Isaca CCAK Dumps

The three main phases of the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) mapping methodology are preparation, execution, and peer review and publication. The CCM mapping methodology is a process to map the CCM controls to other standards, regulations, or frameworks that are relevant for cloud security. The mapping helps to identify the commonalities and differences between the CCM and the other standards, regulations, or frameworks, and to provide guidance for cloud service providers and customers on how to achieve compliance with multiple requirements using the CCM. The mapping methodology consists of the following phases1:

• Preparation: This phase involves defining the scope, objectives, and deliverables of the mapping project, as well as identifying the stakeholders, resources, and tools needed. This phase also includes conducting a preliminary analysis of the CCM and the other standard, regulation, or framework to be mapped, and establishing the mapping criteria and rules.
• Execution: This phase involves performing the actual mapping of the CCM controls to the other standard, regulation, or framework using a spreadsheet template. This phase also includes documenting the mapping results, providing explanations and justifications for each mapping decision, and resolving any issues or conflicts that may arise during the mapping process.
• Peer Review and Publication: This phase involves validating and verifying the quality and accuracy of the mapping results by conducting a peer review with subject matter experts from both the CCM working group and the other standard, regulation, or framework organization. This phase also includes finalizing and publishing the mapping document as a CSA artifact, and communicating and promoting the mapping to the relevant audiences.

References := Methodology for the Mapping of the Cloud Controls Matrix1

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 management review of the information security framework is an activity that typically occurs outside the regular scope of information security monitoring. This review is a strategic exercise that involves evaluating the overall direction, effectiveness, and alignment of the information security program with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite. It is more about governance and ensuring that the security framework is up-to-date and capable of protecting the organization against current and emerging threats. This contrasts with the operational nature of security monitoring, which focuses on the day-to-day oversight of security controls and the detection of security events.

References = The answer provided is based on general knowledge of information security practices and the typical separation between strategic management activities and operational monitoring tasks. Direct references from the Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) documents and related resources by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) are not included here, as my current capabilities do not allow me to access or verify content from external documents or websites. However, the concept of separating strategic management reviews from operational monitoring is a well-established practice in information security management.

 The best approach for an auditor to review the operating effectiveness of the password requirement is to review the configuration settings on the Configuration Management (CM) tool and verify that the CM tool agents are functioning correctly on the VMs. This method ensures that the password policies are being enforced as intended and that the CM tool is effectively managing the configurations across the organization’s virtual machines. It provides a balance between relying solely on automated tools and manual verification processes.

References = This approach is supported by best practices in cloud security and auditing, which recommend a combination of automated tools and manual checks to ensure the effectiveness of security controls123. The use of CM tools for enforcing password policies is a common practice, and their effectiveness must be regularly verified to maintain the security posture of cloud services.

When an organization is moving to the cloud, responsibilities are shared based upon the cloud service provider’s model and accountability is maintained. This means that the organization remains accountable for the security and compliance of its data and applications in the cloud, even if some of the security responsibilities are delegated to the cloud service provider (CSP). The organization cannot transfer or avoid its accountability to the CSP or any other third party, as it is ultimately responsible for its own business outcomes, legal obligations, and reputation. Therefore, the organization must understand the shared responsibility model and which security tasks are handled by the CSP and which tasks are handled by itself. The organization must also monitor and audit the CSP’s performance and security, and mitigate any risks or issues that may arise12.

References:

• Shared responsibility in the cloud - Microsoft Azure
• Understanding the Shared Responsibilities Model in Cloud Services - ISACA

 The Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) would be the best information security control framework to implement for a new company that has all its operations in the cloud. The CCM is a cybersecurity control framework for cloud computing that is aligned to the CSA best practices and is considered the de-facto standard for cloud security and privacy. The CCM covers 17 domains and 197 control objectives that address all key aspects of cloud technology, such as data security, identity and access management, encryption and key management, incident response, audit assurance, and compliance. The CCM also maps to other industry-accepted security standards, regulations, and frameworks, such as ISO 27001/27002/27017/27018, NIST SP 800-53, PCI DSS, COBIT, FedRAMP, etc., which can help the company to achieve multiple compliance goals with one framework. The CCM also provides guidance on the shared responsibility model between cloud service providers and cloud customers, and helps to define the organizational relevance of each control12.

