pose a risk to an organization if it contains sensitive, confidential, or regulated information that is not properly secured, managed, or governed. To minimize the risk of unstructured data, the first step is to identify the repositories of unstructured data, such as file servers, cloud storage, email systems, social media platforms, etc. This will help to understand the scope, volume, and nature of unstructured data in the organization, and to prioritize the areas that need further analysis and action. References: Unstructured data -Wikipedia

 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.

References: 1: Understanding CPRA service provider contract requirements - Transcend 2: What you must know about ‘third parties’ under GDPR and CCPA 3: Data Privacy Implications for Service Provider & Third-Party Contracts 4: Privacy and outsourcing for businesses - Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada 5: Data Security Guidelines for outsourcing and third party compliance - European Union Agency for Network and Information Security

End-user computing (EUC) is a system in which users are able to create working applications besides the divided development process of design, build, test and release that is typically followed by software engineers1. Examples of EUC tools include spreadsheets, databases, low-code/no-code platforms, andgenerative AI applications2. EUC tools can provide flexibility, efficiency, and innovation for the users, but they also pose significant risks if not properly managed and controlled3.

The greatest risk when relying on reports generated by EUC is that the data may be inaccurate. Data accuracy refers to the extent to which the data in the reports reflect the true values of the underlying information4. Inaccurate data can lead to erroneous decisions, misleading analysis, unreliable reporting, and compliance violations. Some of the factors that can cause data inaccuracy in EUC reports are:

Lack of rigorous testing: EUC tools may not undergo the same level of testing and validation as IT-developed applications, which can result in errors, bugs, or inconsistencies in the data processing and output3.

Lack of version and change control: EUC tools may not have a clear record of the changes made to them over time, which can create confusion, duplication, or loss of data. Users may also modify or overwrite the data without proper authorization or documentation3.

Lack of documentation and reliance on end-user who developed it: EUC tools may not have sufficient documentation to explain their purpose, functionality, assumptions, limitations, and dependencies. Users may also rely on the knowledge and expertise of the original developer, who may not be available or may not have followed best practices3.

Lack of maintenance processes: EUC tools may not have regular updates, backups, or reviews to ensure their functionality and security. Users may also neglect to delete or archive obsolete or redundant data3.

Lack of security: EUC tools may not have adequate access controls, encryption, or authentication mechanisms to protect the data from unauthorized access, modification, or disclosure. Users may also store or share the data in insecure locations or devices3.

Lack of audit trail: EUC tools may not have a traceable history of the data sources, inputs, outputs, calculations, and transformations. Users may also manipulate or falsify the data without detection or accountability3.

Overreliance on manual controls: EUC tools may depend on human intervention to input, verify, or correct the data, which can introduce errors, delays, or biases. Users may also lack the skills or training to use the EUC tools effectively and efficiently3.

The other options are not as great as data inaccuracy when relying on EUC reports. Reports may not work efficiently, reports may not be timely, and historical data may not be available are all potential risks associated with EUC tools, but they are less severe and less frequent than data inaccuracy. Moreover, these risks can be mitigated by improving the performance, scheduling, and storage of the EUC tools. However, data inaccuracy can have a pervasive and lasting impact on the quality and credibility of the reports and the decisions based on them. Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

References:

What is Data Accuracy?

What Is End User Computing (EUC) Risk?

End-user computing

End-User Computing (EUC) Risks: A Comprehensive Guide

A business continuity plan (BCP) is a document that outlines how an organization will continue its critical functions in the event of a disruption or disaster. A BCP should include the following elements1:

Business impact analysis: This is the process of identifying and prioritizing the key business processes and assets that are essential for the organization’s survival and recovery.

Risk assessment: This is the process of identifying and evaluating the potential threats and vulnerabilities that could affect the organization’s business continuity.

Recovery strategies: These are the actions and procedures that the organization will implement to restore its normal operations as quickly and effectively as possible after a disruption or disaster.

