CCAK Exam Dumps - Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge

 According to the ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, the final decision to include a material finding in a cloud audit report should be made by the cloud auditor1. A material finding is a significant error or risk in the cloud service that could affect the achievement of the audit objectives or the cloud customer’s business outcomes. The cloud auditor is responsible for identifying, evaluating, and reporting the material findings based on the audit criteria, methodology, and evidence. The cloud auditor should also communicate the material findings to the auditee and other relevant stakeholders, and obtain their feedback and responses.

The other options are not correct. Option A is incorrect, as the auditee’s senior management is not in charge of the audit report, but rather the subject of the audit. The auditee’s senior management should provide their perspective and action plans for the material findings, but they cannot decide whether to include or exclude them from the report. Option B is incorrect, as the organization’s CEO is not involved in the audit process, but rather the ultimate recipient of the audit report. The organization’s CEO should review and act upon the audit report, but they cannot influence the content of the report. Option D is incorrect, as the organization’s CISO is not an independent party, but rather a stakeholder of the audit. The organization’s CISO should support and collaborate with the cloud auditor, but they cannot make the final decision on the material findings. References:

ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, page 19-20.

Risk reduction is a risk treatment approach where controls are implemented to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk event. In this scenario, while the SaaS is still in use, the organization has chosen to limit exposure by avoiding the processing of secret customer data, thus reducing the risk of unauthorized disclosure. This aligns with ISACA’s guidance in CCAK, which emphasizes limiting risk exposure by controlling data handling and processing policies, a practice that is documented in CSA’s Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) guidelines for data protection and data minimization (CSA CCM Domain DSI-05, Data Security and Information Lifecycle Management).

=========================

SLAs in cloud computing define performance metrics and uptime commitments, making them crucial for monitoring and measuring service delivery against predefined benchmarks. Metrics from SLAs help in tracking service performance, compliance with contractual obligations, and cloud service provider accountability. ISACA’s CCAK outlines the importance of SLAs for cloud governance and risk management, as they provide a measurable baseline that informs cloud audit activities (referenced in CCM under Governance, Risk, and Compliance - GOV-05).

=========================

 An example of availability technical impact is a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack that renders the customer’s cloud inaccessible for 24 hours. Availability technical impact refers to the effect of a cloud security incident on the protection of data and services from disruption or denial. Availability is one of the three security properties of an information system, along with confidentiality and integrity.

Option A is an example of availability technical impact because it shows how a DDoS attack, which is a type of cyberattack that overwhelms a system or network with malicious traffic and prevents legitimate users from accessing it, can cause a severe and prolonged disruption of the customer’s cloud services. Option A also implies that the customer’s organization depends on the availability of its cloud services for its core business operations.

The other options are not examples of availability technical impact. Option B is an example of confidentiality technical impact, which refers to the effect of a cloud security incident on the protection of data from unauthorized access or disclosure. Option B shows how a breach of customer personal data from an unsecured server, which is a type of data leakage or exposure attack that exploits the lack of proper security controls on a system or network, can cause a violation of the privacy and security of the customer’s data. Option C is an example of integrity technical impact, which refers to the effect of a cloud security incident on the protection of data from unauthorized modification or deletion. Option C shows how an administrator inadvertently clicking on phish bait, which is a type of social engineering or phishing attack that tricks a user into clicking on a malicious link or attachment, can expose the company to a ransomware attack, which is a type of malware or encryption attack that locks or encrypts the data and demands a ransom for its release. Option D is also an example of integrity technical impact, as it shows how a hacker using a stolen administrator identity, which is a type of identity theft or impersonation attack that exploits the credentials or privileges of a legitimate user to access or manipulate a system or network, can alter the discount percentage in the product database, which is a type of data tampering or corruption attack that affects the accuracy and reliability of the data. References :=

OWASP Risk Rating Methodology | OWASP Foundation1

OEE Factors: Availability, Performance, and Quality | OEE2

The Effects of Technological Developments on Work and Their …

According to the definition of regression testing, it is a type of software testing that confirms that a recent program or code change has not adversely affected existing features1 It involves re-running functional and non-functional tests to ensure that previously developed and tested software still performs as expected after a change2 If the software does not perform as expected, it is called a regression. Therefore, the most important goal of regression testing is to ensure new releases do not impact previous stable features.

The other options are not correct because:

Option A is not correct because the expected outputs are provided by the new features is not the goal of regression testing, but rather the goal of functional testing or acceptance testing. These types of testing aim to verify that the software meets the specified requirements and satisfies the user needs. Regression testing, on the other hand, focuses on checking that the existing features are not broken by the new features3

Option B is not correct because the system can handle a high number of users is not the goal of regression testing, but rather the goal of performance testing or load testing. These types of testing aim to evaluate the behavior and responsiveness of the software under various workloads and conditions. Regression testing, on the other hand, focuses on checking that the software functionality and quality are not degraded by code changes4

Option C is not correct because the system can be restored after a technical issue is not the goal of regression testing, but rather the goal of recovery testing or disaster recovery testing. These types of testing aim to assess the ability of the software to recover from failures or disasters and resume normal operations. Regression testing, on the other hand, focuses on checking that the software does not introduce new failures or defects due to code changes5

References: 1: Wikipedia. Regression testing - Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: 3. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 2: Katalon. What is Regression Testing? Definition, Tools, Examples - Katalon. [Online]. Available: 4. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 3: Guru99. What is Functional Testing? Types & Examples - Guru99. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 4: Guru99. What is Performance Testing? Types & Examples - Guru99. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 5: Guru99. What is Recovery Testing? with Example - Guru99. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023].

 An example of financial business impact is a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack that renders the customer’s cloud inaccessible for 24 hours, resulting in millions in lost sales. Financial business impact refers to the monetary losses or gains that an organization may experience as a result of a cloud security incident. Financial business impact can be measured by factors such as revenue, profit, cost, cash flow, market share, and stock price .

Option A is an example of financial business impact because it shows how a DDoS attack, which is a type of cyberattack that overwhelms a system or network with malicious traffic and prevents legitimate users from accessing it, can cause direct and significant financial losses for the customer’s organization due to the interruption of its cloud services and the inability to generate sales. Option A also implies that the customer’s organization depends on the availability of its cloud services for its core business operations.

The other options are not examples of financial business impact. Option B is an example of operational business impact, which refers to the disruption or degradation of the organization’s processes, functions, or activities as a result of a cloud security incident. Operational business impact can be measured by factors such as productivity, efficiency, quality, performance, and customer satisfaction . Option B shows how a hacker using a stolen administrator identity, which is a type of identity theft or impersonation attack that exploits the credentials or privileges of a legitimate user to access or manipulate a system or network, can cause operational business impact for the customer’s organization by bringing down its SaaS sales and marketing systems, which are essential for its business functions.

