Isaca Updated CISA Exam Questions and Answers by mikayla

Asset life cycle management is a technique of asset management where facility managers maximize the usable life of assets through planning, purchasing, using, maintaining, and disposing of assets1. The main aim of asset life cycle management is to reduce costs and increase productivity by optimizing the performance, reliability, and lifespan of assets2. Asset life cycle management can help prevent the situation of having unused applications by ensuring that the applications are aligned with the business needs, objectives, and strategies, and that they are regularly reviewed, updated, or retired as necessary3.

The other options are not as effective as asset life cycle management for preventing unused applications. A formal request for proposal (RFP) process is a method of soliciting bids from potential vendors or suppliers for a project or service. A RFP process can help select the best application for a specific requirement, but it does not ensure that the application will be used or maintained throughout its lifecycle. Business case development procedures are a set of steps that involve defining the problem, analyzing the alternatives, and proposing a solution for a project or initiative. Business case development procedures can help justify the need and value of an application, but they do not guarantee that the application will be utilized or supported after its implementation. An information asset acquisition policy is a document that outlines the rules and standards for acquiring information assets such as applications. An information asset acquisition policy can help ensure that the applications are acquired in a consistent and compliant manner, but it does not address how the applications will be managed or disposed of after their acquisition.

The finding that should be of greatest concern to the IS auditor is that user accounts are shared between users. User accounts are unique identifiers that grant access to an organization’s financial business application based on the roles and responsibilities of the users. User accounts should be individualized and personalized to ensure accountability, traceability, and auditability of user actions and transactions. User accounts should not be shared between users, because this can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the financial data and systems, and can enable unauthorized or fraudulent activities. If user accounts are shared between users, the IS auditor may not be able to determine who performed what action or transaction, or whether the user had the appropriate authorization or approval. The other findings are also concerning, but not as much as user account sharing, because they either affect the password strength or frequency rather than the user identity, or they relate to monitoring rather than controlling user access. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.2

 The most important thing for an IS auditor to confirm when reviewing an organization’s plans to implement robotic process automation (RPA) to automate routine business tasks is that the end-to-end process is understood and documented. This is because RPA involves the use of software robots or digital workers to mimic human actions and execute predefined rules and workflows. Therefore, it is essential that the IS auditor verifies that the organization has a clear and accurate understanding of the current state of the process, the desired state of the process, the inputs and outputs, the exceptions and errors, the roles and responsibilities, and the performance measures12. Without a proper documentation of the end-to-end process, the organization may face challenges in designing, developing, testing, deploying, and monitoring the RPA solution3. References: 1: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience, Section 4.2: IT Service Delivery and Support, page 211 2: CISA Online Review Course, Module 4: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience, Lesson 4.2: IT Service Delivery and Support 3: ISACA Journal Volume 5, 2019, Article: Robotic Process Automation: Benefits, Risks and Controls

This means that the organization should obtain the source code from the escrow agent and compare it with the current version of the application that they are using. The organization should then identify and apply any changes or updates that are missing or different in the escrow version, so that it matches the current version. This way, the organization can ensure that they have a complete and accurate copy of the source code that reflects their current needs and requirements.

Bringing the escrow version up to date can help the organization to avoid or reduce the risks and costs associated with using an outdated or incompatible version of the source code. For example, an older version of the source code may have bugs, errors, or vulnerabilities that could affect the functionality, security, or performance of the application. An older version of the source code may also lack some features, enhancements, or integrations that could improve the usability, efficiency, or value of the application. An older version of the source code may also not comply with some standards, regulations, or contracts that could affect the quality, reliability, or legality of the application1.

The other options are not as good as bringing the escrow version up to date for the organization. Option A, analyzing a new application that meets the current requirements, is a possible option but it may be more time-consuming, expensive, and risky than updating the existing application. The organization may have to go through a complex and lengthy process of selecting, acquiring, implementing, testing, and migrating to a new application, which could disrupt their operations and performance. The organization may also have to deal with compatibility, interoperability, or data quality issues when switching to a new application2. Option B, performing an analysis to determine the business risk, is a necessary step but not a recommendation for the organization. The organization should already be aware of the business risk of using an application whose vendor has gone out of business and whose escrow has an older version of the source code. The organization should focus on finding and implementing a solution to mitigate or eliminate this risk3. Option D, developing a maintenance plan to support the application using the existing code, is not a feasible option because it assumes that the organization has access to the existing code. However, this is not the case because the vendor has gone out of business and the escrow has an older version of the source code. The organization cannot support or maintain an application without having a complete and accurate copy of its source code.

References:

• How Important Is Source Code Escrow - ISACA1
• The What and Why of Source Code Escrow2
• Unlocking Source Code In Escrow 2023: A Guide To Secure Software3