CISA Exam Dumps - Certified Information Systems Auditor

DLP technologies are designed to prevent the unauthorized transmission or leakage of sensitive data, such as PII, intellectual property, or financial information, by employees or other insiders. DLP technologies can monitor, detect, and block data in motion, data at rest, and data in use across various channels, such as email, web, cloud, or removable devices. DLP technologies can also help enforce data security policies and compliance requirements.

References

ISACA CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 253

The role of disclosures in risk assessment and mitigation

Mitigate Risk Strategy for Information Management

The most concerning issue associated with a data center’s CCTV surveillance cameras is that the recordings are not regularly reviewed. This means that any unauthorized access, theft, vandalism, or other security incidents may go unnoticed and unreported. CCTV recordings are a valuable source of evidence and deterrence for data center security, and they should be monitored and audited periodically to ensure compliance with policies and regulations. If the recordings are not reviewed, the data center may face legal, financial, or reputational risks in case of a security breach or an audit failure.

The other options are less concerning because they do not directly affect the security of the data center. CCTV cameras are not required to be installed in break rooms, as they are not critical areas for data protection. CCTV records can be deleted after one year, as long as they comply with the data retention policy of the organization and the applicable laws. CCTV footage does not need to be recorded 24 x 7, as long as there is sufficient coverage of the data center during operational hours and when access is granted to authorized personnel. References:

ISACA Journal Article: Physical security of a data center1

Data Center Security: Checklist and Best Practices | Kisi2

Video Surveillance Best Practices | Taylored Systems

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 mayalso 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.

 The primary concern when negotiating a contract for a hot site is the availability of the site in the event of multiple disaster declarations. A hot site is a fully equipped alternative facility that can be used to resume business operations in the event of a disaster. However, if multiple clients of the hot site provider declare a disaster at the same time, there may be a shortage of resources or capacity to accommodate all of them. Therefore, the contract should specify the terms and conditions for ensuring the availability and priority of the hot site for the organization. The other options are not as important as availability, as they do not affect the ability to use the hot site in a disaster situation. Coordination with the site staff in the event of multiple disaster declarations is a logistical issue that can be resolved by communication and planning. Reciprocal agreements with other organizations are alternative arrangements that can be used to share resources or facilities in a disaster, but they may not be as reliable or suitable as a hot site. Complete testing of the recovery plan is a good practice that can help validate and improve the effectiveness of the recovery plan, but it is not a concern for negotiating a contract for a hot site. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.3

The answer D is correct because the number of reopened tickets is the best indicator for measuring the performance of IT help desk function. Reopened tickets are tickets that have been marked as resolved by the help desk agents, but the customers are not satisfied with the resolution and reopen them for further assistance. Reopened tickets reflect the quality and effectiveness of the help deskservice, as well as the customer satisfaction level. A high number of reopened tickets indicates that the help desk agents are not resolving the issues properly, or that they are not communicating well with the customers. This can lead to customer frustration, dissatisfaction, and churn. Therefore, minimizing the number of reopened tickets is a key goal for any help desk function.

The other options are not as good as option D. Percentage of problems raised from incidents (option A) is a metric that shows how many incidents are escalated to problems, which are more complex and require root cause analysis and long-term solutions. This metric reflects the complexity and severity of the issues faced by the customers, but it does not directly measure the performance of the help desk function. Mean time to categorize tickets (option B) is a metric that shows how long it takes for the help desk agents to assign a category to each ticket, such as technical, billing, or feedback. This metric reflects the efficiency and accuracy of the help desk agents, but it does not measure the quality or effectiveness of the resolution. Number of incidents reported (option C) is a metric that shows how many issues are reported by the customers to the help desk function. This metric reflects the demand and workload of the help desk function, but it does not measure how well the issues are resolved or how satisfied the customers are.

The most useful tool for determining whether the goals of IT are aligned with the organization’s goals is a balanced scorecard. A balanced scorecard is a strategic managementsystem that translates an organization’s vision and mission into a set of objectives and measures across four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth. A balanced scorecard helps align IT goals with organizational goals by linking them to a common strategy map that shows how IT contributes to value creation and performance improvement in each perspective. A balanced scorecard also helps monitor and evaluate IT performance against predefined targets and indicators.

Enterprise dashboard, enterprise architecture (EA), and key performance indicators (KPIs) are not the most useful tools for determining whether the goals of IT are aligned with the organization’s goals. These tools may help communicate, design, or measure IT goals or activities, but they do not provide a comprehensive framework for aligning IT goals with organizational goals across multiple dimensions.

 The most effective way for an organization to help ensure agreed-upon action plans from an IS audit will be implemented is to ensure ownership is assigned. This means that the management of the audited area should accept responsibility for implementing the action plans and report on their progress and completion to the audit committee or senior management. This will ensure accountability, commitment, and follow-up for the audit recommendations34. References: 3: CISA ReviewManual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: The Process of Auditing Information Systems, Section 1.6: Reporting, page 41 4: CISA Online Review Course, Module 1: The Process of Auditing Information Systems, Lesson 1.6: Reporting