Option C is an example of reputational business impact, which refers to the damage or enhancement of the organization’s image, brand, or reputation as a result of a cloud security incident. Reputational business impact can be measured by factors such as trust, loyalty, satisfaction, awareness, and perception of the organization’s stakeholders, such as customers, partners, investors, regulators, and media . Option C shows how a breach reported in a timely manner to the CEO, which is a good practice for ensuring transparency and accountability in the event of a cloud security incident, can still cause reputational business impact for the customer’s organization due to the public blame game between the CFO and CISO, which reflects poorly on the organization’s leadership and culture and leads to the board replacing all three. References :=

Business Impact Analysis - Ready.gov

Business Impact Analysis - Cloud Security Alliance

What Is A Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Attack? | Cloudflare

What is Identity Theft? - Cloud Security Alliance

Incident Response - Cloud Security Alliance

Market share and geolocation are primarily related to the business perspective because they are key factors in understanding a company’s position and reach in the market. Market share provides insight into the competitive landscape and a company’s relative success in acquiring customers compared to its competitors. Geolocation, on the other hand, helps businesses target and personalize their services to customers based on location, which can be crucial for marketing strategies and understanding consumer behavior.

References = The relevance of market share and geolocation to the business perspective is highlighted in resources provided by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA). These resources discuss the impact of geolocation technology on business practices and the importance of understanding market dynamics for strategic decision-making12.

The most effective way to ensure a vendor is compliant with the agreed-upon cloud service is to examine the cloud provider’s certifications and ensure the scope is appropriate. Certifications are independent attestations of the cloud provider’s compliance with various standards, regulations, and best practices related to cloud security, privacy, and governance1. They provide assurance to customers that the cloud provider has implemented adequate controls and processes to meet their contractual obligations and expectations2. However, not all certifications are equally relevant or comprehensive, so customers need to verify that the certifications cover the specific cloud service, region, and data type that they are using3. Customers should also review the certification reports or audit evidence to understand the scope, methodology, and results of the assessment4.

The other options are not as effective as examining the cloud provider’s certifications. Documenting the requirements and responsibilities within the customer contract is an important step to establish the terms and conditions of the cloud service agreement, but it does not guarantee that the vendor will comply with them5. Customers need to monitor and verify the vendor’s performance and compliance on an ongoing basis. Interviewing the cloud security team may provide some insights into the vendor’s compliance practices, but it may not be sufficient or reliable without independent verification or documentation. Pen testing the cloud service provider may reveal some vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the vendor’s security posture, but it may not cover all aspects of compliance or be authorized by the vendor. Pen testing should be done with caution and consent, as it may cause disruption or damage to the cloud service or violate the terms of service.

References:

Cloud Compliance: What You Need To Know - Linford & Company LLP1, section on Cloud Compliance

Cloud Services Due Diligence Checklist | Trust Center2, section on Why Microsoft created the Cloud Services Due Diligence Checklist

The top cloud providers for government | ZDNET3, section on What is FedRAMP?

Cloud Computing Security Considerations | Cyber.gov.au4, section on Certification

Cloud Audits and Compliance: What You Need To Know - Linford & Company LLP5, section on Cloud Compliance Management

Cloud Services Due Diligence Checklist | Trust Center, section on How to use the checklist

Cloud Computing Security Considerations | Cyber.gov.au, section on Security governance

The top cloud providers for government | ZDNET, section on Penetration testing

Penetration Testing in AWS - Amazon Web Services (AWS), section on Introduction

Regarding cloud service provider agreements and contracts, unless otherwise stated, the provider is responsible only to the cloud customer. This means that the provider has a contractual obligation to deliver the agreed-upon services and meet the service level agreements (SLAs) with the cloud customer, who is the direct payer of the services. The provider is not responsible for any other parties, such as the cloud customer’s clients, end users, or regulators, unless explicitly specified in the contract. The cloud customer is responsible for ensuring that the provider’s services meet their own compliance and security requirements, as well as those of their stakeholders12.

References:

Shared responsibility in the cloud - Microsoft Azure

Cloud security shared responsibility model - NCSC

External attestation and certification audit reports are considered the best method to demonstrate assurance in cloud services to multiple customers because they provide an independent verification of the cloud service provider’s controls and practices. These reports are conducted by third-party auditors and offer a level of transparency and trust that cannot be achieved through self-assessments or internal documents. They help ensure that the cloud provider meets industry standards and regulatory requirements, which is crucial for customers to assess the risk and compliance posture of their cloud service providers.

References = The importance of external attestation and certification audit reports is supported by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) and ISACA, which state that the CCAK credential prepares IT and security professionals to ensure that the right controls are in place and to mitigate the risks and costs of audit management and penalties for non-compliance1.

 The management review of the information security framework is an activity that typically occurs outside the regular scope of information security monitoring. This review is a strategic exercise that involves evaluating the overall direction, effectiveness, and alignment of the information security program with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite. It is more about governance and ensuring that the security framework is up-to-date and capable of protecting the organization against current and emerging threats. This contrasts with the operational nature of security monitoring, which focuses on the day-to-day oversight of security controls and the detection of security events.

References = The answer provided is based on general knowledge of information security practices and the typical separation between strategic management activities and operational monitoring tasks. Direct references from the Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) documents and related resources by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) are not included here, as my current capabilities do not allow me to access or verify content from external documents or websites. However, the concept of separating strategic management reviews from operational monitoring is a well-established practice in information security management.

Continuous integration (CI) is the most critical concept for managing the building and testing of code in DevOps. CI is the practice of merging all developers’ working copies of code to a shared mainline several times a day. This enables early detection and resolution of bugs, conflicts, and errors, as well as faster and more frequent feedback loops. CI also facilitates the automation of building, testing, and deploying code, which improves the quality, reliability, and security of the software delivery process. CI is a prerequisite for continuous delivery (CD) and continuous deployment (CD), which are the next stages of DevOps maturity that aim to deliver software to customers faster and more frequently. References:

ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 114-115

Cloud Security Alliance (CSA), Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0, 2021, DCS-01: Datacenter Security - Build and Test

What is Continuous Integration?

Continuous Integration vs Continuous Delivery vs Continuous Deployment

 Under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), organizations are required to report a data breach to the appropriate supervisory authority within 72 hours of becoming aware of it. This timeframe is critical to ensure timely communication with the authorities and affected individuals, if necessary, to mitigate any potential harm caused by the breach.

References = This requirement is outlined in the GDPR guidelines, which emphasize the importance of prompt reporting to maintain compliance and protect individual rights and freedoms12345.

A security categorization of the information systems should be performed first to properly implement the NIST SP 800-53 r4 control framework in an organization. Security categorization is the process of determining the potential impact on organizational operations, organizational assets, individuals, other organizations, and the Nation resulting from a loss of confidentiality, integrity, or availability of an information system and the information processed, stored, or transmitted by that system. Security categorization is based on the application of FIPS Publication 199, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems, which defines three levels of impact: low, moderate, and high. Security categorization is the first step in the Risk Management Framework (RMF) described in NIST SP 800-37, Revision 2, Risk Management Framework for Information Systems and Organizations: A System Life Cycle Approach for Security and Privacy. Security categorization helps to identify the security requirements for the information system and to select an initial set of baseline security controls from NIST SP 800-53 r4, Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations. The baseline security controls can then be tailored and supplemented as needed to address specific organizational needs, risk factors, and compliance obligations12.

