Visit here for our full Isaca CISA exam dumps and practice test questions.
Question 121:
An IS auditor is reviewing the organization’s disaster recovery plan. Which of the following is the MOST important element to verify?
A) The plan has been tested within the last 12 months
B) The plan has been approved by senior management
C) The plan includes detailed technical procedures
D) The plan is stored securely offsite
Answer: A
The correct answer is option A. Testing the disaster recovery plan within the last 12 months is the most critical element to verify because an untested plan cannot be relied upon during an actual disaster. Regular testing validates that recovery procedures work as documented, recovery time objectives can be met, personnel understand their roles, and the plan remains current with organizational changes.
Without recent testing, assumptions about recovery capabilities remain unvalidated and potentially incorrect. Technology changes, staff turnover, infrastructure modifications, and business process updates can invalidate recovery procedures. Testing identifies gaps in documentation, missing resources, unrealistic timeframes, and coordination issues between teams. Annual testing is considered minimum best practice, with critical systems potentially requiring more frequent testing. Testing should involve actual recovery simulations rather than just walkthroughs, measuring recovery times against RTOs, validating data restoration procedures, and ensuring communication plans function. Test results should be documented with lessons learned incorporated into plan updates. An untested plan creates false confidence, potentially leading to catastrophic failures when actual disasters occur. Organizations often discover during testing that backup systems are misconfigured, restoration procedures are outdated, or recovery times exceed business requirements. Testing also maintains organizational readiness by training staff and reinforcing disaster response procedures.
Option B is incorrect because while management approval is important for authorization and resource allocation, approval alone doesn’t ensure the plan works effectively. An approved but untested plan provides false assurance without validation of actual recovery capabilities.
Option C is incorrect because detailed technical procedures are valuable but don’t guarantee effectiveness. Procedures can be thorough yet based on outdated assumptions, missing critical steps, or referencing systems that no longer exist. Documentation detail matters less than proven functionality.
Option D is incorrect because secure offsite storage protects plan documentation from disasters affecting primary locations, but accessible documentation of a flawed plan provides little value. Storage location is a secondary concern compared to plan effectiveness validated through testing.
Question 122:
During an audit of change management processes, an IS auditor discovers that emergency changes are frequently made without following documented procedures. What is the auditor’s PRIMARY concern?
A) Lack of proper authorization and documentation
B) Potential security vulnerabilities
C) User complaints about system availability
D) Increased operational costs
Answer: A
The correct answer is option A. The primary concern with emergency changes bypassing documented procedures is the lack of proper authorization and documentation, which creates accountability gaps, prevents effective oversight, and increases the risk of unauthorized or poorly planned changes causing system failures or security breaches.
Emergency change procedures should still require appropriate authorization from designated authorities who evaluate necessity and business impact, even under time pressure. Documentation requirements ensure changes are recorded for audit trails, impact assessment shows what was changed and why, and post-implementation reviews verify desired outcomes. When these controls are circumvented, organizations lose visibility into system modifications, cannot track who made changes or their justification, lack information for troubleshooting future issues, and cannot ensure changes don’t conflict with segregation of duties or security policies. While speed is important in emergencies, completely bypassing authorization creates opportunities for unauthorized access, malicious changes, or well-intentioned but poorly executed modifications. Effective emergency change processes balance urgency with appropriate controls through expedited approval workflows, designated emergency change authorities, mandatory post-implementation documentation, and regular reviews ensuring emergency processes aren’t abused for routine changes. Organizations often discover that many “emergency” changes aren’t genuine emergencies but rather symptoms of poor planning or inadequate standard change processes.
Option B is incorrect because while emergency changes could introduce security vulnerabilities, this is a secondary concern derived from inadequate authorization and oversight. Security vulnerabilities are a potential consequence rather than the primary control failure.
Option C is incorrect because user complaints about availability are business impacts that might result from poorly managed changes, but aren’t the primary audit concern. The fundamental issue is control breakdown, not specific operational consequences.
Option D is incorrect because increased operational costs might result from change problems, but cost impact is secondary to control and governance failures. The primary concern addresses risk management and accountability rather than financial efficiency.
Question 123:
An IS auditor is evaluating the effectiveness of an intrusion detection system (IDS). Which of the following findings would be of GREATEST concern?
A) High false positive rate
B) IDS alerts are not investigated promptly
C) IDS signatures are updated monthly
D) Network traffic is not encrypted
Answer: B
The correct answer is option B. Uninvestigated IDS alerts represent the greatest concern because the IDS becomes ineffective regardless of technical capabilities if security events are not analyzed and responded to. Delayed or absent investigation means actual attacks may go undetected, security incidents escalate without response, and the organization gains no security benefit from IDS investment.
