Passed Exam Today CISM

 Reviewing the results of the vendor’s independent control reports is the best way to assess the risk associated with using a SaaS vendor because it provides an objective and reliable evaluation of the vendor’s security controls and practices. Independent control reports, such as SOC 2 or ISO 27001, are conducted by third-party auditors who verify the vendor’s compliance with industry standards and best practices. These reports can help the customer identify any gaps or weaknesses in the vendor’s security posture and determine the level of assurance and trust they can place on the vendor.

Verifying that information security requirements are included in the contract is a good practice, but it does not provide sufficient assurance that the vendor is actually meeting those requirements. The contract may also have limitations or exclusions that reduce the customer’s rights or remedies in case of a breach or incident.

Requesting customer references from the vendor is not a reliable way to assess the risk associated with using a SaaS vendor because the vendor may only provide positive or biased references that do not reflect the true experience or satisfaction of the customers. Customer references may also not have the same security needs or expectations as the customer who is conducting the assessment.

Requiring vendors to complete information security questionnaires is a useful way to gather information about the vendor’s security policies and procedures, but it does not provide enough evidence or verification that the vendor is actually implementing and maintaining those policies and procedures. Information security questionnaires are also subject to the vendor’s self-reporting and interpretation, which may not be accurate or consistent. References =

CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 144

SaaS Security Risk and Challenges - ISACA1

SaaS Security Checklist & Assessment Questionnaire | LeanIX2

Risk Assessment Guide for Microsoft Cloud3

The test addresses the critical components is the most important consideration while conducting a test of a business continuity plan (BCP), as it ensures that the test covers the essential functions, processes, and resources that are required to maintain or resume the organization’s operations in the event of a disruption. The test should also verify that the recovery objectives, such as recovery time objective (RTO) and recovery point objective (RPO), are met. (From CISM Review Manual 15th Edition)

 According to the CISM Review Manual, one of the best ways to contain an SQL injection attack that has been detected by a web application firewall is to reconfigure the web application firewall to block the attack. This means that the web application firewall should be updated with the latest detection patterns and rules that can identify and prevent SQL injection attacks. By doing so, the web application firewall can reduce the impact and damage of the attack, and prevent further exploitation of the vulnerable database1

The other options are not as effective as reconfiguring the web application firewall to block the attack. Force password changes on the SQL database is a reactive measure that does not address the root cause of the problem, and may cause data loss or corruption if not done properly. Updating the detection patterns on the web application firewall is a preventive measure that can help to detect SQL injection attacks, but it does not stop them from happening in the first place. Blocking IPs from where the attack originates is a defensive measure that can limit or stop some SQL injection attacks, but it does not protect all possible sources of malicious traffic, and may also affect legitimate users or applications1

References = 1: CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2020, pp. 32-33…

= Integrating security controls in each phase of the life cycle is the best way to minimize information security risk in deploying applications to the production environment. This ensures that security requirements are defined, designed, implemented, tested, and maintained throughout the development process. Conducting penetration testing post implementation, having a well-defined change process, and verifying security during the testing process are all important activities, but they are not sufficient to address all the potential risks that may arise during the application life cycle. Penetration testing may reveal some vulnerabilities, but it cannot guarantee that all of them are identified and fixed. A change process may help to control and document the modifications made to the application, but it does not ensure that the changes are secure and do not introduce new risks. Verifying security during the testing process may help to validate the functionality and performance of the security controls, but it does not ensure that the security requirements are complete and consistent with the business objectives and the risk appetite of the organization. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, page 1121; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, page 1462