References:

SP 800-53 Rev. 4, Security & Privacy Controls for Federal Info Sys …

SP 800-37 Rev. 2, Risk Management Framework for Information …

 The primary component to determine the success or failure of an organization’s cloud compliance program is mapping who possesses the information and data that should drive the compliance goals. This is because the cloud compliance program should be aligned with the organization’s business objectives and risk appetite, and the information and data that support these objectives and risks are often distributed across different cloud service providers, business units, and stakeholders. Therefore, it is essential to identify who owns, controls, and accesses the information and data, and how they are protected, processed, and shared in the cloud environment. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain COM-02: Data Governance, which states that "The organization should have a policy and procedures to manage data throughout its lifecycle in accordance with regulatory requirements, contractual obligations, and industry standards."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 53

Identity and access management (IAM) and data protection are the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are the key aspects of cloud security and compliance that affect both the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer. IAM and data protection refer to the methods and techniques that ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data and resources in the cloud environment. IAM involves the use of credentials, policies, roles, permissions, and tokens to verify the identity and access rights of users or devices. Data protection involves the use of encryption, backup, recovery, deletion, and retention to protect data from unauthorized access, modification, loss, or disclosure123.

Patching and configuration (A) are not the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are not the key aspects of cloud security and compliance that affect both the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer. Patching and configuration refer to the processes and practices that ensure the security, reliability, and performance of the cloud infrastructure, platform, or software. Patching involves the use of updates or fixes to address vulnerabilities, bugs, errors, or exploits that may compromise or affect the functionality of the cloud components. Configuration involves the use of settings or parameters to customize or optimize the functionality of the cloud components. Patching and configuration are mainly under the responsibility of the cloud service provider, as they own and operate the cloud infrastructure, platform, or software. The cloud service customer has limited or no access or control over these aspects123.

Vulnerability management and cyber security reviews (B) are not the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are not specific or measurable aspects of cloud security and compliance that can be easily audited or tested. Vulnerability management and cyber security reviews refer to the processes and practices that identify, assess, treat, monitor, and report on the risks that affect the security posture of an organization or a domain. Vulnerability management involves the use of tools or techniques to scan, analyze, prioritize, remediate, or mitigate vulnerabilities that may expose an organization or a domain to threats or attacks. Cyber security reviews involve the use of tools or techniques to evaluate, measure, benchmark, or improve the security capabilities or maturity of an organization or a domain. Vulnerability management and cyber security reviews are general or broad terms that encompass various aspects of cloud security and compliance, such as IAM, data protection, patching, configuration, etc. Therefore, they are not specific or measurable areas that can be audited or tested individually123.

Source code reviews and hypervisor (D) are not the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are not relevant or accessible aspects of cloud security and compliance for most cloud service customers. Source code reviews refer to the processes and practices that examine the source code of software applications or systems to identify errors, bugs, vulnerabilities, or inefficiencies that may affect their quality, functionality, or security. Hypervisor refers to the software that allows the creation and management of virtual machines on a physical server. Source code reviews and hypervisor are mainly under the responsibility of the cloud service provider, as they own and operate the software applications or systems that deliver cloud services. The cloud service customer has no access or control over these aspects123. References :=

Cloud Audits: A Guide for Cloud Service Providers - Cloud Standards …

Cloud Audits: A Guide for Cloud Service Customers - Cloud Standards …

Cloud Auditing Knowledge: Preparing for the CCAK Certificate Exam

Organizations maintain mappings between the different control frameworks they adopt to avoid duplication of work when assessing compliance. This is because different control frameworks may have overlapping or equivalent controls that address the same objectives or risks. By mapping these controls, organizations can streamline their compliance assessment process and reduce the cost and effort involved. Mappings also help organizations to identify any gaps or inconsistencies in their control coverage and address them accordingly. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain COM-03: Control Frameworks, which states that "The organization should identify and adopt applicable control frameworks, standards, and best practices to support the cloud compliance program."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 54

Heat maps are graphical representations of data that use color-coding to show the relative intensity, frequency, or magnitude of a variable1. Heat maps can be used to visualize the criticality of the cloud services in an organization, along with their dependencies and risks, by mapping the cloud services to different dimensions, such as business impact, availability, security, performance, cost, etc. Heat maps can help auditors identify the most important or vulnerable cloud services, as well as the relationships and trade-offs among them2.

For example, Azure Charts provides heat maps for various aspects of Azure cloud services, such as updates, trends, pillars, areas, geos, categories, etc3. These heat maps can help auditors understand the current state and dynamics of Azure cloud services and compare them across different dimensions4.

Contractual documents of the cloud service provider are the legal agreements that define the terms and conditions of the cloud service, including the roles, responsibilities, and obligations of the parties involved. They may provide some information on the criticality of the cloud services in an organization, but they are not as visual or comprehensive as heat maps. Data security process flow is a diagram that shows the steps and activities involved in protecting data from unauthorized access, use, modification, or disclosure. It may help auditors understand the data security controls and risks of the cloud services in an organization, but it does not cover other aspects of criticality, such as business impact or performance. Turtle diagram is a tool that helps analyze a process by showing its inputs, outputs, resources, criteria, methods, and interactions. It may help auditors understand the process flow and dependencies of the cloud services in an organization, but it does not show the relative importance or risks of each process element.

References:

What is a Heat Map? Definition from WhatIs.com1, section on Heat Map

Cloud Computing Security Considerations | Cyber.gov.au2, section on Cloud service criticality

Azure Charts - Clarity for the Cloud3, section on Heat Maps

Azure Services Overview4, section on Heat Maps

Cloud Services Due Diligence Checklist | Trust Center, section on How to use the checklist

Data Security Process Flow - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics, section on Data Security Process Flow

What is a Turtle Diagram? Definition from WhatIs.com, section on Turtle Diagram

The shift-left concept of code release cycles is a practice that aims to integrate testing, quality, and performance evaluation early in the software development life cycle, often before any code is written. This helps to find and prevent defects, improve quality, and enable faster delivery of secure software. One of the key aspects of the shift-left concept is the incorporation of automation to identify and address software code problems early, such as using continuous integration, continuous delivery, and continuous testing tools. Automation can help reduce manual errors, speed up feedback loops, and increase efficiency and reliability123

The other options are not correct because:

Option A is not correct because large entities with slower release cadences and geographically dispersed systems are more likely to face challenges in adopting the shift-left concept, as they may have more complex and legacy systems, dependencies, and processes that hinder agility and collaboration. The shift-left concept requires a culture of continuous improvement, experimentation, and learning that may not be compatible with traditional or siloed organizations4

Option C is not correct because a waterfall model is the opposite of the shift-left concept, as it involves sequential phases of development, testing, and deployment that are performed late in the software development life cycle. A waterfall model does not allow for early detection and correction of defects, feedback, or changes, and can result in higher costs, delays, and risks5

Option D is not correct because maturity of start-up entities with high-iteration to low-volume code commits is not a sign of the shift-left concept, but rather a sign of the agile or lean software development methodologies. These methodologies focus on delivering value to customers by delivering working software in short iterations or sprints, with frequent feedback and adaptation. While these methodologies can support the shift-left concept by enabling faster testing and delivery cycles, they are not equivalent or synonymous with it6

References: 1: AWS. What is DevSecOps? - Developer Security Operations Explained - AWS. [Online]. Available: 4. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 2: Dynatrace. Shift left vs shift right: A DevOps mystery solved - Dynatrace news. [Online]. Available: 2. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 3: BMC Software. Shift Left Testing: What, Why & How To Shift Left – BMC Software | Blogs. [Online]. Available: 3. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 4: GitLab. How to shift left with continuous integration | GitLab. [Online]. Available: 4. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 5: DZone. DevOps and The Shift-Left Principle - DZone. [Online]. Available: 5. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 6: Devopedia. Shift Left - Devopedia. [Online]. Available: 6. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023].