An IDS serves as an early warning system detecting suspicious activities requiring human analysis and response. When alerts aren’t promptly investigated, organizations cannot distinguish true security incidents from false positives, miss opportunities to contain attacks before significant damage occurs, allow attackers to maintain persistent access, and fail to learn from security events for prevention. Common causes include alert volume overwhelming security staff, lack of clear escalation procedures, insufficient staffing for 24/7 monitoring, and alert fatigue from poorly tuned detection rules. Best practices include establishing Service Level Agreements for investigation timeframes, implementing security information and event management (SIEM) systems correlating alerts, prioritizing alerts by risk and criticality, staffing security operations centers appropriately, and regularly reviewing investigation processes for effectiveness. An IDS generating perfect alerts but lacking investigation infrastructure provides no security value. Organizations must ensure detection capabilities are matched with response capabilities.
Option A is incorrect because while high false positive rates reduce IDS effectiveness by creating alert fatigue and wasting investigation resources, systems can still provide value if alerts are investigated. False positives are a tuning issue rather than a complete failure of security monitoring.
Option C is incorrect because monthly signature updates may be suboptimal but aren’t catastrophic. While more frequent updates are preferable, monthly updates still provide reasonable protection. This is a minor operational inefficiency rather than a critical control failure.
Option D is incorrect because encrypted traffic prevents IDS inspection of packet contents, which is a limitation rather than an IDS configuration problem. This represents an architectural constraint requiring different security controls like endpoint detection rather than an IDS operational failure.
Question 124:
During a review of access controls, an IS auditor finds that several terminated employees still have active user accounts. What should be the auditor’s FIRST course of action?
A) Recommend immediate deactivation of the accounts
B) Review user account activity logs
C) Report the finding to senior management
D) Interview the system administrator
Answer: B
The correct answer is option B. Reviewing user account activity logs should be the auditor’s first action to determine if the accounts have been used since termination, assess potential security breaches or data access, evaluate the scope and impact of the control failure, and gather evidence for the audit finding before making recommendations.
Activity logs reveal whether terminated employees or unauthorized parties accessed systems using these accounts, what data or resources were accessed, when access occurred relative to termination dates, and whether suspicious activities suggest malicious intent. This investigation determines incident severity and whether immediate incident response is needed beyond simple account deactivation. If logs show post-termination access, the situation escalates from a control weakness to a potential security breach requiring forensic investigation, impact assessment, notification procedures, and potentially legal action. Even if logs show no usage, the review documents due diligence and provides evidence supporting audit findings and recommendations. The auditor should preserve logs as evidence before accounts are deactivated, as deactivation or deletion might trigger automated cleanup processes destroying audit trails. After log review, the auditor can make informed recommendations about immediate actions, assess whether similar issues exist with other accounts, and determine if the problem indicates systemic control failures in the termination process.
Option A is incorrect because while account deactivation is necessary, proceeding without investigating potential compromise would be premature. The auditor must first understand what occurred before recommending remediation, as immediate deactivation might alert threat actors or destroy evidence.
Option C is incorrect because reporting to management before investigating would provide incomplete information without assessing scope and impact. Management needs facts about potential security compromises to make informed decisions, which requires preliminary investigation.
Option D is incorrect because interviewing the system administrator addresses process issues but doesn’t determine if security breaches occurred. The administrator interview is relevant for understanding control failures but secondary to investigating potential compromises through log analysis.
Question 125:
An organization is implementing a new third-party cloud service. Which of the following should be the IS auditor’s PRIMARY focus when reviewing the contract?
A) Service level agreements and penalties
B) Right to audit clause
C) Data ownership and exit provisions
D) Pricing and payment terms
Answer: B
The correct answer is option B. The right to audit clause is the primary focus because it enables the organization to verify the service provider’s security controls, compliance with contractual obligations, and appropriate handling of organizational data. Without audit rights, the organization must trust provider representations without independent verification.
Right to audit provisions should allow independent audits by the organization or its representatives, access to relevant systems and documentation, review of security controls and compliance reports, investigation of security incidents involving organizational data, and verification of contractual compliance. These rights are essential because cloud providers manage organizational assets and data outside direct control, regulatory compliance requires verifying third-party controls, provider security claims need independent validation, and incident response may require access to provider systems and logs. Strong audit clauses specify audit frequency, scope limitations, cost responsibilities, notification requirements, and remediation timelines for identified issues. Providers often offer compromise solutions like SOC 2 Type II reports or shared audit results reducing individual audit needs while providing assurance. Without audit rights, organizations cannot fulfill due diligence obligations, may face regulatory violations, lack visibility into security posture, and cannot verify provider compliance with contracts. Many data breach incidents involve third-party providers where customers lacked visibility into security practices.
Option A is incorrect because while SLAs and penalties are important for service quality and availability, they don’t address the fundamental need to verify security and compliance. SLAs focus on performance metrics rather than security assurance and verification rights.
Option C is incorrect because although data ownership and exit provisions are critical for data protection and vendor transitions, they address different concerns than ongoing security verification. These provisions are important but don’t enable continuous oversight during the relationship.
Option D is incorrect because pricing and payment terms are commercial considerations rather than security or audit concerns. While relevant for contract negotiation, financial terms don’t address the audit and compliance verification needs that are primary concerns for IS auditors.
Question 126:
An IS auditor is reviewing the organization’s patch management process. Which of the following would indicate a significant control weakness?
