Last Updated on December 12, 2021 by Admin 3

CISA : Certified Information Systems Auditor : Part 01

  1. A shared resource matrix is a technique commonly used to locate:

    • Malicious code
    • Security flaws
    • Trap doors
    • Covert channels

    Explanation:

    Analyzing resources of a system is one standard for locating covert channels because the basis of a covert channel is a shared resource.
    The following properties must hold for a storage channel to exist:

    1. Both sending and receiving process must have access to the same attribute of a shared object.
    2. The sending process must be able to modify the attribute of the shared object.
    3. The receiving process must be able to reference that attribute of the shared object.
    4. A mechanism for initiating both processes and properly sequencing their respective accesses to the shared resource must exist.

    Note: Similar properties for timing channel can be listed
    The following answers are incorrect:
    All other answers were not directly related to discovery of Covert Channels.

    Reference:
    Acerbic Publications, Acerbic Publications (Test Series) – CRC Press LLC, Page No. 225
    http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/~sherwood/cs290/papers/covert-kemmerer.pdf
    http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~byoung/cs361/lecture16.pdf
    http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~byoung/cs361/lecture16.pdf

  2. You are part of a security staff at a highly profitable bank and each day, all traffic on the network is logged for later review. Every Friday when major deposits are made you’re seeing a series of bits placed in the “Urgent Pointer” field of a TCP packet. This is only 16 bits which isn’t much but it concerns you because:

    • This could be a sign of covert channeling in bank network communications and should be investigated.
    • It could be a sign of a damaged network cable causing the issue.
    • It could be a symptom of malfunctioning network card or drivers and the source system should be checked for the problem.
    • It is normal traffic because sometimes the previous fields 16-bit checksum value can over run into the urgent pointer’s 16-bit field causing the condition.
    Explanation:

    The Urgent Pointer is used when some information has to reach the server ASAP. When the TCP/IP stack at the other end sees a packet using the Urgent Pointer set, it is duty bound to stop all ongoing activities and immediately send this packet up the stack for immediate processing. Since the packet is plucked out of the processing queue and acted upon immediately, it is known as an Out Of Band (OOB)packet and the data is called Out Of Band (OOB) data.

    The Urgent Pointer is usually used in Telnet, where an immediate response (e.g. the echoing of characters) is desirable.

    Covert Channels are not directly synonymous with backdoors. A covert channel is simply using a communication protocol in a way it was not intended to be used or sending data without going through the proper access control mechanisms or channels. For example, in a Mandatory Access Control systems a user at secret has found a way to communicate information to a user at Confidential without going through the normal channels.

    In this case the Urgent bit could be used for a few reasons:

    1. It could be to attempt a Denial of service where the host receiving a packet with the Urgent bit set will give immediate attention to the request and will be in wait state until the urgent message is receive, if the sender does not send the urgent message then it will simply sit there doing nothing until it times out. Some of the TCP/IP stacks used to have a 600 seconds time out, which means that for 10 minutes nobody could use the port. By sending thousands of packet with the URGENT flag set, it would create a very effective denial of service attack.

    2. It could be used as a client server application to transmit data back and forward without going through the proper channels. It would be slow but it is possible to use reserved fields and bits to transmit data outside the normal communication channels.

    The other answers are incorrect

    Reference:

    http://www.fas.org/irp/nsa/rainbow/tg030.htm document covering the subject of covert channels
    and also see:
    http://gray-world.net/papers.shtml which is a large collection of documents on Covert Channels

  3. John is the product manager for an information system. His product has undergone under security review by an IS auditor. John has decided to apply appropriate security controls to reduce the security risks suggested by an IS auditor. Which of the following technique is used by John to treat the identified risk provided by an IS auditor?

    • Risk Mitigation
    • Risk Acceptance
    • Risk Avoidance
    • Risk transfer
    Explanation:

    Risk mitigation is the practice of the elimination of, or the significant decrease in the level of risk presented.

    For your exam you should know below information about risk assessment and treatment:

    A risk assessment, which is a tool for risk management, is a method of identifying vulnerabilities and threats and assessing the possible impacts to determine where to implement security controls. A risk assessment is carried out, and the results are analyzed. Risk analysis is used to ensure that security is cost-effective, relevant, timely, and responsive to threats. Security can be quite complex, even for well-versed security professionals, and it is easy to apply too much security, not enough security, or the wrong security controls, and to spend too much money in the process without attaining the necessary objectives. Risk analysis helps companies prioritize their risks and shows management the amount of resources that should be applied to protecting against those risks in a sensible manner.

    A risk analysis has four main goals:
    Identify assets and their value to the organization.
    Identify vulnerabilities and threats.
    Quantify the probability and business impact of these potential threats.
    Provide an economic balance between the impact of the threat and the cost of the countermeasure.

    Treating Risk

    Risk Mitigation
    Risk mitigation is the practice of the elimination of, or the significant decrease in the level of risk presented. Examples of risk mitigation can be seen in everyday life and are readily apparent in the information technology world. Risk Mitigation involves applying appropriate control to reduce risk. For example, to lessen the risk of exposing personal and financial information that is highly sensitive and confidential organizations put countermeasures in place, such as firewalls, intrusion detection/prevention systems, and other mechanisms, to deter malicious outsiders from accessing this highly sensitive information. In the underage driver example, risk mitigation could take the form of driver education for the youth or establishing a policy not allowing the young driver to use a cell phone while driving, or not letting youth of a certain age have more than one friend in the car as a passenger at any given time.

    Risk Transfer
    Risk transfer is the practice of passing on the risk in question to another entity, such as an insurance company. Let us look at one of the examples that were presented above in a different way. The family is evaluating whether to permit an underage driver to use the family car. The family decides that it is important for the youth to be mobile, so it transfers the financial risk of a youth being in an accident to the insurance company, which provides the family with auto insurance.
    It is important to note that the transfer of risk may be accompanied by a cost. This is certainly true for the insurance example presented earlier, and can be seen in other insurance instances, such as liability insurance for a vendor or the insurance taken out by companies to protect against hardware and software theft or destruction. This may also be true if an organization must purchase and implement security controls in order to make their organization less desirable to attack. It is important to remember that not all risk can be transferred. While financial risk is simple to transfer through insurance, reputational risk may almost never be fully transferred.

    Risk Avoidance
    Risk avoidance is the practice of coming up with alternatives so that the risk in question is not realized. For example, have you ever heard a friend, or parents of a friend, complain about the costs of insuring an underage driver? How about the risks that many of these children face as they become mobile? Some of these families will decide that the child in question will not be allowed to drive the family car, but will rather wait until he or she is of legal age (i.e., 18 years of age) before committing to owning, insuring, and driving a motor vehicle.
    In this case, the family has chosen to avoid the risks (and any associated benefits) associated with an underage driver, such as poor driving performance or the cost of insurance for the child. Although this choice may be available for some situations, it is not available for all. Imagine a global retailer who, knowing the risks associated with doing business on the Internet, decides to avoid the practice. This decision will likely cost the company a significant amount of its revenue (if, indeed, the company has products or services that consumers wish to purchase). In addition, the decision may require the company to build or lease a site in each of the locations, globally, for which it wishes to continue business. This could have a catastrophic effect on the company’s ability to continue business operations

    Risk Acceptance
    In some cases, it may be prudent for an organization to simply accept the risk that is presented in certain scenarios. Risk acceptance is the practice of accepting certain risk(s), typically based on a business decision that may also weigh the cost versus the benefit of dealing with the risk in another way.
    For example, an executive may be confronted with risks identified during the course of a risk assessment for their organization. These risks have been prioritized by high, medium, and low impact to the organization. The executive notes that in order to mitigate or transfer the low-level risks, significant costs could be involved. Mitigation might involve the hiring of additional highly skilled personnel and the purchase of new hardware, software, and office equipment, while transference of the risk to an insurance company would require premium payments. The
    executive then further notes that minimal impact to the organization would occur if any of the reported low-level threats were realized. Therefore, he or she (rightly) concludes that it is wiser for the organization to forgo the costs and accept the risk. In the young driver example, risk acceptance could be based on the observation that the youngster has demonstrated the responsibility and maturity to warrant the parent’s trust in his or her judgment.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Risk Transfer – Risk transfer is the practice of passing on the risk in question to another entity, such as an insurance company. Let us look at one of the examples that were presented above in a different way.

    Risk Avoidance – Risk avoidance is the practice of coming up with alternatives so that the risk in question is not realized.

    Risk Acceptance – Risk acceptance is the practice of accepting certain risk(s), typically based on a business decision that may also weigh the cost versus the benefit of dealing with the risk in another way.

    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 51
    Official ISC2 guide to CISSP CBK 3rd edition page number 383,384 and 385

  4. Sam is the security Manager of a financial institute. Senior management has requested he performs a risk analysis on all critical vulnerabilities reported by an IS auditor. After completing the risk analysis, Sam has observed that for a few of the risks, the cost benefit analysis shows that risk mitigation cost (countermeasures, controls, or safeguard) is more than the potential lost that could be incurred. What kind of a strategy should Sam recommend to the senior management to treat these risks?

