Isaca Certification Changed CISA Questions

 The IS auditor should be most concerned about the lack of follow-up education for staff members who failed the phishing simulation test. Phishing simulation tests are designed to assess the level of awareness and susceptibility of staff members to phishing attacks, and to provide feedback and training to improve their security behavior. If staff members who failed the test do not receive follow-up education, they will not learn from their mistakes and may continue to fall victim to real phishing attacks, which could compromise the security of the organization.

The other options are less concerning for the IS auditor:

Test results were not communicated to staff members. This is not ideal, as staff members should receive feedback on their performance and learn from the test results. However, this does not necessarily mean that they did not receive any training or education on how to avoid phishing attacks.

Staff members were not notified about the test beforehand. This is a common practice for phishing simulation tests, as it mimics the real-world scenario where staff members do not know when they will receive a phishing email. The purpose of the test is to measure their spontaneous reaction and awareness, not their preparedness or compliance.

Security awareness training was not provided prior to the test. This is not a major concern, as the test can serve as a baseline measurement of the current level of awareness and susceptibility of staff members, and as a starting point for providing tailored training and education based on the test results.

A firewall is a device or software that monitors and controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules. A firewall can help protect an organization’s network and information systems from unauthorized or malicious access, by filtering or blocking unwanted or harmful packets. The most important thing for an IS auditor to verify when evaluating an organization’s firewall is that the logs are being collected in a separate protected host. Logs are records of events or activities that occur on a system or network, such as connections, requests, responses, errors, and alerts. Logs can provide valuable information for auditing, monitoring, troubleshooting, and investigating security incidents. However, logs can also be tampered with, deleted, or corrupted by attackers or insiders who want to hide their tracks or evidence of their actions. Therefore, it is essential that logs are stored in a separate host that is isolated and secured from the network and the firewall itself, to prevent unauthorized access or modification of the logs. Automated alerts are being sent when a risk is detected is a good practice for enhancing the security and efficiency of a firewall, but it is not the most important thing for an IS auditor to verify, as alerts may not always be accurate, timely, or actionable. Insider attacks are being controlled is a desirable outcome for a firewall, but it is not the most important thing for an IS auditor to verify, as insider attacks may involve other factors or methods that bypass or compromise the firewall, such as social engineering, credential theft, or physical access. Access to configuration files is restricted is a critical control for ensuring the security and integrity of a firewall, but it is not the most important thing for an IS auditor to verify, as configuration files may not reflect the actual state or performance of the firewall. 

he design of an incident management process should include prioritization criteria to ensure that incidents are handled according to their impact and urgency. Without prioritization criteria, the organization may not be able to allocate resources effectively and respond to incidents in a timely manner. Expected time to resolve incidents, service management standards, and metrics reporting are important aspects of incident management, but they are not as critical as prioritization criteria for the design of the process. References: ISACA Journal Article: Incident Management: A Practical Approach

 The auditor’s next course of action should be to evaluate the appropriateness of the remedial action taken by the auditee. The auditor should assess whether the alternative approach taken by the auditee is effective, efficient, and aligned with the audit objectives and recommendations. The auditor should also consider the impact of the change on the audit scope, criteria, and risk assessment. Conducting a risk analysis incorporating the change, reporting results of the follow-up to the audit committee, and informing senior management of the change in approach are possible subsequent actions that the auditor may take after evaluating the appropriateness of the remedial action taken. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version): Chapter 1 - Information Systems Auditing Process