A) Patches are tested in a non-production environment before deployment
B) Critical patches are deployed within 30 days of release
C) Patches are deployed without change management approval
D) A patch deployment schedule is published quarterly
Answer: C
The correct answer is option C. Deploying patches without change management approval represents a significant control weakness because it bypasses authorization controls, prevents impact assessment and risk evaluation, eliminates coordination with affected business units, and creates potential for system conflicts or unplanned outages.
Even though patches address security vulnerabilities and are essential for protection, they constitute system changes requiring proper controls. Change management processes ensure patches are evaluated for business impact before deployment, scheduled during approved maintenance windows minimizing disruption, tested appropriately given criticality and risk, documented for audit trails and troubleshooting, and coordinated across teams managing interdependent systems. Bypassing these controls can cause production outages from incompatible patches, security issues from patches breaking security tools, compliance violations from undocumented changes, and inability to rollback problematic patches without proper documentation. Effective patch management balances urgency for security updates with controlled deployment processes. Critical patches may follow expedited change procedures rather than full change processes, but some authorization and oversight should still occur. Organizations implementing automated patching should ensure automation includes appropriate controls, approval workflows for specific patch categories, exception handling for high-risk systems, and audit logging of deployment activities.
Option A is incorrect because testing patches in non-production environments before production deployment is good practice, not a weakness. Pre-deployment testing identifies compatibility issues and reduces deployment risks, representing appropriate due diligence.
Option B is incorrect because 30-day deployment timeframes for critical patches, while potentially slow depending on severity, doesn’t indicate a control weakness. Some industries or patch types may have different urgency requirements, but this represents a procedural decision rather than a control failure.
Option D is incorrect because quarterly publication of deployment schedules demonstrates planning and communication, not a weakness. Regular scheduling provides stakeholders advance notice of maintenance windows and demonstrates organized patch management processes.
Question 127:
During an audit of database security, an IS auditor discovers that database administrators have unrestricted access to production data. What is the BEST recommendation to address this risk?
A) Implement database activity monitoring
B) Require two-factor authentication for database access
C) Enforce segregation of duties between DBAs and security administrators
D) Implement data masking for sensitive fields
Answer: A
The correct answer is option A. Database activity monitoring is the best recommendation because it provides detective controls through continuous monitoring and alerting on DBA activities, creates audit trails for forensic analysis and compliance, deters malicious behavior through awareness of monitoring, and enables identification of policy violations or suspicious activities.
While preventing DBAs from having elevated access would be ideal, complete restriction is often impractical because database administrators require elevated privileges to perform necessary duties like performance tuning, troubleshooting, schema modifications, and backup restoration. Instead, organizations implement compensating controls providing oversight and accountability. Database activity monitoring captures all database access including privileged user activities, alerts on suspicious patterns like bulk data exports or unusual query patterns, provides forensic evidence for investigations, and enables compliance reporting for regulations requiring database activity oversight. Effective monitoring solutions use behavioral analytics identifying anomalous DBA activities, separate monitoring infrastructure preventing DBA tampering, real-time alerting for high-risk activities, and integration with SIEM systems correlating database events with other security data. Organizations should combine monitoring with clear policies defining acceptable DBA activities, mandatory vacation policies for DBAs, and periodic access reviews ensuring privileges remain appropriate.
Option B is incorrect because while two-factor authentication strengthens authentication assurance, it doesn’t address the fundamental risk of authorized users with excessive privileges. Authentication improvements don’t limit what authenticated DBAs can do with legitimate access.
Option C is incorrect because segregating DBA and security administrator duties addresses some risks but doesn’t eliminate DBA access to production data. DBAs still require data access for troubleshooting and maintenance, making segregation alone insufficient to address the identified risk.
Option D is incorrect because data masking protects sensitive information in non-production environments but doesn’t address production access. DBAs managing production systems need access to actual data for support and maintenance, making masking impractical in production while they retain administrative access.
Question 128:
An organization has implemented a bring-your-own-device (BYOD) policy. What should be the IS auditor’s PRIMARY concern?
A) Lack of corporate standard device configurations
B) Inability to enforce security controls on personal devices
C) Increased support costs for diverse device types
D) Potential compliance violations due to uncontrolled devices
Answer: D
The correct answer is option D. Potential compliance violations due to uncontrolled devices represent the primary concern because regulatory requirements often mandate specific security controls, data protection measures, and audit capabilities that may be difficult or impossible to enforce on personal devices, exposing the organization to legal and financial penalties.
BYOD environments challenge compliance with regulations like GDPR requiring data protection controls, HIPAA mandating healthcare information security, PCI-DSS protecting payment card data, and SOX ensuring financial data integrity. Personal devices may store regulated data without encryption, lack required security patches, use unauthorized applications that export data, and resist enterprise security controls that owners perceive as invasive. Organizations face difficulties implementing required controls without appearing to invade employee privacy, conducting forensic investigations when personal devices contain both personal and corporate data, ensuring data deletion during employee termination or device loss, and demonstrating compliance during regulatory audits. Effective BYOD programs require clear policies defining acceptable use and security requirements, mobile device management solutions enforcing security baselines, containerization separating corporate and personal data, regular compliance assessments verifying control effectiveness, and employee training on security responsibilities. Many organizations discover BYOD convenience doesn’t justify compliance risks and implement corporate-owned-personally-enabled (COPE) models instead.
