CCAK Questions and Answers

Trust in a cloud service provider is fundamentally based on the assurance that the provider can deliver secure and reliable services. The level of proven technical skills is a critical factor because it demonstrates the provider’s capability to implement and maintain robust security measures, manage complex cloud infrastructures, and respond effectively to technical challenges. Technical expertise is essential for establishing trust, as it directly impacts the security and performance of the cloud services offered.

References = The importance of technical skills in establishing trust is supported by the resources provided by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA). These resources emphasize the need for cloud service providers to have a strong technical foundation to ensure the fulfillment of internal requirements, proper controls, and compliance with regulations, which are crucial for maintaining customer trust and mitigating risks1234.

 The objective that is most appropriate to measure the effectiveness of password policy is newly created account credentials satisfy requirements. This is because password policy is a set of rules and guidelines that define the characteristics and usage of passwords in a system or network. Password policy aims to enhance the security and confidentiality of the system or network by preventing unauthorized access, data breaches, and identity theft. Therefore, the best way to evaluate the effectiveness of password policy is to check whether the newly created account credentials meet the requirements of the policy, such as length, complexity, expiration, and history. This objective can be measured by conducting periodic audits, reviews, or tests of the account creation process and verifying that the passwords comply with the policy standards. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain IAM-02: User ID Credentials, which states that "The organization should have a policy and procedures to manage user ID credentials for cloud services and data."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 4: A Threat Analysis Methodology for Cloud Using CCM, page 76

 An auditor examining a cloud service provider’s SLA should be most concerned about whether the agreement excludes any operational matters that are material to the service operations, as this could indicate a lack of transparency, accountability, and quality assurance from the provider. Operational matters are the aspects of the cloud service that affect its functionality, performance, availability, reliability, security, and compliance. Examples of operational matters include service scope, roles and responsibilities, service levels and metrics, monitoring and reporting mechanisms, incident and problem management, change management, backup and recovery, data protection and privacy, and termination and exit clauses12. These matters are material to the service operations if they have a significant impact on the achievement of the service objectives and expectations of the cloud customer. The auditor should verify that the SLA covers all the relevant and material operational matters in a clear and comprehensive manner, and that the provider adheres to the SLA terms and conditions.

The other options are not the most concerning for the auditor. Option A is a desirable feature of an SLA, but not a concern if it is missing. Option B is an unrealistic expectation of an SLA, as sourcing and financial matters are usually essential in meeting the SLA. Option C is a specific example of an operational matter that is material to the service operations, but not the only one that should be included in the SLA. References:

Cloud Services Due Diligence Checklist

Cloud Computing: Agencies Need to Incorporate Key Practices to Ensure Effective Performance

The first step to switch from the ISO/IEC 27002 control framework to the NIST 800-53 control framework is to map ISO/IEC 27002 and NIST 800-53 and detect gaps and commonalities. This step can help the organization to understand the similarities and differences between the two frameworks, and to identify which controls are already implemented, which controls need to be added or modified, and which controls are no longer applicable. Mapping can also help the organization to leverage the existing work done under ISO/IEC 27002 and avoid starting from scratch or discarding valuable information. Mapping can also help the organization to align with both frameworks, as they are not mutually exclusive or incompatible. In fact, NIST SP 800-53, Revision 5 provides a mapping table between NIST 800-53 and ISO/IEC 27001 in Appendix H-21. ISO/IEC 27001 is a standard for information security management systems that is based on ISO/IEC 27002, which is a code of practice for information security controls2.

References:

NIST SP 800-53, Revision 5 Control Mappings to ISO/IEC 27001

ISO - ISO/IEC 27002:2013 - Information technology — Security techniques — Code of practice for information security controls

According to the web search results, the most critical finding of an application security and DevOps audit would be that the application architecture and configurations did not consider security measures. This finding indicates a serious lack of security by design and security by default principles, which are essential for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the application and its data . If the application architecture and configurations are not secure, they could expose the application to various threats and vulnerabilities, such as unauthorized access, data breaches, denial-of-service attacks, injection attacks, cross-site scripting attacks, and others . This finding could also result in non-compliance with relevant security standards and regulations, such as ISO 27001, PCI DSS, GDPR, and others . Therefore, this finding should be addressed with high priority and urgency by implementing appropriate security measures and controls in the application architecture and configurations.

The other options are not as critical as option B. Option A is a moderate finding that indicates a lack of awareness and assessment of the global security standards specific to cloud, such as ISO 27017, ISO 27018, CSA CCM, NIST SP 800-53, and others . This finding could affect the security and compliance of the cloud services used by the application, but it does not directly impact the application itself. Option C is a severe finding that indicates a major incident that occurred at the cloud service provider level, such as a service interruption, breach, or loss of stored data. This finding could affect the availability, confidentiality, and integrity of the application and its data, but it is not caused by the application itself. Option D is a minor finding that indicates a lack of efficiency and consistency in integrating cloud compliance with regulatory requirements. This finding could affect the compliance posture of the application and its data, but it does not directly impact the security or functionality of the application. References:

[Application Security Best Practices - OWASP]

[DevSecOps: What It Is and How to Get Started - ISACA]

[Cloud Security Standards: What to Expect & What to Negotiate - CSA]

[Cloud Computing Security Audit - ISACA]

[Cloud Computing Incident Response - ISACA]

[Cloud Compliance: A Framework for Using Cloud Services While Maintaining Compliance - ISACA]

 An organization employing the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) to perform a compliance assessment leverages the Scope Applicability direct mapping to understand which controls encompassed by the CCM may already be partially or fully implemented because of the compliance with other standards. The Scope Applicability direct mapping is a worksheet within the CCM that maps the CCM control specifications to several standards within the ISO/IEC 27000 series, such as ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 27002, ISO/IEC 27017, and ISO/IEC 27018. The mapping helps the organization to identify the commonalities and differences between the CCM and the ISO/IEC standards, and to determine the level of compliance with each standard based on the implementation of the CCM controls. The mapping also helps the organization to avoid duplication of work and to streamline the compliance assessment process.12 References := What you need to know: Transitioning CSA STAR for Cloud Controls Matrix …1; Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA3

An independent auditor report is a method that can be used by a cloud service provider (CSP) with a cloud customer that does not want to share security and control information. An independent auditor report is a document that provides assurance on the CSP’s security and control environment, based on an audit conducted by a qualified third-party auditor. The audit can be based on various standards or frameworks, such as ISO 27001, SOC 2, CSA STAR, etc. The independent auditor report can provide the cloud customer with the necessary information to evaluate the CSP’s security and control posture, without disclosing sensitive or proprietary details. The CSP can also use the independent auditor report to demonstrate compliance with relevant regulations or contractual obligations.

