CISA Exam Dumps - Certified Information Systems Auditor

 The IS auditor’s best course of action in this situation is to determine whether the alternative controls sufficiently mitigate the risk. Alternative controls are different from those originally discussed and agreed with the audit function, but they may still achieve the same objective of addressing the audit issue or reducing the risk to an acceptable level. The IS auditor should evaluate whether the alternative controls are appropriate, effective, and sustainable before closing the audit finding or escalating it to senior management. The other options are not appropriate for resolving this situation, as they do not consider whether the alternative controls are adequate or reasonable. Re-prioritizing the original issue as high risk and escalating to senior management is a drastic step that may undermine the relationship between the auditor and management, and it should be done only after exhausting other means of resolving the issue. Scheduling a follow-up audit in the next audit cycle is unnecessary, as follow-up activities should be performed as soon as possible after management has implemented corrective actions. Postponing follow-up activities and escalating the alternative controls to senior audit management is premature, as follow-up activities should be completed before reporting any findings or recommendations to senior audit management. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.4

 The first step that an IS auditor should take when finding that a business impact analysis (BIA) has not been performed is to evaluate the impact on current disaster recovery capability. A BIA is a process that identifies and analyzes the potential effects of disruptions to critical business functions and processes. A BIA helps determine the recovery priorities, objectives, and strategies for the organization. Without a BIA, the disaster recovery plan may not be aligned with the business needs and expectations, and may not provide adequate protection and recovery for the most critical assets and activities. Therefore, an IS auditor should assess how the lack of a BIA affects the current disaster recovery capability and identify any gaps or risks that need to be addressed.

Performing a BIA, issuing an intermediate report to management, and conducting additional compliance testing are not the first steps that an IS auditor should take when finding that a BIA has not been performed. These steps may be done later in the audit process, after evaluating the impact on current disaster recovery capability. Performing a BIA is not the responsibility of the IS auditor, but of the business owners and managers. Issuing an intermediate report to management may be premature without sufficient evidence and analysis. Conducting additional compliance testing may not be relevant ornecessary without a clear understanding of the disaster recovery requirements and objectives.

The best source of information for assessing the effectiveness of IT process monitoring is performance data. Performance data is a type of information that measures and reports on the results or outcomes of IT processes, such as availability, reliability, throughput, response time, or error rate. Performance data can help assess the effectiveness of IT process monitoring by providing quantitative and qualitative indicators of whether IT processes are meeting their objectives, standards, or expectations. The other options are not as good as performance data in assessing the effectiveness of IT process monitoring, as they do not provide direct or objective evidence of IT process results or outcomes. Real-time audit software is a type of tool that can help automate and facilitate audit activities, such as data collection, analysis, or reporting, but it does not provide information on IT process performance. Quality assurance (QA) reviews are a type of activity that can help evaluate and improve the quality of IT processes, products, or services, but they do not provide information on IT process performance. Participative management techniques are a type of method that can help involve and motivate IT staff in decision-making and problem-solving processes, but they do not provide information on IT process performance. 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 most important aspect of an application development acceptance test is that user management approves the test design before the test is started, as this ensures that the test objectives, criteria, and procedures are aligned with the user requirements and expectations. The programming team’s involvement in the testing process, the testing of data files for valid information before conversion, and the quality assurance (QA) team’s charge of the testing process are also important, but they are not as critical as user management’s approval of the test design. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.4.2

The IS auditor should inform audit management of the earlier involvement in designing the application. This is to ensure that there is no conflict of interest or bias that may affect the objectivity or independence of the audit. Audit management can then decide whether to assign a different auditor or to proceed with the same auditor with appropriate safeguards. The other options are not appropriate for the IS auditor to do in this situation. Refusing the assignment to avoid conflict of interest is an extreme measure that may not be necessary or feasible, especially if there are no other qualified auditors available. Using the knowledge of the application to carry out the audit is risky, as it may lead to overlooking or ignoring potential issues or errors in the application. Modifying the scope of the audit is not advisable, as it may compromise the quality or completeness of the audit. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.1

 The decision to accept an IT control risk related to data quality should be the responsibility of the business owner. The business owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the business process that relies on the data quality. The business owner should understand the impact of data quality issues on the business objectives, performance, and compliance. The business owner should also be involved in defining the data quality requirements, assessing the data quality risks, and implementing the data quality controls or mitigation strategies.

The best way to address segregation of duties issues in an organization with budget constraints is to implement compensating controls, which are alternative controls that reduce or eliminate the risk of errors or fraud due to inadequate segregation of duties. Compensating controls may include independent reviews, reconciliations, approvals, or supervisions. Rotating job duties periodically may reduce the risk of collusion or abuse of privileges, but it may also affect operational efficiency and continuity. Performing an independent audit may detect segregation of duties issues, but it does not prevent them. Hiring temporary staff may increase operational costs and introduce new risks. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.4