Isaca CISA Practice Test - Questions Answers, Page 40

The best recommendation by the IS auditor for finding that application servers had inconsistent security settings leading to potential vulnerabilities is to perform a configuration review. A configuration review is an audit procedure that involves examining and verifying the security settings and parameters of application servers against predefined standards or best practices.A configuration review can help to identify and remediate any deviations, inconsistencies, or misconfigurations that may expose the application servers to unauthorized access, exploitation, or compromise6. A configuration review can also help to ensure compliance with security policies and regulations, as well as enhance the performance and availability of application servers. The other options are less effective or incorrect because:

A . Improving the change management process is not the best recommendation by the IS auditor for finding that application servers had inconsistent security settings leading to potential vulnerabilities, as it does not address the root cause of the problem or provide a specific solution. While improving the change management process may help to prevent future inconsistencies or misconfigurations in application server settings, it does not ensure that the existing ones are detected and corrected.

B . Establishing security metrics is not the best recommendation by the IS auditor for finding that application servers had inconsistent security settings leading to potential vulnerabilities, as it does not address the root cause of the problem or provide a specific solution. While establishing security metrics may help to measure and monitor the security performance and posture of application servers, it does not ensure that the existing inconsistencies or misconfigurations in application server settings are detected and corrected.

C . Performing a penetration test is not the best recommendation by the IS auditor for finding that application servers had inconsistent security settings leading to potential vulnerabilities, as it does not address the root cause of the problem or provide a specific solution. While performing a penetration test may help to simulate and evaluate the impact of an attack on application servers, it does not ensure that the existing inconsistencies or misconfigurations in application server settings are detected and corrected.Reference:Configuring system to use application server security - IBM,Application Security Risk: Assessment and Modeling - ISACA,Five Key Components of an Application Security Program - ISACA,ISACA Practitioner Guidelines for Auditors - SSH,SCADA Cybersecurity Framework - ISACA

A network vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses and exposures in a network that could be exploited by attackers to compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the network or its resources. A network vulnerability assessment typically involves scanning the network devices, such as routers, switches, firewalls, servers, and workstations, using automated tools that compare the device configurations, software versions, and patch levels against a database of known vulnerabilities. A network vulnerability assessment can also include manual testing and verification of the network architecture, design, policies, and procedures.One of the main objectives of a network vulnerability assessment is to detect and report any misconfiguration and missing updates in the network devices that could pose a security risk1. Misconfiguration refers to any deviation from the recommended or best practice settings for the network devices, such as weak passwords, open ports, unnecessary services, default accounts, or incorrect permissions.Missing updates refer to any outdated or unsupported software or firmware that has not been patched with the latest security fixes or enhancements from the vendors2.Misconfiguration and missing updates are common sources of network vulnerabilities that can be exploited by attackers to gain unauthorized access, execute malicious code, cause denial of service, or escalate privileges on the network devices3. Therefore, an IS auditor should expect to see misconfiguration and missing updates in a network vulnerability assessment. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:

B . Malicious software and spyware are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are more related to the content and behavior of the network traffic rather than the configuration and patch level of the network devices. Malicious software and spyware are programs that infect or monitor the network devices or their users for malicious purposes, such as stealing data, displaying ads, or performing remote commands.Malicious software and spyware can be detected by other security tools, such as antivirus software, firewalls, or intrusion detection systems4.

C . Zero-day vulnerabilities are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are unknown or undisclosed vulnerabilities that have not been reported or patched by the vendors or the security community. Zero-day vulnerabilities are rare and difficult to discover, as they require advanced techniques and skills to exploit them.Zero-day vulnerabilities can be detected by other security tools, such as intrusion prevention systems, anomaly detection systems, or artificial intelligence systems5.

Security design flaws are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are more related to the logic and functionality of the network rather than the configuration and patch level of the network devices. Security design flaws are errors or weaknesses in the network architecture, design, policies, or procedures that could compromise the security objectives of the network.Security design flaws can be detected by other security methods, such as security reviews, audits, or assessments6.Reference:Network Vulnerability Assessment - ISACA,Network Vulnerability Scanning - NIST,Network Vulnerabilities - SANS,Malware - ISACA,Zero-Day Attacks - ISACA,Security Design Principles - NIST

The primary objective of an IS auditor when reviewing the installation of a new server is to ensure that security parameters are set in accordance with the organization's policies.Security parameters are settings or options that control the security level and behavior of the server, such as authentication methods, encryption algorithms, access rights, audit logs, firewall rules, or password policies7. The organization's policies are documents that define the security goals, requirements, standards, and guidelines for the organization's information systems. An IS auditor should verify that security parameters are set in accordance with the organization's policies to ensure that the new server complies with the organization's security expectations and regulations. The other options are less important or incorrect because:

A . Security parameters should not be set in accordance with the manufacturer's standards alone, as they may not reflect the organization's specific security needs and environment. The manufacturer's standards are general recommendations or best practices for configuring the server's security parameters based on common scenarios and threats. An IS auditor should compare the manufacturer's standards with the organization's policies and identify any gaps or conflicts that need to be resolved.