References:

ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 83-84.

ISACA, Cloud Computing Audit Program, 2019, p. 6-7.

The greatest governance challenge in the scenario where production is hosted in a public cloud and backups are held on-premises is aligning the shared responsibilities between the provider and the customer. This is because the division of security and compliance duties must be clearly understood and managed to ensure that all aspects of the cloud services are adequately protected and meet regulatory requirements. The customer is responsible for the security ‘in’ the cloud (i.e., the data and applications), while the provider is responsible for the security ‘of’ the cloud (i.e., the infrastructure). Misalignment in this shared responsibility model can lead to gaps in security and compliance, making it a significant governance challenge.

References = This answer is verified by the information available in the Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) documents and related resources provided by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA), which discuss the shared responsibility model and its implications for governance in cloud environments12.

A distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack renders the customer’s cloud inaccessible for 24 hours is an example of availability technical impact. Availability is the protection of data and services from disruption or denial, and it is one of the three dimensions of information security, along with confidentiality and integrity. Availability technical impact refers to the extent of damage or harm that a threat can cause to the availability of the information system and its components, such as servers, networks, applications, and data. A DDoS attack is a malicious attempt to overwhelm a target system with a large volume of traffic or requests from multiple sources, making it unable to respond to legitimate requests or perform its normal functions. A DDoS attack can cause a significant availability technical impact by rendering the customer’s cloud inaccessible for a prolonged period of time, resulting in loss of productivity, revenue, customer satisfaction, and reputation. References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 4: A Threat Analysis Methodology for Cloud Using CCM, page 81; What is a DDoS Attack? | Cloudflare

 An example of availability technical impact is a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack that renders the customer’s cloud inaccessible for 24 hours. Availability technical impact refers to the effect of a cloud security incident on the protection of data and services from disruption or denial. Availability is one of the three security properties of an information system, along with confidentiality and integrity.

Option A is an example of availability technical impact because it shows how a DDoS attack, which is a type of cyberattack that overwhelms a system or network with malicious traffic and prevents legitimate users from accessing it, can cause a severe and prolonged disruption of the customer’s cloud services. Option A also implies that the customer’s organization depends on the availability of its cloud services for its core business operations.

The other options are not examples of availability technical impact. Option B is an example of confidentiality technical impact, which refers to the effect of a cloud security incident on the protection of data from unauthorized access or disclosure. Option B shows how a breach of customer personal data from an unsecured server, which is a type of data leakage or exposure attack that exploits the lack of proper security controls on a system or network, can cause a violation of the privacy and security of the customer’s data. Option C is an example of integrity technical impact, which refers to the effect of a cloud security incident on the protection of data from unauthorized modification or deletion. Option C shows how an administrator inadvertently clicking on phish bait, which is a type of social engineering or phishing attack that tricks a user into clicking on a malicious link or attachment, can expose the company to a ransomware attack, which is a type of malware or encryption attack that locks or encrypts the data and demands a ransom for its release. Option D is also an example of integrity technical impact, as it shows how a hacker using a stolen administrator identity, which is a type of identity theft or impersonation attack that exploits the credentials or privileges of a legitimate user to access or manipulate a system or network, can alter the discount percentage in the product database, which is a type of data tampering or corruption attack that affects the accuracy and reliability of the data. References :=

OWASP Risk Rating Methodology | OWASP Foundation1

OEE Factors: Availability, Performance, and Quality | OEE2

The Effects of Technological Developments on Work and Their …

According to the ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, the cloud customer is the entity that retains accountability for the business outcome of the system or the processes that are supported by the cloud service1. The cloud customer is also responsible for ensuring that the cloud service meets the legal, regulatory, and contractual obligations that apply to the customer’s business context1. The cloud customer should also perform due diligence and risk assessment before selecting a cloud service provider, and establish a clear and enforceable contract that defines the roles and responsibilities of both parties1.

The cloud user is the entity that uses the cloud service on behalf of the cloud customer, but it is not necessarily accountable for the compliance of the service1. The cloud service provider is the entity that makes the cloud service available to the cloud customer, but it is not accountable for the compliance of the customer’s business context1. The certification authority (CA) is an entity that issues digital certificates to verify the identity or authenticity of other entities, but it is not accountable for the compliance of the cloud service2. References:

ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, page 10-11.

Certification authority - Wikipedia

In the context of cloud operationalization, “below the waterline” refers to the aspects of cloud services that are managed and controlled by the cloud service provider (CSP) rather than the customer. This analogy is often used to describe the shared responsibility model in cloud computing, where the CSP is responsible for the infrastructure’s security and stability, akin to the submerged part of an iceberg that supports the structure above water. The customer, on the other hand, is responsible for managing the controls and security measures “above the waterline,” which include the applications, data, and access management they deploy in the cloud environment.

References = The information provided is based on standard cloud computing models and the shared responsibility concept, which is a fundamental principle discussed in cloud auditing and security literature, including the CCAK curriculum and related resources1.

A detective control is a type of internal control that seeks to uncover problems in a company’s processes once they have occurred1. Examples of detective controls include physical inventory checks, reviews of account reports and reconciliations, as well as assessments of current controls1. Detective controls use platform telemetry to detect misconfigurations, vulnerabilities, and potentially malicious activity in the cloud environment2.

In a Software as a Service (SaaS) service provider, privileged access monitoring is a detective control that can help identify unauthorized or suspicious activities by users who have elevated permissions to access or modify cloud resources, data, or configurations. Privileged access monitoring can involve logging, auditing, alerting, and reporting on the actions performed by privileged users3. This can help detect security incidents, compliance violations, or operational errors in a timely manner and enable appropriate responses.

Data encryption, incident management, and network segmentation are examples of preventive controls, which are designed to prevent problems from occurring in the first place. Data encryption protects the confidentiality and integrity of data by transforming it into an unreadable format that can only be decrypted with a valid key1. Incident management is a process that aims to restore normal service operations as quickly as possible after a disruption or an adverse event4. Network segmentation divides a network into smaller subnetworks that have different access levels and security policies, reducing the attack surface and limiting the impact of a breach1.

References:

Detective controls - SaaS Lens - docs.aws.amazon.com3, section on Privileged access monitoring

Detective controls | Cloud Architecture Center | Google Cloud2, section on Detective controls

Internal control: how do preventive and detective controls work?4, section on SaaS Solutions to Support Internal Control

Detective Control: Definition, Examples, Vs. Preventive Control1, section on What Is a Detective Control?

The Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) provides both cloud-specific security controls (Cloud Controls Matrix, CCM) and benchmarking tools like the CSA STAR program. CSA’s CCM maps industry standards and best practices tailored to cloud security requirements, and STAR provides a transparency and assurance framework for benchmarking security maturity. These resources are widely used and referenced in ISACA’s CCAK for cloud auditing and are integral for organizations seeking structured guidance on cloud security.

=========================

Continuous integration (CI) is the most critical concept for managing the building and testing of code in DevOps. CI is the practice of merging all developers’ working copies of code to a shared mainline several times a day. This enables early detection and resolution of bugs, conflicts, and errors, as well as faster and more frequent feedback loops. CI also facilitates the automation of building, testing, and deploying code, which improves the quality, reliability, and security of the software delivery process. CI is a prerequisite for continuous delivery (CD) and continuous deployment (CD), which are the next stages of DevOps maturity that aim to deliver software to customers faster and more frequently. References:

ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 114-115

Cloud Security Alliance (CSA), Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0, 2021, DCS-01: Datacenter Security - Build and Test

What is Continuous Integration?

Continuous Integration vs Continuous Delivery vs Continuous Deployment

The most significant difference between a cloud risk management program and a traditional risk management program is the shared responsibility model. The shared responsibility model is the division of security and compliance responsibilities between the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer, depending on the type of cloud service model (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS). The shared responsibility model implies that both parties have to collaborate and coordinate to ensure that the cloud service meets the required level of security and compliance, as well as to identify and mitigate any risks that may arise from the cloud environment123.

Virtualization of the IT landscape (A) is a difference between a cloud risk management program and a traditional risk management program, but it is not the most significant one. Virtualization of the IT landscape refers to the abstraction of physical IT resources, such as servers, storage, network, or applications, into virtual ones that can be accessed and managed over the internet. Virtualization of the IT landscape enables the cloud service provider to offer scalable, flexible, and efficient cloud services to the cloud service customer. However, virtualization of the IT landscape also introduces new risks, such as data leakage, unauthorized access, misconfiguration, or performance degradation123.

Risk management practices adopted by the cloud service provider © are a difference between a cloud risk management program and a traditional risk management program, but they are not the most significant one. Risk management practices adopted by the cloud service provider refer to the methods or techniques that the cloud service provider uses to identify, assess, treat, monitor, and report on the risks that affect their cloud services. Risk management practices adopted by the cloud service provider may include policies, standards, procedures, controls, audits, certifications, or attestations that demonstrate their security and compliance posture. However, risk management practices adopted by the cloud service provider are not sufficient or reliable on their own, as they may not cover all aspects of cloud security and compliance, or may not align with the expectations or requirements of the cloud service customer123.

Hosting sensitive information in the cloud environment (D) is a difference between a cloud risk management program and a traditional risk management program, but it is not the most significant one. Hosting sensitive information in the cloud environment refers to storing or processing data that are confidential, personal, or valuable in the cloud infrastructure or platform that is owned and operated by the cloud service provider. Hosting sensitive information in the cloud environment can offer benefits such as cost savings, accessibility, availability, or backup. However, hosting sensitive information in the cloud environment also poses risks such as data breaches, privacy violations, compliance failures, or legal disputes123. References :=

Cloud Risk Management - ISACA

Cloud Risk Management: A Primer for Security Professionals - Infosec …

Cloud Risk Management: A Primer for Security Professionals - Infosec …

From a compliance perspective, reviewing logs is crucial when evaluating the effectiveness of Infrastructure as Code (IaC) deployments. Logs provide a detailed record of events, changes, and operations that have occurred within the IaC environment. They are essential for tracking the deployment process, identifying issues, and verifying that the infrastructure has been configured and is operating as intended. Logs can also be used to ensure that the IaC deployments comply with security policies and regulatory requirements, making them a vital artifact for assessors.

References = The importance of logs in assessing IaC deployments is supported by cybersecurity best practices, which recommend the use of logs for auditable records of changes to template files and for tracking resource protection1. Additionally, ISACA’s resources on securing IaC highlight the role of logs in providing transparency and enabling infrastructure blueprints to be audited and reviewed for common errors or misconfigurations2.

SLAs in cloud computing define performance metrics and uptime commitments, making them crucial for monitoring and measuring service delivery against predefined benchmarks. Metrics from SLAs help in tracking service performance, compliance with contractual obligations, and cloud service provider accountability. ISACA’s CCAK outlines the importance of SLAs for cloud governance and risk management, as they provide a measurable baseline that informs cloud audit activities (referenced in CCM under Governance, Risk, and Compliance - GOV-05).

=========================

According to the definition of audit scope, it is the extent and boundaries of an audit, which include the audit objectives, the activities and documents covered, the time period and locations audited, and the related activities not audited1 Audit scope determines how deeply an audit is performed and may vary depending on the type of audit. Audit scope can also mean the examination of a person or the inspection of the books, records, or accounts of a person for tax purposes1

The most important audit scope document when conducting a review of a cloud service provider is the processes and systems to be audited. This document defines the specific areas and aspects of the cloud service provider that will be subject to the audit, such as the cloud service delivery model, the cloud deployment model, the cloud security domains, the cloud service level agreements, the cloud governance framework, etc2 The processes and systems to be audited document also helps to identify the risks, controls, criteria, and objectives of the audit, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the auditors and the auditees3 The processes and systems to be audited document is essential for planning and performing an effective and efficient audit of a cloud service provider.

The other options are not correct because:

Option B is not correct because the updated audit work program is not an audit scope document, but rather an audit planning document. The audit work program is a set of detailed instructions or procedures that guide the auditor in conducting the audit activities4 The audit work program is based on the audit scope, but it does not define it. The audit work program may also change during the course of the audit, depending on the findings and issues encountered by the auditor4

Option C is not correct because the documentation criteria for the audit evidence is not an audit scope document, but rather an audit quality document. The documentation criteria for the audit evidence is a set of standards or guidelines that specify what constitutes sufficient and appropriate evidence to support the auditor’s conclusions and opinions5 The documentation criteria for the audit evidence is derived from the audit scope, but it does not determine it. The documentation criteria for the audit evidence may also vary depending on the nature and source of the evidence collected by the auditor5

Option D is not correct because the testing procedure to be performed is not an audit scope document, but rather an audit execution document. The testing procedure to be performed is a set of steps or actions that describe how to test or verify a specific control or process within the cloud service provider6 The testing procedure to be performed is aligned with the audit scope, but it does not establish it. The testing procedure to be performed may also differ depending on the type and level of testing required by the auditor6

References: 1: AUDIT SCOPE DEFINITION - VentureLine 2: Audit Scope and Criteria - Auditor Training Online 3: Open Certification Framework | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance 4: Audit Work Program Definition - Audit Work Program Example 5: INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ON AUDITING 230 AUDIT DOCUMENTATION CONTENTS - IFAC 6: What are Testing Procedures? - Definition from Techopedia

DevSecOps is an approach that integrates security practices into every phase of the software development lifecycle. It emphasizes the incorporation of security from the beginning, rather than as an afterthought, and utilizes automation to ensure security measures are consistently applied throughout the development process. This method allows for early detection and resolution of security issues, making it an essential practice for organizations with mature security programs and cloud adoption.