Option A is incorrect because lack of standard configurations is an operational challenge rather than the primary concern. Configuration diversity complicates management but doesn’t necessarily create compliance violations if security controls are enforced effectively through other means.
Option B is incorrect because while inability to enforce some security controls is concerning, this is a mechanism that leads to the primary risk of compliance violations. The inability to enforce controls is a control weakness; compliance violations are the consequence.
Option C is incorrect because increased support costs are a business efficiency concern rather than a security or compliance issue. While relevant for BYOD program justification, cost considerations are secondary to regulatory compliance and legal risks.
Question 129:
An IS auditor is reviewing an organization’s business continuity plan and finds that backup tapes are stored in the same building as the primary data center. What is the MOST significant risk?
A) Backup media may be lost during a disaster
B) Backup restoration times may exceed RTOs
C) Backup data may be corrupted
D) Backup processes may not be documented
Answer: A
The correct answer is option A. Storing backup tapes in the same building as the primary data center creates the most significant risk that disaster affecting the primary site will also destroy backup media, eliminating the ability to restore data and recover operations, which defeats the fundamental purpose of maintaining backups.
Physical disasters like fires, floods, earthquakes, or building collapse affecting the primary data center would likely also destroy backup media stored in the same location. This represents a single point of failure where one incident eliminates both primary and backup data, making recovery impossible. Best practices require offsite backup storage at geographically separate locations reducing the probability that one disaster affects both sites, environmental controls protecting media from temperature and humidity damage, security measures preventing unauthorized access, and transportation procedures for regular rotation ensuring recent backups exist offsite. The geographic distance between primary and backup locations should consider regional disaster risks like floods affecting entire areas or earthquakes impacting regions. Organizations increasingly use cloud storage for backups providing geographic diversity, eliminating physical media transportation, enabling faster restoration through high-bandwidth connections, and reducing media degradation risks. The 3-2-1 backup rule recommends three copies of data on two different media types with one copy stored offsite, providing protection against various failure scenarios including facility disasters.
Option B is incorrect because while restoration times are important, exceeding RTOs is a performance issue rather than a catastrophic failure. Slow restoration is problematic but recoverable; total data loss from co-located backups is not.
Option C is incorrect because backup corruption can occur regardless of storage location and is addressed through verification procedures and multiple backup generations. Corruption is a separate concern from geographic concentration risk.
Option D is incorrect because documentation is a process control issue, not a physical risk. While important for successful restoration, documentation problems don’t eliminate recovery capability like co-located backup destruction would.
Question 130:
During an application security review, an IS auditor finds that error messages display detailed system information including database connection strings. What type of vulnerability does this represent?
A) Injection vulnerability
B) Information disclosure
C) Broken authentication
D) Cross-site scripting
Answer: B
The correct answer is option B. Displaying detailed system information in error messages represents information disclosure vulnerability where applications reveal sensitive technical details that attackers can exploit for reconnaissance, system fingerprinting, and planning targeted attacks against identified technologies and configurations.
Error messages should present user-friendly information helping users understand and correct problems without exposing system internals. Detailed technical errors revealing database names and connection strings, server paths and directory structures, framework and version information, SQL queries and database schema, and stack traces with code details provide attackers valuable intelligence. This information enables targeted attacks exploiting known vulnerabilities in identified software versions, crafting injection attacks using revealed database structures, bypassing authentication using connection information, and social engineering with knowledge of internal systems. Secure error handling implements generic error messages for users concealing technical details, detailed logging for administrators stored securely server-side, custom error pages preventing default server error exposure, and different error handling for development versus production environments. Organizations often discover information disclosure during penetration testing when testers quickly identify technologies and versions from error messages, then exploit known vulnerabilities. Defense-in-depth assumes attackers will eventually learn system details but shouldn’t receive free reconnaissance data from error messages.
Option A is incorrect because injection vulnerabilities involve untrusted data sent to interpreters as commands or queries, such as SQL injection. While revealed database information might facilitate injection attacks, the error message disclosure itself is not an injection vulnerability.
Option C is incorrect because broken authentication involves improperly implemented authentication controls allowing unauthorized access. Information disclosure might help attackers bypass authentication but represents a separate vulnerability category.
Option D is incorrect because cross-site scripting (XSS) involves injecting malicious scripts into web pages viewed by other users. While error messages could potentially contain XSS if user input is reflected unsanitized, the described scenario involves system information disclosure rather than script injection.
Question 131:
An organization is implementing a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. What should be the IS auditor’s PRIMARY focus during user acceptance testing (UAT)?
