Isaca CISA Practice Test - Questions Answers, Page 7

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.

The strategy that would provide the greatest assurance of system quality at implementation is delivering only the core functionality on the initial target date. This strategy can help avoid compromising the quality of the system by focusing on the essential features that meet the user needs and expectations. Delivering only the core functionality can also help reduce the scope creep, complexity, and testing efforts of the system development project.

Implementing overtime pay and bonuses for all development staff, utilizing new system development tools to improve productivity, and recruiting IS staff to expedite system development are not strategies that would provide the greatest assurance of system quality at implementation. These strategies may help speed up the system development process, but they may also introduce new risks or challenges such as burnout, learning curve, integration issues, or communication gaps. These risks or challenges may adversely affect the quality of the system.

The first step when planning a penetration test is to obtain management consent for the testing. This is because a penetration test involves simulating a cyberattack against the organization's systems and networks, which may have legal, ethical, and operational implications. Without proper authorization from management, a penetration test may violate laws, policies, contracts, or service level agreements. Management consent also helps define the objectives, scope, and boundaries of the test, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the testers and the stakeholders. Obtaining management consent for the testing also demonstrates due care and due diligence on the part of the testers and the organization.

Executing nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), determining reporting requirements for vulnerabilities, and defining the testing scope are important steps when planning a penetration test, but they are not the first step. These steps should be done after obtaining management consent for the testing, as they depend on the approval and involvement of management and other parties.

The most important thing for the organization to ensure when reducing the actual retention period for media containing completed low-value transactions is that the retention period complies with data owner responsibilities. Data owners are accountable for the quality, security, and availability of the data under their control. They are also responsible for defining and enforcing data retention policies that comply with legal, regulatory, contractual, and business requirements. Data owners should be consulted and involved in any decision that affects the retention period of their data, as they are ultimately liable for any consequences of data loss or breach.

The policy includes a strong risk-based approach, the retention period allows for review during the year-end audit, and the total transaction amount has no impact on financial reporting are not the most important things for the organization to ensure when reducing the actual retention period for media containing completed low-value transactions. These are possible factors or benefits that may influence or justify the decision, but they do not override or replace the data owner responsibilities.

The most important consideration for a go-live decision when implementing an upgraded enterprise resource planning (ERP) system is the business case. The business case is the document that defines and justifies the need, value, feasibility, and risks of the project. It also outlines the expected costs, benefits, outcomes, and impacts of the project. The business case provides the basis for measuring and evaluating the success of the project. Therefore, before deciding to go live with an upgraded ERP system, it is essential to review and validate the business case to ensure that it is still relevant, accurate, realistic, and achievable.

A rollback strategy, test cases, and post-implementation review objectives are not the most important considerations for a go-live decision when implementing an upgraded ERP system. These are important elements of project planning, execution, and evaluation, but they are not sufficient to determine whether the project is worth pursuing or delivering. These elements should be aligned with and derived from the business case.

The most useful tool for determining whether the goals of IT are aligned with the organization's goals is a balanced scorecard. A balanced scorecard is a strategic management system that translates an organization's vision and mission into a set of objectives and measures across four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth. A balanced scorecard helps align IT goals with organizational goals by linking them to a common strategy map that shows how IT contributes to value creation and performance improvement in each perspective. A balanced scorecard also helps monitor and evaluate IT performance against predefined targets and indicators.

Enterprise dashboard, enterprise architecture (EA), and key performance indicators (KPIs) are not the most useful tools for determining whether the goals of IT are aligned with the organization's goals. These tools may help communicate, design, or measure IT goals or activities, but they do not provide a comprehensive framework for aligning IT goals with organizational goals across multiple dimensions.

The first step that an IS auditor should take when finding that a business impact analysis (BIA) has not been performed is to evaluate the impact on current disaster recovery capability. A BIA is a process that identifies and analyzes the potential effects of disruptions to critical business functions and processes. A BIA helps determine the recovery priorities, objectives, and strategies for the organization. Without a BIA, the disaster recovery plan may not be aligned with the business needs and expectations, and may not provide adequate protection and recovery for the most critical assets and activities. Therefore, an IS auditor should assess how the lack of a BIA affects the current disaster recovery capability and identify any gaps or risks that need to be addressed.

Performing a BIA, issuing an intermediate report to management, and conducting additional compliance testing are not the first steps that an IS auditor should take when finding that a BIA has not been performed. These steps may be done later in the audit process, after evaluating the impact on current disaster recovery capability. Performing a BIA is not the responsibility of the IS auditor, but of the business owners and managers. Issuing an intermediate report to management may be premature without sufficient evidence and analysis. Conducting additional compliance testing may not be relevant or necessary without a clear understanding of the disaster recovery requirements and objectives.

The most effective control for protecting the confidentiality and integrity of data stored unencrypted on virtual machines is to monitor access to stored images and snapshots of virtual machines. Images and snapshots are copies of virtual machines that can be used for backup, restoration, or cloning purposes. If data stored on virtual machines are unencrypted, they may be exposed or compromised if unauthorized or malicious users access or copy the images or snapshots. Therefore, monitoring access to stored images and snapshots can help detect and prevent any unauthorized or suspicious activities, and provide audit trails for accountability and investigation.

Restricting access to images and snapshots of virtual machines, limiting creation of virtual machine images and snapshots, and reviewing logical access controls on virtual machines regularly are not the most effective controls for protecting the confidentiality and integrity of data stored unencrypted on virtual machines. These controls may help reduce the risk or impact of data exposure or compromise, but they do not provide sufficient visibility or assurance of data protection. Restricting access to images and snapshots may not prevent authorized users from abusing their privileges or credentials. Limiting creation of virtual machine images and snapshots may not address the existing copies that may contain sensitive data. Reviewing logical access controls on virtual machines regularly may not reflect the actual access activities on images and snapshots.

The greatest concern for an IS auditor if there are flaws in the mapping of accounts between a front-end subledger and a main ledger is the inaccuracy of financial reporting. A subledger is a detailed record of transactions for a specific account, such as accounts receivable, accounts payable, inventory, or fixed assets. A main ledger is a summary record of all transactions for all accounts in an accounting system. The mapping of accounts between a subledger and a main ledger is the process of linking or reconciling the transactions in the subledger with the corresponding entries in the main ledger. If there are flaws in the mapping of accounts, such as missing, duplicated, or incorrect transactions, the main ledger may not reflect the true financial position and performance of the organization. This may lead to inaccurate financial reporting, which may affect decision making, compliance, auditing, taxation, and stakeholder confidence.

Double-posting of a single journal entry, inability to support new business transactions, and unauthorized alteration of account attributes are not the greatest concerns for an IS auditor if there are flaws in the mapping of accounts between a front-end subledger and a main ledger. These are possible consequences or causes of flaws in the mapping of accounts, but they do not have as significant an impact as inaccuracy of financial reporting. Double-posting of a single journal entry may result in errors or discrepancies in the main ledger balances. Inability to support new business transactions may indicate limitations or inefficiencies in the accounting system design or configuration. Unauthorized alteration of account attributes may suggest weaknesses or breaches in access control or segregation of duties.