Pass the Isaca Isaca Certification CISA Questions and answers with CertsForce

The answer A is correct because user activity monitoring is the most effective control to mitigate against the risk of inappropriate activity by employees. User activity monitoring (UAM) is the process of tracking and recording the actions and behaviors of users on devices, networks, or applications that belong to an organization. UAM can help to prevent, detect, and respond to insider threats, such as data theft, fraud, sabotage, or misuse of resources. UAM can also help to enforce policies, ensure compliance, and improve productivity and performance.

Some of the benefits of UAM are:

Prevention: UAM can deter employees from engaging in inappropriate activity by making them aware that their actions are monitored and recorded. UAM can also prevent unauthorized access or use of sensitive data or resources by implementing access controls, encryption, or alerts.

Detection: UAM can detect any anomalies, deviations, or violations in user activity by analyzing the data collected from various sources, such as logs, keystrokes, screenshots, or video recordings. UAM can also use artificial intelligence or machine learning to identify patterns, trends, or risks in user behavior.

Response: UAM can respond to any incidents or issues related to user activity by notifying the relevant stakeholders, such as managers, security teams, or auditors. UAM can also provide evidence or proof of user activity for investigation or remediation purposes.

Some examples of UAM tools are:

Teramind: Teramind is a cloud-based UAM platform that offers features such as user behavior analytics, risk scoring, policy enforcement, data loss prevention, and productivity optimization.

Digital Guardian: Digital Guardian is a data protection platform that offers UAM capabilities such as endpoint detection and response, data classification and tagging, and threat hunting and incident response.

XPLG: XPLG is a log management and analysis platform that offers UAM features such as log aggregation and correlation, user behavior profiling and anomaly detection, and real-time alerts and dashboards.

The other options are not as effective as option A. Two-factor authentication (option B) is a security mechanism that requires users to provide two pieces of evidence to verify their identity before accessing a system or resource. Two-factor authentication can enhance the security and privacy of user accounts, but it does not monitor or record the user activity after the authentication. Network segmentation (option C) is a technique that divides a network into smaller subnetworks based on criteria such as function, location, or security level. Network segmentation can improve the performance, security, and manageability of a network by reducing congestion, isolating threats, and enforcing policies. However, network segmentation does not track or record the user activity within each segment of the network. Access recertification (option D) is a process that verifies and validates the access rights of users to systems or resources periodically or on-demand. Access recertification can ensure that users have the appropriate level of access based on their roles and responsibilities, but it does not monitor or record the user activity with the access rights.

The auditor’s best action is to re-perform the audit before changing the conclusion, because the auditor needs to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence to support the audit opinion. The evidence provided by IT management may not be reliable or relevant, and it may not reflect the actual effectiveness of the control during the audit period. Therefore, the auditor should verify the evidence independently and test the control again to ensure that it meets the audit criteria and objectives. The other options are not appropriate, because they either ignore or accept the evidence provided by IT management without verification, which may compromise the quality and integrity of the audit. References:

ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, chapter 1, section 1.51

ISACA, IT Audit and Assurance Standards,Guidelines and Tools and Techniques for IS Audit and Assurance Professionals, section 12062

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

 The most significant risk associated with a new health records system that replaces a legacy system is data not being converted correctly, resulting in inaccurate patient records. Data conversion is the process of transferring data from one format or system to another. Data conversion is a critical step in implementing a new health records system, as it ensures that the patient data are consistent, complete, accurate, and accessible in the new system. Data not being converted correctly may cause errors, discrepancies, or losses in patient records, which may have serious implications for patient safety, quality of care, legal compliance, and privacy protection. Staff not being involved in the procurement process, creating user resistance to the new system; the deployment project experiencing significant overruns, exceeding budget projections; and the new system having capacity issues, leading to slow response times for users are also risks associated with a new health records system implementation, but they are not as significant as data not being converted correctly. References: [ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition], page 281.