A) Test coverage of critical business processes
B) Number of test cases executed
C) Participation of technical staff in testing
D) Documentation of test procedures
Answer: A
The correct answer is option A. Test coverage of critical business processes is the primary focus because UAT validates that the system meets business requirements, supports essential operations, and allows users to complete their work effectively, which is the fundamental purpose of user acceptance testing.
UAT represents the final validation before production deployment where actual users test the system in realistic business scenarios confirming the system supports critical workflows like order-to-cash or procure-to-pay, processes transactions accurately and completely, produces required reports and outputs, integrates properly with other systems, and meets performance expectations under realistic conditions. Inadequate coverage of critical processes creates risk that production deployment reveals showstopping defects, business operations cannot be performed, workarounds are required defeating automation benefits, and expensive post-implementation fixes are needed. Auditors should verify UAT scenarios include end-to-end business processes, exception handling and error conditions, peak volume scenarios, security and authorization workflows, and regulatory compliance requirements. Strong UAT processes involve business process owners who understand operational requirements, realistic test data representing production scenarios, clear acceptance criteria for pass/fail decisions, and defined escalation paths for critical issues. Organizations sometimes rush UAT to meet deadlines, executing insufficient testing that reveals problems only in production causing significant business disruption.
Option B is incorrect because test case quantity doesn’t indicate quality or adequacy. Many test cases covering minor features while missing critical business processes provide false assurance. Coverage quality matters more than numerical metrics.
Option C is incorrect because while some technical staff participation supports UAT, primary testing should involve business users validating requirements. Heavy technical staff involvement might indicate users aren’t adequately engaged or UAT is being confused with system testing.
Option D is incorrect because while documentation is important for repeatability and evidence, it’s secondary to actual test coverage. Well-documented tests of non-critical features don’t validate that the system supports essential business operations.
Question 132:
An IS auditor is evaluating controls over privileged access management. Which of the following represents the STRONGEST control?
A) Privileged accounts are reviewed quarterly
B) Privileged access requires manager approval
C) Privileged sessions are recorded and monitored
D) Privileged account passwords are changed monthly
Answer: C
The correct answer is option C. Recording and monitoring privileged sessions represents the strongest control because it provides continuous oversight of privileged activities, enables detection of misuse or unauthorized actions in real-time, creates detailed audit trails for forensic analysis, and acts as a deterrent to inappropriate use of elevated privileges.
Privileged access management requires defense-in-depth approaches because privileged users can bypass many security controls. Session recording and monitoring capture all privileged user activities including commands executed, systems accessed, data viewed or modified, and configuration changes made, enabling security teams to identify suspicious behaviors, detect policy violations, reconstruct incident timelines, and demonstrate compliance with regulations. Modern privileged access management solutions provide session recording with searchable transcripts, behavioral analytics identifying anomalous activities, real-time alerting on high-risk actions, and integration with SIEM platforms correlating privileged actions with other security events. Recording alone provides limited value without monitoring and analysis. Effective implementations include automated analysis using machine learning, defined response procedures for suspicious activities, regular review of recorded sessions, and clear policies prohibiting monitoring circumvention. Organizations should disclose monitoring to employees establishing no expectation of privacy when using privileged access, balancing security needs with privacy considerations and legal requirements.
Option A is incorrect because quarterly reviews are periodic controls occurring after misuse could have occurred, potentially allowing significant time for malicious activities. Reviews are valuable but less effective than continuous monitoring for detecting and preventing privileged access abuse.
Option B is incorrect because while manager approval provides authorization control, it doesn’t provide oversight of what privileged users do once access is granted. Approval is a preventive control; monitoring provides detective control during actual usage.
Option D is incorrect because monthly password changes reduce risks from stolen credentials but don’t prevent authorized users from misusing privileges. Password changes are important but don’t address the primary risk of legitimate privileged users performing unauthorized actions.
Question 133:
During a review of the software development lifecycle, an IS auditor finds that code reviews are not performed before production deployment. What is the MOST significant risk?
A) Increased maintenance costs
B) Delayed project timelines
C) Security vulnerabilities in production code
D) Non-compliance with development standards
Answer: C
The correct answer is option C. Security vulnerabilities in production code represent the most significant risk because unreviewed code may contain exploitable flaws that expose the organization to data breaches, system compromises, regulatory violations, and financial losses.
Code reviews by peers or security specialists identify security weaknesses before production deployment including injection vulnerabilities (SQL, command, LDAP), authentication and authorization flaws, insecure cryptographic implementations, improper input validation and output encoding, hard-coded credentials or sensitive information, and insecure API implementations. Automated scanning tools detect common vulnerability patterns, but human reviewers identify logic flaws, business rule violations, and context-specific security issues that tools miss. Without code review, developers’ security knowledge gaps directly translate to production vulnerabilities. Organizations often discover security flaws only after deployment through penetration testing, security incidents, or public disclosure of vulnerabilities, requiring emergency patches and incident response. Implementing code reviews requires clear security coding standards developers must follow, checklists covering common vulnerability categories, tools automating portions of review processes, training for developers and reviewers on secure coding, and integration into development workflows ensuring reviews occur before merging code. Defense-in-depth assumes some vulnerabilities reach production despite reviews, requiring additional controls like web application firewalls and runtime protection.
