Isaca Updated CISA Exam Questions and Answers by minha

When an IS auditor discovers a security weakness in the database configuration, the next course of action should be to identify existing mitigating controls. This involves assessing whether any controls are already in place to address the weakness and mitigate the risk. Understanding the current state of controls helps the auditor determine the severity of the issue and whether additional corrective actions are necessary1. References: 1(https://www.isaca.org/resources/insights-and-expertise/audit-programs-and-tools)

An IS auditor has identified deficiencies within the organization’s software development life cycle (SDLC) policies. The SDLC is the process of planning, developing, testing, and deploying software applications1. SDLC policies are the guidelines and standards that govern the SDLC process and ensure its quality, security, and compliance2. Deficiencies in SDLC policies can lead to various risks, such as:

Software errors, bugs, or vulnerabilities that can affect the functionality, reliability, or security of the applications3

Software failures, delays, or overruns that can affect the delivery, performance, or customer satisfaction of the applications3

Software non-compliance that can result in legal, regulatory, or contractual violations or penalties3

The next step that the IS auditor should do after identifying deficiencies in SDLC policies is to communicate the observation to the auditee. The auditee is the person or entity that is subject to the audit and is responsible for the area being audited4. In this case, the auditee could be the software development manager, the project manager, or the senior management of the organization. Communicating the observation to the auditee is important for several reasons:

It allows the IS auditor to verify the accuracy and validity of the observation and gather additional evidence or information from the auditee4

It gives the auditee an opportunity to respond to the observation and provide their perspective, explanation, or justification for the deficiencies4

It enables the IS auditor to discuss with the auditee the potential impact, root cause, and remediation plan for the deficiencies4

It fosters a collaborative and constructive relationship between the IS auditor and the auditee and promotes transparency and accountability in the audit process4

The other options are not as appropriate as communicating the observation to the auditee. Documenting the findings in the audit report is a later step that should be done after communicating with the auditee and finalizing the observation. Identifying who approved the policies is not relevant for addressing the deficiencies and may imply blame or fault on a specific person or group. Escalating the situation to the lead auditor is not necessary unless there is a serious disagreement or conflict with the auditee that cannot be resolved by normal communication. Therefore, option D is the correct answer.

References:

What Is The Software Development Life Cycle? | PagerDuty

Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) Policy | StrongDM

What Is SDLC? Best Phases, Methodologies, and Benefits Revealed - Kellton

Communicating Audit Findings

The sampling method in which the entire sample is considered to be irregular if a single error is found is discovery sampling. Discovery sampling is a type of statistical sampling that is used to test for the existence of at least one occurrence of a specific characteristic or condition in a population. Discovery sampling is often used when the auditor expects the characteristic or condition to be very rare or nonexistent, and when any occurrence would have a significant impact on the audit objective. For example, discovery sampling can be used to test for fraud, noncompliance, or material misstatement.

Discovery sampling works by setting a very low tolerable error rate (the maximum rate of occurrence of the characteristic or condition that the auditor is willing to accept) and a high confidence level (the degree of assurance that the auditor wants to obtain). The auditor then selects a sample from the population using a random or systematic method, and examines each item in the sample for the presence or absence of the characteristic or condition. If no error is found in the sample, the auditor can conclude with a high level of confidence that the characteristic or condition does not exist or is very rare in the population. However, if one or more errors are found in the sample, the auditor cannot draw any conclusion about the population and must either expand the sample size or perform alternative procedures.

Discovery sampling differs from other sampling methods in that it does not allow for any errors in the sample. Other sampling methods, such as variable sampling, stop-or-go sampling, or judgmental sampling, can tolerate some errors in the sample and use them to estimate the error rate or amount in the population. However, discovery sampling is designed to test for zero-tolerance situations, where any error would be unacceptable or material. Therefore, discovery sampling considers the entire sample to be irregular if a single error is found.

References:

Audit Sampling - Overview, Purpose, Importance, and Types1

Audit Sampling - What Is It, Methods, Example, Advantage, Reason2

ISA 530: Audit sampling | ICAEW3

Audit Sampling - AICPA4

An insider attack poses the greatest risk to an organization’s most sensitive data. An insider attack is a type of cyberattack that is carried out by someone who has legitimate access to the organization’s network, systems, or data, such as an employee, contractor, or business partner. An insider attack can be intentional or unintentional, malicious or negligent, and can have various motives, such as financial gain, revenge, espionage, sabotage, or curiosity.

An insider attack poses the greatest risk to an organization’s most sensitive data because:

An insider has a high level of trust and privilege within the organization, which allows them to bypass security controls and access confidential or restricted data without raising suspicion or detection.

An insider has a deep knowledge of the organization’s operations, processes, policies, and vulnerabilities, which enables them to exploit them effectively and cause maximum damage or disruption.

An insider can use various techniques and tools to conceal their identity and actions, such as encryption, steganography, deletion, or alteration of logs or evidence.

An insider can cause significant harm or loss to the organization in terms of data integrity, availability, confidentiality, reputation, compliance, and profitability.

According to the 2023 Cost of Insider Threats Global Report by Ponemon Institute and ObserveIT 1, the average annual cost of insider threats for organizations worldwide was $11.45 million in 2022, a 31% increase from 2018. The report also found that the average number of incidents per organization was 77 in 2022, a 47% increase from 2018. The report classified insider threats into three categories: careless or negligent employees or contractors, criminal or malicious insiders, and credential thieves. The report revealed that careless or negligent insiders were the most common and costly type of insider threat, accounting for 62% of all incidents and $4.58 million in costs.

The other options are not the greatest risk to an organization’s most sensitive data, although they can still pose significant threats.

A password attack is a type of cyberattack that attempts to guess or crack a user’s password to gain unauthorized access to their account or system. A password attack can use various methods, such as brute force, dictionary, rainbow table, phishing, keylogging, or social engineering. A password attack can compromise the security and privacy of the user’s data and information. However, a password attack can be prevented or mitigated by using strong and unique passwords, changing passwords frequently, enabling multi-factor authentication (MFA), and avoiding clicking on suspicious links or attachments.

An eavesdropping attack is a type of cyberattack that intercepts or monitors the communication between two parties without their knowledge or consent. An eavesdropping attack can use various techniques, such as wiretapping, packet sniffing, man-in-the-middle (MITM), or side-channel. An eavesdropping attack can expose the content and metadata of the communication, such as messages, files, voice calls, emails, etc. However, an eavesdropping attack can be prevented or mitigated by using encryption, authentication, digital signatures, VPNs (virtual private networks), or secure protocols.

A spear phishing attack is a type of phishing attack that targets a specific individual or group with personalized and convincing emails that appear to come from a trusted source. A spear phishing attack aims to trick the recipient into clicking on a malicious link or attachment that can infect their device with malware or steal their credentials or data. A spear phishing attack can compromise the security and privacy of the recipient’s data and information. However, a spear phishing attack can be prevented or mitigated by verifying the sender’s identity and email address, checking the email content for spelling and grammar errors, hovering over links before clicking on them (or not clicking at all), scanning attachments for viruses before opening them (or not opening at all), and reporting suspicious emails to IT security staff.