B . A detailed business case should have been formally approved prior to the purchase of a new server rather than during its installation. A business case is a document that justifies the need for a new server based on its expected benefits, costs, risks, and alternatives. A business case should be approved by senior management before initiating a project to acquire a new server.

D . The procurement project should have invited tenders from at least three different suppliers before purchasing a new server rather than during its installation. A tender is a formal offer or proposal to provide a product or service at a specified price and quality. Inviting tenders from multiple suppliers helps to ensure a fair and competitive procurement process that can result in the best value for money and quality for the organization.Reference:Server Security - ISACA, [Information Security Policy - ISACA], [Server Hardening - ISACA], [Business Case - ISACA], [Tender - ISACA], [Procurement Management - ISACA]

The primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates is that it establishes accountability for the action plans. Accountability means that the individuals or groups who are responsible for implementing the action plans are clearly identified and held liable for their completion within the specified time frame.Accountability also implies that the action plans are monitored and evaluated to ensure that they are effective and efficient in addressing the audit findings and mitigating the associated risks1.Accountability helps to ensure that the audit recommendations are taken seriously and implemented properly, and that the audit value is realized by the organization2. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:

A . It facilitates easier audit follow-up is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of a secondary or indirect benefit.Audit follow-up is the process of verifying whether the action plans have been implemented and whether they have resolved the audit findings3. While having clear action plans, owners, and target dates may facilitate easier audit follow-up by providing a basis for tracking and reporting the progress and status of the action plans, it does not necessarily guarantee that the action plans will be implemented or effective.

B . It enforces action plan consensus between auditors and auditees is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of a prerequisite or condition for such an approach.Action plan consensus means that the auditors and auditees agree on the audit findings and recommendations, and on the action plans to address them4. While having action plan consensus may enhance the credibility and acceptance of the audit approach, it does not necessarily ensure that the action plans will be implemented or effective.

D . It helps to ensure factual accuracy of findings is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of an outcome or result of such an approach.Factual accuracy of findings means that the audit findings are based on sufficient, reliable, relevant, and useful evidence5. While having factual accuracy of findings may increase the confidence and trust in the audit approach, it does not necessarily ensure that the action plans will be implemented or effective.Reference:Accountability - ISACA,Audit Value - ISACA,Audit Follow-up - ISACA,Action Plan Consensus - ISACA,Factual Accuracy of Findings - ISACA

The associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a data loss prevention (DLP) audit is increased vulnerability due to anytime, anywhere accessibility.Mobile computing refers to the use of portable devices, such as laptops, tablets, smartphones, or wearable devices, that can access data and applications over wireless networks from any location6. Mobile computing enables greater flexibility, productivity, and convenience for users, but also poses significant security challenges for organizations. One of these challenges is increased vulnerability due to anytime, anywhere accessibility.This means that mobile devices are exposed to a higher risk of loss, theft, damage, or unauthorized access than stationary devices7.If mobile devices contain or access sensitive data without proper protection, such as encryption or authentication, they could result in data leakage or breach in case of compromise8. Therefore, an IS auditor should identify this risk as part of a DLP audit. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:

A . The use of cloud negatively impacting IT availability is not an associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a DLP audit, as it is more related to cloud computing than mobile computing. Cloud computing refers to the delivery of computing services, such as data storage or processing, over the Internet from remote servers. Cloud computing may enable or support mobile computing by providing access to data and applications from any device or location, but it does not necessarily imply mobile computing. The use of cloud may negatively impact IT availability if there are disruptions or outages in the cloud service provider's network or infrastructure, but this is not a direct consequence of mobile computing.

B . Increased need for user awareness training is not an associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a DLP audit, as it is more of a control or mitigation measure than a risk. User awareness training refers to educating users about security policies, procedures, and best practices for using mobile devices and protecting data. User awareness training may help to reduce the risk of data loss or breach due to mobile computing by increasing user knowledge and responsibility, but it does not eliminate or prevent the risk.

