CISA Exam Dumps - Certified Information Systems Auditor

The best criteria for monitoring an IT vendor’s service levels are the performance metrics, as they provide quantifiable and measurable indicators of how well the vendor is delivering the agreed-upon services, such as availability, reliability, quality, timeliness, and customer satisfaction. A service auditor’s report is a document that provides an independent opinion on the vendor’s controls and processes, but it may not reflect the actual service levels or performance. A surprise visit to the vendor may help to verify the vendor’s compliance and operations, but it may not be feasible or effective for monitoring the service levels on a regular basis. An interview with the vendor may help to obtain feedback and insights from the vendor’s perspective, but it may not be objective or reliable formonitoring the service levels. References: CISA Review Manual(Digital Version), Chapter 2: Governanceand Management of IT, Section 2.4: IT Service Delivery and Support

 The business process owner is the most important stakeholder to involve in the review of the processes that prevent fraud within a business expense claim system. This is because the business process owner is responsible for defining, implementing, and monitoring the business rules and policies that govern the expense claim process. The business process owner also has the authority and accountability to approve or reject expense claims, as well as to investigate and report any suspicious or fraudulent activities. The business process owner can provide valuable insights and feedback to the IS auditor on the effectiveness and efficiency of the current processes, aswell as the potential risks and controls that need to be addressed12.

The information security manager is not the most important stakeholder because their role is mainly focused on ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information systems and data that support the expense claim process. The information security manager can help the IS auditor with assessing the technical aspects of the system, such as access controls, encryption, logging, and backup, but they may not have sufficient knowledge or authority over the business rules and policies that prevent fraud1.

The quality assurance (QA) manager is not the most important stakeholder because their role is mainly focused on ensuring the quality and reliability of the software applications and systems that support the expense claim process. The QA manager can help the IS auditor with testing and verifying the functionality and performanceof the system, but they may not have sufficient knowledge or authority over the business rules and policies that prevent fraud1.

The business department executive is not the most important stakeholder because their role is mainly focused on overseeing the strategic objectives and financial performance of the business department that uses the expense claim system. The business department executive can help the IS auditor with understanding the business context and needs of the expense claim process, but they may not have sufficient knowledge or authority over the operational details and controls that prevent fraud

The auditor’s next action after finding that there is an informal unwritten set of standards in the IS department is to document and test compliance with the informal standards. This is because the auditor’s role is to evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the existing controls, regardless of whether they are formal or informal, written or unwritten. The auditor should also assess the risks and implications of having informal standards, such as lack of consistency, accountability, or traceability. The auditor should not make recommendations, postpone the audit, or finalize the audit without performing the audit procedures. References:

CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.21

CISA Online Review Course, Domain 1, Module 1, Lesson 12

The greatest concern to an IS auditor who is assessing an organization’s configuration and release management process is that changes and change approvals are not documented. This is because documentation is essential for ensuring the traceability, accountability, and quality of the changes made to the configuration items (CIs) and the releases deployed to the production environment. Without documentation, it would be difficult to verify the authenticity, validity, and authorization of the changes, as well as to identify and resolve any issues or incidents that may arise from the changes. Documentation also helps to maintain compliance with internal and external standards and regulations, as well as to facilitate audits and reviews.

The other options are not as concerning as option B, although they may also indicate some weaknesses in the configuration and release management process. The organization does not use an industry-recognized methodology, but this does not necessarily mean that their process is ineffective or inefficient. The organization may have developed their own methodology that suits their specific needs and context. However, using an industry-recognized methodology could help them adopt best practices and improve their process maturity. All changes require middle and senior management approval, but this may not be a problem if the organization has a clear and streamlined approval process that does not cause delays or bottlenecks in the change implementation. However, requiring too many approvals could also introduce unnecessary complexity and bureaucracy in the process. There is no centralized configuration management database (CMDB), but this does not mean that the organization does not have a way of managing their CIs and their relationships. The organization may use other tools or methods to store and access their configuration data, such as spreadsheets, documents, or repositories. However, having a centralized CMDB could help them improve their visibility, accuracy, and consistency of their configuration data.

 An organization is shifting to a remote workforce. In preparation, the IT department is performing stress and capacity testing of remote access infrastructure and systems. This type of control is being implemented to direct or guide actions to achieve a desired outcome. Therefore, it is a directive control. Directive controls are proactive controls that seek to prevent undesirable events from occurring. They include policies, standards, procedures, guidelines, training, and testing. Detective controls are reactive controls that seek to identify undesirable events that have already occurred. They include monitoring, logging, auditing, and reporting. Preventive controls are proactive controls that seek to avoid undesirable events from occurring. They include authentication, encryption, firewalls, and antivirus software. Compensating controls are alternative controls that provide a similar level of protection as the primary controls when the primary controls are not feasible or cost-effective. They include segregation of duties, manual reviews, and backup systems. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), [ISACA Glossary of Terms]

 A business impact analysis (BIA) is the process of identifying and assessing the potential impacts a disruption or incident could have on an organization. A BIA helps organizations understand and prepare for these potential obstacles, so they can act quickly and face challenges head-on when they arise. A BIA tells the organization what to expect when unforeseen roadblocks occur, so they can make a plan to get their business back on track as quickly as possible. Therefore, a BIA is the best option to anticipate the effects of a disaster.

 A computer forensic audit is a process of collecting, preserving, analyzing, and presenting digital evidence from electronic devices in a legally admissible manner. It is most relevant in situations where data loss due to hacking of servers occurs, as it can help to identify the source, method, and extent of the attack, as well as recover the lost or damaged data. The other options are not as suitable for a computer forensic audit, as they relate to internal control issues, data quality issues, orsystem maintenance issues, which can be addressed by other types of audits or reviews. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Domain 4: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience, Section 4.5 Computer Forensics1

The primary focus of the IS auditor reviewing the first year of the project should be regression testing. Regression testing is a type of testing that ensures that the existing functionality of the system is not affected by the changes or upgrades made to the system. Since the project involves upgrading the ERP system hosting the general ledger, which is a critical and complex component of the finance department, it is important to verify that the upgrade does not introduce any errors or defects that could compromise the accuracy, completeness, and reliability of the financial data and reports. Regression testing can help identify and resolve any issues before they affect the users and the business processes.

Unit testing, network performance, and user acceptance testing (UAT) are also important aspects of the project, but they are not the primary focus of the IS auditor in the first year. Unit testing is a type of testing that verifies that each individual module or component of the system works as expected. Network performance is a measure of how well the system can communicate and exchange data with other systems and devices over a network. User acceptance testing (UAT) is a type of testing that validates that the system meets the user requirements and expectations. These aspects are more relevant in later stages of the project, when the system is more developed and ready for deployment.