CISA Exam Dumps - Certified Information Systems Auditor

The most important action before the audit work begins is to establish control objectives. Control objectives are the specific goals or outcomes that the audit intends to achieve or verify in relation to the information protection in the application1. Control objectives provide the basis for designing and performing the audit procedures, evaluating the audit evidence, and reporting the audit findings and recommendations2. Control objectives also help to align the audit scope and criteria with the business needs and expectations, and to ensure that the audit is relevant, reliable, and efficient3.

Some examples of control objectives for an information protection audit are:

To ensure that the information stored in the application is classified according to its sensitivity, value, and regulatory requirements

To ensure that the information stored in the application is encrypted, masked, or anonymized as appropriate

To ensure that the information stored in the application is accessible only by authorized users and processes

To ensure that the information stored in the application is backed up, restored, and retained according to the business continuity and retention policies

To ensure that the information stored in the application is monitored, logged, and audited for any unauthorized or anomalous activities

Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

Option A is not correct because reviewing remediation reports is not the most important action before the audit work begins. Remediation reports are documents that describe how previous audit findings or issues have been resolved or addressed by the auditee4. While reviewing remediation reports may be useful for understanding the current state of information protection in the application, it is not a prerequisite for defining the control objectives of the audit.

Option C is not correct because assessing the threat landscape is not the most important action before the audit work begins. The threat landscape is the set of potential sources, methods, and impacts of cyberattacks or data breaches that may affect the information stored in the application5. While assessing the threat landscape may be helpful for identifying and prioritizing the risks and vulnerabilities of information protection in the application, it is not a prerequisite for defining the control objectives of the audit.

Option D is not correct because performing penetration testing is not the most important action before the audit work begins. Penetration testing is a technique that simulates real-world cyberattacks or data breaches to test the security and resilience of information systems or applications. 

Given the large volume of data transactions, continuous monitoring is the best testing strategy for auditing the inventory control process. Continuous monitoring involves the automated review of operational and financial data to identify anomalies or areas of concern12. This approach allows for real-time identification and resolution of issues, making it particularly effective for large organizations with high transaction volumes12.

References: ISACA’s Information Systems Auditor Study Materials1

The greatest segregation of duties conflict would occur if the individual who performs the related tasks also has approval authority for purchase requisitions and purchase orders. This is because these two tasks are directly related to each other and involve financial transactions. If the same person is responsible for both tasks, it could lead to potential fraud or error12. For instance, the individual could approve a purchase order for a personal need and then also approve the payment for it, leading to misuse of company funds12.

References:

Segregation of Duties: Examples of Roles, Duties & Violations - Pathlock

Functions in the Purchasing Process and how to Segregate Purchasing Duties

 The record-locking option of a database management system (DBMS) serves to eliminate the risk of concurrent updates to a record by different users or transactions. Record locking is a technique of preventing simultaneous access to data in a database, to prevent inconsistent results1. For example, if two bank clerks try to update the same bank account for two different transactions, record locking can ensure that only one clerk can modify the record at a time, while the other has to wait until the lock is released. This way, the record will reflect both transactions correctly and avoid data corruption.

Record locking does not serve to allow database administrators (DBAs) to record the activities of users. This is a function of auditing or logging, which can track the actions performed by users on the database2. Record locking does not affect the ability of DBAs to monitor or audit user activities.

Record locking does not serve to restrict users from changing certain values within records. This is a function of access control or authorization, which can enforce rules or policies on what data users can view or modify2. Record locking does not affect the permissions or privileges of users on the database.

Record locking does not serve to allow users to lock others out of their files. This is a function of encryption or password protection, which can secure files from unauthorized access or modification3. Record locking does not affect the security or confidentiality of files on the database.

References:

Record locking - Wikipedia1

Database security - Wikipedia2

File system permissions - Wikipedia3

Compared to developing a system in-house, acquiring a software package means that the need for testing by end users is unchanged. This is because end users are still the ultimate customers and beneficiaries of the system, and they need to ensure that the software package meets their requirements, expectations, and satisfaction. End user testing, also known as user acceptance testing (UAT) or beta testing, is the final stage of testing performed by the user or client to determine whether the software can be accepted or not1. End user testing is important for both in-house developed and acquired software packages, as it helps to verify the functionality, usability, performance, and reliability of the system2. End user testing also helps to identify and resolve any defects, errors, or issues that may not have been detected by the developers or vendors3.

Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

Option A is not correct because end user testing is not eliminated by acquiring a software package. Even though the software package may have been tested by the vendor or supplier, it may still have bugs, compatibility issues, or configuration problems that need to be fixed before deployment4. Option C is not correct because end user testing is not increased by acquiring a software package. The scope and extent of end user testing depend on various factors, such as the complexity, criticality, and customization of the system, and not on whether it is developed in-house or acquired. Option D is not correct because end user testing is not reduced by acquiring a software package. The software package may still require modifications or integrations to suit the specific needs and environment of the organization, and these changes need to be tested by the end users.