References = The definition and best practices of DevSecOps are well-documented in resources provided by leading industry authorities such as Microsoft1 and IBM2, which describe DevSecOps as a framework that automates the integration of security into the software development lifecycle.

The shift-left concept of code release cycles is an approach that moves testing, quality, and performance evaluation early in the development process, often before any code is written. The goal of shift-left testing is to anticipate and resolve software defects, bugs, errors, and vulnerabilities as soon as possible, reducing the cost and time of fixing them later in the production stage. To achieve this, shift-left testing relies on automation tools and techniques that enable continuous integration, continuous delivery, and continuous deployment of code. Automation also facilitates collaboration and feedback among developers, testers, security experts, and other stakeholders throughout the development lifecycle. Therefore, the incorporation of automation to identify and address software code problems early is a sign that an organization has adopted a shift-left concept of code release cycles. References:

The ‘Shift Left’ Is A Growing Theme For Cloud Cybersecurity In 2022

Shift left vs shift right: A DevOps mystery solved

How to shift left with continuous integration

Cryptography and authentication are good candidates for continuous auditing, as they are critical aspects of cloud security that require constant monitoring and verification. Cryptography and authentication refer to the methods and techniques that ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data and communications in the cloud environment. Cryptography involves the use of encryption algorithms and keys to protect data from unauthorized access or modification. Authentication involves the use of credentials and tokens to verify the identity and access rights of users or devices. Continuous auditing can help to assess the effectiveness and compliance of cryptography and authentication controls, such as data encryption, key management, password policies, multifactor authentication, single sign-on, etc. Continuous auditing can also help to detect and alert any anomalies or issues that may compromise or affect cryptography and authentication, such as data breaches, key leakage, password cracking, unauthorized access, etc123.

Procedures (A) are not good candidates for continuous auditing, as they are not specific or measurable aspects of cloud security that can be easily automated or tested. Procedures refer to the steps or actions that are performed to achieve a certain objective or result in a specific domain or context. Procedures may vary depending on the type, nature, or complexity of the task or process involved. Continuous auditing requires a clear and consistent definition of the expected outcome or output, as well as the criteria or metrics to evaluate it. Procedures may not provide such a definition or criteria, and may require human judgment or interpretation to assess their effectiveness or compliance123.

Governance (B) is not a good candidate for continuous auditing, as it is not a specific or measurable aspect of cloud security that can be easily automated or tested. Governance refers to the framework or system that defines the roles, responsibilities, policies, standards, procedures, and practices for managing and overseeing an organization or a domain. Governance may involve multiple stakeholders, such as management, board of directors, regulators, auditors, customers, etc., who have different interests, expectations, or perspectives. Continuous auditing requires a clear and consistent definition of the expected outcome or output, as well as the criteria or metrics to evaluate it. Governance may not provide such a definition or criteria, and may require human judgment or interpretation to assess its effectiveness or compliance123.

Documentation quality (D) is not a good candidate for continuous auditing, as it is not a specific or measurable aspect of cloud security that can be easily automated or tested. Documentation quality refers to the degree to which the documents that describe or support an organization or a domain are accurate, complete, consistent, relevant, and understandable. Documentation quality may depend on various factors, such as the purpose, audience, format, style, language, structure, content, etc., of the documents involved. Continuous auditing requires a clear and consistent definition of the expected outcome or output, as well as the criteria or metrics to evaluate it. Documentation quality may not provide such a definition or criteria, and may require human judgment or interpretation to assess its effectiveness or compliance123. References :=

Cloud Audits: A Guide for Cloud Service Providers - Cloud Standards …

Cloud Audits: A Guide for Cloud Service Customers - Cloud Standards …

Cloud Auditing Knowledge: Preparing for the CCAK Certificate Exam

The approach that encompasses social engineering of staff, bypassing of physical access controls, and penetration testing is typically associated with a Red team. A Red team is designed to simulate real-world attacks to test the effectiveness of security measures. They often use tactics like social engineering and penetration testing to identify vulnerabilities. In contrast, a Blue team is responsible for defending against attacks, a White box approach involves testing with internal knowledge of the system, and a Gray box is a combination of both White box and Black box testing methods.

References = The information aligns with the principles of cloud auditing and security assessments as outlined in the resources provided by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance, which emphasize the importance of understanding various security testing methodologies to effectively audit cloud systems123.

The Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) is a cybersecurity control framework specifically designed for cloud computing environments. A key benefit of using the CCM is that it maps to existing security standards, best practices, and regulations. This mapping allows organizations to ensure that their cloud security posture aligns with industry-recognized frameworks, thereby facilitating compliance and security assurance efforts. The CCM’s comprehensive set of control objectives covers all key aspects of cloud technology and provides guidance on which security controls should be implemented by various actors within the cloud supply chain.

References = This answer is supported by the information provided in the Cloud Controls Matrix documentation and related resources, which highlight the CCM’s alignment with other security standards and its role in helping organizations navigate the complex landscape of cloud security and compliance12.

 A contract containing the phrase “You automatically consent to these terms by using or logging into the service to which they pertain” is establishing a contract of adhesion. A contract of adhesion is a type of legal agreement that involves one party setting the terms and conditions and the other party having no choice but to accept or reject them without bargaining. These contracts are often used in situations where one party has more power or resources than the other, such as in online services, insurance, leases, or consumer credit. These contracts may be unfair or unclear to the weaker party and may be challenged in court for unconscionability or ambiguity12.

References:

adhesion contract | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

What is a contract of adhesion? A complete guide - PandaDoc

Management representation is a term used in audit parlance to refer to the statements made by management in response to specific inquiries or through the financial statements, as part of the audit evidence that the auditor obtains. Management representation can be oral or written, but the auditor usually obtains written representation from management in the form of a letter that attests to the accuracy and completeness of the financial statements and other information provided to the auditor. The management representation letter is signed by senior management, such as the CEO and CFO, and is dated the same date of audit work completion. The management representation letter confirms or documents the representations explicitly or implicitly given to the auditor during the audit, indicates the continuing appropriateness of such representations, and reduces the possibility of misunderstanding concerning the matters that are the subject of the representations12.