The answer D is correct because the number of reopened tickets is the best indicator for measuring the performance of IT help desk function. Reopened tickets are tickets that have been marked as resolved by the help desk agents, but the customers are not satisfied with the resolution and reopen them for further assistance. Reopened tickets reflect the quality and effectiveness of the help deskservice, as well as the customer satisfaction level. A high number of reopened tickets indicates that the help desk agents are not resolving the issues properly, or that they are not communicating well with the customers. This can lead to customer frustration, dissatisfaction, and churn. Therefore, minimizing the number of reopened tickets is a key goal for any help desk function.

The other options are not as good as option D. Percentage of problems raised from incidents (option A) is a metric that shows how many incidents are escalated to problems, which are more complex and require root cause analysis and long-term solutions. This metric reflects the complexity and severity of the issues faced by the customers, but it does not directly measure the performance of the help desk function. Mean time to categorize tickets (option B) is a metric that shows how long it takes for the help desk agents to assign a category to each ticket, such as technical, billing, or feedback. This metric reflects the efficiency and accuracy of the help desk agents, but it does not measure the quality or effectiveness of the resolution. Number of incidents reported (option C) is a metric that shows how many issues are reported by the customers to the help desk function. This metric reflects the demand and workload of the help desk function, but it does not measure how well the issues are resolved or how satisfied the customers are.

The charging method for IS resources is the way that the IS function allocates its costs to the users or business units that consume its services. The charging method can affect the behavior and incentives of the users and the IS function, as well as the efficiency and effectiveness of the IS resources. Therefore, choosing an appropriate charging method is an important decision for the IS function and its stakeholders.

One of the possible charging methods is to charge specific costs that can be tied back to specific usage. This means that the IS function tracks and measures the actual consumption of each user or business unit for each IS service, and charges them accordingly. For example, if a user uses 10 GB of storage space, 5 hours of CPU time, and 100 MB of network bandwidth, the IS function will charge them based on the unit costs of these resources. This charging method has the advantage of encouraging the most efficient use of IS resources, as it provides clear and accurate feedback to the users about their consumption and costs, and motivates them to optimize their usage and avoid waste or overuse. This charging method also aligns the interests of the IS function and the users, as both parties benefit from reducing costs and improving efficiency.

The other possible charging methods are:

Total utilization to achieve full operating capacity: This means that the IS function charges a fixed amount to each user or business unit based on their proportion of the total operating capacity of the IS resources. For example, if a user or business unit has 10% of the total computing power allocated to them, they will pay 10% of the total IS costs. This charging method has the disadvantage of discouraging efficient use of IS resources, as it does not reflect the actual consumption or usage of each user or business unit, and does not provide any incentive to reduce costs or improve efficiency. This charging method also creates a mismatch between the interests of the IS function and the users, as the IS function benefits from increasing costs and capacity, while the users bear the burden of paying for them.

Residual income in excess of actual incurred costs: This means that the IS function charges a markup or profit margin on top of its actual incurred costs to each user or business unit.For example, if a user or business unit consumes $100 worth of IS resources, the IS function will charge them $120, where $20 is the residual income for the IS function. This charging method has the disadvantage of discouraging efficient use of IS resources, as it increases the costs for the users and reduces their value for money. This charging method also creates a conflict between the interests of the IS function and the users, as the IS function benefits from increasing costs and profits, while the users suffer from paying more than they should.

Allocations based on the ability to absorb charges: This means that the IS function charges different amounts to different users or business units based on their ability to pay or their profitability. For example, if a user or business unit is more profitable or has a higher budget than another user or business unit, they will pay more for the same amount of IS resources. This charging method has the disadvantage of discouraging efficient use of IS resources, as it does not reflect the actual consumption or usage of each user or business unit, and does not provide any incentive to reduce costs or improve efficiency. This charging method also creates an unfair and arbitrary distribution of costs among the users or business units, as some paymore than others for no valid reason. References: 1: Charging Methods for IT Services - IT Process Wiki 2: IT Chargeback Methods - CIO Wiki 3: IT Chargeback - Wikipedia

Automated monitoring tools increase the likelihood of detecting suspicious activity (Option A) by continuously analyzing security logs for anomalies.

ISACA CISA Reference: Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions are recommended for privileged access monitoring.

Zero Trustis based on the principle of " never trust, always verify, " makingidentity validationthe most critical aspect.

Option A (Incorrect):Firmware updatesare important for security but are onlyone partof aZero Trustapproach.