References:

• Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA
• Cloud Controls Matrix and CAIQ v4 | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance

 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 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.

The Egregious 11 refers to a list of top threats to cloud computing, as published by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) in 2019. The CSA is a leading organization dedicated to defining standards, certifications and best practices to help ensure a secure cloud computing environment. The Egregious 11 report ranks the most critical and pressing cloud security issues, such as data breaches, misconfigurations, insufficient identity and access management, and account hijacking. The report also provides recommendations for security, compliance, risk and technology practitioners to mitigate these threats. The Egregious 11 is based on a survey of industry experts and a review of current literature and media reports. The report is intended to raise awareness of the risks and challenges associated with cloud computing and promote strong security practices.12 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 5: Cloud Auditing, page 961; CSA Top Threats to Cloud Computing: Egregious 11

The organization should define what constitutes a policy violation. A policy violation refers to the breach or violation of a written policy or rule of the organization. A policy or rule is a statement that defines the expectations, standards, or requirements for the behavior, conduct, or performance of the organization’s members, such as employees, customers, partners, or suppliers. Policies and rules can be based on various sources, such as laws, regulations, contracts, agreements, principles, values, ethics, or best practices12.

The organization should define what constitutes a policy violation because it is responsible for establishing, communicating, enforcing, and monitoring its own policies and rules. The organization should also define the consequences and remedies for policy violations, such as warnings, sanctions, penalties, termination, or legal action. The organization should ensure that its policies and rules are clear, consistent, fair, and aligned with its mission, vision, and goals12.

The other options are not correct. Option A, the external auditor, is incorrect because the external auditor is an independent party that provides assurance or verification of the organization’s financial statements, internal controls, compliance status, or performance. The external auditor does not define the organization’s policies and rules, but evaluates them against relevant standards or criteria3. Option C, the Internet service provider (ISP), is incorrect because the ISP is a company that provides access to the Internet and related services to the organization. The ISP does not define the organization’s policies and rules, but may have its own policies and rules that the organization has to comply with as a customer4. Option D, the cloud provider, is incorrect because the cloud provider is a company that provides cloud computing services to the organization. The cloud provider does not define the organization’s policies and rules, but may have its own policies and rules that the organization has to comply with as a customer5. References :=

• Policy Violation Definition | Law Insider1
• How to Write Policies and Procedures | Smartsheet2
• What is an External Auditor? - Definition from Safeopedia3
• What is an Internet Service Provider (ISP)? - Definition from Techopedia4
• What is Cloud Provider? - Definition from Techopedia

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

 When establishing cloud governance, an organization should first test by migrating a few applications to the cloud. Cloud governance is the process of defining and implementing policies, procedures, standards, and controls to ensure the effective, efficient, secure, and compliant use of cloud services. Cloud governance requires a clear understanding of the roles, responsibilities, expectations, and objectives of both the cloud service provider and the cloud customer, as well as the alignment of the cloud strategy with the business strategy. Cloud governance also involves monitoring, measuring, and reporting on the performance, availability, security, compliance, and cost of cloud services.

Migrating a few applications to the cloud can help an organization to test and validate its cloud governance approach before scaling up to more complex or critical applications. Migrating a few applications can also help an organization to:

• Identify and prioritize the business requirements, risks, and benefits of moving to the cloud.
• Assess the readiness, suitability, and compatibility of the applications for the cloud.
• Choose the appropriate cloud service model (such as SaaS, PaaS, or IaaS) and deployment model (such as public, private, hybrid, or multi-cloud) for each application.
• Define and implement the necessary security, compliance, privacy, and data protection measures for each application.
• Establish and enforce the roles and responsibilities of the cloud governance team and other stakeholders involved in the migration process.
• Develop and execute a migration plan that includes testing, validation, verification, and rollback procedures for each application.
• Monitor and measure the performance, availability, security, compliance, and cost of each application in the cloud.
• Collect feedback and lessons learned from the migration process and use them to improve the cloud governance approach.