Management representation is not a person or group of persons representing executive management during audits (A), as this would imply that management is not directly involved or accountable for the audit process. Management representation is not a mechanism to represent organizational structure (B), as this would imply that management representation is a graphical or diagrammatic tool to show the hierarchy or relationships within an organization. Management representation is not a project management technique to demonstrate management’s involvement in key project stages ©, as this would imply that management representation is a method or practice to monitor or report on the progress or outcomes of a project.

A SOC 2 Type 2 report is the most comprehensive type of report for cloud service providers, as it evaluates the design and operating effectiveness of a service organization’s controls over a period of time. This type of report is specifically intended to meet the needs of customers who need assurance about the security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, or privacy of the data processed by the service provider1234.

References = The importance of SOC 2 Type 2 reports for cloud service providers is discussed in various resources, including those provided by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance, which highlight the need for such reports to ensure the operating effectiveness of controls5678.

Supply chain agreements between a cloud service provider and cloud customers should, at a minimum, include audits, assessments, and independent verification of compliance certifications with agreement terms. This is because cloud customers need to ensure that the cloud service provider meets the agreed-upon service levels, security standards, and regulatory requirements. Audits, assessments, and independent verification can provide evidence of the cloud service provider’s compliance and performance and help identify any gaps or risks that need to be addressed. This is also stated in the Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 2.012, which is a reference document for cloud customers and providers to analyze and negotiate cloud service agreements.

The other options are not directly related to the question. Option A, regulatory guidelines impacting the cloud customer, refers to the legal and ethical obligations that the cloud customer has to comply with when using cloud services, such as data protection, privacy, and security laws. These guidelines may vary depending on the jurisdiction, industry, and type of data involved. Option C, policies and procedures of the cloud customer, refers to the internal rules and processes that the cloud customer has to follow when using cloud services, such as data governance, access management, and incident response. Option D, the organizational chart of the provider, refers to the structure and hierarchy of the cloud service provider’s organization, such as the roles, responsibilities, and relationships of its employees, departments, and units.

References :=

Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 2.01

Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements V2.0| Object … - OMG3

Supply chain agreements between CSP and cloud customers should …4

Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 3

Traditional cloud compliance assurance approaches such as SOC2 attestations have the main limitation of providing a point-in-time snapshot of an organization’s compliance posture. This means that they only reflect the state of the organization’s security and compliance controls at a specific date or period, which may not be representative of the current or future state. Cloud environments are dynamic and constantly changing, and so are the threats and risks that affect them. Therefore, relying on traditional cloud compliance assurance approaches may not provide sufficient or timely assurance that the organization’s cloud services and data are adequately protected and compliant with the relevant requirements and standards.12

To overcome this limitation, some organizations adopt continuous cloud compliance assurance approaches, such as continuous monitoring, auditing, and reporting. These approaches enable the organization to collect, analyze, and report on the security and compliance status of its cloud environment in near real-time, using automated tools and processes. Continuous cloud compliance assurance approaches can help the organization to identify and respond to any changes, issues, or incidents that may affect its cloud security and compliance posture, and to maintain a high level of trust and transparency with its stakeholders, customers, and regulators.34

References := What is SOC 2? Complete Guide to SOC 2 Reports | CSA1; Guidance on cloud security assessment and authorization - ITSP.50.105 - Canadian Centre for Cyber Security2; Continuous Compliance: The Future of Cloud Security | CloudCheckr3; Continuous Compliance: How to Automate Cloud Security Compliance4

Impact analysis is the aspect of risk management that involves identifying the potential reputational and financial harm when an incident occurs. Impact analysis is the process of estimating the consequences or effects of a risk event on the business objectives, operations, processes, or functions. Impact analysis helps to measure and quantify the severity or magnitude of the risk event, as well as to prioritize and rank the risks based on their impact. Impact analysis also helps to determine the appropriate level of response and mitigation for each risk event, as well as to allocate the necessary resources and budget for risk management123.

Likelihood (A) is not the aspect of risk management that involves identifying the potential reputational and financial harm when an incident occurs. Likelihood is the aspect of risk management that involves estimating the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring. Likelihood is the process of assessing and evaluating the factors or causes that may trigger or influence a risk event, such as threats, vulnerabilities, assumptions, uncertainties, etc. Likelihood helps to measure and quantify the chance or possibility of a risk event happening, as well as to prioritize and rank the risks based on their likelihood123.

Mitigation (B) is not the aspect of risk management that involves identifying the potential reputational and financial harm when an incident occurs. Mitigation is the aspect of risk management that involves reducing or minimizing the likelihood or impact of a risk event. Mitigation is the process of implementing and applying controls or actions that can prevent, avoid, transfer, or accept a risk event, depending on the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. Mitigation helps to improve and enhance the security and resilience of the organization against potential risks, as well as to optimize the cost and benefit of risk management123.

Residual risk © is not the aspect of risk management that involves identifying the potential reputational and financial harm when an incident occurs. Residual risk is the aspect of risk management that involves measuring and monitoring the remaining or leftover risk after mitigation. Residual risk is the process of evaluating and reviewing the effectiveness and efficiency of the mitigation controls or actions, as well as identifying and addressing any gaps or issues that may arise. Residual risk helps to ensure that the actual level of risk is aligned with the desired level of risk, as well as to update and improve the risk management strategy and plan123. References :=

Risk Analysis: A Comprehensive Guide | SafetyCulture

Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA

Risk Management Process - Risk Management | Risk Assessment | Risk …

From an auditor’s perspective, shadow IT is best described as a risk that jeopardizes business continuity planning. Shadow IT refers to the use of IT-related hardware or software that is not under the control of, or has not been approved by, the organization’s IT department. This can lead to a lack of visibility into the IT infrastructure and potential gaps in security and compliance measures. In the context of business continuity planning, shadow IT can introduce unknown risks and vulnerabilities that are not accounted for in the organization’s disaster recovery and business continuity plans, thereby posing a threat to the organization’s ability to maintain or quickly resume critical functions in the event of a disruption.

References = The answer is based on general knowledge of shadow IT risks and their impact on business continuity planning. Specific references from the Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) documents and related resources by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) are not directly cited here, as my current capabilities do not include accessing or verifying content from external documents or websites. However, the concept of shadow IT as a risk to business continuity is a recognized concern in IT governance and auditing practices1234.