Recovery objectives: These are the metrics that define the acceptable level of recovery for the organization’s business processes and assets. The two main recovery objectives are:

Recovery point objective (RPO): This is the maximum amount of data loss that the organization can tolerate in terms of time. For example, an RPO of one hour means that the organization can afford to lose up to one hour’s worth of data after a disruption or disaster.

Recovery time objective (RTO): This is the maximum amount of time that the organization can tolerate to restore its normal operations after a disruption or disaster. For example, an RTO of four hours means that the organization must resume its normal operations within four hours after a disruption or disaster.

Testing and validation: This is the process of verifying and evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of the BCP and its components. Testing and validation can include various methods, such as:

Tabletop exercises: These are discussion-based sessions where team members meet in an informal setting to review and discuss their roles and responsibilities during a disruption or disaster scenario. A facilitator guides participants through a discussion of one or more scenarios2.

Simulation exercises: These are more realistic and interactive sessions where team members perform their roles and responsibilities during a simulated disruption or disaster scenario. A facilitator controls and monitors the simulation and injects events and challenges3.

Full-scale exercises: These are the most complex and realistic sessions where team members perform their roles and responsibilities during a real-life disruption or disaster scenario. A facilitator coordinates and evaluates the exercise with external stakeholders, such as emergency services, media, or customers4.

As an IS auditor, your greatest concern when reviewing the organization’s BCP would be A. The recovery plan does not contain the process and application dependencies.

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.

References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2019, p. 2261

Five Common Spreadsheet Risks and Ways to Control Them2

GREATEST Concerns When Reviewing Data Inputs from Spreadsheets3

Given the large volume of data transactions, continuous monitoring is the best testing strategy for auditing the inventory control process. Continuous monitoring involves the automated review of operational and financial data to identify anomalies or areas of concern12. This approach allows for real-time identification and resolution of issues, making it particularly effective for large organizations with high transaction volumes12.

References: ISACA’s Information Systems Auditor Study Materials1

The IS auditor’s greatest concern when reviewing a business case for a proposed implementation of a third-party system should be A. Lack of ongoing maintenance costs. This is because ongoing maintenance costs are an essential part of the total cost of ownership (TCO) of a third-party system, and they can have a significant impact on the return on investment (ROI) and the feasibility of the project. If the business case does not include ongoing maintenance costs, it may underestimate the true cost of the project and overestimate the benefits. This could lead to poor decision making and unrealistic expectations.

Lack of training materials (B), lack of plan for pilot implementation ©, and lack of detailed work breakdown structure (D) are also potential issues that could affect the quality and success of the project, but they are not as critical as lack of ongoing maintenance costs. Training materials can be developed or acquired later, pilot implementation can be planned during the project initiation or planning phase, and work breakdown structure can be refined as the project progresses. However, ongoing maintenance costs are difficult to change or estimate once the project is approved and implemented, and they can have long-term implications for the organization. Therefore, they should be included and analyzed in the business case.

The main risk associated with adding a new system functionality during the development phase without following a project change management process is that the new functionality may not meet requirements (option B). This is because:

A project change management process is a set of procedures that defines how changes to the project scope, schedule, budget, quality, or resources are requested, evaluated, approved, implemented, and controlled12.

A project change management process helps to ensure that the changes are aligned with the project objectives, stakeholders’ expectations, and business needs12.

Adding a new system functionality during the development phase without following a project change management process can introduce risks such as:

The added functionality has not been documented (option A), which can lead to confusion, inconsistency, errors, and rework3.

The project may fail to meet the established deadline (option C), which can result in delays, penalties, and customer dissatisfaction3.

The project may go over budget (option D), which can cause cost overruns, financial losses, and reduced profitability3.

However, the main risk is that the new functionality may not meet requirements (option B), which can have serious consequences such as:

The new functionality may not be compatible with the existing system or other components3.

The new functionality may not be tested or verified for quality, performance, security, or usability3.

The new functionality may not deliver the expected value or benefits to the users or customers3.

The new functionality may not comply with the regulatory or contractual obligations3.

The new functionality may cause dissatisfaction, complaints, or litigation from the stakeholders3.