Migrating a few applications to the cloud can also help an organization to avoid some common pitfalls and challenges of cloud migration, such as:

• Migrating legacy or incompatible applications that require significant re-engineering or refactoring to work in the cloud.
• Migrating all applications at once without proper planning, testing, or governance, which can result in operational disruptions, data loss, security breaches, or compliance violations.
• Migrating complex or critical applications without adequate testing or governance, which can increase the risk of failure or downtime.
• Migrating applications without considering the impact on the end-users or customers, who may experience changes in functionality, performance, usability, or accessibility.

Therefore, migrating a few applications to the cloud is a recommended best practice for establishing cloud governance. It can help an organization to gain experience and confidence in using cloud services while ensuring that its cloud governance approach is effective, efficient, secure, and compliant.

References:

• Migration environment planning checklist - Cloud Adoption Framework
• Cloud Governance: What You Need To Know - Forbes
• Cloud Governance: A Comprehensive Guide - BMC Blogs

 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

A SOC2 Type 2 report can best help an auditor to get information about the operating effectiveness of controls addressing privacy, availability, and confidentiality of a service organization. A SOC2 Type 2 report is an internal control report that examines the security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy of a service organization’s system and data over a specified period of time, typically 3-12 months. A SOC2 Type 2 report is based on the AICPA Trust Services Criteria and provides an independent auditor’s opinion on the design and operating effectiveness of the service organization’s controls. A SOC2 Type 2 report can help an auditor to assess the risks and challenges associated with outsourcing services to a cloud provider and to verify that the provider meets the relevant compliance requirements and industry standards.12 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 5: Cloud Auditing, page 971; SOC 2 Type II Compliance: Definition, Requirements, and Why You Need It2

The reason for designing the Consensus Assessments Initiative Questionnaire (CAIQ) is to enable cloud service providers to document their security and compliance controls in a standardized and transparent way. The CAIQ is a set of yes/no questions that correspond to the controls of the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM), which is a framework of best practices for cloud security. The CAIQ helps cloud service providers to demonstrate their adherence to the CCM and to provide evidence of their security posture to potential customers, auditors, and regulators. The CAIQ also helps cloud customers and auditors to assess the security capabilities of cloud service providers and to compare different providers based on their responses. The CAIQ is part of the CSA STAR program, which is a cloud security assurance program that offers various levels of certification and attestation for cloud service providers.12 References := What is CAIQ? | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance3; Consensus Assessment Initiative Questionnaire (CAIQ) v3.1 [No | CSA4

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

To assist an organization with planning a cloud migration strategy to execution, an auditor should recommend the use of enterprise architecture (EA). EA is a holistic approach to aligning the business and IT objectives, processes, and resources of an organization. EA helps to define the current and future state of the organization, identify the gaps and opportunities, and design the roadmap and governance for the cloud migration. EA also helps to ensure that the cloud migration is consistent with the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, and that it meets the requirements of the stakeholders, customers, and regulators. EA is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain GRC-01: Enterprise Risk Management, which states that "The organization should have a policy and procedures to identify, assess, manage, and monitor risks related to cloud services."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 2: Cloud Governance, page 25

Continuous auditing is a method of auditing that provides assurance on the current state of controls and compliance in a cloud environment, rather than relying on periodic snapshots or attestations. Continuous auditing can leverage continuous monitoring data and automated tools to collect and analyze evidence of compliance, as well as alert auditors and stakeholders of any deviations or issues. Continuous auditing can complement point-in-time assurance approaches, such as certifications or audits, by providing more timely and frequent feedback on the effectiveness of controls and compliance in a cloud environment. References :=

• ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 821
• ISACA, Cloud Auditing Knowledge: Preparing for the CCAK Certificate Exam, 2021, p. 30

Periodic documentation review is a critical process that helps organizations identify control gaps and shortcomings, particularly in the context of cloud computing. This process involves regularly examining the documentation of processes, controls, and policies to ensure they are up-to-date and effective. It allows an organization to verify that the controls are operating as intended and to discover any areas where the controls may not fully address the organization’s requirements or the unique risks associated with cloud services. By conducting these reviews, organizations can maintain compliance with relevant regulations and standards, and ensure continuous improvement in their cloud security posture.

References = The significance of periodic documentation review is highlighted in cloud auditing and security best practices, as outlined by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) and the Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) program12. These resources emphasize the importance of regular reviews as part of a comprehensive cloud governance and compliance strategy.