    • Risk Mitigation
    • Risk Acceptance
    • Risk Avoidance
    • Risk transfer
    Explanation:

    Risk acceptance is the practice of accepting certain risk(s), typically based on a business decision that may also weigh the cost versus the benefit of dealing with the risk in another way.

    For your exam you should know below information about risk assessment and treatment:

    A risk assessment, which is a tool for risk management, is a method of identifying vulnerabilities and threats and assessing the possible impacts to determine where to implement security controls. A risk assessment is carried out, and the results are analyzed. Risk analysis is used to ensure that security is cost-effective, relevant, timely, and responsive to threats. Security can be quite complex, even for well-versed security professionals, and it is easy to apply too much security, not enough security, or the wrong security controls, and to spend too much money in the process without attaining the necessary objectives. Risk analysis helps companies prioritize their risks and shows
    management the amount of resources that should be applied to protecting against those risks in a sensible manner.

    A risk analysis has four main goals:
    Identify assets and their value to the organization.
    Identify vulnerabilities and threats.
    Quantify the probability and business impact of these potential threats.
    Provide an economic balance between the impact of the threat and the cost
    of the countermeasure.

    Treating Risk

    Risk Mitigation
    Risk mitigation is the practice of the elimination of, or the significant decrease in the level of risk presented. Examples of risk mitigation can be seen in everyday life and are readily apparent in the information technology world. Risk Mitigation involves applying appropriate control to reduce risk. For example, to lessen the risk of exposing personal and financial information that is highly sensitive and confidential organizations put countermeasures in place, such as firewalls, intrusion detection/prevention systems, and other mechanisms, to deter malicious outsiders from accessing this highly sensitive information. In the underage driver example, risk mitigation could take the form of driver education for the youth or establishing a policy not allowing the young driver to use a cell phone while driving, or not letting youth of a certain age have more than one friend in the car as a passenger at any given time.

    Risk Transfer
    Risk transfer is the practice of passing on the risk in question to another entity, such as an insurance company. Let us look at one of the examples that were presented above in a different way. The family is evaluating whether to permit an underage driver to use the family car. The family decides that it is important for the youth to be mobile, so it transfers the financial risk of a youth being in an accident to the insurance company, which provides the family with auto insurance.
    It is important to note that the transfer of risk may be accompanied by a cost. This is certainly true for the insurance example presented earlier, and can be seen in other insurance instances, such as liability insurance for a vendor or the insurance taken out by companies to protect against hardware and software theft or destruction. This may also be true if an organization must purchase and implement security controls in order to make their organization less desirable to attack. It is important to remember that not all risk can be transferred. While financial risk is simple to transfer through insurance, reputational risk may almost never be fully transferred.

    Risk Avoidance
    Risk avoidance is the practice of coming up with alternatives so that the risk in question is not realized. For example, have you ever heard a friend, or parents of a friend, complain about the costs of insuring an underage driver? How about the risks that many of these children face as they become mobile? Some of these families will decide that the child in question will not be allowed to drive the family car, but will rather wait until he or she is of legal age (i.e., 18 years of age) before committing to owning, insuring, and driving a motor vehicle.
    In this case, the family has chosen to avoid the risks (and any associated benefits) associated with an underage driver, such as poor driving performance or the cost of insurance for the child. Although this choice may be available for some situations, it is not available for all. Imagine a global retailer who, knowing the risks associated with doing business on the Internet, decides to avoid the practice. This decision will likely cost the company a significant amount of its revenue (if, indeed, the company has products or services that consumers wish to purchase). In addition, the decision may require the company to build or lease a site in each of the locations, globally, for which it wishes to continue business. This could have a catastrophic effect on the company’s ability to continue business operations

    Risk Acceptance
    In some cases, it may be prudent for an organization to simply accept the risk that is presented in certain scenarios. Risk acceptance is the practice of accepting certain risk(s), typically based on a business decision that may also weigh the cost versus the benefit of dealing with the risk in another way.
    For example, an executive may be confronted with risks identified during the course of a risk assessment for their organization. These risks have been prioritized by high, medium, and low impact to the organization. The executive notes that in order to mitigate or transfer the low-level risks, significant costs could be involved. Mitigation might involve the hiring of additional highly skilled personnel and the purchase of new hardware, software, and office equipment, while transference of the risk to an insurance company would require premium payments. The
    executive then further notes that minimal impact to the organization would occur if any of the reported low-level threats were realized. Therefore, he or she (rightly) concludes that it is wiser for the organization to forgo the costs and accept the risk. In the young driver example, risk acceptance could be based on the observation that the youngster has demonstrated the responsibility and maturity to warrant the parent’s trust in his or her judgment.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Risk Transfer – Risk transfer is the practice of passing on the risk in question to another entity, such as an insurance company. Let us look at one of the examples that were presented above in a different way.

    Risk Avoidance – Risk avoidance is the practice of coming up with alternatives so that the risk in question is not realized.

    Risk Mitigation -Risk mitigation is the practice of the elimination of, or the significant decrease in the level of risk presented.

    Reference:
    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 51
    and
    Official ISC2 guide to CISSP CBK 3rd edition page number 534-539

  5. Which of the following risk handling technique involves the practice of being proactive so that the risk in question is not realized?

    • Risk Mitigation
    • Risk Acceptance
    • Risk Avoidance
    • Risk transfer
    Explanation:

    Risk avoidance is the practice of coming up with alternatives so that the risk in question is not realized.

    For your exam you should know below information about risk assessment and treatment:

    A risk assessment, which is a tool for risk management, is a method of identifying vulnerabilities and threats and assessing the possible impacts to determine where to implement security controls. A risk assessment is carried out, and the results are analyzed. Risk analysis is used to ensure that security is cost-effective, relevant, timely, and responsive to threats. Security can be quite complex, even for well-versed security professionals, and it is easy to apply too much security, not enough security, or the wrong security controls, and to spend too much money in the process without attaining the necessary objectives. Risk analysis helps companies prioritize their risks and shows management the amount of resources that should be applied to protecting against those risks in a sensible manner.

    A risk analysis has four main goals:
    Identify assets and their value to the organization.
    Identify vulnerabilities and threats.
    Quantify the probability and business impact of these potential threats.
    Provide an economic balance between the impact of the threat and the cost
    of the countermeasure.
    Treating Risk

    Risk Mitigation
    Risk mitigation is the practice of the elimination of, or the significant decrease in the level of risk presented. Examples of risk mitigation can be seen in everyday life and are readily apparent in the information technology world. Risk Mitigation involves applying appropriate control to reduce risk. For example, to lessen the risk of exposing personal and financial information that is highly sensitive and confidential organizations put countermeasures in place, such as firewalls, intrusion detection/prevention systems, and other mechanisms, to deter malicious outsiders from accessing this highly sensitive information. In the underage driver example, risk mitigation could take the form of driver education for the youth or establishing a policy not allowing the young driver to use a cell phone while driving, or not letting youth of a certain age have more than one friend in the car as a passenger at any given time.

    Risk Transfer
    Risk transfer is the practice of passing on the risk in question to another entity, such as an insurance company. Let us look at one of the examples that were presented above in a different way. The family is evaluating whether to permit an underage driver to use the family car. The family decides that it is important for the youth to be mobile, so it transfers the financial risk of a youth being in an accident to the insurance company, which provides the family with auto insurance.
    It is important to note that the transfer of risk may be accompanied by a cost. This is certainly true for the insurance example presented earlier, and can be seen in other insurance instances, such as liability insurance for a vendor or the insurance taken out by companies to protect against hardware and software theft or destruction. This may also be true if an organization must purchase and implement security controls in order to make their organization less desirable to attack. It is important to remember that not all risk can be transferred. While financial risk is simple to transfer through insurance, reputational risk may almost never be fully transferred.

    Risk Avoidance
    Risk avoidance is the practice of coming up with alternatives so that the risk in question is not realized. For example, have you ever heard a friend, or parents of a friend, complain about the costs of insuring an underage driver? How about the risks that many of these children face as they become mobile? Some of these families will decide that the child in question will not be allowed to drive the family car, but will rather wait until he or she is of legal age (i.e., 18 years of age) before committing to owning, insuring, and driving a motor vehicle.
    In this case, the family has chosen to avoid the risks (and any associated benefits) associated with an underage driver, such as poor driving performance or the cost of insurance for the child. Although this choice may be available for some situations, it is not available for all. Imagine a global retailer who, knowing the risks associated with doing business on the Internet, decides to avoid the practice. This decision will likely cost the company a significant amount of its revenue (if, indeed, the company has products or services that consumers wish to purchase). In addition, the decision may require the company to build or lease a site in each of the locations, globally, for which it wishes to continue business. This could have a catastrophic effect on the company’s ability to continue business operations

    Risk Acceptance
    In some cases, it may be prudent for an organization to simply accept the risk that is presented in certain scenarios. Risk acceptance is the practice of accepting certain risk(s), typically based on a business decision that may also weigh the cost versus the benefit of dealing with the risk in another way.
    For example, an executive may be confronted with risks identified during the course of a risk assessment for their organization. These risks have been prioritized by high, medium, and low impact to the organization. The executive notes that in order to mitigate or transfer the low-level risks, significant costs could be involved. Mitigation might involve the hiring of additional highly skilled personnel and the purchase of new hardware, software, and office equipment, while transference of the risk to an insurance company would require premium payments. The
    executive then further notes that minimal impact to the organization would occur if any of the reported low-level threats were realized. Therefore, he or she (rightly) concludes that it is wiser for the organization to forgo the costs and accept the risk. In the young driver example, risk acceptance could be based on the observation that the youngster has demonstrated the responsibility and maturity to warrant the parent’s trust in his or her judgment.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Risk Transfer – Risk transfer is the practice of passing on the risk in question to another entity, such as an insurance company. Let us look at one of the examples that were presented above in a different way.

