CISA Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

The programmer having access to the production programs is the most likely control weakness that would have contributed to the unauthorized changes to the payroll system report. This is because theprogrammer could modify the production code without proper authorization, documentation, or testing, and bypass the change management process. This could result in errors, fraud, or data integrity issues in the payroll system. The programmer should only have access to the development or test environment, and the production programs should be under the control of a librarian or a change manager.

References

ISACA CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 254

4 Types of Internal Control Weaknesses

ACCT 4631 - Internal Auditing: CIA Quiz Topic 6 Flashcards

Consolidating mission-critical applications onto a single large server introduces a single point of failure. If the server experiences an outage, all hosted applications could be impacted simultaneously, leading to significant operational disruptions. While continuous monitoring costs, potential network bandwidth issues, and challenges in capacity forecasting are valid concerns, the risk of a single outage affecting multiple critical applications presents the most substantial threat to business continuity.

References:

ISACA CISA Review Manual, 28th Edition, Chapter 4: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience.

Comprehensive and Detailed Step-by-Step Explanation:

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

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

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

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

Advising Management (Incorrect – B)

The audit teamreviewsrather than advises management.

Designing Testing Procedures (Incorrect – C)

Management should design CSA procedures, not auditors.

De-Scoping Business Processes (Incorrect – D)

Internal auditshould notreduce audit scope due to CSAs.

References:

ISACA CISA Review Manual

COBIT 2019: Control Self-Assessment

Changing default passwords is a critical security measure for IoT devices. Many IoT devices come with default credentials that are widely known and easily exploitable by attackers. Ensuring that these default passwords are changed to strong, unique passwords significantly reduces the risk of unauthorized access. While logging, monitoring, firmware compliance, and network diagram reviews are important security practices, they are secondary to the fundamental step of securing device access through strong authentication.

References:

ISACA CISA Review Manual, 28th Edition, Chapter 5: Protection of Information Assets.

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The best solution for ensuring secure remote access to corporate resources is to use a virtual private network (VPN), as this creates an encrypted tunnel between the user’s device and the corporate network, preventing unauthorized interception or modification of data in transit. Additional firewallrules may help to restrict access to certain ports or protocols, but they do not provide encryption or authentication. Multi-factor authentication may help to verify the identity of the user, but it does not protect the data in transit. Virtual desktop may help to provide a consistent user interface and access to applications, but it does not ensure the security of thecommunication channel. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5:Protection of Information Assets, Section 5.2: Network Security Devices and Technologies

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

SQL injection attacks exploit vulnerabilities in web applications by inserting malicious SQL code into input fields, such as a search box. This can cause the server to execute unintended commands, often revealing restricted information.

Man-in-the-Middle (Option A):This intercepts communication but does not involve code injection.

Denial of Service (DoS) (Option B):This aims to disrupt service, not extract information.

Cross-Site Scripting (Option D):Involves injecting malicious scripts to execute in a user's browser but does not extract server-side data.

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

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

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

References:

Ensuring Data Integrity with Hash Codes

Message Integrity

The first step in addressing a vulnerability is to evaluate the associated risk, which involves assessing the likelihood and impact of a potential exploit. Based on the risk assessment, the appropriatemitigation strategy can be determined, such as implementing a new system, addingfirewalls, or decommissioning the server. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 280

 An external assessment of network vulnerability is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses and risks that affect the security and availability of a network froman outsider’s perspective. The most important factor to verify during this process is the completeness of network asset inventory, which is a list of all the devices, systems, and software that are connected to or part of the network. A complete and accurate network asset inventory can help identify the scope and boundaries of the network, the potential attack vectors and entry points, the critical assets and dependencies, and the existing security controls and gaps. Without a complete network asset inventory, an external assessment of network vulnerability may miss some important assets or vulnerabilities, leading to inaccurate or incomplete results and recommendations.

References:

1 explains what is an external vulnerability scan and why it is important to have a complete network asset inventory.

2 provides a guide on how to conduct a full network vulnerability assessment and emphasizes the importance of knowing the network assets.

3 compares internal and external vulnerability scanning and highlights the need for a comprehensive network asset inventory for both types.

 The best recommendation to reduce the risk of data leakage from employee use of social networking sites for business purposes is to provide education and guidelines to employees on use of social networking sites. Education and guidelines can help employees understand the benefits and risks of using social media for business purposes, such as enhancing brand awareness, engaging with customers, or sharing industry insights. They can also inform employees about the dos and don’ts of social media etiquette, such as respecting privacy, protecting intellectual property, avoiding conflicts of interest, or complying with legal obligations. Education and guidelines can also raise awareness of potential data leakage scenarios, such as phishing attacks, malicious links, fake profiles, or oversharing sensitive information, and provide tips on how to prevent or respond to them. 