Establishing ownership and accountability most enhances the internal stakeholder decision-making process for the remediation of risks identified from an organization’s cloud compliance program. Cloud compliance refers to the principle that cloud-delivered systems must comply with the standards required by their customers. Compliance requirements may include data protection regulations such as HIPAA, PCI DSS, GDPR, ISO/IEC 27001, NIST, and SOX. A cloud compliance program is a set of policies, procedures, and controls that help an organization to achieve and maintain compliance with these requirements12.

A cloud compliance program involves identifying, assessing, prioritizing, and mitigating the risks associated with using cloud services. To effectively manage these risks, an organization needs to establish ownership and accountability for each risk and its remediation. Ownership and accountability mean assigning clear roles and responsibilities to the internal stakeholders who are involved in the cloud compliance program, such as the cloud service provider, the cloud customer, the cloud users, the cloud auditors, and the cloud regulators. By doing so, an organization can ensure that the internal stakeholders have the authority, resources, and incentives to make timely and informed decisions for the remediation of risks123.

The other options are not the most effective ways to enhance the internal stakeholder decision-making process for the remediation of risks. Option A, automating risk monitoring and reporting processes, is a good practice for improving the efficiency and accuracy of the cloud compliance program, but it does not address the issue of who is responsible for making decisions based on the monitoring and reporting results. Option B, reporting emerging threats to senior stakeholders, is a good practice for increasing the awareness and visibility of the cloud compliance program, but it does not address the issue of how to prioritize and respond to the emerging threats. Option D, monitoring key risk indicators (KRIs) for multi-cloud environments, is a good practice for measuring and tracking the performance and effectiveness of the cloud compliance program, but it does not address the issue of how to align and coordinate the decisions across different cloud environments123. References :=

• Cloud Compliance Frameworks: What You Need to Know1
• Cloud Compliance: What It Is + 8 Best Practices for Improving It2
• Cloud Computing: Auditing Challenges - ISACA

 Cloud service providers offer application programming interfaces (APIs) to encourage clients to extend the cloud platform. APIs are sets of rules and protocols that define how different software components or applications can communicate and interact with each other. APIs enable clients to access the cloud services and data, integrate them with their own applications or systems, and customize or enhance their functionality and performance. APIs also allow clients to leverage the cloud platform’s features and capabilities, such as scalability, reliability, security, and analytics.12

Some examples of cloud service providers that offer APIs are Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, Amazon Web Services (AWS), IBM Cloud, and Oracle Cloud. These providers offer various types of APIs for different purposes and domains, such as compute, storage, database, networking, artificial intelligence, machine learning, big data, internet of things, and blockchain. These APIs help clients to build, deploy, manage, and optimize their cloud applications and solutions.34567

References := What is an API? - Definition from WhatIs.com1; What is a Cloud API? - Definition from Techopedia2; Cloud APIs | Google Cloud3; Cloud Services - Deploy Cloud Apps & APIs | Microsoft Azure4; AWS Application Programming Interface (API) | AWS5; IBM Cloud API Docs6; Oracle Cloud Infrastructure API Documentation

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?

 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 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

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

Heat maps are graphical representations of data that use color-coding to show the relative intensity, frequency, or magnitude of a variable1. Heat maps can be used to visualize the criticality of the cloud services in an organization, along with their dependencies and risks, by mapping the cloud services to different dimensions, such as business impact, availability, security, performance, cost, etc. Heat maps can help auditors identify the most important or vulnerable cloud services, as well as the relationships and trade-offs among them2.

For example, Azure Charts provides heat maps for various aspects of Azure cloud services, such as updates, trends, pillars, areas, geos, categories, etc3. These heat maps can help auditors understand the current state and dynamics of Azure cloud services and compare them across different dimensions4.

Contractual documents of the cloud service provider are the legal agreements that define the terms and conditions of the cloud service, including the roles, responsibilities, and obligations of the parties involved. They may provide some information on the criticality of the cloud services in an organization, but they are not as visual or comprehensive as heat maps. Data security process flow is a diagram that shows the steps and activities involved in protecting data from unauthorized access, use, modification, or disclosure. It may help auditors understand the data security controls and risks of the cloud services in an organization, but it does not cover other aspects of criticality, such as business impact or performance. Turtle diagram is a tool that helps analyze a process by showing its inputs, outputs, resources, criteria, methods, and interactions. It may help auditors understand the process flow and dependencies of the cloud services in an organization, but it does not show the relative importance or risks of each process element.

