CISA Exam Dumps - Certified Information Systems Auditor

The most important thing for an IS auditor to review when evaluating the accuracy of a spreadsheet that contains several macros is the formulas within macros. Macros are sequences of commands or instructions that can automate tasks or calculations in a spreadsheet. Formulas are expressions that perform calculations on values or data in a spreadsheet. The accuracy of a spreadsheet depends largely on whether the formulas within macros are correct, consistent, and complete. The IS auditor should review the formulas within macros to verify that they produce the expected results and do not contain any errors or inconsistencies. The other options are not as important as formulas within macros, as they do not directly affect the accuracy of a spreadsheet. Encryption of the spreadsheet is a security control that can protect the confidentiality and integrity of the spreadsheet, but it does not ensure its accuracy. Version history is a document control feature that can track and manage changes to the spreadsheet, but it does not verify its accuracy. Reconciliation of key calculations is a validation technique that can compare and confirm the results of calculations with other sources, but it does not evaluate the accuracy of formulas within macros. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

 Carbon dioxide fire suppression systems need to be combined with an automatic switch to shut down the electricity supply in the event of activation. This is because carbon dioxide displaces oxygen in the air and can create a suffocation hazard for people in the protected area. Therefore, it is essential to cut off the power source before releasing carbon dioxide to avoid electrical shocks and sparks that could ignite the fire again. Carbon dioxide systems are typically used for total flooding applications in spaces that are not habitable, such as server rooms or data centers. 

 The primary reason for an IS auditor to conduct post-implementation reviews is to determine whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. A post-implementation review is an audit activity that evaluates whether a project has delivered its expected outcomes or benefits in accordance with its objectives, scope, budget, and schedule. A business case is a document that defines and justifies the need, value, and feasibility of a project. A post-implementation review can help assess whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved by comparing actual results with planned expectations and identifying any gaps or deviations. The other options are not primary reasons for conducting post-implementation reviews, as they do not measure whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. Ensuring key stakeholder sign-off has been obtained is a project closure activity that confirms that all project deliverables have been completed and accepted by key stakeholders, but it does not evaluate whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. Aligning project objectives with business needs is a project initiation activity that ensures that the project is aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and priorities, but it does not evaluate whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. Documenting lessons learned to improve future project delivery is a project learning activity that captures and shares the knowledge, experience, and feedback gained from the project, but it does not evaluate whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

 Substantive testing provides the most reliable audit evidence on the validity of transactions in a financial application. Substantive testing is an audit procedure that examines the financial statements and supporting documentation to see if they contain errors or misstatements. Substantive testing can help to verify that the transactions recorded in the financial applicationare authorized, complete, accurate, and properly classified. Substantive testing can include methods such as vouching, confirmation, analytical procedures, or physical examination. 

 In a controlled application development environment, the most important segregation of duties should be between the person who implements changes into the production environment and the application programmer. This segregation of duties ensures that no one person can create and deploy code without proper review, testing, and approval. This reduces the risk of errors, fraud, or malicious code being introduced into the production environment.

The other options are not as important as the segregation between the application programmer and the person who implements changes into production, but they are still relevant for achieving a secure and reliable application development environment. The segregation of duties between the person who implements changes into production and the systems programmer is important to prevent unauthorized or untested changes to system software or configuration. The segregation of duties between the person who implements changes into production and the computer operator is important to prevent unauthorized or uncontrolled access to production data or resources. The segregation of duties between the person who implements changes into production and the quality assurance (QA) personnel is important to ensure independent verification and validation of code quality and functionality.

 If an IS auditor finds that management did not address a prior period audit finding, the next course of action should be to interview management to determine why the finding was not addressed, as this would help to understand the root cause, the impact, and the risk level of the issue. Noting the exception in a new report, recommending alternative solutions, or conducting a risk assessment are possible subsequent steps, but they should not precede interviewing management. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1, Section 1.6

The primary factor to determine system criticality within an organization is the maximum allowable downtime (MAD). MAD is the maximum time frame during which recovery must become effective before an outage compromises the ability of an organization to achieve its business objectives and/or survival. MAD reflects the business impact of a system outage onthe organization’s operations, reputation, compliance, and finances. MAD can help to prioritize system recovery efforts, allocate resources, and establish recovery objectives.