Option B (Correct):Device and user identity validationensures that onlyauthorizedentities can accesscritical resources, reducing the risk of unauthorized access.

Option C (Incorrect):User awarenessis important but does not enforce access control, which isfundamentalto Zero Trust.

Option D (Incorrect):Encryptionsecures data but does not controlwho can access resources, which is the primary focus of Zero Trust.

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

The correct answer is B. Ensuring vendor default accounts and passwords have been disabled.

When implementing a new cloud-based application, the first priority is to ensure the system is securely configured before it goes live. Vendor default accounts and default passwords are well-known security weaknesses because attackers often try default credentials first. For a cloud-based application, this risk is especially important because SaaS and cloud services are commonly exposed through the Internet, increasing the risk of credential-based attacks and account takeover. ISACA discusses SaaS account-takeover risk and notes that SaaS exposure to the Internet creates opportunities for credential-based attacks.

Option A is not the best answer because, in a cloud-based vendor application, the customer usually does not control the vendor’s source code. Option C is not first because maintenance agreement compliance is normally reviewed after service operation begins or during vendor management reviews. Option D is not relevant because escrow normally applies to source code or software ownership/continuity arrangements, and SaaS customers often do not hold or manage old program copies.

This question maps to Information Systems Acquisition, Development and Implementation because it concerns secure system implementation, vendor-provided systems, and readiness before production use. ISACA’s CISA Exam Content Outline includes system development/acquisition, implementation readiness, and implementation testing under Domain 3.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 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 help inform 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

A project deliverable is a tangible or intangible product or service that is produced as a result of a project and delivered to the customer or stakeholder. A project deliverable can be either an intermediate deliverable that is part of the project process or a final deliverable that is the outcome of the project.

An agile software development methodology is a project management approach that involves breaking the project into phases and emphasizes continuous collaboration and improvement. Teams follow a cycle of planning, executing, and evaluating. Agile software development methodologies value working software over comprehensive documentation and respond to change over following a plan.

Rapidly created working prototypes are most likely to be a project deliverable of an agile software development methodology because they:

Provide early and frequent feedback from customers and stakeholders on the functionality and usability of the software product

Allow for rapid validation and verification of the software requirements and design

Enable continuous improvement and adaptation of the software product based on changing customer needs and expectations

Reduce the risk of delivering a software product that does not meet customer needs or expectations

Increase customer satisfaction and trust by delivering working software products frequently and consistently

Some examples of agile software development methodologies that use rapidly created working prototypes as project deliverables are:

Scrum - a framework that organizes the work into fixed-length sprints (usually 2-4 weeks) and delivers potentially shippable increments of the software product at the end of each sprint1

Extreme Programming (XP) - a methodology that focuses on delivering high-quality software products through practices such as test-driven development, pair programming, continuous integration, and frequent releases2

Rapid Application Development (RAD) - a methodology that emphasizes rapid prototyping and user involvement throughout the software development process3

The other options are not likely to be project deliverables of an agile software development methodology.

Strictly managed software requirements baselines are not likely to be project deliverables of an agile software development methodology. A software requirements baseline is a set of agreed-upon and approved software requirements that serve as the basis for the software design, development, testing, and delivery. A strictly managed software requirements baseline is a software requirements baseline that is controlled and changed only through a formalchange management process. Strictly managed software requirements baselines are more suitable for traditional or waterfall software development methodologies that follow a linear and sequential process of defining, designing, developing, testing, and delivering software products. Strictly managed software requirements baselines are not compatible with agile software development methodologies that embrace change and flexibility in the software requirements based on customer feedback and evolving needs.

Extensive project documentation is not likely to be project deliverables of an agile software development methodology. Project documentation is any written or electronic information that describes or records the activities, processes, results, or decisions of a project. Extensive project documentation is project documentation that covers every aspect of the project in detail and requires significant time and effort to produce and maintain. Extensive project documentation is more suitable for traditional or waterfall software development methodologies that rely on comprehensive documentation to communicate and document the project scope, requirements, design, testing, and delivery. Extensive project documentation is not compatible with agile software development methodologies that value working software over comprehensive documentation and use minimal documentation to support the communication and collaboration among the project team members.