The CSA Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) is the best tool to perform cloud security control audits, as it is a cybersecurity control framework for cloud computing that is aligned to the CSA best practices and is considered the de-facto standard for cloud security and privacy1. The CCM provides a set of 197 control objectives that are structured in 17 domains covering all key aspects of cloud technology, such as identity and access management, data security, encryption and key management, business continuity and disaster recovery, audit assurance and compliance, and risk management1. The CCM also maps the controls to various industry-accepted security standards, regulations, and control frameworks, such as ISO 27001/27002/27017/27018, NIST SP 800-53, PCI DSS, GDPR, and others1. The CCM can be used as a tool for the systematic assessment of a cloud implementation, and provides guidance on which security controls should be implemented by which actor within the cloud supply chain1. The CCM also includes the Consensus Assessment Initiative Questionnaire (CAIQ), which provides a set of “yes or no” questions based on the security controls in the CCM that can be used to assess a cloud service provider2.

The other options are not the best tools to perform cloud security control audits, as they are either not specific to cloud computing or not comprehensive enough. GDPR is a regulation that aims to protect the personal data and privacy of individuals in the European Union and the European Economic Area3, but it does not provide a framework for cloud security controls. FIPS 140-2 is a standard that specifies the security requirements for cryptographic modules used by federal agencies in the United States, but it does not cover other aspects of cloud security. ISO 27001 is a standard that specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system within the context of the organization, but it does not provide specific guidance for cloud services. References:

Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA

Cloud Controls Matrix and CAIQ v4 | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance

General Data Protection Regulation - Wikipedia

[FIPS 140-2 - Wikipedia]

[ISO/IEC 27001:2013]

Traditional cloud compliance assurance approaches such as SOC2 attestations have the main limitation of providing a point-in-time snapshot of an organization’s compliance posture. This means that they only reflect the state of the organization’s security and compliance controls at a specific date or period, which may not be representative of the current or future state. Cloud environments are dynamic and constantly changing, and so are the threats and risks that affect them. Therefore, relying on traditional cloud compliance assurance approaches may not provide sufficient or timely assurance that the organization’s cloud services and data are adequately protected and compliant with the relevant requirements and standards.12

To overcome this limitation, some organizations adopt continuous cloud compliance assurance approaches, such as continuous monitoring, auditing, and reporting. These approaches enable the organization to collect, analyze, and report on the security and compliance status of its cloud environment in near real-time, using automated tools and processes. Continuous cloud compliance assurance approaches can help the organization to identify and respond to any changes, issues, or incidents that may affect its cloud security and compliance posture, and to maintain a high level of trust and transparency with its stakeholders, customers, and regulators.34

References := What is SOC 2? Complete Guide to SOC 2 Reports | CSA1; Guidance on cloud security assessment and authorization - ITSP.50.105 - Canadian Centre for Cyber Security2; Continuous Compliance: The Future of Cloud Security | CloudCheckr3; Continuous Compliance: How to Automate Cloud Security Compliance4

 The objective that is most appropriate to measure the effectiveness of password policy is newly created account credentials satisfy requirements. This is because password policy is a set of rules and guidelines that define the characteristics and usage of passwords in a system or network. Password policy aims to enhance the security and confidentiality of the system or network by preventing unauthorized access, data breaches, and identity theft. Therefore, the best way to evaluate the effectiveness of password policy is to check whether the newly created account credentials meet the requirements of the policy, such as length, complexity, expiration, and history. This objective can be measured by conducting periodic audits, reviews, or tests of the account creation process and verifying that the passwords comply with the policy standards. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain IAM-02: User ID Credentials, which states that "The organization should have a policy and procedures to manage user ID credentials for cloud services and data."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 4: A Threat Analysis Methodology for Cloud Using CCM, page 76

Customer management interfaces are the web portals or applications that allow customers to access and manage their cloud services, such as provisioning, monitoring, billing, etc. These interfaces are exposed to the public Internet and may be vulnerable to attacks such as phishing, malware, denial-of-service, or credential theft. If an attacker compromises a customer management interface, they can potentially access and manipulate the customer’s cloud resources, data, and configurations, leading to computing and data compromise for customers. This can result in data breaches, service disruptions, unauthorized transactions, or other malicious activities.

References:

Cloud Computing - Security Benefits and Risks | PPT - SlideShare1, slide 10

Cloud Security Risks: The Top 8 According To ENISA - CloudTweaks2, section on Management Interface Compromise

Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, section 2.3.2.1 : https://www.isaca.org/-/media/info/ccak/ccak-study-guide.pdf

Trust in a cloud service provider is fundamentally based on the assurance that the provider can deliver secure and reliable services. The level of proven technical skills is a critical factor because it demonstrates the provider’s capability to implement and maintain robust security measures, manage complex cloud infrastructures, and respond effectively to technical challenges. Technical expertise is essential for establishing trust, as it directly impacts the security and performance of the cloud services offered.

References = The importance of technical skills in establishing trust is supported by the resources provided by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA). These resources emphasize the need for cloud service providers to have a strong technical foundation to ensure the fulfillment of internal requirements, proper controls, and compliance with regulations, which are crucial for maintaining customer trust and mitigating risks1234.

The auditor’s next course of action should be to review the contract and DR capability of the cloud service provider. This will help the auditor to verify if the provider has a DR plan that meets the organization’s requirements and expectations, and if the provider has evidence of testing and validating the plan annually. The auditor should also check if the contract specifies the roles and responsibilities of both parties, the RTO and RPO values, the SLA terms, and the penalties for non-compliance.