References:

Chapter 4 Methods of Software Acquisition5

What is User Acceptance Testing (UAT): A Complete Guide1

What Is End-to-End Testing? (With How-To and Example)3

How to Evaluate New Software in 5 Steps4

User Acceptance Testing (UAT) in ERP Projects

User Acceptance Testing for Packaged Software

 The best way to prevent a chip-level security vulnerability from being exploited is to install vendor patches. A chip-level security vulnerability is a flaw in the design or implementation of a processor that allows an attacker to bypass the normal security mechanisms and access privileged information or execute malicious code. A vendor patch is a software update provided by the manufacturer of the processor that fixes or mitigates the vulnerability. Installing vendor patches can help to protect the system from known exploits and reduce the risk of data leakage or compromise.

Security awareness training, reviewing hardware vendor contracts, and reviewing security log incidents are not as effective as installing vendor patches for preventing a chip-level security vulnerability from being exploited. Security awareness training is an educational program that teaches users about the importance of security and how to avoid common threats. Reviewing hardware vendor contracts is a legal process that evaluates the terms and conditions of the agreement between the organization and the processor supplier. Reviewing security log incidents is an analytical process that examines the records of security events and activities on the system. These methods may be useful for other security purposes, but they do not directly address the root cause of the chip-level vulnerability or prevent its exploitation. References: Protecting your device against chip-related security vulnerabilities, New ‘Downfall’ Flaw Exposes Valuable Data in Generations of Intel Chips

Involving the application owner early in the audit planning process is the best way to contribute to the quality of an audit of a business-critical application. The application owner has a deep understanding of the application and its business context, which can provide valuable insights for the audit. Early involvement can also help ensure that the audit is aligned with the business objectives and risks, and that any potential issues are identified and addressed promptly12.

References:

Business Critical Applications: An In-Depth Look

Framework for Audit Quality - IFAC

Outsourcing the audit to independent and qualified resources is the best course of action for the IS audit manager who was temporarily tasked with supervising a project manager assigned to the organization’s payroll application upgrade. This is because the IS audit manager has a potential conflict of interest and a threat to objectivity and independence, which are essential principles and standards for IS auditors.

According to the ISACA Code of Professional Ethics, IS auditors should maintain objectivity and independence in their professional judgment and avoid any situations that may impair or be presumed to impair their objectivity or independence1. Objectivity is the mental attitude of an IS auditor that allows them to perform their work honestly, impartially, and with integrity, while independence is the freedom from conditions that threaten the ability of an IS auditor to carry out their work in an unbiased manner2.

The IS audit manager who was involved in supervising the payroll application upgrade project may have a self-review threat, which is the risk that an IS auditor will not appropriately evaluate the results of a previous judgment made or service performed by them or their subordinates3. The IS audit manager may also have a familiarity threat, which is the risk that an IS auditor will be influenced by a close relationship with someone involved in the project or by their own personal interests4. These threats may compromise the IS audit manager’s objectivity and independence and affect the quality and credibility of the audit.

Therefore, the IS audit manager should disclose their involvement in the project to their senior management and the audit committee and decline to perform or manage the audit. The IS audit manager should also recommend outsourcing the audit to independent and qualified resources who have no connection or interest in the project and who have the necessary skills and experience to conduct a reliable and effective audit.

The other options are not the best course of action for the IS audit manager.

Transferring the assignment to a different audit manager despite lack of IT project management experience is not the best course of action because it may result in a low-quality audit that does not meet the expectations and standards of the stakeholders. IT project management experience is essential for auditing an IT project, as it requires knowledge of project management methodologies, tools, techniques, risks, and best practices. An audit manager who lacks IT project management experience may not be able to plan, execute, report, and follow up on the audit effectively and efficiently.

Managing the audit since there is no one else with the appropriate experience is not the best course of action because it violates the ethical principles and standards of objectivity and independence for IS auditors. Managing the audit would create a conflict of interest and a threat to objectivity and independence for the IS audit manager, as they would be reviewing their own work or that of their subordinate. Managing the audit would also undermine the credibility and reliability of the audit results and recommendations, as they may be biased or influenced by personal or professional relationships or interests.

Having a senior IS auditor manage the project with the IS audit manager performing final review is not the best course of action because it still involves the IS audit manager in the audit process, which poses a conflict of interest and a threat to objectivity and independence. Performing final review would require the IS audit manager to evaluate and approve the work done by the senior IS auditor, which may be affected by their previous involvement in or knowledge of the project. Performing final review would also expose the IS audit manager to undue pressure or influence from management or other stakeholders who may have expectations or preferences regarding the audit outcome.