Automated software programming routines are not likely to be project deliverables of an agile software development methodology. Automated software programming routines are programs or scripts that perform repetitive or complex tasks in the software development process without human intervention. Automated software programming routines can improve the efficiency, quality, and consistency of the software development process by reducing human errors, saving time, and enforcing standards. Automated software programming routines can be used in any software development methodology, but they are not specific to agile software development methodologies. Automated software programming routines are not considered as project deliverables because they are not part of the final product that is delivered to the customer.

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

Evidence collection is the process of identifying, acquiring, preserving, and documenting digital evidence from various sources, such as computers, networks, mobile devices, or cloud services, that can be used to support the investigation and prosecution of cybercrimes. Evidence collection is an IS auditor’s primary focus when evaluating the response process for cybercrimes, because it determines the quality and validity of the evidence that can be used to prove or disprove the facts of the case, identify the perpetrators, and recover the losses. Evidence collection should follow the standards and best practices for digital forensics, such as ISO/IEC 270371, which provide guidelines for ensuring the integrity, authenticity, reliability, and admissibility of the evidence2.

The other possible options are:

A. Communication with law enforcement: This is the process of reporting, cooperating, and coordinating with law enforcement agencies that have the jurisdiction and authority to investigate and prosecute cybercrimes. Communication with law enforcement is an important aspect of the response process for cybercrimes, but it is not an IS auditor’s primary focus when evaluating it. Communication with law enforcement depends on the legal and regulatory requirements, the nature and severity of the incident, and the organizational policies and procedures. Communication with law enforcement should be done after evidence collection, to avoid compromising or contaminating the evidence3.

B. Notification to regulators: This is the process of informing and updating the relevant regulatory bodies or authorities that oversee or supervise the organization’s activities or industry sector about the cybercrime incident. Notification to regulators is an important aspect of the response process for cybercrimes, but it is not an IS auditor’s primary focus when evaluating it. Notification to regulators depends on the legal and regulatory requirements, the nature and impact of the incident, and the organizational policies and procedures. Notification to regulators should be doneafter evidence collection, to avoid disclosing sensitiveor confidential information4.

C. Root cause analysis: This is the process of identifying and analyzing the underlying factors or causes that led to or contributed to the cybercrime incident. Root cause analysis is an important aspect of the response process for cybercrimes, but it is not an IS auditor’s primary focus when evaluating it. Root cause analysis helps to prevent or mitigate future incidents, improve security controls and processes, and learn from mistakes. Root cause analysis should be done after evidence collection, to avoid interfering with or affecting theinvestigation5.

The best answer is D. Maturity model.

ISACA states that maturity models are becoming the common language used by organizations to understand the current state of their COBIT implementations and to support gap analysis and road maps for improvement. That is exactly what this question asks: measuring the current state of IT processes against leading practices.

Option A provides direction, but policies do not measure current state. Option B can provide comparison with peers, but benchmarking is not the primary mechanism for assessing process capability or maturity against good practice levels. Option C provides structure for controls, but a control framework alone does not inherently measure present maturity. A maturity model is the specific tool for assessing where the organization currently stands and how far it is from desired practice levels.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, Building a Maturity Model for COBIT 2019 Based on CMMI.

ISACA Journal, A Holistic Approach to Controls, Risk and Maturity.

ISACA, Effective Capability and Maturity Assessment Using COBIT 2019.

Problem management is the best way to enable the organization to resolve the issue of repeated failures of critical data processing services, as it focuses on identifying and eliminating the root causes of incidents and preventing their recurrence. Problem management involves analyzing incidents, performing root cause analysis, finding solutions, implementing changes and documenting lessons learned. Incident management is not the best way to resolve the issue, as it focuses on restoring normal service operation as quickly as possible after an incident occurs, but does not address the underlying causes or prevent future incidents. Service level management is not the best way to resolve the issue, as it focuses on defining, monitoring and reporting on the service levels agreed upon between service providers and customers, but does not address the causes or solutions of incidents. Change management is not the best way to resolve the issue, as it focuses on ensuring that changes are implemented in a controlled and coordinated manner, but does not address the identification or elimination of incidents. References:

[Problem Management Definition]

[Incident Management Definition]

[Service Level Management Definition]

[Change Management Definition]

 IT Service Management | ISACA

The first step in an incident response plan is typically preparation12. However, among the options provided, validating the incident would be the first step. This involves confirming that a security event is actually an incident3. It’s important to verify the event to avoid wasting resources on false positives.