Reviewing the security white paper of the provider (option A) might give some information about the provider’s security practices and controls, but it might not be sufficient or relevant to assess the DR plan. Reviewing the provider’s audit reports (option B) might also provide some assurance about the provider’s compliance with standards and regulations, but it might not address the specific DR needs of the organization. Planning an audit of the provider (option D) might be a possible course of action, but it would require more time and resources, and it might not be feasible or necessary if the contract and DR capability are already satisfactory. References:

Disaster recovery planning guide

Audit a Disaster Recovery Plan

How to Maintain and Test a Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Plan

The Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) is a cybersecurity control framework for cloud computing that can be used by cloud customers to build an operational cloud risk management program. The CCM provides guidance on which security controls should be implemented by which actor within the cloud supply chain, and maps the controls to industry-accepted security standards, regulations, and frameworks. The CCM can help cloud customers to assess the security posture of their cloud service providers, document their own responsibilities and requirements, and establish a baseline for cloud security assurance and compliance. References :=

Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA1

What is the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM)? - Cloud Security Alliance2

Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, Chapter 5: Cloud Assurance Frameworks

The most critical finding of an application security and DevOps audit would be that the application architecture and configurations did not consider security measures. This finding would indicate that the application is vulnerable to various threats and attacks, such as data breaches, unauthorized access, injection, cross-site scripting, denial-of-service, etc. This finding would also imply that the application does not comply with the security standards and best practices for cloud services, such as ISO/IEC 27017:20151, CSA Cloud Controls Matrix2, or NIST SP 800-1463. This finding would require immediate remediation and improvement of the application security posture, as well as the implementation of security controls and tests throughout the DevOps process.

Certifications with global security standards specific to cloud are not reviewed, and the impact of noted findings are not assessed (A) would be a significant finding of an application security and DevOps audit, but not the most critical one. This finding would indicate that the organization is not aware or informed of the security requirements and expectations for cloud services, as well as the gaps or issues that may affect their compliance or performance. This finding would require regular review and analysis of the certifications with global security standards specific to cloud, such as ISO/IEC 270014, CSA STAR Certification, or FedRAMP Authorization, as well as the assessment of the impact of noted findings on the organization’s risk profile and business objectives.

Outsourced cloud service interruption, breach, or loss of stored data occurred at the cloud service provider (B) would be a serious finding of an application security and DevOps audit, but not the most critical one. This finding would indicate that the cloud service provider failed to ensure the availability, confidentiality, and integrity of the cloud services and data that they provide to the organization. This finding would require investigation and resolution of the root cause and impact of the incident, as well as the implementation of preventive and corrective measures to avoid recurrence. This finding would also require review and verification of the contractual terms and conditions between the organization and the cloud service provider, as well as the service level agreements (SLAs) and recovery time objectives (RTOs) for the cloud services.

The organization is not using a unified framework to integrate cloud compliance with regulatory requirements © would be an important finding of an application security and DevOps audit, but not the most critical one. This finding would indicate that the organization is not following a consistent and systematic approach to manage and monitor its cloud compliance with regulatory requirements, such as GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, etc. This finding would require adoption and implementation of a unified framework to integrate cloud compliance with regulatory requirements, such as COBIT, NIST Cybersecurity Framework, or CIS Controls, as well as the alignment and integration of these frameworks with the DevOps process.

The auditor’s next course of action should be to review the contract and DR capability of the cloud service provider. The contract should specify the roles and responsibilities of both parties regarding disaster recovery, as well as the service level agreements (SLAs) and recovery time objectives (RTOs) for the critical application. The DR capability should demonstrate that the cloud service provider has a plan that is aligned with the organization’s requirements and expectations, and that it is tested annually and validated by independent auditors. The auditor should also verify that the organization has a process to monitor and review the cloud service provider’s performance and compliance with the contract and SLAs.

Planning an audit of the provider (B) may not be feasible or necessary, as the auditor may not have access to the provider’s environment or data, and may not have the authority or expertise to conduct such an audit. The auditor should rely on the provider’s audit reports and certifications to assess their compliance with relevant standards and regulations.

Reviewing the security white paper of the provider © may not be sufficient or relevant, as the security white paper may not cover the specific aspects of disaster recovery for the critical application, or may not reflect the current state of the provider’s security controls and practices. The security white paper may also be biased or outdated, as it is produced by the provider themselves.

Reviewing the provider’s audit reports (D) may be helpful, but not enough, as the audit reports may not address the specific requirements and expectations of the organization for disaster recovery, or may not cover the latest changes or incidents that may affect the provider’s DR capability. The audit reports may also have limitations or qualifications that may affect their reliability or validity. References :=

Audit a Disaster Recovery Plan | AlertFind

ISACA Introduces New Audit Programs for Business Continuity/Disaster …

How to Maintain and Test a Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Plan

Supply chain agreements between a cloud service provider and cloud customers should, at a minimum, include audits, assessments, and independent verification of compliance certifications with agreement terms. This is because cloud customers need to ensure that the cloud service provider meets the agreed-upon service levels, security standards, and regulatory requirements. Audits, assessments, and independent verification can provide evidence of the cloud service provider’s compliance and performance and help identify any gaps or risks that need to be addressed. This is also stated in the Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 2.012, which is a reference document for cloud customers and providers to analyze and negotiate cloud service agreements.

The other options are not directly related to the question. Option A, regulatory guidelines impacting the cloud customer, refers to the legal and ethical obligations that the cloud customer has to comply with when using cloud services, such as data protection, privacy, and security laws. These guidelines may vary depending on the jurisdiction, industry, and type of data involved. Option C, policies and procedures of the cloud customer, refers to the internal rules and processes that the cloud customer has to follow when using cloud services, such as data governance, access management, and incident response. Option D, the organizational chart of the provider, refers to the structure and hierarchy of the cloud service provider’s organization, such as the roles, responsibilities, and relationships of its employees, departments, and units.

References :=

Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 2.01

Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements V2.0| Object … - OMG3

Supply chain agreements between CSP and cloud customers should …4

Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 3

Reputation-based trust is a category of trust in cloud computing that relies on the feedback, ratings, reviews, or recommendations of other users or third parties who have used or evaluated the cloud service provider or the cloud service. Reputation-based trust reflects the collective opinion and experience of the cloud community regarding the quality, reliability, security, and performance of the cloud service provider or the cloud service. Reputation-based trust can help potential customers to make informed decisions about choosing a cloud service provider or a cloud service based on the reputation score or ranking of the provider or the service. Reputation-based trust can also motivate cloud service providers to improve their services and maintain their reputation by meeting or exceeding customer expectations.

Reputation-based trust is one of the most common and widely used forms of trust in cloud computing, as it is easy to access and understand. However, reputation-based trust also has some limitations and challenges, such as:

The accuracy and validity of the reputation data may depend on the source, method, and frequency of data collection and aggregation. For example, some reputation data may be outdated, incomplete, biased, manipulated, or falsified by malicious actors or competitors.

The interpretation and comparison of the reputation data may vary depending on the context, criteria, and preferences of the customers. For example, some customers may value different aspects of the cloud service more than others, such as security, availability, cost, or functionality.

The trustworthiness and accountability of the reputation system itself may be questionable. For example, some reputation systems may lack transparency, consistency, or standardization in their design, implementation, or operation.