Therefore, the main risk associated with adding a new system functionality during the development phase without following a project change management process is that the new functionality may not meet requirements (option B), as this can jeopardize the success and acceptance of the project.

References: 1: How to Make a Change Management Plan (Templates Included) - ProjectManager 2: What Is Change Management? Process & Models Explained - ProjectManager 3: 8 Steps for an Effective Change Management Process - Smartsheet

Hashing is a technique that transforms data into a fixed-length value, called a hash or a digest, that uniquely represents the original data. Hashing can be used to validate the integrity of data communicated between production databases and a big data analytics system by comparing the hash values of the data before and after the communication. If the hash values match, the data has not been altered; if they differ, the data has been tampered with or corrupted. Hashing is a better security control than encrypting, running and comparing the count function, or hosting a digital certificate for this purpose because:

Encrypting in-scope data sets can protect the confidentiality of the data, but not necessarily the integrity. Encryption algorithms can be broken or bypassed by malicious actors, or encryption keys can be compromised or lost. Moreover, encryption adds overhead to the communication process and may affect the performance of the big data analytics system.

Running and comparing the count function within the in-scope data sets can only verify the number of records or elements in the data sets, but not the content or quality of the data. The count function cannot detect any changes or errors in the data values, such as missing, duplicated, corrupted, or manipulated data.

Hosting a digital certificate for in-scope data sets can provide authentication and non-repudiation for the data sources, but not integrity for the data itself. A digital certificate is a document that contains information about the identity and public key of an entity, such as a person, organization, or device. A digital certificate does not contain or verify the actual data that is communicated between production databases and a big data analytics system.

References:

Ensuring Data Integrity with Hash Codes

Database Security: An Essential Guide

Control methods of Database Security

According to the CISA - Certified Information Systems Auditor Study Guide1, the correct answer to your question is A. Encrypt the disk drive. This is because encryption is a logical security measure that can protect data even if the physical device is stolen or lost. Encryption makes thedata unreadable and inaccessible without the proper key or password. The other options are not as effective as encryption in this scenario. Two-factor authentication is a user authentication method that requires two pieces of evidence to verify the user’s identity, such as a password and a code sent to a phone. However, this does not prevent unauthorized access to the data if the laptop is already logged in or if the attacker can bypass the authentication. Enhancing physical security is a preventive measure that can reduce the risk of theft, but it does not guarantee that theft will not occur or that the data will be safe if it does. Requiring the use of cable locks is another preventive measure that can deter thieves, but it can also be easily cut or removed by a determined attacker.

In the event of a disaster where the data center is no longer available, the first step should be to activate the call tree1. A call tree is a layered hierarchical communication model used to notify specific individuals of an event and coordinate recovery efforts1. This ensures that all relevant parties are informed about the situation and can begin executing their parts of the disaster recovery plan1.

References:

IT Disaster Recovery Plan | Ready.gov

A risk and control framework is a set of principles, processes, and tools that guide an organization in identifying, assessing, managing, and monitoring the risks and controls that affect its objectives and performance. A risk and control framework helps an organization to align its risk appetite and tolerance with its strategy, culture, and values, and to ensure that its security controls are appropriate, effective, and efficient1.

Re-evaluating the organization’s risk and control framework is the best recommendation to management because it can help them to:

Review the current risk environment and the sources, causes, and impacts of potential threats and vulnerabilities.

Update the risk assessment and analysis methods and criteria, such as likelihood, impact, severity, and priority.

Reconsider the risk response and treatment options, such as avoidance, reduction, transfer, or acceptance.

Realign the security controls with the risk profile and the business needs and expectations.

Evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the security controls using key indicators and metrics.

Identify the gaps, weaknesses, or inefficiencies in the security controls and implement corrective or improvement actions.

Communicate and report the risk and control status and results to relevant stakeholders.

Re-evaluating the organization’s risk and control framework can help management to determine whether the current security controls are excessive or not, and to make informed and rational decisions on how to adjust them accordingly.