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

References:

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

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

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

The best test to provide assurance that a health care organization is handling patient data appropriately is compliance with local laws and regulations, as these are the primary sources of authority and obligation for data protection and privacy. Compliance with action plans, industry standards, or organizational policies and procedures are also important, but they may not cover all the legal requirements or reflect the currentbest practices for handling patient data. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.3

 The primary reason for an IS auditor to conduct post-implementation reviews is to determine whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. A post-implementation review is an audit activity that evaluates whether a project has delivered its expected outcomes or benefits in accordance with its objectives, scope, budget, and schedule. A business case is a document that defines and justifies the need, value, and feasibility of a project. A post-implementation review can help assess whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved by comparing actual results with planned expectations and identifying any gaps or deviations. The other options are not primary reasons for conducting post-implementation reviews, as they do not measure whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. Ensuring key stakeholder sign-off has been obtained is a project closure activity that confirms that all project deliverables have been completed and accepted by key stakeholders, but it does not evaluate whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. Aligning project objectives with business needs is a project initiation activity that ensures that the project is aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and priorities, but it does not evaluate whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. Documenting lessons learned to improve future project delivery is a project learning activity that captures and shares the knowledge, experience, and feedback gained from the project, but it does not evaluate whether project objectives inthe business case have been achieved. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

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

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

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

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

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

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

Controls to minimize risk and maximize value for the IT portfolio should be the most important consideration when conducting a review of IT portfolio management, because they ensure that the IT portfolio aligns with the business strategy, objectives, and priorities, and that the IT investments deliver optimal benefits and outcomes. Assignment of responsibility for each project to an IT team member, adherence to best practice and industry approved methodologies, and frequency of meetings where the business discusses the IT portfolio are also relevant aspects of IT portfolio management, but they are not asimportant as controls to minimize risk and maximize value. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version),Chapter 1, Section 1.2.3

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

To ensure that a DRP is effective, it should betested regularly and thoroughly to identify and resolve any issues or gaps that might hinder itsexecution2345. Testing a DRP can help evaluate its feasibility, validity, reliability, and compatibility with the organization’s environment and needs4. Testing can also help prepare the staff, stakeholders, and vendors involved in the DRP for their roles and responsibilities during a disaster3.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

However, full interruption testing also has some drawbacks, such as being costly, time-consuming, risky, and disruptive to the normaloperations4. Therefore, it should be planned carefullyand conducted periodically with proper coordination and communication among all parties involved4.

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

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

 Coding standards provide field naming conventions, which are rules for naming variables, constants, functions, classes, and other elements in a program. Coding standards help to ensure consistency, readability, maintainability, and portability of code. Program documentation, access control tables, and data flow diagrams are not part of coding standards. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1

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

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

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

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

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

 User requirements are statements that describe what the users expect from the software system in terms of functionality, quality, and usability. They are essential inputs for the software development process, as they guide the design, implementation, testing, and deployment of the system. Therefore, an IS auditor’s greatest concern when reviewing the early stages of a software development project would be the lack of acceptance criteria behind user requirements. Acceptance criteria are measurable conditions that define when a user requirement is met or satisfied. They help ensure that the user requirements are clear, complete, consistent, testable, and verifiable. Without acceptance criteria, it would be difficult to evaluate whether the system meets the user expectations and delivers value to the organization. Technical documentation, such as program code, is usually produced in later stages of the software development process. Completion of all requirements at the end of each sprint is not mandatory in agile software development methods, as long as there is a prioritized backlog of requirements that can be delivered incrementally. A detailed unit and system test plan is also important for ensuring software quality, but it depends on well-defined user requirements andacceptance criteria. References: Information Systems Acquisition, Development & Implementation, CISA ReviewManual (Digital Version)

 Configuring each authentication server as belonging to a cluster of authentication servers is the best way to minimize performance degradation of servers used to authenticate users of an e-commerce website. A cluster is a group of servers that work together to provide high availability, load balancing, and fault tolerance. If one server fails or becomes overloaded, another server in the cluster can take over its workload without disrupting the service. A single server as a primary authentication server and a second server as a secondary authentication server is not as effective as a cluster, because the secondary server is only used when the primary server fails, which means it is idle most of the time and does not improve performance. Configuring each authentication server and ensuring that each disk of its RAID is attached to the primary controller does not address the issue of performance degradation, but rather the issue of data redundancy and reliability. RAID (redundant array of independent disks) is a technology that combines multiple disks into a logical unit that can tolerate disk failures and improve data access speed. Configuring each authentication server and ensuring that the disks of each server form part of a duplex does not address the issue of performance degradation, but rather the issue of data backup and recovery. A duplex is a pair of disks that store identical copies of data, so that if one disk fails, the other disk can be used to restore the data. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 310

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

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

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

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