CISA Exam Dumps - Certified Information Systems Auditor

The primary role of an audit reviewer with regard to evidence is to ensure that evidence is sufficient to support audit conclusions. Evidence is the information obtained by the auditor to provide a reasonable basis for the audit opinion or findings. Evidence should be sufficient, reliable, relevant, and useful to support the audit objectives and criteria. The audit reviewer should evaluate the quality and quantity of evidence collected by the auditor and determine if it is adequate to draw valid conclusions and recommendations. Ensuring unauthorized individuals do not tamper with evidence after it has been captured is a role of the auditor, not the audit reviewer. The auditor is responsible for safeguarding the evidence from loss, damage, or alteration during the audit process. The auditor should also document the source, date, and method of obtaining the evidence, as well as any limitations or restrictions on its use or disclosure. Ensuring appropriate statistical sampling methods were used is a role of the auditor, not the audit reviewer. The auditor is responsible for selecting an appropriate sampling method and technique that can provide sufficient evidence to achieve the audit objectives and criteria. The auditor should also document the sampling plan, population, sample size, selection method, evaluation method, and results. Ensuring evidence is labeled to show it was obtained from an approved source is a role of the auditor, not the audit reviewer. The auditor is responsible for labeling the evidence to indicate its origin, nature, and ownership. The auditor should also ensure that the evidence is obtained from reliable and credible sources that can be verified and corroborated. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 295

Monitoringcapacity utilizationsupportsavailabilityby ensuring thatresources remain functional and do not exceed operational limits.

Option A (Incorrect):Integrityensures that data isaccurate and unaltered, but monitoring capacity thresholds primarily relates tosystem availability.

Option B (Correct):Availabilityensures that systems remainaccessible and functional, and monitoring capacity utilization helpsprevent downtimeandservice disruptions.

Option C (Incorrect):Confidentialityensures that data isprotected from unauthorized access, which is unrelated to capacity monitoring.

Option D (Incorrect):Nonrepudiationensures that actions can betraced to specific individuals, but it does not relate tocapacity monitoring.

 An IS auditor would be most concerned if process ownership has not been established for the information asset management process, as this would indicate a lack of accountability, responsibility, and authority for managing the assets throughout their lifecycle. The process owner should also ensure that the process is aligned with the organization’s objectives, policies, and standards. The process should require specifying the physicallocations of assets, include asset review, and identify asset value, but these are less critical than establishing process ownership. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

 The exact definition of the service levels and their measurement is the first thing that the IS auditor should review in order to understand the problem of different opinions on the availability of their application servers. Service levels are the agreed-upon standards or targets for delivering IT services, such as availability, reliability, performance, and security. Service level measurement is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting data related to the achievement of service levels. By reviewing the exact definition of the service levels and their measurement, the IS auditor can identify any gaps, inconsistencies, or ambiguities that may cause confusion or disagreement among IT and the business. The other options are not as important as reviewing the exact definition of the service levels and their measurement, as they do not address the root cause of the problem. References: CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition,page 372

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.