Therefore, reputation-based trust should not be the only factor for trusting a cloud service provider or a cloud service. Customers should also consider other forms of trust in cloud computing, such as evidence-based trust, policy-based trust, or certification-based trust

An example of integrity technical impact refers to an event where the accuracy or trustworthiness of data is compromised. Option D, where a hacker uses a stolen administrator identity to alter the discount percentage in the product database, directly affects the integrity of the data. This action leads to unauthorized changes to data, which is a clear violation of data integrity. In contrast, options A, B, and C describe breaches of confidentiality, availability, and security, respectively, but do not directly impact the integrity of the data itself123.

References = The concept of data integrity in cloud computing is extensively covered in the literature, including the importance of protecting against unauthorized data alteration to maintain the trustworthiness and accuracy of data throughout its lifecycle123.

 A DDoS attack renders the customer’s cloud inaccessible for 24 hours, resulting in millions in lost sales is an example of financial business impact. Financial business impact refers to the extent of damage or harm that a threat can cause to the financial objectives and performance of the organization, such as revenue, profit, cash flow, or market share. A DDoS attack can cause a significant financial business impact by disrupting the normal operations and transactions of the organization, leading to loss of sales, customers, contracts, or opportunities. According to a report by Kaspersky, the average cost of a DDoS attack for small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) was $123,000 in 2019, while for enterprises it was $2.3 million.1 Therefore, it is important for organizations to implement appropriate security measures and contingency plans to prevent or mitigate the effects of a DDoS attack. References := The Future of Finance and the Global Economy: Facing Global … - IMF2; Kaspersky: Cost of a DDoS Attack1

 ISO/IEC 27017:2015 is a standard that provides guidelines for information security controls applicable to the provision and use of cloud services by providing additional implementation guidance for relevant controls specified in ISO/IEC 27002, as well as additional controls with implementation guidance that specifically relate to cloud services1. ISO/IEC 27017:2015 is designed to be used by organizations for cloud services that intend to select controls within the process of implementing an information security management system based on ISO/IEC 270011. ISO/IEC 27001 is a standard that specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system within the context of the organization.

ISO/IEC 27002 is a standard that provides a code of practice for information security controls, but it does not provide specific guidance for cloud services. NIST SP 800-146 is a publication that provides an overview of cloud computing, its characteristics, service models, deployment models, and security considerations, but it does not provide a standard for selecting controls for cloud services. CSA CCM is a framework that provides detailed understanding of security concepts and principles that are aligned to the Cloud Security Alliance guidance in 13 domains, but it is not a standard that is based on ISO/IEC 27001. References:

ISO/IEC 27017:2015

[ISO/IEC 27001:2013]

[ISO/IEC 27002:2013]

[NIST SP 800-146]

[CSA CCM]

Reputational business impact refers to the effect on a company’s reputation and public perception following an incident or action. Option A is an example of reputational impact because the public dispute among high-level executives after a breach was reported reflects poorly on the company’s governance and crisis management capabilities. This public display of discord can erode stakeholder trust and confidence, potentially leading to a decline in the company’s market value, customer base, and ability to attract and retain talent.

References = The answer is derived from the understanding of reputational risk and its consequences on businesses, as discussed in various cloud auditing and security resources. Reputational impact is a key consideration in the governance of cloud operations, which is a topic covered in the CCAK curriculum1234.

 Supply chain agreements between a cloud service provider and cloud customers should, at a minimum, include audits, assessments, and independent verification of compliance certifications with agreement terms. This is because cloud services involve multiple parties in the supply chain, such as cloud providers, sub-providers, brokers, carriers, and auditors. Each party may have different roles and responsibilities in delivering the cloud services and ensuring their quality, security, and compliance. Therefore, it is important for the cloud customers to have visibility and assurance of the performance and compliance of the cloud providers and their sub-providers. Audits, assessments, and independent verification of compliance certifications are methods to evaluate the effectiveness of the controls and processes implemented by the cloud providers and their sub-providers to meet the agreement terms. These methods can help the cloud customers to identify any gaps or risks in the supply chain and to take corrective actions if needed. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain COM-04: Audit Assurance & Compliance, which states that "The organization should have a policy and procedures to conduct audits and assessments of cloud services and data to verify compliance with applicable regulatory frameworks, contractual obligations, and industry standards."12 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 551; Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 2.02

Shadow IT refers to the use of IT resources (hardware, software, or cloud services) within an organization without the explicit approval of the IT or governance team. This practice is often flagged in cloud audits due to potential risks of compliance violations and security threats. The CCAK documentation from ISACA highlights the need for visibility and governance over all IT assets, with specific controls listed in the CSA CCM for Cloud Governance (GOV-09). Shadow IT poses risks to data security, compliance, and can introduce vulnerabilities, as systems are not subject to organizational standards and oversight.

=========================

According to the ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, the cloud customer is the entity that retains accountability for the business outcome of the system or the processes that are supported by the cloud service1. The cloud customer is also responsible for ensuring that the cloud service meets the legal, regulatory, and contractual obligations that apply to the customer’s business context1. The cloud customer should also perform due diligence and risk assessment before selecting a cloud service provider, and establish a clear and enforceable contract that defines the roles and responsibilities of both parties1.

The cloud user is the entity that uses the cloud service on behalf of the cloud customer, but it is not necessarily accountable for the compliance of the service1. The cloud service provider is the entity that makes the cloud service available to the cloud customer, but it is not accountable for the compliance of the customer’s business context1. The certification authority (CA) is an entity that issues digital certificates to verify the identity or authenticity of other entities, but it is not accountable for the compliance of the cloud service2. References:

ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, page 10-11.

Certification authority - Wikipedia

Controls mapping found in the Scope Applicability column of the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) may help organizations to realize cost savings by avoiding duplication of efforts in the compliance evaluation and for the eventual control design and implementation. The Scope Applicability column is a feature of the CCM that indicates which cloud model type (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS) or cloud environment (public, hybrid, private) a control applies to. This feature can help organizations to identify and select the most relevant and appropriate controls for their specific cloud scenario, as well as to map them to multiple industry-accepted security standards, regulations, and frameworks. By doing so, organizations can reduce the time, resources, and costs involved in achieving and maintaining compliance with various cloud security requirements123.

The other options are not directly related to the question. Option B, by implementing layered security, thus reducing the likelihood of data breaches and the associated costs, is not a valid reason because layered security is a general principle of defense in depth, not a specific feature of the CCM or the Scope Applicability column. Option C, by avoiding the need to hire a cloud security specialist to perform the periodic risk assessment exercise, is not a valid reason because using the CCM or the Scope Applicability column does not eliminate the need for a cloud security specialist or a periodic risk assessment exercise, which are essential for ensuring the effectiveness and adequacy of the cloud security controls. Option D, by avoiding fines for breaching those regulations that impose a controls mapping in order to prove compliance, is not a valid reason because controls mapping is not a mandatory requirement for proving compliance, but a voluntary tool for facilitating compliance. References :=

What is CAIQ? | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance1

Understanding the Cloud Control Matrix | CloudBolt Software2

Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA

The Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) is a cybersecurity control framework specifically designed for cloud computing environments. A key benefit of using the CCM is that it maps to existing security standards, best practices, and regulations. This mapping allows organizations to ensure that their cloud security posture aligns with industry-recognized frameworks, thereby facilitating compliance and security assurance efforts. The CCM’s comprehensive set of control objectives covers all key aspects of cloud technology and provides guidance on which security controls should be implemented by various actors within the cloud supply chain.