D . Lack of governance and oversight for IT infrastructure and applications is not an associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a DLP audit, as it is more of a general or organizational risk than a specific or technical risk. Governance and oversight refer to the establishment and implementation of policies, standards, and procedures for managing IT resources and aligning them with business objectives. Lack of governance and oversight for IT infrastructure and applications may affect the security and performance of mobile devices and data, but it is not a direct or inherent result of mobile computing.Reference:Mobile Computing - ISACA,Mobile Computing Device Threats, Vulnerabilities and Risk Factors Are Ubiquitous - ISACA,Data Loss Prevention---Next Steps - ISACA, [Cloud Computing - ISACA], [Cloud Computing Risk Assessment - ISACA], [User Awareness Training - ISACA], [Governance and Oversight - ISACA]

An appropriate role of internal audit in helping to establish an organization's privacy program is analyzing risks posed by new regulations. A privacy program is a set of policies, procedures, and controls that aim to protect the personal data of individuals from unauthorized or unlawful collection, use, disclosure, or disposal. A privacy program should comply with the applicable laws and regulations that govern the privacy rights and obligations of individuals and organizations, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). New regulations may introduce new requirements or changes that affect the organization's privacy program and expose it to potential compliance risks or penalties.Therefore, internal audit can help to establish an organization's privacy program by analyzing the risks posed by new regulations and providing assurance, advice, or recommendations on how to address them1. The other options are less appropriate or incorrect because:

B . Developing procedures to monitor the use of personal data is not an appropriate role of internal audit in helping to establish an organization's privacy program, as it is more of a management or operational role. Internal audit should not be involved in designing or implementing the organization's privacy program, as it would compromise its independence and objectivity.Internal audit should provide assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization's privacy program, but not create or execute it2.

C . Defining roles within the organization related to privacy is not an appropriate role of internal audit in helping to establish an organization's privacy program, as it is more of a governance or strategic role. Internal audit should not be involved in setting or approving the organization's privacy strategy, objectives, or policies, as it would compromise its independence and objectivity.Internal audit should provide assurance on the alignment and compliance of the organization's privacy program with its strategy, objectives, and policies, but not define or approve them2.

D . Designing controls to protect personal data is not an appropriate role of internal audit in helping to establish an organization's privacy program, as it is more of a management or operational role. Internal audit should not be involved in designing or implementing the organization's privacy program, as it would compromise its independence and objectivity.Internal audit should provide assurance on the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization's privacy program, but not design or implement it2.Reference:ISACA Introduces New Audit Programs for Business Continuity/Disaster ...,Best Practices for Privacy Audits - ISACA,ISACA Produces New Audit and Assurance Programs for Data Privacy and ...

The greatest concern for an IS auditor reviewing an organization's business continuity plan (BCP) is that the BCP has not been tested since it was first issued. A BCP is a document that describes how an organization will continue its critical business functions in the event of a disruption or disaster.A BCP should include information such as roles and responsibilities, recovery strategies, resources, procedures, communication plans, and backup arrangements3. Testing the BCP is a vital step in ensuring its validity, effectiveness, and readiness. Testing the BCP involves simulating various scenarios and executing the BCP to verify whether it meets its objectives and requirements.Testing the BCP can also help to identify and correct any gaps, errors, or weaknesses in the BCP before they become issues during a real incident4. Therefore, an IS auditor should be concerned if the BCP has not been tested since it was first issued, as it may indicate that the BCP is outdated, inaccurate, incomplete, or ineffective. The other options are less concerning or incorrect because:

A . The BCP's contact information needs to be updated is not a great concern for an IS auditor reviewing an organization's BCP, as it is a minor issue that can be easily fixed. Contact information refers to the names, phone numbers, email addresses, or other details of the people involved in the BCP execution or communication. Contact information needs to be updated regularly to reflect any changes in personnel or roles. While having outdated contact information may cause some delays or confusion during a BCP activation, it does not affect the overall validity or effectiveness of the BCP.

B . The BCP is not version controlled is not a great concern for an IS auditor reviewing an organization's BCP, as it is a moderate issue that can be improved. Version control refers to the process of tracking and managing changes made to the BCP over time. Version control helps to ensure that only authorized changes are made to the BCP and that there is a clear record of who made what changes when and why. Version control also helps to avoid conflicts or inconsistencies among different versions of the BCP. While having no version control may cause some difficulties or risks in maintaining and updating the BCP, it does not affect the overall validity or effectiveness of the BCP.

