Isaca Updated CISA Exam Questions and Answers by zack

The most appropriate control to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system is to enforce an internal data access policy. A data access policy defines who can access what data, under what conditions and for what purposes. It also specifies the roles and responsibilities of data owners, custodians and users, as well as the security measures and controls to protect data confidentiality, integrity and availability. By enforcing a data access policy, the organization can ensure that only authorized personnel can retrieve confidential information from the business application system. Applying single sign-on for access control, implementing segregation of duties and enforcing the use of digital signatures are also useful controls, but they are not sufficient to prevent unauthorized data retrieval without a clear and comprehensive data access policy. References:

• CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 2301
• CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription2

 The most efficient way to identify segregation of duties violations in a new system is to review a report of security rights in the system. Segregation of duties is a control principle that aims to prevent or detect errors, fraud, or abuse by ensuring that no single individual has the ability to perform incompatible or conflicting functions or activities within a system or process. A report of security rights in the system can provide a comprehensive and accurate overview of the roles, responsibilities, and access levels assigned to different users or groups in the system, and can help to identify any potential segregation of duties violations or risks. The other options are not as efficient as reviewing a report of security rights in the system, because they either rely on observation or testing rather than analysis, or they focus on existing rather than potential violations. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)1, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.2

The primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates is that it establishes accountability for the action plans. Accountability means that the individuals or groups who are responsible for implementing the action plans are clearly identified and held liable for their completion within the specified time frame. Accountability also implies that the action plans are monitored and evaluated to ensure that they are effective and efficient in addressing the audit findings and mitigating the associated risks1. Accountability helps to ensure that the audit recommendations are taken seriously and implemented properly, and that the audit value is realized by the organization2. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:

• A. It facilitates easier audit follow-up is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of a secondary or indirect benefit. Audit follow-up is the process of verifying whether the action plans have been implemented and whether they have resolved the audit findings3. While having clear action plans, owners, and target dates may facilitate easier audit follow-up by providing a basis for tracking and reporting the progress and status of the action plans, it does not necessarily guarantee that the action plans will be implemented or effective.
• B. It enforces action plan consensus between auditors and auditees is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of a prerequisite or condition for such an approach. Action plan consensus means that the auditors and auditees agree on the audit findings and recommendations, and on the action plans to address them4. While having action plan consensus may enhance the credibility and acceptance of the audit approach, it does not necessarily ensure that the action plans will be implemented or effective.
• D. It helps to ensure factual accuracy of findings is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of an outcome or result of such an approach. Factual accuracy of findings means that the audit findings are based on sufficient, reliable, relevant, and useful evidence5. While having factual accuracy of findings may increase the confidence and trust in the audit approach, it does not necessarily ensure that the action plans will be implemented or effective. References: Accountability - ISACA, Audit Value - ISACA, Audit Follow-up - ISACA, Action Plan Consensus - ISACA, Factual Accuracy of Findings - ISACA

The best way to validate that appropriate security controls are in place to prevent data loss is to review compliance with data loss and applicable mobile device user acceptance policies. This will ensure that the organization has established clear rules and guidelines for employees to follow when connecting their personal devices to company-owned computers. A walk-through, a DLP tool configuration, and a security awareness training are not sufficient to validate the effectiveness of the controls, as they may not cover all possible scenarios and risks. References: IT Audit Fundamentals Certificate Resources