Option A is incorrect because while increased maintenance costs are a negative consequence, they’re a business efficiency concern rather than a security risk. Maintenance costs are manageable operational expenses, while security vulnerabilities create existential risks.
Option B is incorrect because code reviews might actually prevent delays by identifying issues earlier when they’re less expensive to fix. Even if reviews cause minor delays, this is preferable to security incidents caused by vulnerable production code.
Option D is incorrect because non-compliance with standards is a process concern, not an immediate security risk. While standards violations may correlate with problems, the direct risk is security vulnerabilities rather than procedural non-compliance.
Question 134:
An IS auditor is reviewing access controls for a financial application and discovers that the same person can initiate and approve transactions. What control principle is violated?
A) Least privilege
B) Need to know
C) Segregation of duties
D) Defense in depth
Answer: C
The correct answer is option C. Segregation of duties is violated when the same person can both initiate and approve transactions, creating opportunity for unauthorized activities, fraud, or errors to occur without detection because no independent verification exists.
Segregation of duties is a fundamental control principle requiring different individuals to perform complementary steps of critical processes, preventing single individuals from completing transactions without oversight. Financial transactions typically require separation between initiation (creating transaction requests), authorization (approving transactions for processing), recording (posting transactions to accounting systems), and reconciliation (verifying transactions were processed correctly). When one person performs multiple functions, they can commit fraud by creating and approving fictitious transactions, conceal errors by manipulating records, bypass controls designed to prevent unauthorized activities, and operate without accountability or oversight. Classic examples include accounts payable staff initiating and approving payments enabling embezzlement, system administrators with both programming and production access making unauthorized changes, and procurement staff able to both order goods and approve invoices facilitating kickback schemes. Implementing segregation requires identifying incompatible duties requiring separation, designing roles and permissions enforcing separation, using workflow systems requiring multiple approvers, and implementing compensating controls like management review when separation isn’t feasible. Small organizations may struggle to achieve full segregation due to limited staff, requiring enhanced detective controls through monitoring and supervision.
Option A is incorrect because least privilege means users receive minimum permissions necessary for their roles, which is related but distinct from segregation of duties. One person might have least privilege for each individual function while still violating segregation by performing incompatible functions.
Option B is incorrect because need to know restricts information access to only what’s required for legitimate purposes, which is an information security principle rather than a process control principle. Need to know addresses data access rather than task separation.
Option D is incorrect because defense in depth involves multiple layers of security controls, which is a security architecture principle rather than addressing the specific control failure of inadequate segregation between transaction initiation and approval.
Question 135:
An organization is implementing a security information and event management (SIEM) system. What should be the IS auditor’s PRIMARY concern during implementation?
A) Cost of SIEM licenses and infrastructure
B) Integration with all log sources
C) Definition of use cases and alerting rules
D) Training for security operations staff
Answer: C
The correct answer is option C. Definition of use cases and alerting rules is the primary concern because without clearly defined scenarios the SIEM should detect and appropriate rules for generating alerts, the system won’t provide effective security monitoring regardless of technical capabilities or comprehensive log collection.
SIEM systems collect and correlate events from diverse sources, but value comes from identifying security-relevant patterns requiring investigation. Use cases define specific threats or policy violations the SIEM should detect, such as multiple failed login attempts indicating brute force attacks, unusual data transfers suggesting exfiltration, privilege escalation indicating compromise, access from suspicious locations showing account compromise, and compliance violations like unauthorized access to sensitive data. Each use case requires correlation rules combining multiple events, thresholds determining when alerts trigger, severity classifications prioritizing response, and response procedures guiding security teams. Without well-defined use cases, SIEM implementations suffer from alert overload with thousands of low-quality alerts, inability to detect actual threats among noise, security team burnout from investigating false positives, and wasted investment when the SIEM collects data without providing actionable intelligence. Effective implementations identify high-priority threats based on risk assessments, develop detection rules iteratively through testing, tune rules reducing false positives while maintaining detection capability, and continuously refine use cases as threats evolve. Organizations often underestimate effort required for use case development and ongoing tuning.
Option A is incorrect because while cost is a business consideration, it’s not the auditor’s primary technical concern. Proper cost management is important but doesn’t ensure effective security monitoring if use cases are poorly defined.
Option B is incorrect because while comprehensive log collection is valuable, collecting all possible logs without defined use cases creates data overload without corresponding security value. Quality of detection matters more than quantity of log sources.
Option D is incorrect because staff training is important for ongoing operations but secondary to having effective detection capabilities to operate. Training unskilled staff on a poorly configured SIEM with weak use cases won’t provide good security outcomes.
Question 136:
During an audit of IT operations, an IS auditor discovers that server configurations are not documented. What is the GREATEST risk?
A) Inability to efficiently troubleshoot problems
B) Difficulty complying with audit requirements
C) Inconsistent recovery after system failures
D) Increased time for new staff training
Answer: C
The correct answer is option C. Inconsistent recovery after system failures represents the greatest risk because without documented configurations, administrators cannot reliably rebuild or restore systems to their correct operational state, potentially causing extended outages, data loss, security vulnerabilities from misconfiguration, and business impact from improper system restoration.
