CISA Exam Dumps - Certified Information Systems Auditor

A disaster recovery plan (DRP) is a set of procedures and resources that enable an organization to restore its critical operations, data, and applications in the event of a disaster1. A DRP should be aligned with the organization’s business continuity plan (BCP), which defines the strategies and objectives for maintaining business functions during and after a disaster1.

To ensure that a DRP is effective, it should betested regularly and thoroughly to identify and resolve any issues or gaps that might hinder itsexecution2345. Testing a DRP can help evaluate its feasibility, validity, reliability, and compatibility with the organization’s environment and needs4. Testing can also help prepare the staff, stakeholders, and vendors involved in the DRP for their roles and responsibilities during a disaster3.

There are different methods and levels of testing a DRP, depending on the scope, complexity, and objectives of the test4. Some of the common testing methods are:

Walkthrough testing: This is a step-by-step review of the DRP by the disaster recovery team and relevant stakeholders. It aims to verify the completeness and accuracy of the plan, as well as to clarify any doubts or questions among the participants45.

Simulation testing: This is a mock exercise of the DRP in a simulated disaster scenario. It aims to assess the readiness and effectiveness of the plan, as well as to identify any challenges or weaknesses that might arise during a real disaster45.

Checklist testing: This is a verification of the availability and functionality of the resources and equipment required for the DRP. It aims toensure that the backup systems, data, anddocumentation are accessible and up-to-date45.

Full interruption testing: This is the most realistic and rigorous method of testing a DRP. It involves shutting down the primary site and activating the backup site for a certain period of time. It aims to measure the actual impact andperformance of the DRP under real conditions45.

Parallel testing: This is a less disruptive method of testing a DRP. It involves running the backup site in parallel with the primary site without affecting the normal operations. It aims to compare and validate the results and outputs of both sites45.

Amongthese methods, full interruption testing would best demonstrate that an effectiveDRP is in place, as it provides the most accurate and comprehensive evaluation ofthe plan’s capabilities and limitations4. Full interruption testing can reveal any hidden or unforeseen issues or risks that might affect the recovery process, such as data loss, system failure, compatibility problems, or human errors4. Full interruption testing can also verify that the backup site can support the critical operations and services ofthe organization without compromising its quality or security4.

However, full interruption testing also has some drawbacks, such as being costly, time-consuming, risky, and disruptive to the normaloperations4. Therefore, it should be planned carefullyand conducted periodically with proper coordination and communication among all parties involved4.

The other options are not as effective as full interruption testing in demonstrating that an effective DRP is in place. Frequent testing of backups is only one aspect of checklist testing, which does not cover other components or scenarios of the DRP4. Annual walk-through testing is only atheoretical review of the DRP, which does not test its practical implementation or outcomes4. Periodic risk assessment is only a preparatory step for developing or updating the DRP, which does not test its functionality or performance4.

References: 2: Best Practices For Disaster Recovery Testing | Snyk 3: Disaster Recovery Plan (DR) Testing — Methods and Must-haves -US Signal 4: Disaster Recovery Testing: What You Need toKnow - Enterprise Storage Forum 5: Disaster Recovery Testing Best Practices - MSP360 1: How to Test a Disaster Recovery Plan - Abacus

 The auditor’s best action when IT management provides suitable evidence for a control that had been concluded as ineffective is to re-perform the audit before changing the conclusion. This means that the auditor should verify the validity, completeness, and timeliness of the evidence provided by IT management and test the effectiveness of the new control in meeting the audit objectives. The auditor should not change the conclusion based on evidence provided by IT management without re-performing the audit, as this could compromise the auditor’s independence and objectivity. The auditor should also not explain to IT management that the new control will be evaluated during follow-up or add comments about the action taken by IT management in the report, as these actions do not address the original audit finding. References: CISA Review Manual, 27thEdition, page 439

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

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

 The IS auditor’s first action after discovering an option in a database that allows the administrator to directly modify any table should be to determine whether the audit trail is secured and reviewed. This is because direct modification of database tables can pose a significant risk to data integrity, security, and accountability. An audit trail is a record of all changes made to database tables, including who made them, when they were made, and what was changed. An audit trail can help to detect unauthorized or erroneous changes, provide evidence for investigations or audits, and support data recovery or restoration. The IS auditor should assess whether the audit trail is protected from tampering or deletion, and whether it is regularly reviewed for anomalies or exceptions.

Reviewing the performance against service level agreements (SLAs) would best determine whether the service provider continues to meet the organization’s objectives, as SLAs define the expected level of service, quality, availability, and responsibilities of both parties. Assessment of the personnel training processes of the provider, adequacy of the service provider’s insurance, and periodic audits of controls by an independent auditor are important aspects of outsourcing, but they do not directly measure the performance of the service provider against the organization’s objectives. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.5.2

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

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

The most important aspect of an application development acceptance test is that user management approves the test design before the test is started, as this ensures that the test objectives, criteria, and procedures are aligned with the user requirements and expectations. The programming team’s involvement in the testing process, the testing of data files for valid information before conversion, and the quality assurance (QA) team’s charge of the testing process are also important, but they are not as critical as user management’s approval of the test design. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.4.2

 Fine tuning the intrusion detection system (IDS) is the best recommendation to reduce the number of false positive alerts that overwhelm the log management system, because it can help adjust the sensitivity and accuracy of the IDS rules and signatures to match the network environment and traffic patterns. Establishing criteria for reviewing alerts, recruiting more monitoring personnel, and reducing thefirewall rules are not effective solutions to address theroot cause of the false positive alerts, but rather ways to cope with the consequences. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section5.4.3