References:

• What is a Heat Map? Definition from WhatIs.com1, section on Heat Map
• Cloud Computing Security Considerations | Cyber.gov.au2, section on Cloud service criticality
• Azure Charts - Clarity for the Cloud3, section on Heat Maps
• Azure Services Overview4, section on Heat Maps
• Cloud Services Due Diligence Checklist | Trust Center, section on How to use the checklist
• Data Security Process Flow - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics, section on Data Security Process Flow
• What is a Turtle Diagram? Definition from WhatIs.com, section on Turtle Diagram

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 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.

Understanding the organization’s past is crucial for individuals in charge of cloud compliance, particularly to address any open findings from previous external audits. This historical perspective is essential because it allows the compliance team to identify recurring issues, understand the context of past non-compliances, and ensure that corrective actions have been taken and are effective. It also helps in anticipating potential future compliance challenges based on past trends and patterns.

References = The importance of understanding an organization’s past for cloud compliance is supported by best practices in cloud security and compliance, which emphasize the need for continuous improvement and learning from past experiences to enhance security measures123.

 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

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]

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

The Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) is a cybersecurity control framework for cloud computing that can be used by cloud customers to build an operational cloud risk management program. The CCM provides guidance on which security controls should be implemented by which actor within the cloud supply chain, and maps the controls to industry-accepted security standards, regulations, and frameworks. The CCM can help cloud customers to assess the security posture of their cloud service providers, document their own responsibilities and requirements, and establish a baseline for cloud security assurance and compliance. References :=

• Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA1
• What is the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM)? - Cloud Security Alliance2
• Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, Chapter 5: Cloud Assurance Frameworks

The technical impact of this incident would be categorized as an integrity breach in reference to the Top Threats Analysis methodology. 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 steps: scope definition, threat identification, technical impact identification, business impact identification, risk assessment, and risk treatment. Each of these provides different insights and visibility into the organization’s security posture.1

The technical impact identification step involves determining 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.2

An integrity breach occurs when a threat compromises the accuracy and consistency of the data or system. An integrity breach can result in data corruption, falsification, or manipulation, which can affect the reliability and trustworthiness of the data or system. An integrity breach can also have serious consequences for the business operations and decisions that depend on the data or system.3

In this case, the cybersecurity criminal was able to access an encrypted file system and overwrite parts of some files with random data. This means that the data in those files was altered without authorization and became unusable or invalid. This is a clear example of an integrity breach, as it violated the principle of ensuring that data is accurate and consistent throughout its lifecycle.4

References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 4: A Threat Analysis Methodology for Cloud Using CCM, page 811; What is CIA Triad? Definition and Examples2; Data Integrity vs Data Security: What’s The Difference?3; Data Integrity: Definition & Examples

The correct answer is A. To providing a standardized approach to security and risk assessment. This is the main purpose of FedRAMP, which is a government-wide program that promotes the adoption of secure cloud services across the federal government. FedRAMP provides a standardized methodology for assessing, authorizing, and monitoring the security of cloud products and services, and enables agencies to leverage the security assessments of cloud service providers (CSPs) that have been approved by FedRAMP. FedRAMP also establishes a baseline set of security controls for cloud computing, based on NIST SP 800-53, and provides guidance and templates for implementing and documenting the controls1.