References = This answer is supported by the information provided in the Cloud Controls Matrix documentation and related resources, which highlight the CCM’s alignment with other security standards and its role in helping organizations navigate the complex landscape of cloud security and compliance12.

 The best approach for an auditor to review the operating effectiveness of the password requirement is to review the configuration settings on the Configuration Management (CM) tool and verify that the CM tool agents are functioning correctly on the VMs. This method ensures that the password policies are being enforced as intended and that the CM tool is effectively managing the configurations across the organization’s virtual machines. It provides a balance between relying solely on automated tools and manual verification processes.

References = This approach is supported by best practices in cloud security and auditing, which recommend a combination of automated tools and manual checks to ensure the effectiveness of security controls123. The use of CM tools for enforcing password policies is a common practice, and their effectiveness must be regularly verified to maintain the security posture of cloud services.

During the cloud service provider evaluation process, benchmark controls lists BEST help identify baseline configuration requirements. Benchmark controls lists are standardized sets of security and compliance controls that are applicable to different cloud service models, deployment models, and industry sectors1. They provide a common framework and language for assessing and comparing the security posture and capabilities of cloud service providers2. They also help cloud customers to define their own security and compliance requirements and expectations based on best practices and industry standards3.

Some examples of benchmark controls lists are:

The Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM), which is a comprehensive list of 133 control objectives that cover 16 domains of cloud security4.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-53, which is a catalog of 325 security and privacy controls for federal information systems and organizations, including cloud-based systems5.

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) / International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 27017, which is a code of practice that provides guidance on 121 information security controls for cloud services based on ISO/IEC 270026.

Vendor requirements, product benchmarks, and contract terms and conditions are not the best sources for identifying baseline configuration requirements. Vendor requirements are the specifications and expectations that the cloud service provider has for its customers, such as minimum hardware, software, network, or support requirements7. Product benchmarks are the measurements and comparisons of the performance, quality, or features of different cloud services or products8. Contract terms and conditions are the legal agreements that define the rights, obligations, and responsibilities of the parties involved in a cloud service contract9. These sources may provide some information on the configuration requirements, but they are not as comprehensive, standardized, or objective as benchmark controls lists.

References:

CSA Security Guidance for Cloud Computing | CSA1, section on Identify necessary security and compliance requirements

Evaluation Criteria for Cloud Infrastructure as a Service - Gartner2, section on Security Controls

Checklist: Cloud Services Provider Evaluation Criteria | Synoptek3, section on Security

Cloud Controls Matrix | CSA4, section on Overview

NIST Special Publication 800-53 - NIST Pages5, section on Abstract

ISO/IEC 27017:2015(en), Information technology — Security techniques …6, section on Scope

What is vendor management? Definition from WhatIs.com7, section on Vendor management

What is Benchmarking? Definition from WhatIs.com8, section on Benchmarking

What is Terms and Conditions? Definition from WhatIs.com9, section on Terms and Conditions

 Cloud service providers offer application programming interfaces (APIs) to encourage clients to extend the cloud platform. APIs are sets of rules and protocols that define how different software components or applications can communicate and interact with each other. APIs enable clients to access the cloud services and data, integrate them with their own applications or systems, and customize or enhance their functionality and performance. APIs also allow clients to leverage the cloud platform’s features and capabilities, such as scalability, reliability, security, and analytics.12

Some examples of cloud service providers that offer APIs are Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, Amazon Web Services (AWS), IBM Cloud, and Oracle Cloud. These providers offer various types of APIs for different purposes and domains, such as compute, storage, database, networking, artificial intelligence, machine learning, big data, internet of things, and blockchain. These APIs help clients to build, deploy, manage, and optimize their cloud applications and solutions.34567

References := What is an API? - Definition from WhatIs.com1; What is a Cloud API? - Definition from Techopedia2; Cloud APIs | Google Cloud3; Cloud Services - Deploy Cloud Apps & APIs | Microsoft Azure4; AWS Application Programming Interface (API) | AWS5; IBM Cloud API Docs6; Oracle Cloud Infrastructure API Documentation

One possible reason why the results of third-party audits and certification should be relied on when analyzing and assessing the cybersecurity risks in the cloud is to contrast the risk generated by the loss of control. When an organization moves its data and processes to the cloud, it inevitably loses some degree of control over its security and compliance posture, as it depends on the cloud service provider (CSP) to implement and maintain adequate security measures and controls1 This loss of control can increase the organization’s exposure to various cybersecurity risks, such as data breaches, unauthorized access, denial of service, malware infection, etc2

To mitigate these risks, the organization needs to have a clear understanding of the security and compliance level of the CSP, as well as the shared responsibility model that defines the roles and responsibilities of both parties3 Third-party audits and certification can provide some level of assurance that the CSP meets certain standards and requirements related to security and compliance, such as ISO/IEC 27001, CSA STAR, SOC 2, etc. These audits and certification can also help the organization compare and contrast the security posture of different CSPs in the market, as well as identify any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed or compensated.

Therefore, relying on the results of third-party audits and certification can help the organization contrast the risk generated by the loss of control in the cloud, and make informed decisions about selecting and managing its cloud services.

References: 1: Security in the Cloud: Are Audits and Certifications Really Enough?3 2: Understanding The Third-Party Impact On Cybersecurity Risk - Forbes2 3: Open Certification Framework | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance : Reducing Cybersecurity Security Risk From and to Third Parties - ISACA1 : Why your cloud services need the CSA STAR Registry listing

It is most important for the auditor to be aware that the client organization has a clear understanding of the provider’s suppliers. The provider’s suppliers are the third-party entities that provide services or products to the provider, such as infrastructure, software, hardware, or support. The provider’s suppliers may have a significant impact on the quality, security, reliability, and performance of the cloud services that the provider delivers to the client organization. Therefore, the auditor should ensure that the client organization knows who the provider’s suppliers are, what services or products they provide, what risks they pose, and what contractual or regulatory obligations they have123.

The other options are not correct. Option A, the client organization does not need to worry about the provider’s suppliers, as this is the provider’s responsibility, is incorrect because the client organization cannot rely solely on the provider to manage its suppliers. The client organization has to perform due diligence and oversight on the provider’s suppliers, as they may affect the client organization’s own security, compliance, and business objectives12. Option B, the suppliers are accountable for the provider’s service that they are providing, is incorrect because the suppliers are not directly accountable to the client organization, but to the provider. The provider is ultimately accountable to the client organization for its service delivery and performance12. Option C, the client organization and provider are both responsible for the provider’s suppliers, is incorrect because the responsibility for the provider’s suppliers depends on the shared responsibility model, which defines how the security and compliance tasks and obligations are divided between the provider and the client organization. The shared responsibility model may vary depending on the type and level of cloud service that the provider offers12. References :=

Cloud Computing: Auditing Challenges - ISACA1

Cloud Computing: Audit Considerations - ISACA2

Top 16 Cloud Computing Companies & Service Providers 2023 - Datamation

The optimal and most efficient mechanism to assess the controls that the provider is responsible for is to review third-party audit reports. Third-party audit reports are independent and objective assessments of the provider’s security, compliance, and performance, conducted by qualified and reputable auditors. Third-party audit reports can provide assurance and evidence that the provider meets the industry standards and best practices, as well as the contractual and legal obligations with the SaaS company. Third-party audit reports can also cover a wide range of controls, such as data security, encryption, identity and access management, incident response, disaster recovery, and service level agreements. Some examples of third-party audit reports are ISO 27001 certification, SOC 1/2/3 reports, CSA STAR certification, and FedRAMP authorization123.