System configuration documentation should capture operating system settings and patches, installed software and versions, network configurations and firewall rules, security controls and hardening measures, integration points with other systems, and custom scripts or automation. During disaster recovery or system rebuilds, this documentation ensures administrators restore systems identically to their previous state rather than approximating configurations from memory or making educated guesses. Undocumented configurations lead to configuration drift where rebuilt systems differ from originals, introduction of vulnerabilities when security hardening is forgotten, performance problems from omitted tuning, and compatibility issues when integration settings are incorrect. Recovery testing often reveals documentation gaps when systems can’t be properly restored. Effective configuration management requires automated documentation through configuration management databases (CMDBs), infrastructure-as-code approaches defining configurations in version-controlled files, regular audits comparing actual configurations to documentation, and procedures ensuring documentation updates with configuration changes. Organizations increasingly use automated configuration management tools like Ansible, Puppet, or Chef eliminating manual documentation needs by defining configurations as executable code.
Option A is incorrect because while troubleshooting efficiency is affected by documentation quality, this is an operational inconvenience rather than a critical risk. Skilled administrators can troubleshoot systems even without perfect documentation through analysis and testing.
Option B is incorrect because audit compliance difficulties are procedural concerns rather than operational risks. Audit findings are manageable business issues, while improper system recovery can cause significant outages and data loss.
Option D is incorrect because training efficiency is a human resources concern rather than a system reliability risk. Training takes longer without documentation, but this is an operational inefficiency rather than a critical risk affecting system availability or integrity.
Question 137:
An IS auditor is evaluating encryption controls for data at rest. Which of the following provides the STRONGEST protection?
A) Database-level encryption
B) Application-level encryption
C) Disk-level encryption
D) File-level encryption
Answer: B
The correct answer is option B. Application-level encryption provides the strongest protection for data at rest because encryption occurs within the application before data is written to any storage layer, providing protection throughout the data lifecycle, limiting decryption capabilities to authorized application components, and ensuring data remains encrypted in backups, logs, and database storage.
Application-level encryption implements cryptographic operations in application code before persisting data, meaning data is encrypted before being stored in databases, written to log files, transmitted over networks, or included in backups. This approach provides several security advantages: compromised database administrators cannot access plaintext data since the database only stores ciphertext, stolen database backups remain protected without additional encryption layers, data remains protected across all storage tiers and backup media, and fine-grained encryption can protect specific fields like credit cards while leaving searchable fields unencrypted. Application encryption requires careful key management ensuring keys are stored separately from encrypted data, access controls limit decryption to authorized application components, and key rotation procedures prevent long-term key exposure. Challenges include performance overhead from encryption operations, complexity in application code managing cryptography, and difficulty searching encrypted data without compromising security. Organizations should use proven cryptographic libraries rather than implementing custom encryption, ensure secure key storage using hardware security modules or cloud key management services, and implement appropriate key rotation and audit logging for cryptographic operations.
Option A is incorrect because database-level encryption typically implements transparent data encryption (TDE) at the storage layer, which protects against physical media theft but doesn’t protect against database administrator access or database-level attacks. DBAs with appropriate privileges can access decrypted data through normal database operations.
Option C is incorrect because disk-level encryption (like BitLocker or LUKS) protects against physical disk theft but provides no protection once the system is running and the disk is unlocked. Any user or process with file system access can read unencrypted data, making it ineffective against logical attacks.
Option D is incorrect because file-level encryption protects individual files but operates at the operating system layer rather than application layer. While stronger than disk encryption, it still allows access to decrypted data through file system operations by authorized OS users including system administrators.
Question 138:
An organization plans to outsource its data center operations. What should be the IS auditor’s PRIMARY focus when reviewing the outsourcing contract?
A) Pricing structure and payment terms
B) Service provider’s financial stability
C) Service level agreements and performance metrics
D) Data ownership and security responsibilities
Answer: D
The correct answer is option D. Data ownership and security responsibilities are the primary focus because unclear definition of who owns data and who is responsible for security controls creates legal risks, potential data loss, security gaps, and challenges recovering from security incidents or contract termination.
Outsourcing contracts must explicitly address data ownership affirming the organization retains ownership of its data, security control responsibilities defining which security measures the provider implements versus client responsibilities, data location and residency requirements ensuring compliance with geographic restrictions, incident response procedures specifying notification timelines and investigation responsibilities, and data return and destruction upon contract termination. Without clear definitions, disputes arise about who is responsible when security incidents occur, providers may claim data ownership rights, regulatory compliance becomes ambiguous, and organizations cannot demonstrate due diligence in protecting data. The shared responsibility model in outsourcing requires documenting which party handles network security, access controls, patch management, monitoring, encryption, and backup operations. Many high-profile data breaches involve third parties where unclear security responsibilities allowed vulnerabilities to persist. Contracts should include right to audit provisions allowing verification of security controls, security requirements based on data classification and regulatory needs, notification requirements for security incidents and subcontractor changes, and liability provisions addressing damages from security failures. Organizations often discover security responsibility gaps only after incidents occur.