 A digital signature is a cryptographic technique that verifies the authenticity and integrity of a message or document, by using a hash function and an asymmetric encryption algorithm. A hash function is a mathematical function that transforms any input data into a fixed-length output value called a digest, which is unique for each input. An asymmetric encryption algorithm uses two keys: a public key and a private key. The public key can be shared with anyone, while the private key must be kept secret by the owner. To create a digital signature, the sender first applies a hash function to the plaintext message to generate a digest. Then, the sender encrypts the digest with their private key to produce the digital signature. To verify the digital signature, the receiver decrypts the digital signature with the sender’s public key to obtain the digest. Then, the receiver applies the same hash function to the plaintext message to generate another digest. If the two digests match, it means that the message has not been altered and that it came from the sender. The security of a digital signature depends on the secrecy of the sender’s private key. If an attacker obtains the sender’s private key, they can create fake digital signatures for any message they want, thus compromising the control provided by the digital signature. Reversing the hash function using the digest is not possible, as hash functions are designed to be one-way functions that cannot be inverted. Altering the plaintext message will result in a different digest after applying the hash function, which will not match with the decrypted digest from the digital signature, thus invalidating the digital signature. Deciphering the receiver’s public key is not relevant, as public keys are meant to be publicly available and do not affect the security of digital signatures. 

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

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

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

The best approach for an IS auditor to evaluate whether the IT strategy supports the organization’s vision and mission is to meet with senior management to understand the business goals and how IT can enable them. This will help the IS auditor to assess the alignment and integration of IT with the business strategy and to identify any gaps or opportunities for improvement. Reviewing ROIs, KPIs, or feedback from other departments may provide some insights, but they are not sufficient to evaluate the IT strategy. References: IS Audit and Assurance Standards, section “Standard 1201: Engagement Planning”

The IS auditor’s best course of action is to evaluate the implemented control to ensure it mitigates the risk to an acceptable level. This is because the objective of a follow-up audit is to verify that corrective actions have been accomplished as scheduled and that theyare effective in preventing orminimizing future recurrence1. If senior management has implemented a different remediation action plan than what was previously agreed upon, the IS auditor should assess whether the alternative control is adequate and appropriate for the situation. Requesting justification from management for not implementing the recommended control (option D) may be a secondary step, but it is not the best course of action. Reporting the deviation by the control owner in the audit report (option A) may be premature and unnecessary if the implemented control is satisfactory. Canceling the follow-up audit and rescheduling for the next audit period (option C) is not advisable, as it would delay the verification of the effectiveness of the implemented control and potentially expose the organization to further risks. References: 1: Follow-up Audits - Canadian Audit and Accountability Foundation

Function point analysis (FPA) is the best methodology to use for estimating the complexity of developing a large business application. FPA is a technique that measures the functionality of a software system based on the user requirements and the business processes that the system supports. FPA assigns a numerical value to each function or feature of the system, based on its type, complexity, and relative size. The total number of function points represents the size and complexity of the system, which can be used to estimate the development effort, cost, and time.

FPA has several advantages over other estimation methods, such as:

It is independent of the technology, programming language, or development methodology used for the system. Therefore, it can be applied consistently across different platforms and environments.

It is based on the user perspective and the business value of the system, rather than the technical details or implementation aspects. Therefore, it can be performed early in the project life cycle, before the design or coding phases.

It is objective and standardized, as it follows a set of rules and guidelines defined by the International Function Point Users Group (IFPUG). Therefore, it can reduce ambiguity and improve accuracy and reliability of the estimates.

It is adaptable and scalable, as it can handle changes in the user requirements or the system scope. Therefore, it can support agile and iterative development approaches.