Credential scanning is a technique that can be used to detect and prevent the exposure of access keys and other sensitive information in the source code or any other configuration files during development. Credential scanning tools can scan the code repositories, files, and commits for any hardcoded credentials, such as access keys, passwords, tokens, certificates, and connection strings. They can also alert the developers or security teams of any potential leaks and suggest remediation actions, such as rotating or revoking the compromised keys, removing the credentials from the code, or using secure storage mechanisms like vaults or environment variables. Credential scanning can be integrated into the development pipeline as part of the continuous integration and continuous delivery (CI/CD) process, or performed periodically as a security audit. Credential scanning can help reduce the risk of credential leakage, which can lead to unauthorized access, data breaches, or account compromise. References:

Protecting Source Code in the Cloud with DSPM

Best practices for managing service account keys

Protect your code repository

 The greatest concern to the auditor should be that the customer cannot monitor its cloud subscription on its own and must rely on the provider for monitoring purposes. This situation can lead to a lack of transparency and control over the security and compliance posture of the cloud services being used. It is crucial for customers to have the ability to independently monitor their systems to ensure that they are secure and compliant with relevant regulations and standards.

References = This concern is highlighted in the Cloud Security Alliance’s (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) and the Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) materials, which emphasize the importance of continuous monitoring and the customer’s ability to audit and ensure the security of their cloud services1.

When auditing a public cloud, it is essential to review areas such as Identity and Access Management (IAM) and data protection. IAM involves ensuring that only authorized individuals have access to the cloud resources, and that their access is appropriately managed and monitored. This includes reviewing user authentication methods, access control policies, role-based access controls, and user activity monitoring1.

Data protection is another critical area to review. It involves ensuring that the data stored in the public cloud is secure from unauthorized access, breaches, and leaks. This includes reviewing data encryption methods, data backup and recovery processes, data privacy policies, and compliance with relevant data protection regulations1.

While the other options may also be relevant in certain contexts, they are not as universally applicable as IAM and data protection for auditing a public cloud. Source code reviews and hypervisor (option B), patching and configuration (option C), and vulnerability management and cybersecurity reviews (option D) are important but are more specific to certain types of cloud services or deployment models. References:

Cloud Computing — What IT Auditors Should Really Know - ISACA

According to the ISACA CCAK Study Guide, the auditor should report the findings to the management of the organization being audited, as they are the primary stakeholders and decision makers for the cloud service. The management is responsible for ensuring that the cloud service meets the requirements and expectations of the community, as well as complying with any relevant laws and regulations. The auditor should also communicate the findings to the cloud service provider, as they are the secondary stakeholders and service providers for the cloud service. The cloud service provider should be aware of any issues or gaps identified by the auditor and work with the management to resolve them. The auditor should not report the findings to the public, shareholders, or interested parties, as they are not directly involved in the cloud service or its governance. The auditor should respect the confidentiality and privacy of the community and its data, and only disclose the findings to those who have a legitimate need to know. References :=

ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 971

ISACA, Cloud Auditing Knowledge: Preparing for the CCAK Certificate Exam, 2021, p. 36

The auditor’s next course of action should be to review the contract and DR capability of the cloud service provider. The contract should specify the roles and responsibilities of both parties regarding disaster recovery, as well as the service level agreements (SLAs) and recovery time objectives (RTOs) for the critical application. The DR capability should demonstrate that the cloud service provider has a plan that is aligned with the organization’s requirements and expectations, and that it is tested annually and validated by independent auditors. The auditor should also verify that the organization has a process to monitor and review the cloud service provider’s performance and compliance with the contract and SLAs.

Planning an audit of the provider (B) may not be feasible or necessary, as the auditor may not have access to the provider’s environment or data, and may not have the authority or expertise to conduct such an audit. The auditor should rely on the provider’s audit reports and certifications to assess their compliance with relevant standards and regulations.

Reviewing the security white paper of the provider © may not be sufficient or relevant, as the security white paper may not cover the specific aspects of disaster recovery for the critical application, or may not reflect the current state of the provider’s security controls and practices. The security white paper may also be biased or outdated, as it is produced by the provider themselves.

Reviewing the provider’s audit reports (D) may be helpful, but not enough, as the audit reports may not address the specific requirements and expectations of the organization for disaster recovery, or may not cover the latest changes or incidents that may affect the provider’s DR capability. The audit reports may also have limitations or qualifications that may affect their reliability or validity. References :=

Audit a Disaster Recovery Plan | AlertFind

ISACA Introduces New Audit Programs for Business Continuity/Disaster …

How to Maintain and Test a Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Plan

 When applying the Top Threats Analysis methodology following an incident, the scope of the technical impact identification step is to determine the impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information system. The Top Threats Analysis methodology is a process developed by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) to help organizations identify, analyze, and mitigate the top threats to cloud computing, as defined in the CSA Top Threats reports. The methodology consists of six steps1:

Scope definition: Define the scope of the analysis, such as the cloud service model, deployment model, and business context.

Threat identification: Identify the relevant threats from the CSA Top Threats reports that may affect the scope of the analysis.

Technical impact identification: Determine the impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information system caused by each threat. Confidentiality refers to the protection of data from unauthorized access or disclosure. Integrity refers to the protection of data from unauthorized modification or deletion. Availability refers to the protection of data and services from disruption or denial.

Business impact identification: Determine the impact on the business objectives and operations caused by each threat, such as financial loss, reputational damage, legal liability, or regulatory compliance.

Risk assessment: Assess the likelihood and severity of each threat based on the technical and business impacts, and prioritize the threats according to their risk level.

Risk treatment: Select and implement appropriate risk treatment options for each threat, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, or acceptance.

The technical impact identification step is important because it helps to measure the extent of damage or harm that each threat can cause to the information system and its components. This step also helps to align the technical impacts with the business impacts and to support the risk assessment and treatment steps.

References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 4: A Threat Analysis Methodology for Cloud Using CCM, page 81

 Dynamic application security testing (DAST) is a method of testing the security of an application by simulating attacks from an external source. DAST does not require access to the source code or binaries of the application, unlike static application security testing (SAST), which analyzes the code for vulnerabilities. Therefore, DAST is a black box testing technique, meaning that it does not need any knowledge of the internal structure, design, or implementation of the application. DAST is also programming language agnostic, meaning that it can test applications written in any language, framework, or platform. This makes DAST more flexible and adaptable to different types of applications and environments. However, DAST also has some limitations, such as being slower, less accurate, and more dependent on the availability and configuration of the application. References:

SAST vs. DAST: What’s the Difference?