C . The BCP has not been approved by senior management is not a great concern for an IS auditor reviewing an organization's BCP, as it is a high-level issue that can be resolved. Approval by senior management refers to the formal endorsement and support of the BCP by the top executives or leaders of the organization. Approval by senior management helps to ensure that the BCP is aligned with the organization's strategy, objectives, and priorities, and that it has sufficient resources and authority to be implemented. Approval by senior management also helps to increase the awareness and commitment of the organization's stakeholders to the BCP. While having no approval by senior management may affect the credibility and acceptance of the BCP, it does not affect the overall validity or effectiveness of the BCP.Reference:Working Toward a Managed, Mature Business Continuity Plan - ISACA,ISACA Introduces New Audit Programs for Business Continuity/Disaster ...,Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity Preparedness for Cloud-based ...

The greatest concern for an IS auditor when a post-implementation review was conducted by issuing a survey to users is that the survey questions did not address the scope of the business case. A post-implementation review is a process of evaluating the outcomes and benefits of a project after it has been completed and implemented.A post-implementation review can help to assess whether the project met its objectives, delivered its expected value, and satisfied its stakeholders1. A survey is a method of collecting feedback and opinions from users or other stakeholders about their experience and satisfaction with the project.A survey can help to measure the user acceptance, usability, and functionality of the project deliverables2. A business case is a document that justifies the need for a project based on its expected benefits, costs, risks, and alternatives.A business case defines the scope, objectives, and requirements of the project and provides a basis for its approval and initiation3. Therefore, an IS auditor should be concerned if the survey questions did not address the scope of the business case, as it may indicate that the post-implementation review was not comprehensive, relevant, or aligned with the project goals. The other options are less concerning or incorrect because:

A . The survey results were not presented in detail to management is not a great concern for an IS auditor when a post-implementation review was conducted by issuing a survey to users, as it is more of a communication or reporting issue than an audit issue. While presenting the survey results in detail to management may help to inform them about the project performance and outcomes, it does not affect the validity or quality of the post-implementation review itself.

C . The survey form template did not allow additional feedback to be provided is not a great concern for an IS auditor when a post-implementation review was conducted by issuing a survey to users, as it is more of a design or format issue than an audit issue. While allowing additional feedback to be provided may help to capture more insights or suggestions from users, it does not affect the validity or quality of the post-implementation review itself.

D . The survey was issued to employees a month after implementation is not a great concern for an IS auditor when a post-implementation review was conducted by issuing a survey to users, as it is more of a timing or scheduling issue than an audit issue. While issuing the survey to employees sooner after implementation may help to collect more accurate and timely feedback from users, it does not affect the validity or quality of the post-implementation review itself.Reference:Post Implementation Review - ISACA,Survey - ISACA,Business Case - ISACA

The best reason to implement a data retention policy is to limit the liability associated with storing and protecting information. A data retention policy is a document that defines how long data should be kept by an organization and how they should be disposed of when they are no longer needed.A data retention policy should comply with the applicable laws and regulations that govern the data retention requirements and obligations of organizations, such as tax laws, privacy laws, or industry standards4.Implementing a data retention policy can help to limit the liability associated with storing and protecting information by reducing the amount of data that need to be stored and secured, minimizing the risk of data breaches or leaks, ensuring compliance with legal or contractual obligations, and avoiding potential fines or penalties for non-compliance5. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:

B . Documenting business objectives for processing data within the organization is not a reason to implement a data retention policy, as it is more related to data governance than data retention. Data governance refers to the policies, procedures, and controls that define how data are collected, used, managed, and shared within an organization.Data governance helps to ensure that data are aligned with business objectives and support decision making6.

C . Assigning responsibility and ownership for data protection outside IT is not a reason to implement a data retention policy, as it is more related to data accountability than data retention. Data accountability refers to the identification and assignment of roles and responsibilities for data protection among different stakeholders within an organization.Data accountability helps to ensure that data are handled appropriately and securely by authorized parties7.

D . Establishing a recovery point objective (RPO) for disaster recovery procedures is not a reason to implement a data retention policy, as it is more related to data backup than data retention. Data backup refers to the process of creating copies of data that can be restored in case of data loss or corruption.Data backup helps to ensure that data are available and recoverable in case of disaster8.RPO is a measure of the maximum amount of data that can be lost or acceptable in case of disaster9.Reference:Data Retention Policy - ISACA,Data Retention - ISACA,Data Governance - ISACA,Data Accountability - ISACA,Data Backup - ISACA,Recovery Point Objective - ISACA