The missing access control requirements should present the greatest concern to the IS auditor when reviewing a contract for the outsourcing of IT facilities. Access control requirements are essential for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the outsourced IT resources and data. They specify the roles, responsibilities, and permissions of the outsourcing vendor and its staff, as well as the client and its users, in accessing and managing the IT facilities. They also define the security policies, standards, and procedures that the outsourcing vendor must follow to protect the IT facilities from unauthorized or malicious access, use, modification, or disclosure. Without clear and comprehensive access control requirements, the outsourcing contract may expose the client to significant risks of data breaches, compliance violations, service disruptions, or reputational damage.

Hardware configurations, help desk availability, and perimeter network security diagram are important aspects of an outsourcing contract, but they are not as critical as access control requirements. Hardware configurations describe the technical specifications and performance of the IT equipment that the outsourcing vendor will provide and maintain. Help desk availability defines the service levels and support channels that the outsourcing vendor will offer to the client and its users. Perimeter network security diagram illustrates the network architecture and security measures that the outsourcing vendor will implement to protect the IT facilities from external threats. These aspects can be verified or modified during the implementation or operation phases of the outsourcing contract, but access control requirements need to be established and agreed upon before signing the contract.

The most important thing for the IS auditor to determine in a post-implementation review of a recently purchased system is whether the user requirements were met. User requirements are the specifications and expectations of the users of the system, such as the features, functions, performance, quality, and security of the system. User requirements are usually defined and documented in the early stages of the system acquisition process, such as in the request for proposal (RFP) or the contract. User requirements are also used as the basis for testing and evaluating the system before and after implementation.

Determining whether the user requirements were met can help the IS auditor assess whether the system is fit for purpose and delivers value and benefits to the users and the organization. Determining whether the user requirements were met can also help the IS auditor identify any gaps, issues, or problems with the system that may affect its functionality, usability, or reliability. Determining whether the user requirements were met can also help the IS auditor provide feedback and recommendations for improvement or enhancement of the system.

Stakeholder expectations were identified is not the most important thing for the IS auditor to determine in a post-implementation review of a recently purchased system, but rather a prerequisite or input for it. Stakeholder expectations are the needs and wants of the various parties who have an interest or influence in the system, such as users, managers, customers, suppliers, regulators, or auditors. Stakeholder expectations are usually identified and analyzed in the initial stages of the system acquisition process, such as in the feasibility study or the business case. Stakeholder expectations are also used as inputs for defining and prioritizing the user requirements.

Vendor product offered a viable solution is not the most important thing for the IS auditor to determine in a post-implementation review of a recently purchased system, but rather an outcome or result of it. Vendor product is the system that is provided by an external supplier or service provider to meet the user requirements. Vendor product offered a viable solution means that the vendor product satisfied or exceeded the user requirements and delivered value and benefits to the users and organization. Vendor product offered a viable solution can be determined by comparing and evaluating the user requirements and the vendor product performance and quality.

Test scenarios reflected operating activities is not the most important thing for the IS auditor to determine in a post-implementation review of a recently purchased system, but rather a factor or criterion for it. Test scenarios are sets of conditions or situations that are used to test and verify whether the system meets the user requirements. Test scenarios reflected operating activities means that test scenarios simulated or replicated real-world scenarios that occur during normal operations of business processes or functions that use or depend on the system. Test scenarios reflected operating activities can help ensure that test results are valid, reliable, and relevant.

The correct answer is B. Inability to correlate security events in time.

The greatest risk is that storing logs only in native device formats can make centralized analysis and event correlation difficult. Different devices may use different log formats, field names, timestamp formats, event codes, and levels of detail. If logs cannot be normalized, parsed, and correlated, the organization may fail to identify patterns across systems, reconstruct incidents, or detect coordinated attacks.

ISACA explains that SIEM technology is used for real-time monitoring, correlation, and processing of security events, as well as historical analysis of log file information for investigations. ISACA also states that a SIEM solution consumes event logs from many source systems and provides a consolidated view of security activities, and that poor implementation or lack of a purpose-driven logging approach reduces the value of SIEM. ISACA’s CISA Exam Content Outline includes Operational Log Management under Domain 4 and Security Monitoring Tools and Techniques under Domain 5.