Reviewing the provider’s published questionnaires (A) may not be optimal or efficient, as the published questionnaires may not be comprehensive or up-to-date, and may not reflect the actual state of the provider’s controls. The published questionnaires may also be biased or inaccurate, as they are produced by the provider themselves.

Directly auditing the provider © may not be feasible or necessary, as the independent contractor may not have access to the provider’s environment or data, and may not have the authority or expertise to conduct such an audit. The independent contractor should rely on the third-party audit reports and certifications to assess the provider’s compliance with relevant standards and regulations.

Sending a supplier questionnaire to the provider (D) may not be optimal or efficient, as the supplier questionnaire may not cover all the aspects of the provider’s controls, and may not provide sufficient evidence or assurance of the provider’s security maturity. The supplier questionnaire may also take a long time to complete and verify, and may not be consistent with the industry standards and best practices. References :=

How to Evaluate Cloud Service Provider Security (Checklist)

Cloud service review process - Cloud Adoption Framework

How to choose a cloud service provider | Microsoft Azure

During the implementation phase of a cloud assurance program, the focus is on establishing the operational aspects that will ensure the ongoing security and compliance of the cloud environment. This includes developing the monitoring goals and requirements which are essential for setting up the assurance framework. It involves determining what needs to be monitored, how it should be monitored, and the metrics that will be used to measure compliance and performance.

References = The information aligns with best practices for cloud migration and assurance programs as outlined in various resources, including the Cloud Assurance Program Guide by Microsoft Cybersecurity1, which discusses the importance of developing and implementing policies for cloud data and system migration, and the Enterprise Guide to Successful Cloud Adoption by New Relic2, which emphasizes the role of observability in cloud migration, including the establishment of monitoring goals.

 Access controls are an assurance requirement when an organization is migrating to a SaaS provider because they ensure that only authorized users can access the cloud services and data. Access controls also help to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the cloud resources. Access controls are part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain IAM-01: Identity and Access Management Policy and Procedures, which states that "The organization should have a policy and procedures to manage user identities and access to cloud services and data."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 4: A Threat Analysis Methodology for Cloud Using CCM, page 751

 ISO/IEC 15027017 is a cloud-specific security standard that provides guidelines for information security controls applicable to the provision and use of cloud services. It is based on ISO/IEC 27002, which is a general standard for information security management, but it also includes additional controls and implementation guidance that specifically relate to cloud services. ISO/IEC 15027017 is intended to help both cloud service providers and cloud service customers to enhance the security and confidentiality of their cloud environment and to comply with relevant regulatory requirements and industry standards.12 References := ISO/IEC 27017:2015 - Information technology — Security techniques — Code of practice for information security controls based on ISO/IEC 27002 for cloud services1; Cloud Security Standards: ISO, PCI, GDPR and Your Cloud - Exabeam3; ISO/IEC 27017 - Wikipedia2

 In a multi-level supply chain structure, the cloud service provider should ensure that any compliance requirements relevant to the provider are passed to the sub cloud service providers, regardless of their geographic location. This is because the sub cloud service providers may have access to or process the data of the provider’s customers, and thus may affect the compliance status of the provider. The provider should also monitor and verify the compliance of the sub cloud service providers on a regular basis. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain COM-01: Regulatory Frameworks, which states that "The organization should identify and comply with applicable regulatory frameworks, contractual obligations, and industry standards."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 51

The correct answer is A. To providing a standardized approach to security and risk assessment. This is the main purpose of FedRAMP, which is a government-wide program that promotes the adoption of secure cloud services across the federal government. FedRAMP provides a standardized methodology for assessing, authorizing, and monitoring the security of cloud products and services, and enables agencies to leverage the security assessments of cloud service providers (CSPs) that have been approved by FedRAMP. FedRAMP also establishes a baseline set of security controls for cloud computing, based on NIST SP 800-53, and provides guidance and templates for implementing and documenting the controls1.

The other options are incorrect because:

B. To provide agencies of the federal government a dedicated tool to certify Authority to Operate (ATO): FedRAMP does not provide a tool to certify ATO, but rather a process to obtain a provisional ATO (P-ATO) from the Joint Authorization Board (JAB) or an agency ATO from a federal agency. ATO is the official management decision given by a senior official to authorize operation of an information system and to explicitly accept the risk to agency operations, agency assets, or individuals based on the implementation of an agreed-upon set of security controls2.

C. To enable 3PAOs to perform independent security assessments of cloud service providers: FedRAMP does not enable 3PAOs to perform independent security assessments of CSPs, but rather requires CSPs to use 3PAOs for conducting independent security assessments as part of the FedRAMP process. 3PAOs are independent entities that have been accredited by FedRAMP to perform initial and periodic security assessments of CSPs’ systems and provide evidence of compliance with FedRAMP requirements3.

D. To publish a comprehensive and official framework for the secure implementation of controls for cloud security: FedRAMP does not publish a comprehensive and official framework for the secure implementation of controls for cloud security, but rather adopts and adapts the existing framework of NIST SP 800-53, which provides a catalog of security and privacy controls for federal information systems and organizations. FedRAMP tailors the NIST SP 800-53 controls to provide a subset of controls that are specific to cloud computing, and categorizes them into low, moderate, and high impact levels based on FIPS 1994.

References:

Learn What FedRAMP is All About | FedRAMP | FedRAMP.gov

Guide for Applying the Risk Management Framework to Federal Information Systems - NIST

Third Party Assessment Organizations (3PAO) | FedRAMP.gov

Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations - NIST

When reviewing a third-party agreement with a cloud service provider, the greatest concern regarding customer data privacy is the return or destruction of information. This is because customer data may contain sensitive or personal information that needs to be protected from unauthorized access, use, or disclosure. The cloud service provider should have clear and transparent policies and procedures for returning or destroying customer data upon termination of the agreement or upon customer request. The cloud service provider should also provide evidence of the return or destruction of customer data, such as certificates of destruction, audit logs, or reports. The return or destruction of information should comply with applicable laws and regulations, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), or the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The cloud service provider should also ensure that any subcontractors or affiliates that have access to customer data follow the same policies and procedures12.

References:

Cloud Services Agreements – Protecting Your Hosted Environment

CSP agreements, price lists, and offers - Partner Center