    Risk Acceptance – Risk acceptance is the practice of accepting certain risk(s), typically based on a business decision that may also weigh the cost versus the benefit of dealing with the risk in another way.

    Risk Mitigation -Risk mitigation is the practice of the elimination of, or the significant decrease in the level of risk presented

    Reference:
    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 51
    and
    Official ISC2 guide to CISSP CBK 3rd edition page number 534-536

  6. Which of the following control is intended to discourage a potential attacker?

    • Deterrent
    • Preventive
    • Corrective
    • Recovery
    Explanation:

    Deterrent Control are intended to discourage a potential attacker

    For your exam you should know below information about different security controls

    Deterrent Controls
    Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.

    The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events.

    When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs.

    It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.

    Preventative Controls
    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed. Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control
    rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to find a flaw in the control’s implementation.

    Compensating Controls
    Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk.

    For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement.

    Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.

    Detective Controls
    Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk.

    As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system.

    This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.

    Corrective Controls
    When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.

    Recovery Controls
    Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management.

    Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install.

    Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Preventive – Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring
    Corrective – Corrective control fixes components or systems after an incident has occurred
    Recovery – Recovery controls are intended to bring the environment back to regular operations

    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    and
    Official ISC2 CISSP guide 3rd edition Page number 50 and 51

  7. Which of the following security control is intended to avoid an incident from occurring?

    • Deterrent
    • Preventive
    • Corrective
    • Recovery
    Explanation:

    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring

    For your exam you should know below information about different security controls

    Deterrent Controls
    Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.

    The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events.

    When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs.

    It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.

    Preventative Controls
    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed. Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control
    rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to find a flaw in the control’s implementation.

    Compensating Controls
    Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk.

    For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement.

    Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.

    Detective Controls
    Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk.

    As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system.

    This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.

    Corrective Controls
    When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.

    Recovery Controls
    Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management.

    Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install.

    Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Deterrent – Deterrent controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker
    Corrective – Corrective control fixes components or systems after an incident has occurred
    Recovery – Recovery controls are intended to bring the environment back to regular operations
    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    and
    Official ISC2 CISSP guide 3rd edition Page number 50 and 51

  8. Which of the following control fixes a component or system after an incident has occurred?

    • Deterrent
    • Preventive
    • Corrective
    • Recovery
    Explanation:

    Corrective control fixes components or systems after an incident has occurred

    For your exam you should know below information about different security controls

    Deterrent Controls
    Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.

    The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events.

    When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs.

    It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.

    Preventative Controls
    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed. Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control
    rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to find a flaw in the control’s implementation.

    Compensating Controls
    Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk.

    For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement.

    Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.

    Detective Controls
    Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk.

    As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system.

    This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.

    Corrective Controls
    When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.

    Recovery Controls
    Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management.

    Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install.

    Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Deterrent – Deterrent controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker

    Preventive – Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring
    Recovery – Recovery controls are intended to bring the environment back to regular operations

    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    and
    Official ISC2 CISSP guide 3rd edition Page number 50 and 51

  9. Which of the following security control is intended to bring environment back to regular operation?

    • Deterrent
    • Preventive
    • Corrective
    • Recovery
    Explanation:

    Recovery controls are intended to bring the environment back to regular operations

    For your exam you should know below information about different security controls

    Deterrent Controls
    Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.

    The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events.

    When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs.

    It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.

    Preventative Controls
    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed. Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control
    rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to find a flaw in the control’s implementation.

    Compensating Controls
    Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk.

    For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement.

    Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.

    Detective Controls
    Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk.

    As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system.

    This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.

    Corrective Controls
    When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.

    Recovery Controls
    Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management.

    Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install.

    Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Deterrent – Deterrent controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker
    Preventive – Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring
    Corrective – Corrective control fixes components or systems after an incident has occurred
    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    and
    Official ISC2 CISSP guide 3rd edition Page number 50 and 51

  10. Which of the following control helps to identify an incident’s activities and potentially an intruder?

    • Deterrent
    • Preventive
    • Detective
    • Compensating
    Explanation:

    Detective control helps identify an incident’s activities and potentially an intruder

    For your exam you should know below information about different security controls

    Deterrent Controls
    Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.

    The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events.

    When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs.

    It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.

    Preventative Controls
    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed. Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control
    rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to find a flaw in the control’s implementation.

    Compensating Controls
    Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk.

    For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement.

    Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.

    Detective Controls
    Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk.

    As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system.

    This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.

    Corrective Controls
    When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.

    Recovery Controls
    Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management.

    Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install.

    Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Deterrent – Deterrent controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker
    Preventive – Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring
    Compensating – Compensating Controls provide an alternative measure of control
    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    and
    Official ISC2 CISSP guide 3rd edition Page number 50 and 51

  11. Which of the following control provides an alternative measure of control?

    • Deterrent
    • Preventive
    • Detective
    • Compensating
    Explanation:

    For your exam you should know below information about different security controls

    Deterrent Controls
    Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.
    The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events. When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs. It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.

    Preventative Controls
    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed. Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control
    rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to
    find a flaw in the control’s implementation.

    Compensating Controls
    Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other
    technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk. For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement. Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.

    Detective Controls
    Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective
    nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk. As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system. This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.

    Corrective Controls
    When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security
    incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take
    many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.

    Recovery Controls
    Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management. Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install. Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.

    For your exam you should know below information about different security controls

    Deterrent Controls
    Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.

    The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events.

    When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs.

    It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.

    Preventative Controls
    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed. Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control
    rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to find a flaw in the control’s implementation.

    Compensating Controls
    Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk.

    For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement.

    Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.

    Detective Controls
    Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk.

    As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system.

    This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.

    Corrective Controls
    When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.

    Recovery Controls
    Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management.

    Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install.

    Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Deterrent – Deterrent controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker
    Preventive – Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring
    Detective -Detective control helps identify an incident’s activities and potentially an intruder
    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    and
    Official ISC2 CISSP guide 3rd edition Page number 50 and 51

  12. Which of the following is NOT an example of preventive control?

    • Physical access control like locks and door
    • User login screen which allows only authorize user to access website
    • Encrypt the data so that only authorize user can view the same
    • Duplicate checking of a calculations
    Explanation:

    The word NOT is used as a keyword in the question. You need to find out a security control from given options which in not preventive. Duplicate checking of a calculation is a detective control and not a preventive control.

    For your exam you should know below information about different security controls

    Deterrent Controls
    Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.
    The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events. When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs. It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.

    Preventative Controls
    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed. Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control
    rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to
    find a flaw in the control’s implementation.

    Compensating Controls
    Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other
    technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk. For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement. Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.

    Detective Controls
    Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective
    nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk. As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system. This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.

    Corrective Controls
    When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security
    incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take
    many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.

    Recovery Controls
    Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management. Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install. Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.

    For your exam you should know below information about different security controls

    Deterrent Controls
    Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.

    The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events.

    When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs.

    It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.

    Preventative Controls
    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed. Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control
    rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to find a flaw in the control’s implementation.

    Compensating Controls
    Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk.

    For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement.

    Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.

    Detective Controls
    Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk.

    As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system.

    This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.

    Corrective Controls
    When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.

    Recovery Controls
    Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management.

    Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install.

    Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.

    The following answers are incorrect:
    The other examples belong to Preventive control.
    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    and
    Official ISC2 CISSP guide 3rd edition Page number 50 and 51

  13. Which of the following is NOT an example of corrective control?

    • OS Upgrade
    • Backup and restore
    • Contingency planning
    • System Monitoring
    Explanation:

    The word NOT is used as a keyword in the question. You need to find out a security control from given options which in not corrective control. System Monitoring is a detective control and not a corrective control.

    For your exam you should know below information about different security controls

    Deterrent Controls
    Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.
    The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events. When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs. It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.

    Preventative Controls
    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed. Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control
    rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to
    find a flaw in the control’s implementation.

    Compensating Controls
    Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other
    technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk. For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement. Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.

    Detective Controls
    Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective
    nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk. As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system. This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.

    Corrective Controls
    When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security
    incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take
    many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.

    Recovery Controls
    Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management. Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install. Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.