Option A is not the greatest risk because automation may still be possible even if logs are stored in native formats. Option C is not the best answer because storage cost is less significant than loss of detection, investigation, and incident-response capability. Option D is a concern for log integrity, but the question’s strongest clue is the decision to keep logs in native device formats, which most directly affects event normalization and correlation. Also, encryption mainly protects confidentiality; it does not by itself guarantee that logs cannot be modified.

Therefore, the greatest audit concern is that the organization may be unable to correlate security events accurately and timely across systems.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

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

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

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

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

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

Linking incidents to problem management activities would most effectively help to reduce the number of repeated incidents in an organization, because problem management aims to identify and eliminate the root causes of incidents and prevent their recurrence. Testing incident response plans, prioritizing incidents, and training incident management teams are all good practices, but they do not directly address the issue of repeated incidents. References: ISACA ITAF 3rd Edition Section 3600

 Ongoing monitoring of the audit activities is the most important activity to include as part of the quality assurance (QA) program requirements for an internal audit department. An IS auditor should perform regular reviews and evaluations of the audit processes, methods, standards, and outcomes to ensure that they comply with the QA program objectives and criteria. This will help to maintain and improve the quality and consistency of the audit services and deliverables. The other options are less important activities to include as part of the QA program requirements, as they may involve long-term resource planning, user satisfaction reports, or feedback from internal audit staff. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section2.61

CISA Review Questions, Answers and Explanations Database, Question ID 224

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

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

The best answer is B. It provides a timeline and schedule for deploying new releases into production.

ISACA release and change guidance explains that successful deployment requires scrutiny over change and release, including scheduling, coordination among parties, and validation before implementation. That aligns directly with the role of a release plan: organizing when and how releases move into production.

Option A is more closely related to configuration management. Option C is too narrow because release plans cover much more than database integration. Option D is more closely associated with change evaluation and impact assessment before approval. The release plan’s main function is the coordinated timeline and schedule for production rollout.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, Implementing Emerging Technologies

ISACA Journal, Speeding Up Software Delivery With Effective Change Management

An insider attack poses the greatest risk to an organization’s most sensitive data. An insider attack is a type of cyberattack that is carried out by someone who has legitimate access to the organization’s network, systems, or data, such as an employee, contractor, or business partner. An insider attack can be intentional or unintentional, malicious or negligent, and can have various motives, such as financial gain, revenge, espionage, sabotage, or curiosity.

An insider attack poses the greatest risk to an organization’s most sensitive data because:

An insider has a high level of trust and privilege within the organization, which allows them to bypass security controls and access confidential or restricted data without raising suspicion or detection.

An insider has a deep knowledge of the organization’s operations, processes, policies, and vulnerabilities, which enables them to exploit them effectively and cause maximum damage or disruption.

An insider can use various techniques and tools to conceal their identity and actions, such as encryption, steganography, deletion, or alteration of logs or evidence.

An insider can cause significant harm or loss to the organization in terms of data integrity, availability, confidentiality, reputation, compliance, and profitability.

According to the 2023 Cost of Insider Threats Global Report by Ponemon Institute and ObserveIT 1, the average annual cost of insider threats for organizations worldwide was $11.45 million in 2022, a 31% increase from 2018. The report also found that the average number of incidents per organization was 77 in 2022, a 47% increase from 2018. The report classified insider threats into three categories: careless or negligent employees or contractors, criminal or malicious insiders, and credential thieves. The report revealed that careless or negligent insiders were the most common and costly type of insider threat, accounting for 62% of all incidents and $4.58 million in costs.

The other options are not the greatest risk to an organization’s most sensitive data, although they can still pose significant threats.

A password attack is a type of cyberattack that attempts to guess or crack a user’s password to gain unauthorized access to their account or system. A password attack can use various methods, such as brute force, dictionary, rainbow table, phishing, keylogging, or social engineering. A password attack can compromise the security and privacy of the user’s data and information. However, a password attack can be prevented or mitigated by using strong and unique passwords, changing passwords frequently, enabling multi-factor authentication (MFA), and avoiding clicking on suspicious links or attachments.

