Isaca Updated CISA Exam Questions and Answers by rogan

The best assurance that a new DBMS meets local privacy regulations is provided by a compliance audit. ISACA defines privacy compliance as adherence to relevant data protection laws, regulations, standards, and policies. A compliance-focused review is therefore the most direct way to determine whether the DBMS design, configuration, and operation satisfy applicable privacy requirements.

Option A is correct because the question is specifically about meeting local privacy regulations. A compliance audit is designed to assess conformance with external legal and regulatory obligations as well as applicable internal requirements. ISACA’s privacy risk guidance also notes that privacy assessments determine whether an enterprise is in compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

Option B is incorrect because an administrative audit is broader and does not specifically target legal and regulatory privacy compliance.

Option C is incorrect because a general IT controls review may assess access, change management, backup, and operations controls, but it does not directly assure compliance with privacy laws.

Option D is incorrect because a forensic audit is typically used to investigate incidents or evidence after suspected wrongdoing, not to assess upfront regulatory compliance. ISACA’s digital forensics guidance is centered on identifying, preserving, analyzing, and presenting evidence.

Therefore, A is the best answer because a compliance audit most directly evaluates whether the DBMS meets local privacy regulatory requirements.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA, Privacy Compliance — adherence to relevant data protection laws, regulations, standards, and policies.

ISACA Journal, Privacy Risk Management — privacy risk assessment determines compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

ISACA Journal, What Is Your Privacy and Data Protection Strategy? — privacy strategy should ensure compliance with privacy standards, rules, and laws.

ISACA, Overview of Digital Forensics — clarifies why forensic audit is not the best fit for regulatory assurance.

The best answer is A. Business risk.

ISACA guidance ties data classification directly to the organization’s risk context. ISACA notes that data classification defines the threshold beyond which damage to the organization may occur, and recent ISACA guidance also states that data-centric controls should align directly to business risk. That means classification should first reflect how sensitive the information is from the standpoint of business impact, not simply standards, policy wording, or retention schedules.

Option B is useful as a reference, but industry standards are secondary to the organization’s own risk exposure and business impact. Option C is also secondary because security policy should itself be based on business risk. Option D matters for lifecycle governance, but retention requirements do not drive the fundamental sensitivity classification of information.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Journal, Security Adjustments to Strengthen the Bond Between Risk Registers and Information.

ISACA, Detect, Prevent, Comply: The Three Pillars of Modern DLP Use Cases.

ISACA, Navigating Risk When Transitioning to the Cloud.

Deferring remediation testing until the next audit is justified only when there are significant changes in the audit environment that affect the relevance or validity of the audit observations and recommendations. For example, if there are changes in the business processes, systems, regulations, or risks that require a new audit scope or approach. The other options are not valid justifications for deferring remediation testing, as they do not address the timeliness or quality of the audit follow-up process. The auditor who conducted the audit and agreed with the timeline has left the organization does not affect the responsibility of the audit function to ensure that remediation testing is performed as planned. Management’s planned actions are sufficient given the relative importance of the observations does not guarantee that management will actually implement those actions or that they will be effective in addressing the audit issues. Auditee management has accepted all observations reported by the auditor does not eliminate the need for verification of remediation actions by an independent party. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.4

Managing projects as a portfolio allows an organization to oversee and coordinate multiple projects collectively. This approach provides a holistic view, enabling the identification of interdependencies among projects. Recognizing these dependencies is crucial for resource allocation, scheduling, and achieving strategic objectives. While informing users, managing quality, and addressing individual project risks are important, they are typically handled within the scope of each project. The unique advantage of portfolio management lies in its ability to identify and manage relationships and dependencies across multiple projects, ensuring that the portfolio aligns with the organization ' s strategic goals.