CISA Exam Dumps - Certified Information Systems Auditor

 A black box penetration test is a type of security assessment that simulates an attack on a system or network without any prior knowledge of its configuration or architecture. The main objective of this test is to identify vulnerabilities and weaknesses that can be exploited by external or internal threat actors. To plan a black box penetration test, it is most important to ensure that the environment and penetration test scope have been determined. This means that the tester and the client organization have agreed on the boundaries, objectives, methods, and deliverables of the test, as well as the legal and ethical aspects of the engagement. Without a clear definition of the environment and scope, the testmay not be effective, efficient, or compliant with relevant standards and regulations. Additionally, the tester may cause unintended damage or disruption to the client’s systems or networks, or violate their privacy or security policies.

References:

What are black box, grey box, and white box penetration testing?

What Is Black-Box Penetration Testing and Why ShouldYou Choose It?

The best indicator of whether a PIR performed by the PMO was effective is whether project outcomes have been realized. Project outcomes are the benefits or value that a project delivers to its stakeholders, such as improved efficiency, quality, customer satisfaction, or revenue. A PIR should evaluate whether project outcomes have been achieved in accordance with project objectives, scope, budget, and schedule. The other options are not as good as project outcomes in determining the effectiveness of a PIR. Lessons learned are valuable inputs for improving future projects, but they do not measure whether project outcomes have been realized. Management approval of the PIR report is a sign of acceptance and support for the PIR findings and recommendations, but it does not reflect whether project outcomes have been achieved. The review performed by an external provider is a way of ensuring objectivity and independence for the PIR, but it does not guarantee whether project outcomes have been realized. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

 The greatest concern for an IS auditor when evaluating an organization’s IT strategy and plans is that IT is not engaged in business strategic planning, as this indicates a lack of alignment between IT and business objectives, which could result in inefficient and ineffective use of IT resources and capabilities. The absence of a defined IT security policy, the nondistribution of business strategy meeting minutes, and the inadequate documentation of IT strategic planning are also issues that should be addressed by an IS auditor, but they are not as significant as IT’s noninvolvement in business strategic planning. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.1

The best recommendation to facilitate compliance with the regulation that requires organizations to report significant security incidents to the regulator within 24 hours of identification is to include the requirement in the incident management response plan. An incident management response plan is a document that defines the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and tools for managing security incidents effectively and efficiently. Including the requirement in the incident management response plan can help ensure that security incidents are identified, classified, reported, and escalated in accordance with the regulation. The other options are not as effective as including the requirement in the incident management response plan, as they do not address all aspects of incident management or compliance. Establishing key performance indicators (KPIs) for timely identification of security incidents is a monitoring technique that can help measure and improve the performance of incident management processes, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation. Enhancing the alert functionality of the intrusion detection system (IDS) is a technical control that can help detect and notify security incidents faster, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation. Engaging an external security incident response expert for incident handling is a contingency measure that can help augment the organization’s internal capabilities and resources for managing security incidents, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2

 An employee is induced to reveal confidential IP addresses and passwords by answering questions over the phone. This is a social engineering attack method that exploits the trust or curiosity of the employee to obtain sensitive information that can be used to access or compromise the network. According to the web search results, social engineering is a technique that uses psychological manipulationto trick users into making security mistakes or giving away sensitive information1. Phishing, whaling, baiting, and pretexting are some of the common forms of social engineering attacks2. Social engineering attacks are often more effective and profitable than purely technical attacks, as they rely on human error rather than system vulnerabilities

The primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project is to evaluate the controls incorporated into the system specifications. Controls aremechanisms or procedures that aim to ensure the security, reliability, or performance of a system or process. System specifications are documents that define and describe the requirements, features, functions, or components of a system or software. Evaluating the controls incorporated into the system specifications is a key responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project, as it helps ensure that the system or software meets the organization’s objectives, standards, and expectations for security, reliability, or performance. The other options are not primary responsibilities of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project, as they do not directly relate to evaluating the controls incorporated into the system specifications. Future compatibility of the application is a possible factor that may affect the functionality or usability of the application in different environments or platforms, but it is not a primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project. Proposed functionality of the application is a possible factor that may affect the suitability or value of the application for meeting user needs or expectations, but it is not a primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project. Development methodology employed is a possible factor that may affect the quality or consistency of the software development process, but it is not a primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

 The IS auditor’s next course of action after finding that firewalls are outdated and not supported by vendors should be to determine the risk of not replacing the firewall. Outdated firewalls may have known vulnerabilities that can be exploited by attackers to bypass security controls and access the network. They may also lack compatibility with newer technologies or standards that are required for optimal network performance and protection. Not replacing the firewall could expose the organization to various threats, such as data breaches, denial-of-service attacks, malware infections, or regulatory non-compliance. The IS auditor should assess the likelihood and impact of these threats and quantify the risk level for management to make informed decisions.