    For your exam you should know below information about different security controls

    Deterrent Controls
    Deterrent Controls are intended to discourage a potential attacker. Access controls act as a deterrent to threats and attacks by the simple fact that the existence of the control is enough to keep some potential attackers from attempting to circumvent the control. This is often because the effort required to circumvent the control is far greater than the potential reward if the attacker is successful, or, conversely, the negative implications of a failed attack (or getting caught) outweigh the benefits of success. For example, by forcing the identification and authentication of a user, service, or application, and all that it implies, the potential for incidents associated with the system is significantly reduced because an attacker will fear association with the incident. If there are no controls for a given access path, the number of incidents and the potential impact become infinite. Controls inherently reduce exposure to risk by applying oversight for a process. This oversight acts as a deterrent, curbing an attacker’s appetite in the face of probable repercussions.

    The best example of a deterrent control is demonstrated by employees and their propensity to intentionally perform unauthorized functions, leading to unwanted events.

    When users begin to understand that by authenticating into a system to perform a function, their activities are logged and monitored, and it reduces the likelihood they will attempt such an action. Many threats are based on the anonymity of the threat agent, and any potential for identification and association with their actions is avoided at all costs.

    It is this fundamental reason why access controls are the key target of circumvention by attackers. Deterrents also take the form of potential punishment if users do something unauthorized. For example, if the organization policy specifies that an employee installing an unauthorized wireless access point will be fired, that will determine most employees from installing wireless access points.

    Preventative Controls
    Preventive controls are intended to avoid an incident from occurring. Preventative access controls keep a user from performing some activity or function. Preventative controls differ from deterrent controls in that the control is not optional and cannot (easily) be bypassed. Deterrent controls work on the theory that it is easier to obey the control
    rather than to risk the consequences of bypassing the control. In other words, the power for action resides with the user (or the attacker). Preventative controls place the power of action with the system, obeying the control is not optional. The only way to bypass the control is to find a flaw in the control’s implementation.

    Compensating Controls
    Compensating controls are introduced when the existing capabilities of a system do not support the requirement of a policy. Compensating controls can be technical, procedural, or managerial. Although an existing system may not support the required controls, there may exist other technology or processes that can supplement the existing environment, closing the gap in controls, meeting policy requirements, and reducing overall risk.

    For example, the access control policy may state that the authentication process must be encrypted when performed over the Internet. Adjusting an application to natively support encryption for authentication purposes may be too costly. Secure Socket Layer (SSL), an encryption protocol, can be employed and layered on top of the authentication process to support the policy statement.

    Other examples include a separation of duties environment, which offers the capability to isolate certain tasks to compensate for technical limitations in the system and ensure the security of transactions. In addition, management processes, such as authorization, supervision, and administration, can be used to compensate for gaps in the access control environment.

    Detective Controls
    Detective controls warn when something has happened, and are the earliest point in the post-incident timeline. Access controls are a deterrent to threats and can be aggressively utilized to prevent harmful incidents through the application of least privilege. However, the detective nature of access controls can provide significant visibility into the access environment and help organizations manage their access strategy and related security risk.

    As mentioned previously, strongly managed access privileges provided to an authenticated user offer the ability to reduce the risk exposure of the enterprise’s assets by limiting the capabilities that authenticated user has. However, there are few options to control what a user can perform once privileges are provided. For example, if a user is provided write access to a file and that file is damaged, altered, or otherwise negatively impacted (either deliberately or unintentionally), the use of applied access controls will offer visibility into the transaction. The control environment can be established to log activity regarding the identification, authentication, authorization, and use of privileges on a system.

    This can be used to detect the occurrence of errors, the attempts to perform an unauthorized action, or to validate when provided credentials were exercised. The logging system as a detective device provides evidence of actions (both successful and unsuccessful) and tasks that were executed by authorized users.

    Corrective Controls
    When a security incident occurs, elements within the security infrastructure may require corrective actions. Corrective controls are actions that seek to alter the security posture of an environment to correct any deficiencies and return the environment to a secure state. A security incident signals the failure of one or more directive, deterrent, preventative, or compensating controls. The detective controls may have triggered an alarm or notification, but now the corrective controls must work to stop the incident in its tracks. Corrective controls can take many forms, all depending on the particular situation at hand or the particular security failure that needs to be dealt with.

    Recovery Controls
    Any changes to the access control environment, whether in the face of a security incident or to offer temporary compensating controls, need to be accurately reinstated and returned to normal operations. There are several situations that may affect access controls, their applicability, status, or management.

    Events can include system outages, attacks, project changes, technical demands, administrative gaps, and full-blown disaster situations. For example, if an application is not correctly installed or deployed, it may adversely affect controls placed on system files or even have default administrative accounts unknowingly implemented upon install.

    Additionally, an employee may be transferred, quit, or be on temporary leave that may affect policy requirements regarding separation of duties. An attack on systems may have resulted in the implantation of a Trojan horse program, potentially exposing private user information, such as credit card information and financial data. In all of these cases, an undesirable situation must be rectified as quickly as possible and controls returned to normal operations.

    The following answers are incorrect:
    The other examples belong to corrective control.

    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    and
    Official ISC2 CISSP guide 3rd edition Page number 50 and 51

  14. Which of the following audit include specific tests of control to demonstrate adherence to specific regulatory or industry standard?

    • Compliance Audit
    • Financial Audit
    • Operational Audit
    • Forensic audit
    Explanation:

    A compliance audit is a comprehensive review of an organization’s adherence to regulatory guidelines. Independent accounting, security or IT consultants evaluate the strength and thoroughness of compliance preparations. Auditors review security polices, user access controls and risk management procedures over the course of a compliance audit. Compliance audit include specific tests of controls to demonstrate adherence to specific regulatory or industry standard. These audits often overlap traditional audits, but may focus on particular system or data.

    For your exam you should know below information about different types of audit:

    What is an audit?
    An audit in general terms is a process of evaluating an individual or organization’s accounts. This is usually done by an independent auditing body. Thus, audit involves a competent and independent person obtaining evidence and evaluating it objectively with regard to a given entity, which in this case is the subject of audit, in order to establish conformance to a given set of standards. Audit can be on a person, organization, system, enterprise, project or product.

    Compliance Audit
    A compliance audit is a comprehensive review of an organization’s adherence to regulatory guidelines. Independent accounting, security or IT consultants evaluate the strength and thoroughness of compliance preparations. Auditors review security polices, user access controls and risk management procedures over the course of a compliance audit. Compliance audit include specific tests of controls to demonstrate adherence to specific regulatory or industry standard. These audits often overlap traditional audits, but may focus on particular system or data.

    What, precisely, is examined in a compliance audit will vary depending upon whether an organization is a public or private company, what kind of data it handles and if it transmits or stores sensitive financial data. For instance, SOX requirements mean that any electronic communication must be backed up and secured with reasonable disaster recovery infrastructure. Health care providers that store or transmit e-health records, like personal health information, are subject to HIPAA requirements. Financial services companies that transmit credit card data are subject to PCI DSS requirements. In each case, the organization must be able to demonstrate compliance by producing an audit trail, often generated by data from event log management software.

    Financial Audit
    A financial audit, or more accurately, an audit of financial statements, is the verification of the financial statements of a legal entity, with a view to express an audit opinion. The audit opinion is intended to provide reasonable assurance, but not absolute assurance, that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, and/or give a true and fair view in accordance with the financial reporting framework. The purpose of an audit is to provide an objective independent examination of the financial statements, which increases the value and credibility of the financial statements produced by management, thus increase user confidence in the financial statement, reduce investor risk and consequently reduce the cost of capital of the preparer of the financial statements.

    Operational Audit
    Operational Audit is a systematic review of effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operation. Operational audit is a future-oriented, systematic, and independent evaluation of organizational activities. In Operational audit financial data may be used, but the primary sources of evidence are the operational policies and achievements related to organizational objectives. Operational audit is a more comprehensive form of an Internal audit.

    The Institute of Internal Auditor (IIA) defines Operational Audit as a systematic process of evaluating an organization’s effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operations under management’s control and reporting to appropriate persons the results of the evaluation along with recommendations for improvement.

    Objectives
    To appraise the effectiveness and efficiency of a division, activity, or operation of the entity in meeting organizational goals.
    To understand the responsibilities and risks faced by an organization.
    To identify, with management participation, opportunities for improving control.
    To provide senior management of the organization with a detailed understanding of the Operations.

    Integrated Audits
    An integrated audit combines financial and operational audit steps. An integrated audit is also performed to assess overall objectives within an organization, related to financial information and asset, safeguarding, efficiency and or internal auditors and would include compliance test of internal controls and substantive audit step.

    IS Audit
    An information technology audit, or information systems audit, is an examination of the management controls within an Information technology (IT) infrastructure. The evaluation of obtained evidence determines if the information systems are safeguarding assets, maintaining data integrity, and operating effectively to achieve the organization’s goals or objectives. These reviews may be performed in conjunction with a financial statement audit, internal audit, or other form of attestation engagement.

    The primary functions of an IT audit are to evaluate the systems that are in place to guard an organization’s information. Specifically, information technology audits are used to evaluate the organization’s ability to protect its information assets and to properly dispense information to authorized parties. The IT audit aims to evaluate the following:

    Will the organization’s computer systems be available for the business at all times when required? (known as availability) Will the information in the systems be disclosed only to authorized users? (known as security and confidentiality) Will the information provided by the system always be accurate, reliable, and timely? (measures the integrity) In this way, the audit hopes to assess the risk to the company’s valuable asset (its information) and establish methods of minimizing those risks.