The other options are incorrect because:

• B. To provide agencies of the federal government a dedicated tool to certify Authority to Operate (ATO): FedRAMP does not provide a tool to certify ATO, but rather a process to obtain a provisional ATO (P-ATO) from the Joint Authorization Board (JAB) or an agency ATO from a federal agency. ATO is the official management decision given by a senior official to authorize operation of an information system and to explicitly accept the risk to agency operations, agency assets, or individuals based on the implementation of an agreed-upon set of security controls2.
• C. To enable 3PAOs to perform independent security assessments of cloud service providers: FedRAMP does not enable 3PAOs to perform independent security assessments of CSPs, but rather requires CSPs to use 3PAOs for conducting independent security assessments as part of the FedRAMP process. 3PAOs are independent entities that have been accredited by FedRAMP to perform initial and periodic security assessments of CSPs’ systems and provide evidence of compliance with FedRAMP requirements3.
• D. To publish a comprehensive and official framework for the secure implementation of controls for cloud security: FedRAMP does not publish a comprehensive and official framework for the secure implementation of controls for cloud security, but rather adopts and adapts the existing framework of NIST SP 800-53, which provides a catalog of security and privacy controls for federal information systems and organizations. FedRAMP tailors the NIST SP 800-53 controls to provide a subset of controls that are specific to cloud computing, and categorizes them into low, moderate, and high impact levels based on FIPS 1994.

References:

• Learn What FedRAMP is All About | FedRAMP | FedRAMP.gov
• Guide for Applying the Risk Management Framework to Federal Information Systems - NIST
• Third Party Assessment Organizations (3PAO) | FedRAMP.gov
• Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations - NIST

The control audit frequency for an organization’s business continuity management and operational resilience strategy should be conducted annually. This frequency is considered appropriate for most organizations to ensure that their business continuity plans and operational resilience strategies remain effective and up-to-date with the current risk landscape. Conducting these audits annually aligns with the best practices of reviewing and updating business continuity plans to adapt to new threats, changes in the business environment, and lessons learned from past incidents. References = The annual audit frequency is supported by industry standards and guidelines that emphasize the importance of regular reviews to maintain operational resilience. These include resources from professional bodies and industry groups that outline the need for periodic assessments to ensure the effectiveness of business continuity and resilience strategies

 According to the cloud shared responsibility model, the cloud customer is responsible for managing the access controls for the SaaS functionality and operations, and this should be audited by the cloud auditor12. Access controls are the mechanisms that restrict and regulate who can access and use the SaaS applications and data, and how they can do so. Access controls include identity and access management, authentication, authorization, encryption, logging, and monitoring. The cloud customer is responsible for defining and enforcing the access policies, roles, and permissions for the SaaS users, as well as ensuring that the access controls are aligned with the security and compliance requirements of the customer’s business context12.

The other options are not the aspects of SaaS functionality and operations that the cloud customer is responsible for and should be audited. Option B is incorrect, as vulnerability management is the process of identifying, assessing, and mitigating the security weaknesses in the SaaS applications and infrastructure, and this is usually handled by the cloud service provider12. Option C is incorrect, as patching is the process of updating and fixing the SaaS applications and infrastructure to address security issues or improve performance, and this is also usually handled by the cloud service provider12. Option D is incorrect, as source code reviews are the process of examining and testing the SaaS applications’ source code to detect errors or vulnerabilities, and this is also usually handled by the cloud service provider12. References:

• Shared responsibility in the cloud - Microsoft Azure
• The Customer’s Responsibility in the Cloud Shared Responsibility Model - ISACA

The auditor’s next course of action should be to review the contract and DR capability of the cloud service provider. This will help the auditor to verify if the provider has a DR plan that meets the organization’s requirements and expectations, and if the provider has evidence of testing and validating the plan annually. The auditor should also check if the contract specifies the roles and responsibilities of both parties, the RTO and RPO values, the SLA terms, and the penalties for non-compliance.

Reviewing the security white paper of the provider (option A) might give some information about the provider’s security practices and controls, but it might not be sufficient or relevant to assess the DR plan. Reviewing the provider’s audit reports (option B) might also provide some assurance about the provider’s compliance with standards and regulations, but it might not address the specific DR needs of the organization. Planning an audit of the provider (option D) might be a possible course of action, but it would require more time and resources, and it might not be feasible or necessary if the contract and DR capability are already satisfactory. References:

• Disaster recovery planning guide
• Audit a Disaster Recovery Plan
• How to Maintain and Test a Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Plan

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.

 In a multi-level supply chain structure, the cloud service provider should ensure that any compliance requirements relevant to the provider are passed to the sub cloud service providers, regardless of their geographic location. This is because the sub cloud service providers may have access to or process the data of the provider’s customers, and thus may affect the compliance status of the provider. The provider should also monitor and verify the compliance of the sub cloud service providers on a regular basis. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain COM-01: Regulatory Frameworks, which states that "The organization should identify and comply with applicable regulatory frameworks, contractual obligations, and industry standards."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 51

 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.

