Isaca CISA Practice Test - Questions Answers, Page 114

To detect unauthorized disclosure of confidential documents sent over corporate email, monitoring all emails based on pre-defined criteria is the best approach. This involves setting up automated monitoring systems that analyze email content, attachments, and metadata to identify any potential unauthorized disclosures. By defining specific criteria (such as keywords related to confidential information), organizations can proactively detect and prevent leaks. Requiring encryption before sending documents (option A) is important but does not address monitoring for unauthorized disclosures. Firewalls (option B) protect the network but do not specifically focus on email content.Reporting outgoing emails marked as confidential (option C) relies on user self-reporting and may not catch all incidents12.Reference:1(https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/past-issues/2010/data-governance-for-privacy-confidentiality-and-compliance-a-holistic-approach)2(https://www.isaca.org/resources/news-and-trends/newsletters/atisaca/2020/volume-6/best-practices-for-privacy-audits)

When an IS auditor discovers a security weakness in the database configuration, the next course of action should be to identify existing mitigating controls. This involves assessing whether any controls are already in place to address the weakness and mitigate the risk.Understanding the current state of controls helps the auditor determine the severity of the issue and whether additional corrective actions are necessary1.Reference:1(https://www.isaca.org/resources/insights-and-expertise/audit-programs-and-tools)

When operational management informs the IS auditor that recent organizational changes have addressed previously identified risks and implementing the action plan is no longer necessary, the IS auditor should accept management's assertion and report that the risks have been addressed. However, it is essential to document this communication and ensure that there is evidence supporting management's claim. If there are any doubts or concerns, further investigation may be necessary.The auditor should not assume new risks without proper assessment or evidence1.Reference:1(https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2016/volume-6/enhancing-the-audit-follow-up-process-using-cobit-5)

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

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

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

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

Five Common Spreadsheet Risks and Ways to Control Them2

GREATEST Concerns When Reviewing Data Inputs from Spreadsheets3

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

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

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

Disaster Recovery Audit Work Program2

IT governance should be driven by organizational strategies.It provides a formal structure for organizations to produce measurable results toward achieving their strategies and ensures that IT investments support business objectives12. While business unit initiatives, balanced scorecards, and policies and standards can play a role in IT governance, they are tools or methods that support the implementation of the organizational strategies.

Conducting periodic testing and incorporating lessons learned is the best way to improve the effectiveness of an incident response team. This allows the team to practice their response procedures, identify any gaps or weaknesses in their response, and learn from their mistakes. It also helps to keep the team's skills sharp and up-to-date.The lessons learned from these tests can then be used to improve the team's procedures and performance12. While understanding information systems technology, disseminating incident response procedures, and publishing KPI metrics can contribute to the effectiveness of the team, they do not provide the same level of continuous improvement as periodic testing and learning from experience.

Assessing and tracking all compliance audit findings is the best way to support the effectiveness of a compliance program.This allows an organization to identify areas of non-compliance, take corrective action, and monitor improvements over time12. While implementing an awareness plan, using a governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) tool, and monitoring applicable regulations can contribute to a compliance program, they do not provide the same level of continuous improvement and effectiveness as assessing and tracking audit findings.