Isaca Certification CISA Syllabus Exam Questions Answers

The primary benefit of a tabletop exercise for an incident response plan is to increase confidence in the team’s response readiness (D). A tabletop exercise is a simulated scenario that tests the effectiveness and efficiency of the incident response plan and team. It allows the team to practice their roles and responsibilities, review their procedures and tools, and identify and resolve any gaps or issues in their response process. A tabletop exercise can help the team to improve their skills, knowledge, and communication, and to prepare for real incidents1.

A full interruption test is the most realistic and reliable way to ensure that recovery time objectives (RTOs) are met for an organization’s disaster recovery plan (DRP). RTOs are the maximum amount of time that a business can tolerate being offline after a disaster. A full interruption test involves shutting down the primary site and switching over to the backup site, simulating a real disaster scenario. This test can measure the actual time it takes to restore the systems, applications, and functions that are critical for the business continuity. A full interruption test can also reveal any issues or gaps in the DRP that might affect the recovery process.

The other options are not as effective as a full interruption test for ensuring RTOs are met. A cyber resilience test is a type of DR test that focuses on the ability to withstand and recover from cyberattacks. It does not necessarily cover other types of disasters or test the entire DRP. A tabletop test is a low-impact DR test that involves a walkthrough of the DRP with the key stakeholders and staff. It does not involve any actual switching over or testing of the backup systems. A parallel test is a type of DR test that involves running the backup systems alongside the primary systems, without disrupting the normal operations. It does not measure the time it takes to switch over or resume operations at the backup site.

If an IS auditor suspects that independence may not have been maintained in past audits, the best course of action is to inform audit management. Audit management has the responsibility and authority to address such issues. They can review the situation, determine if there was indeed a lack of independence, and decide on the appropriate actions to take123. While informing senior management, reevaluating internal controls, and re-performing past audits might be necessary at some point, the first step should be to inform audit management.

Reviewing the application implementation documents is the best way for an IS auditor to assess the design of an automated application control. An automated application control is a control that is embedded in the application software and is executed by the system without human intervention. An automated application control is designed to ensure the accuracy, completeness, validity, and authorization of transactions and data processed by the application. Examples of automated application controls are input validation, edit checks, calculations, reconciliations, and exception reports.

The application implementation documents are the documents that describe the design specifications, logic, and functionality of the application and its controls. The application implementation documents may include:

Business requirements document - a document that defines the business objectives, needs, and expectations of the application.

Functional specifications document - a document that describes the features, functions, and interfaces of the application and its controls.

Technical specifications document - a document that details the technical architecture, design, and configuration of the application and its controls.

Test plan and test cases - a document that outlines the testing strategy, methodology, and scenarios for verifying the functionality and performance of the application and its controls.

User manual and training material - a document that provides instructions and guidance on how to use the application and its controls.

By reviewing the application implementation documents, an IS auditor can:

Gain an understanding of the purpose, scope, and nature of the application and its controls.

Evaluate whether the application and its controls are designed to meet the business requirements and objectives.

Identify any gaps, inconsistencies, or errors in the design of the application and its controls.

Compare the design of the application and its controls with the best practices and standards in the industry.

Determine whether the application and its controls are adequately tested and documented.

Interviewing the application developer is not the best way for an IS auditor to assess the design of an automated application control. An interview is a verbal communication technique that involves asking questions and listening to responses. An interview can be useful for obtaining general information or clarifying specific issues related to the application and its controls. However, an interview alone cannot provide sufficient evidence or documentation to support the auditor’s assessment of the design of an automated application control. An interview may also be subject to bias, misunderstanding, or misinterpretation by either party.

Obtaining management attestation and sign-off is not the best way for an IS auditor to assess the design of an automated application control. Management attestation and sign-off is a formal process that involves obtaining written confirmation from management that they have reviewed and approved the design of the application and its controls. Management attestation and sign-off can indicate management’s commitment and accountability for the quality and effectiveness of the application and its controls. However, management attestation and sign-off cannot substitute for an independent and objective evaluation by an IS auditor. Management attestation and sign-off may also be influenced by pressure, conflict of interest, or fraud.

Reviewing system configuration parameters and output is not the best way for an IS auditor to assess the design of an automated application control. System configuration parameters are settings that define how the system operates or interacts with other components. System output is data or information that is produced by the system as a result of processing transactions or performing functions. Reviewing system configuration parameters and output can help an IS auditor to verify whether the system is configured correctly and whether it produces accurate and reliable output. However, reviewing system configuration parameters and output cannot provide a comprehensive view of how the application and its controls are designed to achieve their objectives. Reviewing system configuration parameters and output may also require technical expertise or access rights that may not be available to an IS auditor.