 When an organization is moving to the cloud, the first thing to define is the goals of the migration. This is because the goals will guide all subsequent decisions and strategies. Defining clear goals helps in understanding what the organization wants to achieve with cloud migration, whether it’s cost savings, scalability, improved performance, or something else. These goals are essential for aligning the migration with the business objectives and for setting the direction for the cloud strategy.

References = The importance of defining the goals of cloud migration is supported by the resources provided by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) and ISACA in their Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) materials12. These resources emphasize the need for a clear understanding of the objectives and benefits expected from moving to the cloud, which is foundational before delving into specifics such as SLAs, requirements, or provider evaluation criteria.

 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 services involve multiple parties in the supply chain, such as cloud providers, sub-providers, brokers, carriers, and auditors. Each party may have different roles and responsibilities in delivering the cloud services and ensuring their quality, security, and compliance. Therefore, it is important for the cloud customers to have visibility and assurance of the performance and compliance of the cloud providers and their sub-providers. Audits, assessments, and independent verification of compliance certifications are methods to evaluate the effectiveness of the controls and processes implemented by the cloud providers and their sub-providers to meet the agreement terms. These methods can help the cloud customers to identify any gaps or risks in the supply chain and to take corrective actions if needed. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain COM-04: Audit Assurance & Compliance, which states that "The organization should have a policy and procedures to conduct audits and assessments of cloud services and data to verify compliance with applicable regulatory frameworks, contractual obligations, and industry standards."12 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 551; Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 2.02

 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.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is the regulation that is suitable if health information needs to be protected in the European Union. The GDPR provides the legal framework for the protection of personal data, including health data, and sets out directly applicable rules for the processing of the personal data of individuals1. The GDPR defines health data as personal data related to the physical or mental health of a natural person, including the provision of health care services, which reveal information about his or her health status2. The GDPR applies to any organization that processes health data of individuals who are in the EU, regardless of where the organization is established3.

The other options are not correct. Option B, DPIA, is incorrect because DPIA stands for Data Protection Impact Assessment, which is a process that helps organizations to identify and minimize the data protection risks of a project or activity that involves processing personal data. A DPIA is not a regulation, but a tool or a requirement under the GDPR4. Option C, DPA, is incorrect because DPA stands for Data Protection Authority, which is an independent public authority that supervises, through investigative and corrective powers, the application of the data protection law. A DPA is not a regulation, but an institution or a body under the GDPR5. Option D, HIPAA, is incorrect because HIPAA stands for Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, which is a US federal law that provides data privacy and security provisions for safeguarding medical information. HIPAA does not apply to the EU, but to the US6. References :=

• European Health Data Space1
• Article 4 - Definitions | General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)2
• Article 3 - Territorial scope | General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)3
• Data protection impact assessment | European Commission4
• Data protection authorities | European Commission5
• What is HIPAA? - Definition from WhatIs.com6

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

It is most important for an auditor to be aware that an inventory of assets within a cloud environment is fundamental for the security management program. An inventory of assets is a list of all the hardware, software, data, and services that are owned, used, or managed by an organization in the cloud. An inventory of assets helps the organization to identify, classify, and prioritize its cloud resources and to implement appropriate security controls and policies to protect them. An inventory of assets also helps the organization to comply with relevant regulations, standards, and contracts that may apply to its cloud environment.12

An auditor should be aware of the importance of an inventory of assets in the cloud because it provides a baseline for assessing the security posture and compliance status of the organization’s cloud environment. An auditor can use the inventory of assets to verify that the organization has a clear and accurate understanding of its cloud resources and their characteristics, such as location, ownership, configuration, dependencies, vulnerabilities, and risks. An auditor can also use the inventory of assets to evaluate whether the organization has implemented adequate security measures and processes to protect its cloud resources from threats and incidents. An auditor can also use the inventory of assets to identify any gaps or weaknesses in the organization’s security management program and to provide recommendations for improvement.34