    Forensic Audit
    Forensic audit is the activity that consists of gathering, verifying, processing, analyzing of and reporting on data in order to obtain facts and/or evidence – in a predefined context – in the area of legal/financial disputes and or irregularities (including fraud) and giving preventative advice.

    The purpose of a forensic audit is to use accounting procedures to collect evidence for the prosecution or investigation of financial crimes such as theft or fraud. Forensic audits may be conducted to determine if wrongdoing occurred, or to gather materials for the case against an alleged criminal.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Financial Audit- A financial audit, or more accurately, an audit of financial statements, is the verification of the financial statements of a legal entity, with a view to express an audit opinion. The audit opinion is intended to provide reasonable assurance, but not absolute assurance, that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, and/or give a true and fair view in accordance with the financial reporting framework.

    Operational Audit – Operational Audit is a systematic review of effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operation. Operational audit is a future-oriented, systematic, and independent evaluation of organizational activities. In Operational audit financial data may be used, but the primary sources of evidence are the operational policies and achievements related to organizational objectives. [1] Operational audit is a more comprehensive form of an Internal audit.

    Forensic Audit – Forensic audit is the activity that consists of gathering, verifying, processing, analyzing of and reporting on data in order to obtain facts and/or evidence – in a predefined context – in the area of legal/financial disputes and or irregularities (including fraud) and giving preventative advice.
    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 47
    http://searchcompliance.techtarget.com/definition/compliance-audit
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_audit
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_auditing
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology_audit
    http://www.investorwords.com/16445/forensic_audit.html

  15. Which of the following audit assess accuracy of financial reporting?

    • Compliance Audit
    • Financial Audit
    • Operational Audit
    • Forensic audit
    Explanation:

    A financial audit, or more accurately, an audit of financial statements, is the verification of the financial statements of a legal entity, with a view to express an audit opinion. The audit opinion is intended to provide reasonable assurance, but not absolute assurance, that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, and/or give a true and fair view in accordance with the financial reporting framework. The purpose of an audit is to provide an objective independent examination of the financial statements, which increases the value and credibility of the financial statements produced by management, thus increase user confidence in the financial statement, reduce investor risk and consequently reduce the cost of capital of the preparer of the financial statements.

    For your exam you should know below information about different types of audit:

    What is an audit?
    An audit in general terms is a process of evaluating an individual or organization’s accounts. This is usually done by an independent auditing body. Thus, audit involves a competent and independent person obtaining evidence and evaluating it objectively with regard to a given entity, which in this case is the subject of audit, in order to establish conformance to a given set of standards. Audit can be on a person, organization, system, enterprise, project or product.

    Compliance Audit
    A compliance audit is a comprehensive review of an organization’s adherence to regulatory guidelines. Independent accounting, security or IT consultants evaluate the strength and thoroughness of compliance preparations. Auditors review security polices, user access controls and risk management procedures over the course of a compliance audit. Compliance audit include specific tests of controls to demonstrate adherence to specific regulatory or industry standard. These audits often overlap traditional audits, but may focus on particular system or data.

    What, precisely, is examined in a compliance audit will vary depending upon whether an organization is a public or private company, what kind of data it handles and if it transmits or stores sensitive financial data. For instance, SOX requirements mean that any electronic communication must be backed up and secured with reasonable disaster recovery infrastructure. Health care providers that store or transmit e-health records, like personal health information, are subject to HIPAA requirements. Financial services companies that transmit credit card data are subject to PCI DSS requirements. In each case, the organization must be able to demonstrate compliance by producing an audit trail, often generated by data from event log management software.

    Financial Audit
    A financial audit, or more accurately, an audit of financial statements, is the verification of the financial statements of a legal entity, with a view to express an audit opinion. The audit opinion is intended to provide reasonable assurance, but not absolute assurance, that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, and/or give a true and fair view in accordance with the financial reporting framework. The purpose of an audit is to provide an objective independent examination of the financial statements, which increases the value and credibility of the financial statements produced by management, thus increase user confidence in the financial statement, reduce investor risk and consequently reduce the cost of capital of the preparer of the financial statements.

    Operational Audit
    Operational Audit is a systematic review of effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operation. Operational audit is a future-oriented, systematic, and independent evaluation of organizational activities. In Operational audit financial data may be used, but the primary sources of evidence are the operational policies and achievements related to organizational objectives. Operational audit is a more comprehensive form of an Internal audit.

    The Institute of Internal Auditor (IIA) defines Operational Audit as a systematic process of evaluating an organization’s effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operations under management’s control and reporting to appropriate persons the results of the evaluation along with recommendations for improvement.

    Objectives

    To appraise the effectiveness and efficiency of a division, activity, or operation of the entity in meeting organizational goals.
    To understand the responsibilities and risks faced by an organization.
    To identify, with management participation, opportunities for improving control.
    To provide senior management of the organization with a detailed understanding of the Operations.

    Integrated Audits
    An integrated audit combines financial and operational audit steps. An integrated audit is also performed to assess overall objectives within an organization, related to financial information and asset, safeguarding, efficiency and or internal auditors and would include compliance test of internal controls and substantive audit step.

    IS Audit
    An information technology audit, or information systems audit, is an examination of the management controls within an Information technology (IT) infrastructure. The evaluation of obtained evidence determines if the information systems are safeguarding assets, maintaining data integrity, and operating effectively to achieve the organization’s goals or objectives. These reviews may be performed in conjunction with a financial statement audit, internal audit, or other form of attestation engagement.

    The primary functions of an IT audit are to evaluate the systems that are in place to guard an organization’s information. Specifically, information technology audits are used to evaluate the organization’s ability to protect its information assets and to properly dispense information to authorized parties. The IT audit aims to evaluate the following:

    Will the organization’s computer systems be available for the business at all times when required? (known as availability) Will the information in the systems be disclosed only to authorized users? (known as security and confidentiality) Will the information provided by the system always be accurate, reliable, and timely? (measures the integrity) In this way, the audit hopes to assess the risk to the company’s valuable asset (its information) and establish methods of minimizing those risks.

    Forensic Audit
    Forensic audit is the activity that consists of gathering, verifying, processing, analyzing of and reporting on data in order to obtain facts and/or evidence – in a predefined context – in the area of legal/financial disputes and or irregularities (including fraud) and giving preventative advice.

    The purpose of a forensic audit is to use accounting procedures to collect evidence for the prosecution or investigation of financial crimes such as theft or fraud. Forensic audits may be conducted to determine if wrongdoing occurred, or to gather materials for the case against an alleged criminal.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Compliance Audit – A compliance audit is a comprehensive review of an organization’s adherence to regulatory guidelines. Independent accounting, security or IT consultants evaluate the strength and thoroughness of compliance preparations. Auditors review security polices, user access controls and risk management procedures over the course of a compliance audit. Compliance audit include specific tests of controls to demonstrate adherence to specific regulatory or industry standard. These audits often overlap traditional audits, but may focus on particular system or data.

    Operational Audit – Operational Audit is a systematic review of effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operation. Operational audit is a future-oriented, systematic, and independent evaluation of organizational activities. In Operational audit financial data may be used, but the primary sources of evidence are the operational policies and achievements related to organizational objectives.[1] Operational audit is a more comprehensive form of an Internal audit.

    Forensic Audit – Forensic audit is the activity that consists of gathering, verifying, processing, analyzing of and reporting on data in order to obtain facts and/or evidence – in a predefined context – in the area of legal/financial disputes and or irregularities (including fraud) and giving preventative advice.

    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    http://searchcompliance.techtarget.com/definition/compliance-audit
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_audit
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_auditing
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology_audit
    http://www.investorwords.com/16445/forensic_audit.html

  16. Which of the following audit is mainly designed to evaluate the internal control structure in a given process or area?

    • Compliance Audit
    • Financial Audit
    • Operational Audit
    • Forensic audit
    Explanation:

    Operational audit is mainly designed to evaluate the internal control structure in a given process or area. Operational Audit is a systematic review of effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operation. Operational audit is a future-oriented, systematic, and independent evaluation of organizational activities. In Operational audit financial data may be used, but the primary sources of evidence are the operational policies and achievements related to organizational objectives. Operational audit is a more comprehensive form of an Internal audit.

    For your exam you should know below information about different types of audit:

    What is an audit?
    An audit in general terms is a process of evaluating an individual or organization’s accounts. This is usually done by an independent auditing body. Thus, audit involves a competent and independent person obtaining evidence and evaluating it objectively with regard to a given entity, which in this case is the subject of audit, in order to establish conformance to a given set of standards. Audit can be on a person, organization, system, enterprise, project or product.

    Compliance Audit
    A compliance audit is a comprehensive review of an organization’s adherence to regulatory guidelines. Independent accounting, security or IT consultants evaluate the strength and thoroughness of compliance preparations. Auditors review security polices, user access controls and risk management procedures over the course of a compliance audit. Compliance audit include specific tests of controls to demonstrate adherence to specific regulatory or industry standard. These audits often overlap traditional audits, but may focus on particular system or data.