SAST vs DAST: What’s the Difference?

SAST vs. DAST: Enhancing application security

The Architectural Relevance feature within the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) allows for the filtering of security controls based on relevant delivery models like SaaS, PaaS, and IaaS. This feature is crucial because it aligns the security controls with the specific cloud service models being used, ensuring that the controls are applicable and effective for the particular cloud architecture in place.

References = The CCM’s focus on delivery models is supported by the CSA Enterprise Architecture Working Group, which helps define the organizational relevance of each control, including the alignment with different cloud service models1.

 According to the ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, the final decision to include a material finding in a cloud audit report should be made by the cloud auditor1. A material finding is a significant error or risk in the cloud service that could affect the achievement of the audit objectives or the cloud customer’s business outcomes. The cloud auditor is responsible for identifying, evaluating, and reporting the material findings based on the audit criteria, methodology, and evidence. The cloud auditor should also communicate the material findings to the auditee and other relevant stakeholders, and obtain their feedback and responses.

The other options are not correct. Option A is incorrect, as the auditee’s senior management is not in charge of the audit report, but rather the subject of the audit. The auditee’s senior management should provide their perspective and action plans for the material findings, but they cannot decide whether to include or exclude them from the report. Option B is incorrect, as the organization’s CEO is not involved in the audit process, but rather the ultimate recipient of the audit report. The organization’s CEO should review and act upon the audit report, but they cannot influence the content of the report. Option D is incorrect, as the organization’s CISO is not an independent party, but rather a stakeholder of the audit. The organization’s CISO should support and collaborate with the cloud auditor, but they cannot make the final decision on the material findings. References:

ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, page 19-20.

 The CSA STAR Attestation allows for the immediate adoption of the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) as additional criteria alongside the AICPA Trust Service Criteria. It also offers the flexibility to update the criteria as technology and market requirements evolve. This is because the CSA STAR Attestation is a combination of SOC 2 and additional cloud security criteria from the CSA CCM, providing guidelines for CPAs to conduct SOC 2 engagements using criteria from both the AICPA and the CSA Cloud Controls Matrix.

References = The information is supported by the Cloud Security Alliance’s resources, which explain that the CSA STAR Attestation integrates SOC 2 with additional criteria from the CCM, allowing for a comprehensive approach to cloud security that aligns with evolving technologies and market needs1.

The CSA STAR Certification is based on criteria outlined in the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) in addition to ISO/IEC 27001 implementation. ISO/IEC 27001 is an international standard that specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS). The CSA STAR Certification is a third-party independent assessment of the security of a cloud service provider, which demonstrates the alignment of the provider’s ISMS with the CCM best practices. The CSA STAR Certification has three levels: Level 1 (STAR Certification), Level 2 (STAR Attestation), and Level 3 (STAR Continuous Monitoring).1 [2][2] References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 5: Cloud Auditing, page 971; CSA STAR Certification, Overview[2][2]

 Effective operationalization of cloud security controls is highly dependent on the level of training and awareness among the staff who implement and manage these controls. Without proper understanding and awareness of security policies, procedures, and the specific controls in place, even the most sophisticated security measures can be rendered ineffective. Training ensures that the personnel are equipped with the necessary knowledge to perform their duties securely, while awareness programs help in maintaining a security-conscious culture within the organization.

References = This answer is supported by the CCAK materials which highlight the importance of training and awareness in cloud security. The Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) also emphasizes the need for security education and the role it plays in the successful implementation of security controls1234.

 The organization (client) is accountable for the use of a cloud service. Accountability in cloud computing is the responsibility of cloud service providers and other parties in the cloud ecosystem to protect and properly process the data of their clients and users. However, accountability ultimately rests with the organization (client) that uses the cloud service, as it is the data owner and controller. The organization (client) has to ensure that the cloud service provider and its suppliers meet the agreed-upon service levels, security standards, and regulatory requirements. The organization (client) also has to perform due diligence and oversight on the cloud service provider and its suppliers, as well as to comply with the shared responsibility model, which defines how the security and compliance tasks and obligations are divided between the cloud service provider and the organization (client)123.

The other options are not correct. Option A, the cloud access security broker (CASB), is incorrect because a CASB is a software tool or service that acts as an intermediary between cloud users and cloud service providers, providing visibility, data security, threat protection, and compliance. A CASB does not use the cloud service, but facilitates its secure and compliant use4. Option B, the supplier, is incorrect because a supplier is a third-party entity that provides services or products to the cloud service provider, such as infrastructure, software, hardware, or support. A supplier does not use the cloud service, but supports its delivery5. Option C, the cloud service provider, is incorrect because a cloud service provider is a company that provides cloud computing services to the organization (client). A cloud service provider does not use the cloud service, but offers it to the organization (client)6. References :=

Accountability Issues in Cloud Computing (5 Step … - Medium1

Shared responsibility in the \uE000cloud\uE001 - Microsoft Azure2

Who Is Responsible for Cloud Security? - Security Intelligence3

What is CASB? - Cloud Security Alliance4

Cloud Computing: Auditing Challenges - ISACA5

What is Cloud Provider? - Definition from Techopedia

Identity and access management (IAM) and data protection are the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are the key aspects of cloud security and compliance that affect both the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer. IAM and data protection refer to the methods and techniques that ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data and resources in the cloud environment. IAM involves the use of credentials, policies, roles, permissions, and tokens to verify the identity and access rights of users or devices. Data protection involves the use of encryption, backup, recovery, deletion, and retention to protect data from unauthorized access, modification, loss, or disclosure123.

Patching and configuration (A) are not the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are not the key aspects of cloud security and compliance that affect both the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer. Patching and configuration refer to the processes and practices that ensure the security, reliability, and performance of the cloud infrastructure, platform, or software. Patching involves the use of updates or fixes to address vulnerabilities, bugs, errors, or exploits that may compromise or affect the functionality of the cloud components. Configuration involves the use of settings or parameters to customize or optimize the functionality of the cloud components. Patching and configuration are mainly under the responsibility of the cloud service provider, as they own and operate the cloud infrastructure, platform, or software. The cloud service customer has limited or no access or control over these aspects123.

