Isaca Updated CISA Exam Questions and Answers by thiago

If an IS audit reveals that an organization is not proactively addressing known vulnerabilities, the IS auditor should recommend that the organization assess the security risks to the business first, as this would help to prioritize the vulnerabilities based on their impact and likelihood, and determine the appropriate mitigation strategies. Verifying the disaster recovery plan (DRP) has been tested, ensuring the intrusion prevention system (IPS) is effective, and confirming the incident response team understands the issue are important steps, but they are not as urgent as assessing the security risks to the business. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.6

The primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project is to evaluate the controls incorporated into the system specifications. Controls are mechanisms or procedures that aim to ensure the security, reliability, or performance of a system or process. System specifications are documents that define and describe the requirements, features, functions, or components of a system or software. Evaluating the controls incorporated into the system specifications is a key responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project, as it helps ensure that the system or software meets the organization’s objectives, standards, and expectations for security, reliability, or performance. The other options are not primary responsibilities of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project, as they do not directly relate to evaluating the controls incorporated into the system specifications. Future compatibility of the application is a possible factor that may affect the functionality or usability of the application in different environments or platforms, but it is not a primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project. Proposed functionality of the application is a possible factor that may affect the suitability or value of the application for meeting user needs or expectations, but it is not a primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project. Development methodology employed is a possible factor that may affect the quality or consistency of the software development process, but it is not a primary responsibility of an IS auditor during the design phase of a software development project. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

 The most important task before implementing any associated email controls to prevent sensitive information from being emailed outside the organization by employees is to develop an information classification scheme. An information classification scheme is a framework that defines the categories and levels of sensitivity for different types of information, such as public, internal, confidential, or secret. An information classification scheme can help implement email controls by providing criteria and guidelines for identifying, labeling, handling, and protecting sensitive information in email attachments. The other options are not as important as developing an information classification scheme, as they do not address the root cause of the problem or provide the same benefits. Requiring all employees to sign nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) is a legal control that can help deter or penalize employees from disclosing sensitive information, but it does not prevent them from emailing it outside the organization. Developing an acceptable use policy for end-user computing (EUC) is a governance control that can help define and communicate the rules and expectations for using IT resources, such as email, but it does not prevent employees from emailing sensitive information outside the organization. Providing notification to employees about possible email monitoring is a transparency control that can help inform and warn employees about the potential consequences of emailing sensitive information outside the organization, but it does not prevent them from doing so. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2

The best recommendation for a small IT web development company where developers must have write access to production is to remove production access from the developers. Production access is the ability to modify or update the live systems or applications that are used by customers or end users. Production access should be restricted to authorized and qualified personnel only, as any changes or errors in production can affect the functionality, performance, or security of the systems or applications. Developers should not have write access to production, as they may introduce bugs, vulnerabilities, or inconsistencies in the code that can compromise the quality or reliability of the systems or applications. The other options are not as effective as removing production access from the developers, as they do not address the root cause of the problem or provide the same benefits. Hiring another person to perform migration to production is a costly solution that can help segregate the roles and responsibilities of developers and migrators, but it does not remove production access from the developers. Implementing continuous monitoring controls is a good practice that can help detect and correct any issues or anomalies in production, but it does not remove production access from the developers. Performing a user access review for the development team is a detective control that can help verify and validate the access rights and privileges of developers, but it does not remove production access from the developers. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2