    What, precisely, is examined in a compliance audit will vary depending upon whether an organization is a public or private company, what kind of data it handles and if it transmits or stores sensitive financial data. For instance, SOX requirements mean that any electronic communication must be backed up and secured with reasonable disaster recovery infrastructure. Health care providers that store or transmit e-health records, like personal health information, are subject to HIPAA requirements. Financial services companies that transmit credit card data are subject to PCI DSS requirements. In each case, the organization must be able to demonstrate compliance by producing an audit trail, often generated by data from event log management software.

    Financial Audit
    A financial audit, or more accurately, an audit of financial statements, is the verification of the financial statements of a legal entity, with a view to express an audit opinion. The audit opinion is intended to provide reasonable assurance, but not absolute assurance, that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, and/or give a true and fair view in accordance with the financial reporting framework. The purpose of an audit is to provide an objective independent examination of the financial statements, which increases the value and credibility of the financial statements produced by management, thus increase user confidence in the financial statement, reduce investor risk and consequently reduce the cost of capital of the preparer of the financial statements.

    Operational Audit
    Operational Audit is a systematic review of effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operation. Operational audit is a future-oriented, systematic, and independent evaluation of organizational activities. In Operational audit financial data may be used, but the primary sources of evidence are the operational policies and achievements related to organizational objectives. Operational audit is a more comprehensive form of an Internal audit.

    The Institute of Internal Auditor (IIA) defines Operational Audit as a systematic process of evaluating an organization’s effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operations under management’s control and reporting to appropriate persons the results of the evaluation along with recommendations for improvement.

    Objectives

    To appraise the effectiveness and efficiency of a division, activity, or operation of the entity in meeting organizational goals.
    To understand the responsibilities and risks faced by an organization.
    To identify, with management participation, opportunities for improving control.
    To provide senior management of the organization with a detailed understanding of the Operations.

    Integrated Audits
    An integrated audit combines financial and operational audit steps. An integrated audit is also performed to assess overall objectives within an organization, related to financial information and asset, safeguarding, efficiency and or internal auditors and would include compliance test of internal controls and substantive audit step.

    IS Audit
    An information technology audit, or information systems audit, is an examination of the management controls within an Information technology (IT) infrastructure. The evaluation of obtained evidence determines if the information systems are safeguarding assets, maintaining data integrity, and operating effectively to achieve the organization’s goals or objectives. These reviews may be performed in conjunction with a financial statement audit, internal audit, or other form of attestation engagement.

    The primary functions of an IT audit are to evaluate the systems that are in place to guard an organization’s information. Specifically, information technology audits are used to evaluate the organization’s ability to protect its information assets and to properly dispense information to authorized parties. The IT audit aims to evaluate the following:

    Will the organization’s computer systems be available for the business at all times when required? (known as availability) Will the information in the systems be disclosed only to authorized users? (known as security and confidentiality) Will the information provided by the system always be accurate, reliable, and timely? (measures the integrity) In this way, the audit hopes to assess the risk to the company’s valuable asset (its information) and establish methods of minimizing those risks.

    Forensic Audit
    Forensic audit is the activity that consists of gathering, verifying, processing, analyzing of and reporting on data in order to obtain facts and/or evidence – in a predefined context – in the area of legal/financial disputes and or irregularities (including fraud) and giving preventative advice.

    The purpose of a forensic audit is to use accounting procedures to collect evidence for the prosecution or investigation of financial crimes such as theft or fraud. Forensic audits may be conducted to determine if wrongdoing occurred, or to gather materials for the case against an alleged criminal.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Compliance Audit – A compliance audit is a comprehensive review of an organization’s adherence to regulatory guidelines. Independent accounting, security or IT consultants evaluate the strength and thoroughness of compliance preparations. Auditors review security polices, user access controls and risk management procedures over the course of a compliance audit. Compliance audit include specific tests of controls to demonstrate adherence to specific regulatory or industry standard. These audits often overlap traditional audits, but may focus on particular system or data.

    Financial Audit- A financial audit, or more accurately, an audit of financial statements, is the verification of the financial statements of a legal entity, with a view to express an audit opinion. The audit opinion is intended to provide reasonable assurance, but not absolute assurance, that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, and/or give a true and fair view in accordance with the financial reporting framework. The purpose of an audit is to provide an objective independent examination of the financial statements, which increases the value and credibility of the financial statements produced by management, thus increase user confidence in the financial statement, reduce investor risk and consequently reduce the cost of capital of the preparer of the financial statements.

    Forensic Audit – Forensic audit is the activity that consists of gathering, verifying, processing, analyzing of and reporting on data in order to obtain facts and/or evidence – in a predefined context – in the area of legal/financial disputes and or irregularities (including fraud) and giving preventative advice.

    Reference:
    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    http://searchcompliance.techtarget.com/definition/compliance-audit
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_audit
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_auditing
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology_audit
    http://www.investorwords.com/16445/forensic_audit.html

  17. Which of the following audit combines financial and operational audit steps?

    • Compliance Audit
    • Financial Audit
    • Integrated Audit
    • Forensic audit
    Explanation:

    An integrated audit combines financial and operational audit steps. An integrated audit is also performed to assess overall objectives within an organization, related to financial information and asset, safeguarding, efficiency and or internal auditors and would include compliance test of internal controls and substantive audit step.

    For your exam you should know below information about different types of audit:

    What is an audit?
    An audit in general terms is a process of evaluating an individual or organization’s accounts. This is usually done by an independent auditing body. Thus, audit involves a competent and independent person obtaining evidence and evaluating it objectively with regard to a given entity, which in this case is the subject of audit, in order to establish conformance to a given set of standards. Audit can be on a person, organization, system, enterprise, project or product.

    Compliance Audit
    A compliance audit is a comprehensive review of an organization’s adherence to regulatory guidelines. Independent accounting, security or IT consultants evaluate the strength and thoroughness of compliance preparations. Auditors review security polices, user access controls and risk management procedures over the course of a compliance audit. Compliance audit include specific tests of controls to demonstrate adherence to specific regulatory or industry standard. These audits often overlap traditional audits, but may focus on particular system or data.

    What, precisely, is examined in a compliance audit will vary depending upon whether an organization is a public or private company, what kind of data it handles and if it transmits or stores sensitive financial data. For instance, SOX requirements mean that any electronic communication must be backed up and secured with reasonable disaster recovery infrastructure. Health care providers that store or transmit e-health records, like personal health information, are subject to HIPAA requirements. Financial services companies that transmit credit card data are subject to PCI DSS requirements. In each case, the organization must be able to demonstrate compliance by producing an audit trail, often generated by data from event log management software.

    Financial Audit
    A financial audit, or more accurately, an audit of financial statements, is the verification of the financial statements of a legal entity, with a view to express an audit opinion. The audit opinion is intended to provide reasonable assurance, but not absolute assurance, that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, and/or give a true and fair view in accordance with the financial reporting framework. The purpose of an audit is to provide an objective independent examination of the financial statements, which increases the value and credibility of the financial statements produced by management, thus increase user confidence in the financial statement, reduce investor risk and consequently reduce the cost of capital of the preparer of the financial statements.

    Operational Audit
    Operational Audit is a systematic review of effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operation. Operational audit is a future-oriented, systematic, and independent evaluation of organizational activities. In Operational audit financial data may be used, but the primary sources of evidence are the operational policies and achievements related to organizational objectives. Operational audit is a more comprehensive form of an Internal audit.

    The Institute of Internal Auditor (IIA) defines Operational Audit as a systematic process of evaluating an organization’s effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operations under management’s control and reporting to appropriate persons the results of the evaluation along with recommendations for improvement.

    Objectives

    To appraise the effectiveness and efficiency of a division, activity, or operation of the entity in meeting organizational goals.
    To understand the responsibilities and risks faced by an organization.
    To identify, with management participation, opportunities for improving control.
    To provide senior management of the organization with a detailed understanding of the Operations.

    Integrated Audits
    An integrated audit combines financial and operational audit steps. An integrated audit is also performed to assess overall objectives within an organization, related to financial information and asset, safeguarding, efficiency and or internal auditors and would include compliance test of internal controls and substantive audit step.

    IS Audit
    An information technology audit, or information systems audit, is an examination of the management controls within an Information technology (IT) infrastructure. The evaluation of obtained evidence determines if the information systems are safeguarding assets, maintaining data integrity, and operating effectively to achieve the organization’s goals or objectives. These reviews may be performed in conjunction with a financial statement audit, internal audit, or other form of attestation engagement.

    The primary functions of an IT audit are to evaluate the systems that are in place to guard an organization’s information. Specifically, information technology audits are used to evaluate the organization’s ability to protect its information assets and to properly dispense information to authorized parties. The IT audit aims to evaluate the following:

    Will the organization’s computer systems be available for the business at all times when required? (known as availability) Will the information in the systems be disclosed only to authorized users? (known as security and confidentiality) Will the information provided by the system always be accurate, reliable, and timely? (measures the integrity) In this way, the audit hopes to assess the risk to the company’s valuable asset (its information) and establish methods of minimizing those risks.