An eavesdropping attack is a type of cyberattack that intercepts or monitors the communication between two parties without their knowledge or consent. An eavesdropping attack can use various techniques, such as wiretapping, packet sniffing, man-in-the-middle (MITM), or side-channel. An eavesdropping attack can expose the content and metadata of the communication, such as messages, files, voice calls, emails, etc. However, an eavesdropping attack can be prevented or mitigated by using encryption, authentication, digital signatures, VPNs (virtual private networks), or secure protocols.

A spear phishing attack is a type of phishing attack that targets a specific individual or group with personalized and convincing emails that appear to come from a trusted source. A spear phishing attack aims to trick the recipient into clicking on a malicious link or attachment that can infect their device with malware or steal their credentials or data. A spear phishing attack can compromise the security and privacy of the recipient’s data and information. However, a spear phishing attack can be prevented or mitigated by verifying the sender’s identity and email address, checking the email content for spelling and grammar errors, hovering over links before clicking on them (or not clicking at all), scanning attachments for viruses before opening them (or not opening at all), and reporting suspicious emails to IT security staff.

High employee turnover (A) poses the greatest risk because it leads to knowledge loss, operational disruptions, and potential security risks from departing employees. A constantly changing workforce can also impact compliance, training, and overall IT stability.

Other options:

Lack of customer satisfaction surveys (B) is a business issue but not a critical IT risk.

Aging staff (C) may be a long-term risk but does not have an immediate impact.

Frequent software upgrades (D) can be beneficial if managed correctly.

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

The most effective way for the audit team to leverage the risk management maturity of the organization is to integrate the risk register for audit planning purposes. The risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their likelihood, impact, and mitigation strategies for a project or an organization. By using the risk register, the audit team can align their audit objectives, scope, and procedures with the organization’s risk profile and priorities. This will help the audit team to provide more value-added and relevant assurance and recommendations to the management and stakeholders.

Some of the web sources that support this answer are:

Audit Maturity And Risk Management | Ideagen

Building a Mature Enterprise Risk Management Plan | AuditBoard

CISA CertifiedInformation Systems Auditor – Question0551

The correct answer is D. Create an interdisciplinary IT steering committee to oversee IT prioritization and spending.

The issue is not just poor documentation; it is weak IT governance. Projects are being managed informally and separately by isolated project managers. This indicates a lack of centralized prioritization, oversight, accountability, and alignment with business objectives. An interdisciplinary IT steering committee would help ensure that IT initiatives are reviewed, prioritized, funded, monitored, and aligned with enterprise strategy.

ISACA’s glossary defines an IT steering committee as an executive-management-level committee that assists in delivering IT strategy, oversees day-to-day management of IT service delivery and IT projects, and focuses on implementation aspects. This directly addresses the problem described in the question.

Option A is too extreme. Stopping all projects could harm the organization and is not a mature governance response unless there is an immediate critical risk. Option B is weak because a follow-up audit only checks later whether improvement occurred; it does not create governance now. Option C may improve documentation, but a project management tool alone does not establish governance, prioritization, or business accountability.

This question maps to Governance and Management of IT because the concern is IT governance maturity, project oversight, prioritization, and spending. ISACA’s CISA Exam Content Outline includes organizational structure, IT governance, IT strategy, IT resource management, and evaluation of IT project management alignment with organizational objectives.

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 important thing for an IS auditor to review when evaluating the accuracy of a spreadsheet that contains several macros is the formulas within macros. Macros are sequences of commands or instructions that can automate tasks or calculations in a spreadsheet. Formulas are expressions that perform calculations on values or data in a spreadsheet. The accuracy of a spreadsheet depends largely on whether the formulas within macros are correct, consistent, and complete. The IS auditor should review the formulas within macros to verify that they produce the expected results and do not contain any errors or inconsistencies. The other options are not as important as formulas within macros, as they do not directly affect the accuracy of a spreadsheet. Encryption of the spreadsheet is a security control that can protect the confidentiality and integrity of the spreadsheet, but it does not ensure its accuracy. Version history is a document control feature that can track and manage changes to the spreadsheet, but it does not verify its accuracy. Reconciliation of key calculations is a validation technique that can compare and confirm the results of calculations with other sources, but it does not evaluate the accuracy of formulas within macros. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

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

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

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

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

Therefore, option D is the correct answer.