Isaca Certified Information Systems Auditor CISA Exam Practice Test

Answer : B

Among the options provided, fingerprint scanning has the highest rate of false negatives. False negatives occur when a biometric system fails to recognize an authentic individual.Factors such as skin conditions (wet, dry, greasy), finger injuries, and inadequate scanning can contribute to false negatives in fingerprint scanning1.In comparison, iris recognition23, face recognition45, and retina scanning67generally have lower rates of false negatives.

How Accurate are today's Fingerprint Scanners? - Bayometric

25 Advantages and Disadvantages of Iris Recognition - Biometric Today

Iris Recognition Technology (or, Musings While Going through Airport ...

The Critics Were Wrong: NIST Data Shows the Best Facial Recognition Algorithms Are Neither Racist Nor Sexist | ITIF

NIST Launches Studies into Masks' Effect on Face Recognition Software

Retinal scan - Wikipedia

How accurate are retinal security scans - Smart Eye Technology

Answer : D

The most effective way to minimize downtime during system conversions is to use a parallel run. A parallel run is a method of system conversion where both the old and new systems operate simultaneously for a period of time until the new system is verified to be functioning correctly. Thisreduces the risk of errors, data loss, or system failure during conversion and allows for a smooth transition from one system to another.Reference:CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 467

Topic 2, Exam Pool B

Answer : A

The main risk associated with adding a new system functionality during the development phase without following a project change management process is that the new functionality may not meet requirements (option B). This is because:

A project change management process is a set of procedures that defines how changes to the project scope, schedule, budget, quality, or resources are requested, evaluated, approved, implemented, and controlled12.

A project change management process helps to ensure that the changes are aligned with the project objectives, stakeholders' expectations, and business needs12.

Adding a new system functionality during the development phase without following a project change management process can introduce risks such as:

The added functionality has not been documented (option A), which can lead to confusion, inconsistency, errors, and rework3.

The project may fail to meet the established deadline (option C), which can result in delays, penalties, and customer dissatisfaction3.

The project may go over budget (option D), which can cause cost overruns, financial losses, and reduced profitability3.

However, the main risk is that the new functionality may not meet requirements (option B), which can have serious consequences such as:

The new functionality may not be compatible with the existing system or other components3.

The new functionality may not be tested or verified for quality, performance, security, or usability3.

The new functionality may not deliver the expected value or benefits to the users or customers3.

The new functionality may not comply with the regulatory or contractual obligations3.

The new functionality may cause dissatisfaction, complaints, or litigation from the stakeholders3.

Therefore, the main risk associated with adding a new system functionality during the development phase without following a project change management process is that the new functionality may not meet requirements (option B), as this can jeopardize the success and acceptance of the project.

Answer : A

Sending a copy of the transaction logs to offsite storage on a daily basis would minimize the risk of losing transactions as a result of a disaster. This is because offsite storage provides a backup of the data that can be recovered in case of a catastrophic event that destroys or damages the onsite data. Storing a copy of the transaction logs onsite in a fireproof vault (B) would not protect the data from other types of disasters, such as floods, earthquakes, or theft. Encrypting or signing (D) a copy of the transaction logs and storing them on a local server would not prevent the loss of data if the server is affected by the disaster. Encryption and digital signatures are security measures that protect the confidentiality and integrity of the data, but not the availability.

Answer : A

The most critical finding for an IS auditor following up on a recent security incident is that the security weakness facilitating the attack was not identified. This finding indicates that the root cause of the incident was not analyzed, and the vulnerability that allowed the attack to succeed was not remediated. This means that the organization is still exposed to the same or similar attacks in the future, and its security posture has not improved. Identifying and addressing the security weakness is a key step in the incident response process, as it helps to prevent recurrence, mitigate impact, and improve resilience.

The other findings are not as critical as the failure to identify the security weakness, but they are still important issues that should be addressed by the organization. The attack was not automatically blocked by the intrusion detection system (IDS) is a finding that suggests that the IDS was not configured properly, or that it did not have the latest signatures or rules to detect and prevent the attack. The attack could not be traced back to the originating person is a finding that implies that the organization did not have sufficient logging, monitoring, or forensic capabilities to identify and attribute the attacker. Appropriate response documentation was not maintained is a finding that indicates that the organization did not follow a consistent and formal incident response procedure, or that it did not document its actions, decisions, and lessons learned from the incident.

ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition (2019), page 254

Incident Response Process - ISACA1

Incident Response: How to Identify and Fix Security Weaknesses

Answer : B

The most significant concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an industrial control system (ICS) that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit is that there is a greater risk of system exploitation. System exploitation is an attack that occurs when an unauthorized entity or individual takes advantage of a vulnerability or weakness in a system to compromise its security or functionality. System exploitation can cause harm or damage to the system or its users, such as data loss, corruption, theft, manipulation, denial of service (DoS), etc. An ICS that uses older unsupported technology poses a high risk of system exploitation, as older technology may have known or unknown vulnerabilities or defects that have not been patched or fixed by the vendor or manufacturer, and unsupported technology may not receive any updates or support from the vendor or manufacturer in case of issues or incidents. Attack vectors are evolving for industrial control systems is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. Attack vectors are methods or pathways that attackers use to gain access to or attack a system. Attack vectors are evolving for industrial control systems, as attackers are developing new techniques or tools to target ICSs that are increasingly connected and complex. However, this concern may not be specific to older unsupported technology, as it may affect any ICS regardless of its technology level. Disaster recovery plans (DRPs) are not in place is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. DRPs are documents that outline the technical and operational steps for restoring the IT systems and infrastructure that support critical functions or processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. DRPs are not in place, as they may affect the availability and continuity of the ICS and its functions or processes in case of a failure or incident. However, this concern may not be related to older unsupported technology, as it may apply to any ICS regardless of its technology level. Technical specifications are not documented is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. Technical specifications are documents that describe the technical characteristics or requirements of a system or component, such as functionality, performance, design, etc. Technical specifications are not documented, as they may affect the understanding, maintenance, and improvement of the ICS and its components. However, this concern may not beassociated with older unsupported technology, as it may affect any ICS regardless of its technology level.

Answer : C

The best approach for an IS auditor to evaluate whether the IT strategy supports the organization's vision and mission is to meet with senior management to understand the business goals and how IT can enable them. This will help the IS auditor to assess the alignment and integration of IT with the business strategy and to identify any gaps or opportunities for improvement. Reviewing ROIs, KPIs, or feedback from other departments may provide some insights, but they are not sufficient to evaluate the IT strategy.Reference:IS Audit and Assurance Standards, section ''Standard 1201: Engagement Planning''