CISA Exam Dumps - Certified Information Systems Auditor

The best recommendation to prevent unauthorized access to a highly sensitive data center by piggybacking or tailgating is to use an airlock entrance. An airlock entrance is a type of access control system that consists of two doors that are interlocked, so that only one door can be opened at a time. This prevents an unauthorized person from following an authorized person into the data center without being detected. An airlock entrance can also be integrated with other security measures, such as biometrics, card readers, or PIN pads, to verify the identity and authorization of each person entering the data center.

Biometrics (option A) is a method of verifying the identity of a person based on their physical or behavioral characteristics, such as fingerprints, iris scans, or voice recognition. Biometrics can provide a high level of security, but they are not sufficient to prevent piggybacking or tailgating, as an unauthorized person can still follow an authorized person who has been authenticated by the biometric system.

Procedures for escorting visitors (option B) is a policy that requires all visitors to the data center to be accompanied by an authorized employee at all times. This can help prevent unauthorized access by visitors, but it does not address the risk of piggybacking or tailgating by other employees or contractors who may have legitimate access to the building but not to the data center.

Intruder alarms (option D) are devices that detect and alert when an unauthorized person enters a restricted area. Intruder alarms can provide a deterrent and a response mechanism for unauthorized access, but they are not effective in preventing piggybacking or tailgating, as they rely on the detection of the intruder after they have already entered the data center.

The primary risk is data exposure if a mobile device is lost or stolen. A centrally enforced mobile device management (MDM) solution with remote wipe ensures sensitive data can be erased quickly, effectively mitigating disclosure risk. While training and reporting provide value, they are not preventative. Locating devices is helpful but does not protect data if recovery fails.

References (ISACA): COBIT® 2019, DSS05 (Managed Security Services).

 The primary purpose of obtaining a baseline image during an operating system audit is to identify atypical running processes. A baseline image is a snapshot of the normal state and configuration of an operating system, including the processes that are expected to run on it. By comparing the current state of the operating system with the baseline image, an IS auditor can detect any deviations or anomalies that may indicate unauthorized or malicious activity, such as malware infection, privilege escalation, or data exfiltration. A baseline image can also help an IS auditor to assess the performance and efficiency of the operating system, as well as its compliance with security standards and policies.

Verifying antivirus definitions (option B) is not the primary purpose of obtaining a baseline image, although it may be a part of the baseline configuration. Antivirus definitions are the files that contain the signatures and rules for detecting and removing malware. An IS auditor may verify that the antivirus definitions are up to date and consistent across the operating system, but this does not require obtaining a baseline image.

Identifying local administrator account access (option C) is not the primary purpose of obtaining a baseline image, although it may be a part of the baseline configuration. Local administrator accounts are user accounts that have full control over the operating system and its resources. An IS auditor may identify and review the local administrator accounts to ensure that they are properly secured and authorized, but this does not require obtaining a baseline image.

Verifying the integrity of operating system backups (option D) is not the primary purpose of obtaining a baseline image, although it may be a part of the backup process. Operating system backups are copies of the operating system data and settings that can be used to restore the system in case of failure or disaster. An IS auditor may verify that the operating system backups are complete, accurate, and accessible, but this does not require obtaining a baseline image.

 Secure code reviews as part of a continuous deployment program are preventive controls. Preventive controls are controls that aim to prevent or avoid undesirable events or outcomes from occurring, such as errors, defects, or incidents. Secure code reviews are activities that examine and evaluate the source code of a software or application to identify and eliminate any vulnerabilities, flaws, or weaknesses that may compromise its security, functionality, or performance. Secure code reviews as part of a continuous deployment program can help prevent or avoid security issues or incidents from occurring by ensuring that the code is secure and compliant before it is deployed to production. The other options are not correct types of controls for secure code reviews as part of a continuous deployment program, as they have different meanings and functions. Detective controls are controls that aim to detect or discover undesirable events or outcomes that have occurred, such as errors, defects, or incidents. Logical controls are controls that use software or hardware mechanisms to regulate or restrict access to IT resources, such as data, systems, or networks. Corrective controls are controls that aim to correct or rectify undesirable events or outcomes that have occurred, such as errors, defects, or incidents. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

Toverify the effectivenessof a third-party provider’ssecurity controls, anindependent external audit reportis thestrongestevidence.

Option A (Incorrect):Security configuration documentsare helpful butdo not confirm effectivenesswithout validation.

Option B (Incorrect):Policies and procedures outlineintent, but anaudit confirms actual implementation.

Option C (Correct):External audit reports (e.g., SOC 2, ISO 27001)provideindependent assurancethat security controls are effective.

Option D (Incorrect):Management interviews providequalitativeinsights but arenot objective evidenceof control effectiveness.

The first action that an IS auditor should take when finding a high-risk vulnerability in a public-facing web server used to process online customer payments is to identify compensating controls. Compensating controls are alternative or additional controls that provide reasonable assurance of mitigating the risk of exploiting the vulnerability. The IS auditor should assess the effectiveness of the compensating controls and determine whether they reduce the risk to an acceptable level. If not, the IS auditor should recommend remediation actions to address the vulnerability. Documenting the exception in an audit report is an important action, but it should not be the first action, as it does not address the urgency of the situation. Reviewing security incident reports is a useful action, but it should not be the first action, as it does not provide assurance of preventing future incidents. Notifying the audit committee is a necessary action, but it should not be the first action, as it does not involve taking any corrective measures. References:

CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, pages 295-2961

CISA Review Questions, Answers and Explanations Database, Question ID: 260

The primary advantage of a decentralized database architecture over a centralized one is that it reduces the concentration of risk in a single location or single service point. Because data and processing are distributed, the effect of a single outage or denial of service event is generally reduced compared with a centralized architecture, where one core point of failure can disrupt the whole environment.

Option A is therefore the best answer. Decentralization improves resilience by avoiding total dependency on one central database or service node. In audit and risk terms, this lowers the impact of certain availability attacks or failures by distributing exposure.

Option B is incorrect because real-time synchronization over public networks is usually more difficult, not easier, in decentralized environments. Distributed synchronization introduces latency, consistency, and network management challenges.

Option C is incorrect because transaction consistency is generally harder to maintain in decentralized systems. Distributed databases often trade some degree of simplicity or immediacy of consistency for resilience, scalability, or local autonomy.

Option D is incorrect because uniform security policy enforcement is usually easier in centralized architectures, where governance and administration can be applied from a single control point.

So the correct answer is A, because the main architectural benefit of decentralization in this context is reduced single-point failure risk and reduced impact from centralized service disruption.

References (Official ISACA):

ISACA Glossary — control and architecture terminology reference.

ISACA COBIT resources — governance and resilience principles support reducing concentration risk through architectural design choices.

The greatest concern to an IS auditor conducting an audit of an organization that recently experienced a ransomware attack is that backups were only performed within the local network. This means that the backups could have been encrypted or deleted by the ransomware, making it impossible to restore the data and systems without paying the ransom or losing the data. Backups are a critical part of the recovery process from a ransomware attack, and they should be performed frequently, securely, and off-site or in the cloud to ensure their availability and integrity.

The other options are not as concerning as option C, although they may also indicate some security weaknesses. Antivirus software was unable to prevent the attack even though it was properly updated, but this is not surprising given that ransomware variants are constantly evolving and antivirus software may not be able to detect them all. The most recent security patches were not tested prior to implementation, but this is a trade-off between security and availability that may be justified depending on the severity and urgency of the patches. Employees were not trained on cybersecurity policies and procedures, but this is a preventive measure that may not have prevented the attack if it was initiated by other means such as phishing or exploiting vulnerabilities.