    Forensic Audit
    Forensic audit is the activity that consists of gathering, verifying, processing, analyzing of and reporting on data in order to obtain facts and/or evidence – in a predefined context – in the area of legal/financial disputes and or irregularities (including fraud) and giving preventative advice.

    The purpose of a forensic audit is to use accounting procedures to collect evidence for the prosecution or investigation of financial crimes such as theft or fraud. Forensic audits may be conducted to determine if wrongdoing occurred, or to gather materials for the case against an alleged criminal.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Compliance Audit – A compliance audit is a comprehensive review of an organization’s adherence to regulatory guidelines. Independent accounting, security or IT consultants evaluate the strength and thoroughness of compliance preparations. Auditors review security polices, user access controls and risk management procedures over the course of a compliance audit. Compliance audit include specific tests of controls to demonstrate adherence to specific regulatory or industry standard. These audits often overlap traditional audits, but may focus on particular system or data.

    Financial Audit- A financial audit, or more accurately, an audit of financial statements, is the verification of the financial statements of a legal entity, with a view to express an audit opinion. The audit opinion is intended to provide reasonable assurance, but not absolute assurance, that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, and/or give a true and fair view in accordance with the financial reporting framework. The purpose of an audit is to provide an objective independent examination of the financial statements, which increases the value and credibility of the financial statements produced by management, thus increase user confidence in the financial statement, reduce investor risk and consequently reduce the cost of capital of the preparer of the financial statements.

    Forensic Audit – Forensic audit is the activity that consists of gathering, verifying, processing, analyzing of and reporting on data in order to obtain facts and/or evidence – in a predefined context – in the area of legal/financial disputes and or irregularities (including fraud) and giving preventative advice.

    Reference:
    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    http://searchcompliance.techtarget.com/definition/compliance-audit
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_audit
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_auditing
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology_audit
    http://www.investorwords.com/16445/forensic_audit.html

  18. Which of the following audit mainly focuses on discovering and disclosing on frauds and crimes?

    • Compliance Audit
    • Financial Audit
    • Integrated Audit
    • Forensic audit
    Explanation:

    Forensic audit is the activity that consists of gathering, verifying, processing, analyzing of and reporting on data in order to obtain facts and/or evidence – in a predefined context – in the area of legal/financial disputes and or irregularities (including fraud) and giving preventative advice

    For your exam you should know below information about different types of audit:

    What is an audit?
    An audit in general terms is a process of evaluating an individual or organization’s accounts. This is usually done by an independent auditing body. Thus, audit involves a competent and independent person obtaining evidence and evaluating it objectively with regard to a given entity, which in this case is the subject of audit, in order to establish conformance to a given set of standards. Audit can be on a person, organization, system, enterprise, project or product.

    Compliance Audit
    A compliance audit is a comprehensive review of an organization’s adherence to regulatory guidelines. Independent accounting, security or IT consultants evaluate the strength and thoroughness of compliance preparations. Auditors review security polices, user access controls and risk management procedures over the course of a compliance audit. Compliance audit include specific tests of controls to demonstrate adherence to specific regulatory or industry standard. These audits often overlap traditional audits, but may focus on particular system or data.

    What, precisely, is examined in a compliance audit will vary depending upon whether an organization is a public or private company, what kind of data it handles and if it transmits or stores sensitive financial data. For instance, SOX requirements mean that any electronic communication must be backed up and secured with reasonable disaster recovery infrastructure. Health care providers that store or transmit e-health records, like personal health information, are subject to HIPAA requirements. Financial services companies that transmit credit card data are subject to PCI DSS requirements. In each case, the organization must be able to demonstrate compliance by producing an audit trail, often generated by data from event log management software.

    Financial Audit
    A financial audit, or more accurately, an audit of financial statements, is the verification of the financial statements of a legal entity, with a view to express an audit opinion. The audit opinion is intended to provide reasonable assurance, but not absolute assurance, that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, and/or give a true and fair view in accordance with the financial reporting framework. The purpose of an audit is to provide an objective independent examination of the financial statements, which increases the value and credibility of the financial statements produced by management, thus increase user confidence in the financial statement, reduce investor risk and consequently reduce the cost of capital of the preparer of the financial statements.

    Operational Audit
    Operational Audit is a systematic review of effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operation. Operational audit is a future-oriented, systematic, and independent evaluation of organizational activities. In Operational audit financial data may be used, but the primary sources of evidence are the operational policies and achievements related to organizational objectives. Operational audit is a more comprehensive form of an Internal audit.

    The Institute of Internal Auditor (IIA) defines Operational Audit as a systematic process of evaluating an organization’s effectiveness, efficiency and economy of operations under management’s control and reporting to appropriate persons the results of the evaluation along with recommendations for improvement.

    Objectives

    To appraise the effectiveness and efficiency of a division, activity, or operation of the entity in meeting organizational goals.
    To understand the responsibilities and risks faced by an organization.
    To identify, with management participation, opportunities for improving control.
    To provide senior management of the organization with a detailed understanding of the Operations.

    Integrated Audits
    An integrated audit combines financial and operational audit steps. An integrated audit is also performed to assess overall objectives within an organization, related to financial information and asset, safeguarding, efficiency and or internal auditors and would include compliance test of internal controls and substantive audit step.

    IS Audit
    An information technology audit, or information systems audit, is an examination of the management controls within an Information technology (IT) infrastructure. The evaluation of obtained evidence determines if the information systems are safeguarding assets, maintaining data integrity, and operating effectively to achieve the organization’s goals or objectives. These reviews may be performed in conjunction with a financial statement audit, internal audit, or other form of attestation engagement.

    The primary functions of an IT audit are to evaluate the systems that are in place to guard an organization’s information. Specifically, information technology audits are used to evaluate the organization’s ability to protect its information assets and to properly dispense information to authorized parties. The IT audit aims to evaluate the following:

    Will the organization’s computer systems be available for the business at all times when required? (known as availability) Will the information in the systems be disclosed only to authorized users? (known as security and confidentiality) Will the information provided by the system always be accurate, reliable, and timely? (measures the integrity) In this way, the audit hopes to assess the risk to the company’s valuable asset (its information) and establish methods of minimizing those risks.

    Forensic Audit
    Forensic audit is the activity that consists of gathering, verifying, processing, analyzing of and reporting on data in order to obtain facts and/or evidence – in a predefined context – in the area of legal/financial disputes and or irregularities (including fraud) and giving preventative advice.

    The purpose of a forensic audit is to use accounting procedures to collect evidence for the prosecution or investigation of financial crimes such as theft or fraud. Forensic audits may be conducted to determine if wrongdoing occurred, or to gather materials for the case against an alleged criminal.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Compliance Audit – A compliance audit is a comprehensive review of an organization’s adherence to regulatory guidelines. Independent accounting, security or IT consultants evaluate the strength and thoroughness of compliance preparations. Auditors review security polices, user access controls and risk management procedures over the course of a compliance audit. Compliance audit include specific tests of controls to demonstrate adherence to specific regulatory or industry standard. These audits often overlap traditional audits, but may focus on particular system or data.

    Financial Audit- A financial audit, or more accurately, an audit of financial statements, is the verification of the financial statements of a legal entity, with a view to express an audit opinion. The audit opinion is intended to provide reasonable assurance, but not absolute assurance, that the financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, and/or give a true and fair view in accordance with the financial reporting framework. The purpose of an audit is to provide an objective independent examination of the financial statements, which increases the value and credibility of the financial statements produced by management, thus increase user confidence in the financial statement, reduce investor risk and consequently reduce the cost of capital of the preparer of the financial statements.

    Integrated Audits – An integrated audit combines financial and operational audit steps. An integrated audit is also performed to assess overall objectives within an organization, related to financial information and asset, safeguarding, efficiency and or internal auditors and would include compliance test of internal controls and substantive audit step.

    Reference:

    CISA Review Manual 2014 Page number 44
    http://searchcompliance.techtarget.com/definition/compliance-audit
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_audit
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_auditing
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_technology_audit
    http://www.investorwords.com/16445/forensic_audit.html

  19. Which of the following audit risk is related to exposure of a process or entity to be audited without taking into account the control that management has implemented?

    • Inherent Risk
    • Control Risk
    • Detection Risk
    • Overall Audit Risk
    Explanation:

    Inherent Risk is the risk level or exposure of a process or entity to be audited without taking into account the control that management has implemented. Inherent risk exists independent of an audit and can occur because of the nature of the business.

    For your exam you should know below information about audit risk:

    Audit risk (also referred to as residual risk) refers to the risk that an auditor may issue unqualified report due to the auditor’s failure to detect material misstatement either due to error or fraud. This risk is composed of inherent risk (IR), control risk (CR) and detection risk (DR), and can be calculated thus:

    AR = IR × CR × DR

    Inherent Risk

    Auditors must determine risks when working with clients. One type of risk to be aware of is inherent risk. While assessing this level of risk, you ignore whether the client has internal controls in place (such as a secondary review of financial statements) in order to help mitigate the inherent risk. You consider the strength of the internal controls when assessing the client’s control risk. Your job when assessing inherent risk is to evaluate how susceptible the financial statement assertions are to material misstatement given the nature of the client’s business. A few key factors can increase inherent risk.