Vulnerability management and cyber security reviews (B) are not the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are not specific or measurable aspects of cloud security and compliance that can be easily audited or tested. Vulnerability management and cyber security reviews refer to the processes and practices that identify, assess, treat, monitor, and report on the risks that affect the security posture of an organization or a domain. Vulnerability management involves the use of tools or techniques to scan, analyze, prioritize, remediate, or mitigate vulnerabilities that may expose an organization or a domain to threats or attacks. Cyber security reviews involve the use of tools or techniques to evaluate, measure, benchmark, or improve the security capabilities or maturity of an organization or a domain. Vulnerability management and cyber security reviews are general or broad terms that encompass various aspects of cloud security and compliance, such as IAM, data protection, patching, configuration, etc. Therefore, they are not specific or measurable areas that can be audited or tested individually123.

Source code reviews and hypervisor (D) are not the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are not relevant or accessible aspects of cloud security and compliance for most cloud service customers. Source code reviews refer to the processes and practices that examine the source code of software applications or systems to identify errors, bugs, vulnerabilities, or inefficiencies that may affect their quality, functionality, or security. Hypervisor refers to the software that allows the creation and management of virtual machines on a physical server. Source code reviews and hypervisor are mainly under the responsibility of the cloud service provider, as they own and operate the software applications or systems that deliver cloud services. The cloud service customer has no access or control over these aspects123. References :=

Cloud Audits: A Guide for Cloud Service Providers - Cloud Standards …

Cloud Audits: A Guide for Cloud Service Customers - Cloud Standards …

Cloud Auditing Knowledge: Preparing for the CCAK Certificate Exam

 For a European manufacturing corporation migrating to the cloud, the best control framework would be the Cloud Security Alliance’s (CSA) General Data Protection Regulation Code of Conduct (GDPR CoC). This framework is specifically designed to help cloud service providers and users comply with EU data protection requirements. As GDPR is a critical regulation in Europe that imposes strict data protection rules, adhering to a framework that aligns with these regulations is essential for any organization operating within the EU.

References = The CSA’s GDPR CoC is recognized as a robust framework for ensuring compliance with GDPR, which is a key consideration for European organizations migrating to the cloud. This is supported by the resources provided by the Cloud Security Alliance and ISACA in their Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) materials1.

 The effect of applicable statutory requirements should have priority in planning the scope and objectives of a cloud audit, as they are the mandatory and enforceable rules that govern the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer. Statutory requirements may vary depending on the jurisdiction, industry, or sector of the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer, as well as the type, location, and sensitivity of the data processed or stored in the cloud. Statutory requirements may include laws, regulations, standards, or codes that relate to data protection, privacy, security, compliance, governance, taxation, or liability. The cloud auditor should identify and understand the applicable statutory requirements that affect the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer, and assess whether they are met and adhered to by both parties. The cloud auditor should also verify that the contractual terms and conditions between the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer reflect and comply with the applicable statutory requirements123.

Applicable industry good practices (A) are important for planning the scope and objectives of a cloud audit, but they are not as high priority as applicable statutory requirements. Industry good practices are the recommended or accepted methods or techniques for achieving a desired outcome or result in a specific domain or context. Industry good practices may include frameworks, guidelines, principles, or best practices that are developed by professional bodies, associations, or organizations that have expertise or authority in a certain field or area. Industry good practices may help the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer to improve their performance, quality, efficiency, or effectiveness in delivering or using cloud services. However, industry good practices are not mandatory or enforceable, and they may vary or change over time depending on the evolution of technology or business needs123.

Organizational policies and procedures © are important for planning the scope and objectives of a cloud audit, but they are not as high priority as applicable statutory requirements. Organizational policies and procedures are the internal rules and guidelines that define the objectives, expectations, and responsibilities of an organization regarding its operations, activities, processes, or functions. Organizational policies and procedures may include mission statements, vision statements, values statements, strategies, goals, plans, standards, manuals, handbooks, or instructions that are specific to an organization. Organizational policies and procedures may help the organization to align its actions and decisions with its purpose and direction, as well as to ensure consistency and accountability among its members or stakeholders. However, organizational policies and procedures are not mandatory or enforceable outside the organization, and they may differ or conflict among different organizations123.

Applicable corporate standards (D) are important for planning the scope and objectives of a cloud audit, but they are not as high priority as applicable statutory requirements. Corporate standards are the internal rules and guidelines that define the minimum level of quality, performance, reliability, or compatibility that an organization expects from its products, services, processes, or systems. Corporate standards may include specifications, criteria, metrics, indicators, benchmarks, or baselines that are specific to an organization. Corporate standards may help the organization to measure and evaluate its outputs or outcomes against its objectives or expectations, as well as to identify and address any gaps or issues that may arise. However, corporate standards are not mandatory or enforceable outside the organization, and they may differ or conflict among different organizations123. References :=

Cloud Audits: A Guide for Cloud Service Providers - Cloud Standards …

Cloud Audits: A Guide for Cloud Service Customers - Cloud Standards …

Cloud Auditing Knowledge: Preparing for the CCAK Certificate Exam

 Database backup and replication guidelines are essential for ensuring the availability and integrity of data in the event of a disruption or disaster. They describe how the data is backed up, stored, restored, and synchronized across different locations and platforms. An auditor should review these guidelines to verify that they are aligned with the business continuity objectives, policies, and procedures of the organization and the cloud service provider. The auditor should also check that the backup and replication processes are tested regularly and that the results are documented and reported. References:

ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 96

Cloud Security Alliance (CSA), Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0, 2021, BCR-01: Business Continuity Planning/Resilience

The primary purpose of the Open Certification Framework (OCF) for the CSA STAR program is to provide global, accredited, and trusted certification of the cloud service provider. According to the CSA website1, the OCF is an industry initiative to allow global, trusted independent evaluation of cloud providers. It is a program for flexible, incremental and multi-layered cloud provider certification and/or attestation according to the Cloud Security Alliance’s industry leading security guidance and control framework. The OCF aims to address the gaps within the IT ecosystem that are inhibiting market adoption of secure and reliable cloud services. The OCF also integrates with popular third-party assessment and attestation statements developed within the public accounting community to avoid duplication of effort and cost. The OCF manages the foundation that runs and monitors the CSA STAR Certification program, which is an assurance framework that enables cloud service providers to embed cloud-specific security controls. The STAR Certification program has three levels of assurance, each based on a different type of audit or assessment: Level 1: Self-Assessment, Level 2: Third-Party Audit, and Level 3: Continuous Auditing. The OCF also oversees the CSA STAR Registry, which is a publicly accessible repository that documents the security controls provided by various cloud computing offerings2. The OCF helps consumers to evaluate and compare their providers’ resilience, data protection, privacy capabilities, and service portability. It also helps providers to demonstrate their compliance with industry standards and best practices.

References:

Open Certification Framework Working Group | CSA

STAR | CSA