Isaca Updated CISA Exam Questions and Answers by elora

 The best performance indicator for the effectiveness of an incident management program is the incident resolution meantime. This is the average time it takes to resolve an incident from the moment it is reported to the moment it is closed. The incident resolution meantime reflects how quickly and efficiently the incident management team can restore normal service and minimize the impact of incidents on the business operations and customer satisfaction.

The average time between incidents (option A) is not a good performance indicator for the effectiveness of an incident management program, as it does not measure how well the incidents are handled or resolved. It only shows how frequently the incidents occur, which may depend on various factors beyond the control of the incident management team, such as the complexity and reliability of the systems, the security threats and vulnerabilities, and the user behavior and expectations.

The incident alert meantime (option B) is the average time it takes to detect and report an incident. While this is an important metric for measuring the responsiveness and awareness of the incident management team, it does not indicate how effective the incident management program is in resolving the incidents and restoring normal service.

The number of incidents reported (option C) is also not a good performance indicator for the effectiveness of an incident management program, as it does not reflect how well the incidents are handled or resolved. It only shows how many incidents are identified and recorded, which may vary depending on the reporting channels, tools, and procedures used by the incident management team and the users.

Therefore, option D is the correct answer.

References:

Incident Management: Processes, Best Practices & Tools - Atlassian

What is backup and disaster recovery? | IBM

Full disk encryption (FDE) is a means of protecting information by encrypting all of thedata on a disk, including temporary files, programs, and system files1. FDE is best suited for addressing the risk scenario of physical theft of media on which information is stored, as it prevents unauthorized access to the data even if the device is lost or stolen2. FDE does not prevent data leakage as a result of employees leaving to work for competitors, as they may still have access to the data while using the device or copy the data to another device before leaving. FDE does not prevent noncompliance fines related to storage of regulated information, as it does not ensure that the data is stored in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations. FDE does not prevent unauthorized logical access to information through an application interface, as it does not control the access rights and permissions of users and applications. *References: According to the ISACA IT Audit and Assurance Standards, Guidelines and Tools and Techniques for IS Audit and Assurance Professionals, section 2402 Planning, “The IS audit and assurance professional should identify and assess risk relevant to the area under review.” 3 Oneof the risk factors to consider is “the sensitivity of information processed, stored or transmitted by the system” 3. FDE is one of the possible controls to mitigate the risk of unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information due to physical theft of media.

The best indication to an IS auditor that management’s post-implementation review was effective is that lessons learned were documented and applied, as this shows that the management has identified and addressed the issues and gaps that arose during the implementation, and has improved the processes and practices for future projects. Business and IT stakeholders participating in the post-implementation review is a good practice, but it does not guarantee that the review was effective or that the outcomes were implemented. Post-implementation review being a formal phase in the system development life cycle (SDLC) is a requirement, but it does not ensure that the review was effective or that the outcomes were implemented. Internal audit follow-up being completed without any findings is a desirable result, but it does not indicate that the management’s post-implementation review was effectiveorthat the outcomes were implemented. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: Information Systems Acquisition, Development andImplementation, Section 3.2: Project Management Practices1

The best source ofinformation for examining the classification of new data is the risk assessment results, because they provide an objective and consistent basis for determining the value, sensitivity, and criticality of the data, as well as the potential impact of unauthorized disclosure, modification, or loss of the data12. The risk assessment results can help to definethe appropriate classification levels and criteria for the data, such as public, internal, confidential, or restricted12. Input by data custodians, security policy requirements, and current levelof protection are not the best sources of information for examining the classification of new data, because they may not reflect the actual risk exposure or business needs of the data. References: 1: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section5.4.2 2: CISA Online Review Course, Module 5, Lesson 4