Option A is incorrect because while pricing is a commercial consideration, it’s not the auditor’s primary focus. Financial terms are important for business viability but don’t address the fundamental risks of data protection and security in outsourcing relationships.
Option B is incorrect because although provider financial stability affects service continuity, it’s secondary to immediate concerns about data protection and security. Financial health matters for long-term viability but doesn’t address security responsibilities.
Option C is incorrect because while SLAs are important for service quality and availability, they typically address performance metrics rather than security and data protection. SLAs without clear security responsibilities leave critical risks unaddressed.
Question 139:
During a cybersecurity incident response audit, an IS auditor finds that the organization has no documented incident response plan. What is the MOST significant risk?
A) Regulatory compliance violations
B) Ineffective and delayed incident response
C) Inability to recover from incidents
D) Lack of forensic evidence preservation
Answer: B
The correct answer is option B. Ineffective and delayed incident response is the most significant risk because without documented procedures, response teams waste critical time determining what to do, miss important response steps, lack coordination between teams, and allow incidents to escalate causing greater damage than necessary.
Incident response plans provide structured approaches to detecting, analyzing, containing, eradicating, and recovering from security incidents. Without documentation, organizations experience delayed detection when unclear indicators aren’t recognized, chaotic initial response with teams unsure of their roles, inadequate containment allowing attacks to spread, incomplete eradication leaving attackers persistent access, and poor communication both internally and externally. Critical early hours of incidents determine outcomes – rapid, coordinated responses limit damage while slow, disorganized responses allow catastrophic losses. Documented plans should define incident classification and severity levels, escalation procedures and notification requirements, roles and responsibilities for response teams, communication templates for stakeholders and regulators, containment strategies for different incident types, and evidence preservation procedures supporting forensic analysis. Plans require regular testing through tabletop exercises and simulations, periodic updates reflecting changes in threats and infrastructure, integration with business continuity planning, and training ensuring staff understand their responsibilities. Organizations discovering the need for incident response plans during actual incidents face worst-case scenarios responding under pressure without guidance.
Option A is incorrect because while many regulations require incident response capabilities, regulatory violations are consequences rather than the immediate operational risk. Compliance issues can be addressed through remediation; poor incident response causes immediate damage.
Option C is incorrect because inability to recover is typically addressed through disaster recovery and business continuity plans rather than incident response plans. While related, these address different scenarios – incident response handles active attacks while recovery addresses restoration.
Option D is incorrect because while evidence preservation is an important component of incident response, it’s a specific element rather than the overarching risk. Poor evidence handling affects investigations but doesn’t prevent incident containment and recovery.
Question 140:
An IS auditor is reviewing controls over mobile device management. Which of the following findings represents the GREATEST risk?
A) Mobile devices are not enrolled in the MDM system
B) MDM policies require only 4-digit PINs
C) Remote wipe capability is not tested regularly
D) BYOD devices are allowed without restrictions
Answer: A
The correct answer is option A. Mobile devices not enrolled in the MDM (Mobile Device Management) system represent the greatest risk because unenrolled devices operate without any organizational oversight or security controls, creating unmanaged endpoints that access corporate resources while lacking encryption requirements, access controls, compliance monitoring, security patch enforcement, and remote management capabilities.
MDM enrollment is the foundation enabling all mobile security controls. Unenrolled devices can access email containing sensitive information without encryption, connect to corporate networks without security posture validation, store data on unencrypted devices vulnerable to theft, install malicious applications without restriction, and remain unpatched with known vulnerabilities, all without the organization’s knowledge or ability to intervene. When devices are lost or stolen, organizations cannot remotely wipe corporate data, leaving information exposed. When employees leave, corporate data remains on their personal devices. Effective mobile security requires mandatory MDM enrollment before granting access to corporate resources, automated enrollment processes reducing friction, clear policies defining enrollment requirements, technical controls blocking access from unenrolled devices, and regular audits identifying unenrolled devices accessing resources. Many data breaches involve mobile devices that were never properly managed. Organizations should implement conditional access policies requiring MDM enrollment and compliance before allowing connections, regularly scan for unenrolled devices accessing resources, and educate users about enrollment importance and procedures. Without enrollment, even perfect MDM policies provide zero protection since they aren’t enforced.
Option B is incorrect because while 4-digit PINs are weaker than longer passwords, they still provide basic authentication protection. Weak PINs are a security concern but better than no MDM enrollment which provides no protection at all.
Option C is incorrect because while testing remote wipe is important for validating capabilities, untested functionality is less critical than completely unmanaged devices. Remote wipe addresses device loss scenarios; unenrolled devices create continuous exposure.
Option D is incorrect because while unrestricted BYOD creates risks, the scenario doesn’t clarify if these devices are enrolled in MDM. BYOD with MDM enrollment and appropriate policies can be managed securely; any device without MDM enrollment creates uncontrolled risk regardless of ownership.