    Environment and external factors: Here are some examples of environment and external factors that can lead to high inherent risk:

    Rapid change: A business whose inventory becomes obsolete quickly experiences high inherent risk.
    Expiring patents: Any business in the pharmaceutical industry also has inherently risky environment and external factors. Drug patents eventually expire, which means the company faces competition from other manufacturers marketing the same drug under a generic label.
    State of the economy: The general level of economic growth is another external factor affecting all businesses.
    Availability of financing: Another external factor is interest rates and the associated availability of financing. If your client is having problems meeting its short-term cash payments, available loans with low interest rates may mean the difference between your client staying in business or having to close its doors.
    Prior-period misstatements: If a company has made mistakes in prior years that weren’t material (meaning they weren’t significant enough to have to change), those errors still exist in the financial statements. You have to aggregate prior-period misstatements with current year misstatements to see if you need to ask the client to adjust the account for the total misstatement.

    You may think an understatement in one year compensates for an overstatement in another year. In auditing, this assumption isn’t true. Say you work a cash register and one night the register comes up $20 short. The next week, you somehow came up $20 over my draw count. The $20 differences are added together to represent the total amount of your mistakes which is $40 and not zero. Zero would indicate no mistakes at all had occurred.

    Susceptibility to theft or fraud: If a certain asset is susceptible to theft or fraud, the account or balance level may be considered inherently risky. For example, if a client has a lot of customers who pay in cash, the balance sheet cash account is going to have risk associated with theft or fraud because of the fact that cash is more easily diverted than customer checks or credit card payments.

    Looking at industry statistics relating to inventory theft, you may also decide to consider the inventory account as inherently risky. Small inventory items can further increase the risk of this account valuation being incorrect because those items are easier to conceal (and therefore easier to steal).

    Control Risk
    Control risk has been defined under International Standards of Auditing (ISAs) as following:

    The risk that a misstatement that could occur in an assertion about a class of transaction, account balance or disclosure and that could be material, either individually or when aggregated with other misstatements, will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis by the entity’s internal control.

    In simple words control risk is the probability that a material misstatement exists in an assertion because that misstatement was not either prevented from entering entity’s financial information or it was not detected and corrected by the internal control system of the entity.

    It is the responsibility of the management and those charged with governance to implement internal control system and maintain it appropriately which includes managing control risk.

    There can be many reasons for control risk to arise and why it cannot be eliminated absolutely. But some of them are as follows:

    Cost-benefit constraints
    Circumvention of controls
    Inappropriate design of controls
    Inappropriate application of controls
    Lack of control environment and accountability
    Novel situations
    Outdated controls
    Inappropriate segregation of duties

    Detection Risk
    Detection Risk is the risk that the auditors fail to detect a material misstatement in the financial statements.
    An auditor must apply audit procedures to detect material misstatements in the financial statements whether due to fraud or error. Misapplication or omission of critical audit procedures may result in a material misstatement remaining undetected by the auditor. Some detection risk is always present due to the inherent limitations of the audit such as the use of sampling for the selection of transactions.
    Detection risk can be reduced by auditors by increasing the number of sampled transactions for detailed testing.

    The following answers are incorrect:
    Control Risk – The risk that material error exist that would not be prevented or detected on timely basis by the system of internal controls.

    Detection risk – The risk that material errors or misstatements that have occurred will not be detected by an IS auditor.
    Overall audit risk – The probability that information or financial report may contain material errors and that the auditor may not detect an error that has occurred. An objective in formulating the audit approach is to limit the audit risk in the area under security so the overall audit risk is at sufficiently low level at the completion of the examination.

    Reference:

    CISA review manual 2014 page number 50
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audit_risk
    http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-to-assess-inherent-risk-in-an-audit.html
    http://pakaccountants.com/what-is-control-risk/
    http://accounting-simplified.com/audit/risk-assessment/audit-risk.html

  20. Which of the following audit risk is related to material error exist that would not be prevented or detected on timely basis by the system of internal controls?

    • Inherent Risk
    • Control Risk
    • Detection Risk
    • Overall Audit Risk
    Explanation:

    The risk that material error exist that would not be prevented or detected on timely basis by the system of internal controls. For example, the control risk associated with manual review could be high because activities requiring investigation are often easily missed due to the volume of logged information.

    For your exam you should know below information about audit risk:

    Audit risk (also referred to as residual risk) refers to the risk that an auditor may issue unqualified report due to the auditor’s failure to detect material misstatement either due to error or fraud. This risk is composed of inherent risk (IR), control risk (CR) and detection risk (DR), and can be calculated thus:

    AR = IR × CR × DR

    Inherent Risk
    Auditors must determine risks when working with clients. One type of risk to be aware of is inherent risk. While assessing this level of risk, you ignore whether the client has internal controls in place (such as a secondary review of financial statements) in order to help mitigate the inherent risk. You consider the strength of the internal controls when assessing the client’s control risk. Your job when assessing inherent risk is to evaluate how susceptible the financial statement assertions are to material misstatement given the nature of the client’s business. A few key factors can increase inherent risk.

    Environment and external factors: Here are some examples of environment and external factors that can lead to high inherent risk:

    Rapid change: A business whose inventory becomes obsolete quickly experiences high inherent risk.
    Expiring patents: Any business in the pharmaceutical industry also has inherently risky environment and external factors. Drug patents eventually expire, which means the company faces competition from other manufacturers marketing the same drug under a generic label.
    State of the economy: The general level of economic growth is another external factor affecting all businesses.
    Availability of financing: Another external factor is interest rates and the associated availability of financing. If your client is having problems meeting its short-term cash payments, available loans with low interest rates may mean the difference between your client staying in business or having to close its doors.
    Prior-period misstatements: If a company has made mistakes in prior years that weren’t material (meaning they weren’t significant enough to have to change), those errors still exist in the financial statements. You have to aggregate prior-period misstatements with current year misstatements to see if you need to ask the client to adjust the account for the total misstatement.

    You may think an understatement in one year compensates for an overstatement in another year. In auditing, this assumption isn’t true. Say you work a cash register and one night the register comes up $20 short. The next week, you somehow came up $20 over my draw count. The $20 differences are added together to represent the total amount of your mistakes which is $40 and not zero. Zero would indicate no mistakes at all had occurred.

    Susceptibility to theft or fraud: If a certain asset is susceptible to theft or fraud, the account or balance level may be considered inherently risky. For example, if a client has a lot of customers who pay in cash, the balance sheet cash account is going to have risk associated with theft or fraud because of the fact that cash is more easily diverted than customer checks or credit card payments.

    Looking at industry statistics relating to inventory theft, you may also decide to consider the inventory account as inherently risky. Small inventory items can further increase the risk of this account valuation being incorrect because those items are easier to conceal (and therefore easier to steal).

    Control Risk
    Control risk has been defined under International Standards of Auditing (ISAs) as following:

    The risk that a misstatement that could occur in an assertion about a class of transaction, account balance or disclosure and that could be material, either individually or when aggregated with other misstatements, will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis by the entity’s internal control.

    In simple words control risk is the probability that a material misstatement exists in an assertion because that misstatement was not either prevented from entering entity’s financial information or it was not detected and corrected by the internal control system of the entity.

    It is the responsibility of the management and those charged with governance to implement internal control system and maintain it appropriately which includes managing control risk.

    There can be many reasons for control risk to arise and why it cannot be eliminated absolutely. But some of them are as follows:

    Cost-benefit constraints
    Circumvention of controls
    Inappropriate design of controls
    Inappropriate application of controls
    Lack of control environment and accountability
    Novel situations
    Outdated controls
    Inappropriate segregation of duties

    Detection Risk
    Detection Risk is the risk that the auditors fail to detect a material misstatement in the financial statements.
    An auditor must apply audit procedures to detect material misstatements in the financial statements whether due to fraud or error. Misapplication or omission of critical audit procedures may result in a material misstatement remaining undetected by the auditor. Some detection risk is always present due to the inherent limitations of the audit such as the use of sampling for the selection of transactions.
    Detection risk can be reduced by auditors by increasing the number of sampled transactions for detailed testing.

    The following answers are incorrect:

    Inherent Risk – It is the risk level or exposure of a process or entity to be audited without taking into account the control that management has implemented.

    Detection risk – The risk that material errors or misstatements that have occurred will not be detected by an IS auditor.
    Overall audit risk – The probability that information or financial report may contain material errors and that the auditor may not detect an error that has occurred. An objective in formulating the audit approach is to limit the audit risk in the area under security so the overall audit risk is at sufficiently low level at the completion of the examination.

    Reference:

    CISA review manual 2014 page number 50
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audit_risk
    http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-to-assess-inherent-risk-in-an-audit.html
    http://pakaccountants.com/what-is-control-risk/
    http://accounting-simplified.com/audit/risk-assessment/audit-risk.html