CISA Dumps with Practice Exam Questions Answers

 A top-down maturity model process is a method of assessing and improving the maturity level of a process or a set of processes within an organization. A maturity level is a measure of how well-defined, controlled, measured, and optimized a process is. A top-down maturity model process starts with defining the desired maturity level and then identifying the gaps and improvement opportunities for each process. This helps prioritize the processes that need the most attention and improvement. Therefore, a result of utilizing a top-down maturity model process is identification of processes with the most improvement opportunities.

A means of benchmarking the effectiveness of similar processes with peers, a means of comparing the effectiveness of other processes within the enterprise, and identification of older, more established processes to ensure timely review are not results of utilizing a top-down maturity model process. These are possible benefits or objectives of using other types of maturity models or assessment methods, but they are not specific to a top-down approach.

The best recommendation to facilitate compliance with the regulation that requires organizations to report significant security incidents to the regulator within 24 hours of identification is to include the requirement in the incident management response plan. An incident management response plan is a document that defines the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and tools for managing security incidents effectively and efficiently. Including the requirement in the incident management response plan can help ensure that security incidents are identified, classified, reported, and escalated in accordance with the regulation. The other options are not as effective as including the requirement in the incident management response plan, as they do not address all aspects of incident management or compliance. Establishing key performance indicators (KPIs) for timely identification of security incidents is a monitoring technique that can help measure and improve the performance of incident management processes, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation. Enhancing the alert functionality of the intrusion detection system (IDS) is a technical control that can help detect and notify security incidents faster, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation. Engaging an external security incident response expert for incident handling is a contingency measure that can help augment the organization’s internal capabilities and resources for managing security incidents, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2

Reviewing and evaluating application test cases is the most effective use of an IS auditor’s time during the evaluation of controls over a major application development project. Application test cases are designed to verify that the application meets the functional and non-functional requirements and specifications. They also help to identify and correct any errors, defects, or vulnerabilities in the application before it is deployed. By reviewing and evaluating the test cases, the IS auditor can assess the quality, reliability, security, and performance of the application and provide recommendations for improvement. 

 The project manager should be accountable for managing the risks to project benefits. Project benefits are the expected outcomes or value that a project delivers to its stakeholders, such as improved efficiency, quality, customer satisfaction, or revenue. Project risks are uncertain events or conditions that may affect the project objectives, scope, budget, schedule, or quality. The project manager is responsible for identifying, analyzing, prioritizing, responding to, and monitoring project risks throughout the project life cycle. The other options are not accountable for managing project risks, as they have different roles and responsibilities. The enterprise risk manager is responsible foroverseeing the organization’s overall risk management framework and strategy, but not for managing specific project risks. The project sponsor is responsible for initiating, approving, and supporting the project, but not for managing project risks. The information security officer is responsible for ensuring that the project complies with the organization’s information security policies and standards, but not for managing project risks. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3

 The IS auditor’s independence would be most likely impaired if they implemented a specific control during the development of an application system. This is because the IS auditor would be auditing their own work, which creates a self-review threat that could compromise their objectivity and impartiality. The IS auditor should avoid participating in any operational or management activities that could affect their ability to perform an unbiased audit. The other options do not pose a significant threat to the IS auditor’s independence, as long as they follow the ethical standards and guidelines of the profession.