Full Access Isaca CISA Tutorials

End-user computing (EUC) is a system in which users are able to create working applications besides the divided development process of design, build, test and release that is typically followed by software engineers1. Examples of EUC tools include spreadsheets, databases, low-code/no-code platforms, and generative AI applications2. EUC tools can provide flexibility, efficiency, and innovation for the users, but they also pose significant risks if not properly managed and controlled3.

The greatest risk when relying on reports generated by EUC is that the data may be inaccurate. Data accuracy refers to the extent to which the data in the reports reflect the true values of the underlying information4. Inaccurate data can lead to erroneous decisions, misleading analysis, unreliable reporting, and compliance violations. Some of the factors that can cause data inaccuracy in EUC reports are:

Lack of rigorous testing: EUC tools may not undergo the same level of testing and validation as IT-developed applications, which can result in errors, bugs, or inconsistencies in the data processing and output3.

Lack of version and change control: EUC tools may not have a clear record of the changes made to them over time, which can create confusion, duplication, or loss of data. Users may also modify or overwrite the data without proper authorization or documentation3.

Lack of documentation and reliance on end-user who developed it: EUC tools may not have sufficient documentation to explain their purpose, functionality, assumptions, limitations, and dependencies. Users may also rely on the knowledge and expertise of the original developer, who may not be available or may not have followed best practices3.

Lack of maintenance processes: EUC tools may not have regular updates, backups, or reviews to ensure their functionality and security. Users may also neglect to delete or archive obsolete or redundant data3.

Lack of security: EUC tools may not have adequate access controls, encryption, or authentication mechanisms to protect the data from unauthorized access, modification, or disclosure. Users may also store or share the data in insecure locations or devices3.

Lack of audit trail: EUC tools may not have a traceable history of the data sources, inputs, outputs, calculations, and transformations. Users may also manipulate or falsify the data without detection or accountability3.

Overreliance on manual controls: EUC tools may depend on human intervention to input, verify, or correct the data, which can introduce errors, delays, or biases. Users may also lack the skills or training to use the EUC tools effectively and efficiently3.

The other options are not as great as data inaccuracy when relying on EUC reports. Reports may not work efficiently, reports may not be timely, and historical data may not be available are all potential risks associated with EUC tools, but they are less severe and less frequent than data inaccuracy. Moreover, these risks can be mitigated by improving the performance, scheduling, and storage of the EUC tools. However, data inaccuracy can have a pervasive and lasting impact on the quality and credibility of the reports and the decisions based on them. Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

References:

What is Data Accuracy?

What Is End User Computing (EUC) Risk?

End-user computing

End-User Computing (EUC) Risks: A Comprehensive Guide

 An acceptable use policy (AUP) is a document that defines the rules and guidelines for using an organization’s IT resources, such as networks, devices, and software. It aims to protect the organization’s assets, security, and productivity. An AUP should be formally acknowledged by users to ensure that they are aware of their responsibilities and obligations when using the IT resources. Without formal acknowledgment, users may not be held accountable for violating the AUP or may claim ignorance of the policy. This can expose the organization to legal, regulatory, reputational, or operational risks. Lack of data for measuring compliance, violation of industry standards, and noncompliance with documentation requirements are also possible risks from not having users acknowledge the AUP, but they are less significant than lack of user accountability. References: Workable: Acceptable use policy template, Wikipedia: Acceptable use policy

The organization’s software inventory is not complete. This finding would be of greatest concern to an IS auditor assessing an organization’s patch management process because:

A software inventory is a list of all the software assets that an organization owns, uses, or manages. A software inventory is essential for effective patch management, as it helps identify the software that needs to be updated, the patches that are available, and the dependencies and compatibility issues that may arise. Without a complete software inventory, an organization may miss some critical patches, expose itself to security risks, and waste resources on unnecessary or redundant patches.

Applications frequently need to be rebooted for patches to take effect. This finding would be of moderate concern to an IS auditor assessing an organization’s patch management process because:

Rebooting applications for patches to take effect is a common and expected practice in some cases, especially for operating system or kernel patches. However, frequent reboots may indicate that the organization is not applying patches in a timely or efficient manner, or that the patches are not well-designed or tested. Frequent reboots may also cause disruption to the business operations and user experience, and increase the risk of data loss or corruption.

Software vendors are bundling patches. This finding would be of low concern to an IS auditor assessing an organization’s patch management process because:

Bundling patches is a practice where software vendors combine multiple patches into a single package or update. Bundling patches can have some advantages, such as reducing the number of downloads and installations, simplifying the patch management process, and ensuring consistency and compatibility among patches. However, bundling patches can also have some disadvantages, such as increasing the size and complexity of the updates, delaying the delivery of critical patches, and introducing new bugs or vulnerabilities.

Testing patches takes significant time. This finding would be of low concern to an IS auditor assessing an organization’s patch management process because:

Testing patches is a vital step in the patch management process, as it helps ensure that the patches are functional, secure, and compatible with the existing software and hardware environment. Testing patches can take significant time, depending on the scope, complexity, and frequency of the patches. However, testing patches is a necessary investment to avoid potential problems or failures that could result from applying untested or faulty patches.

References:

Best practices for patch management

Server Patch Management: Best Practices and Tools

11 Key Steps of the Patch Management Process

When identifying which servers are no longer required, reviewing server CPU usage trends is the most helpful approach. Monitoring the CPU usage over time provides insights into how actively a server is being utilized. Servers with consistently low CPU usage may be candidates for consolidation or decommissioning. By analyzing CPU utilization patterns, IT management can make informed decisions about which servers can be retired without impacting performance or availability1.

References:

1. ISACA. “Technical Guide on IT Migration

2. Zapier. “IT audit: The ultimate guide [with

3. ISACA. “CISA Certification | Certified Information Systems