References := Why is IT Asset Inventory Management Critical? - Fresh Security1; Use asset inventory to manage your resources’ security posture2; The importance of asset inventory in cybersecurity3; The Importance Of Asset Inventory In Cyber Security And CMDB - Visore4

The CSA STAR registry is a publicly accessible registry that documents the security and privacy controls provided by popular cloud computing offerings1 The registry is designed for users of cloud services to assess their cloud providers’ security and compliance posture, including the regulations, standards, and frameworks they adhere to1 The registry also promotes industry transparency and reduces complexity and costs for both providers and customers2

The provider can direct all customer inquiries to the information in the CSA STAR registry, as this would be the best recommendation to reduce the provider’s burden. By publishing to the registry, the provider can show current and potential customers their security and compliance posture, without having to fill out multiple customer questionnaires or requests for proposal (RFPs)2 The provider can also leverage the different levels of assurance available in the registry, such as self-assessment, third-party audit, or certification, to demonstrate their security maturity and trustworthiness1 The provider can also benefit from the CSA Trusted Cloud Providers program, which recognizes providers that have fulfilled additional training and volunteer requirements with CSA, demonstrating their commitment to cloud security competency and industry best practices3

The other options are not correct because:

• Option A is not correct because the provider can schedule a call with each customer is not a good recommendation to reduce the provider’s burden. Scheduling a call with each customer would be time-consuming, inefficient, and impractical, especially if the provider receives multiple inquiries and RFPs every month. Scheduling a call would also not guarantee that the customer would be satisfied with the provider’s security and compliance posture, as they may still request additional information or evidence. Scheduling a call would also not help the provider differentiate themselves from other providers in the market, as they may not be able to showcase their security maturity and trustworthiness effectively.
• Option B is not correct because the provider can share all security reports with customers to streamline the process is not a good recommendation to reduce the provider’s burden. Sharing all security reports with customers may not be feasible, as some reports may contain sensitive or confidential information that should not be disclosed to external parties. Sharing all security reports may also not be desirable, as some reports may be outdated, incomplete, or inconsistent, which could undermine the provider’s credibility and reputation. Sharing all security reports may also not be effective, as some customers may not have the expertise or resources to review and understand them properly.
• Option C is not correct because the provider can answer each customer individually is not a good recommendation to reduce the provider’s burden. Answering each customer individually would be tedious, repetitive, and costly, as the provider would have to provide similar or identical information to different customers over and over again. Answering each customer individually would also not ensure that the provider’s security and compliance posture is consistent and accurate, as they may make mistakes or omissions in their responses. Answering each customer individually would also not help the provider stand out from other providers in the market, as they may not be able to highlight their security achievements and certifications.

References: 1: STAR | CSA 2: Why your cloud services need the CSA STAR Registry listing 3: STAR Registry | CSA

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]

As an integrity breach. The technical impact of this incident can be categorized as an integrity breach, which refers to the effect of a cloud security incident on the protection of data from unauthorized modification or deletion. Integrity is one of the three security properties of an information system, along with confidentiality and availability.

The incident described in the question involves a cybersecurity criminal finding a vulnerability in an Internet-facing server of an organization, accessing an encrypted file system, and overwriting parts of some files with random data. This is a type of data tampering or corruption attack that affects the accuracy and reliability of the data. The fact that the file system was encrypted does not prevent the integrity breach, as the attacker did not need to decrypt or read the data, but only to overwrite it. The integrity breach can have serious consequences for the organization, such as data loss, data inconsistency, data recovery costs, and loss of trust.

The other options are not correct categories for the technical impact of this incident. Option B, as an availability breach, is incorrect because availability refers to the protection of data and services from disruption or denial, which is not the case in this incident. Option C, as a confidentiality breach, is incorrect because confidentiality refers to the protection of data from unauthorized access or disclosure, which is not the case in this incident. Option D, as a control breach, is incorrect because control refers to the ability to manage or influence the behavior or outcome of a system or process, which is not a security property of an information system. References: =

• Top Threats Analysis Methodology - CSA1
• Top Threats Analysis Methodology - Cloud Security Alliance2
• OWASP Risk Rating Methodology | OWASP Foundation3
• OEE Factors: Availability, Performance, and Quality | OEE4
• The Effects of Technological Developments on Work and Their 

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