Full Access Isaca CISA Tutorials

 A network vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses and exposures in a network that could be exploited by attackers to compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the network or its resources. A network vulnerability assessment typically involves scanning the network devices, such as routers, switches, firewalls, servers, and workstations, using automated tools that compare the device configurations, software versions, and patch levels against a database of known vulnerabilities. A network vulnerability assessment can also include manual testing and verification of the network architecture, design, policies, and procedures. One of the main objectives of a network vulnerability assessment is to detect and report any misconfiguration and missing updates in the network devices that could pose a security risk1. Misconfiguration refers to any deviation from the recommended or best practice settings for the network devices, such as weak passwords, open ports, unnecessary services, default accounts, or incorrect permissions. Missing updates refer toany outdated or unsupported software or firmware that has not been patched with the latest security fixes or enhancements from the vendors2. Misconfiguration and missing updates are common sources of network vulnerabilities that can be exploited by attackers to gain unauthorized access, executemalicious code, causedenial of service, or escalate privileges on the network devices3. Therefore, an IS auditor should expect to see misconfiguration and missing updates in a network vulnerability assessment. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:

B. Malicious software and spyware are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are more related to the content and behavior of the network traffic ratherthan the configuration and patch level of the network devices. Malicious software and spyware are programs that infect or monitor the network devices or their users for malicious purposes, such as stealing data, displaying ads, or performing remote commands. Malicious software and spyware can be detected by other security tools, such as antivirus software, firewalls, or intrusion detection systems4.

C. Zero-day vulnerabilities are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are unknown or undisclosed vulnerabilities that have not been reported or patched by the vendors or the security community. Zero-day vulnerabilities are rare and difficult to discover, as they require advanced techniques and skills to exploit them. Zero-day vulnerabilities can be detected by other security tools, such as intrusion prevention systems, anomaly detection systems, or artificial intelligence systems5.

D. Security design flaws are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are more related to the logic and functionality of the network rather than the configuration and patch level of the network devices. Security design flaws are errors or weaknesses in the network architecture, design, policies, or procedures that could compromise the security objectives of the network. Securitydesign flaws can be detected by other security methods, such as security reviews, audits, or assessments6. References: Network VulnerabilityAssessment - ISACA, Network Vulnerability Scanning - NIST, Network Vulnerabilities - SANS, Malware - ISACA, Zero-Day Attacks - ISACA, Security Design Principles - NIST

The primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates is that it establishes accountability for the action plans. Accountability means that the individuals or groups who are responsible for implementing the action plans are clearly identified and held liable for their completion within the specified time frame. Accountability also implies that the action plans are monitored and evaluated to ensure that they are effective and efficient in addressing the audit findings and mitigating the associated risks1. Accountability helps to ensure that the audit recommendations are taken seriously and implemented properly, and that the audit value is realized by the organization2. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:

A. It facilitates easier audit follow-up is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of a secondary or indirect benefit. Auditfollow-up is the process of verifyingwhether the action plans have been implemented and whether they have resolved the audit findings3. While having clear action plans, owners, and target dates may facilitate easier audit follow-up by providing a basis for tracking and reporting the progress and status of the action plans, it does not necessarily guarantee that the action plans will be implemented or effective.

B. It enforces action plan consensus between auditors and auditees is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of a prerequisite or condition for such an approach. Action plan consensus means that the auditors and auditees agree on the audit findings and recommendations, and on the action plans to address them4. While having action plan consensus may enhance the credibility and acceptance of the audit approach, it does not necessarily ensure that the action plans will be implemented or effective.

D. It helps to ensure factual accuracy of findings is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of an outcome or result of such an approach. Factual accuracy of findings means that theaudit findings are based on sufficient, reliable, relevant, and useful evidence5. While having factual accuracy of findings may increase the confidence and trust in the audit approach, it does not necessarily ensure that the action plans will be implemented or effective. References: Accountability - ISACA, Audit Value - ISACA, Audit Follow-up - ISACA, Action Plan Consensus - ISACA, Factual Accuracy of Findings - ISACA

The best way to mitigate the risk associated with unintentional modifications of complex calculations in end-user computing (EUC) is to execute copies of EUC programs out of a secure library. This will ensure that the original EUC programs are protected from unauthorized changes and that thecopies are run in a controlled environment. A secure library is a repository of EUC programs that have been tested, validated, and approved by the appropriate authority. Executing copies of EUC programs out of a secure library can also help with version control, backup, and recovery of EUC programs. Having an independent party review the source calculations, implementing complex password controls, and verifying EUC results through manual calculations are not as effective as executing copies of EUC programs out of a secure library, as they do not prevent or detect unintentional modifications of complex calculations in EUC. References: End-User Computing (EUC) Risks: A Comprehensive Guide, End User Computing (EUC) Risk Management

 The finding that should be the IS auditor’s greatest concern is that the data model is not clearly documented. A data model is a representation of the structure, relationships, and constraints of the data used by an application. It is a vital component of the software development process, as it helps to ensure the accuracy, consistency, and quality of the data1. A clear and comprehensive documentation of the data model is essential for the maintenance and support of the application, as it facilitates the understanding, modification, and troubleshooting of the data and the application logic2.

If the organization plans to bring the support and future maintenance of the application back in-house, it will need to have access to the data model documentation from the vendor. Without it, the organization may face difficulties in transferring the knowledge and skills from the vendor to the in-house team, as well as in adapting and enhancing the application to meet changing businessneeds and requirements3. The lack of data model documentation may also increase therisk of errors, inconsistencies, and inefficiencies in the data and the application performance2.

The other findings are not as concerning as the lack of data model documentation, because they do not directly affect the quality and maintainability of the application. The cost of outsourcing is lowerthan in-house development is a benefit rather than a risk for the organization, as it implies that outsourcing has helped to save time and money for the organization4. The vendor development team is located overseas is a common practice in outsourcing, and it does not necessarily imply a lower quality or a higher risk of the application. However, it may pose some challenges in terms of communication, coordination, and cultural differences, which can bemanaged by establishing clear expectations, roles, and responsibilities, as well as using effective tools and methods for communication and collaboration5. A training plan for business users has not been developed is a gap that should be addressed by the organization before deploying the application, as it may affect the user acceptance and satisfaction of the application. However, it does not directly impact the quality or maintainability of the application itself. References:

What is Data Modeling? Definition & Types | Informatica1

Data Modeling Best Practices: Documentation | erwin2

Data Model Documentation - an overview |ScienceDirect Topics3

Outsourcing App Development Pros and Cons – Droids On Roids4

8 Risks of Software Development Outsourcing & Their Solutions - Acropolium5

Software Training Plan: How to Create One for Your Business - Elinext