CISA-KR 문제 21
IS 감사인은 공급업체가 폐업했고 에스크로에 이전 버전의 소스 코드가 있음을 발견했습니다. 감사인이 조직에 대해 가장 권장하는 사항은 무엇입니까?
정답: C
Explanation
This means that the organization should obtain the source code from the escrow agent and compare it with the current version of the application that they are using. The organization should then identify and apply any changes or updates that are missing or different in the escrow version, so that it matches the current version.
This way, the organization can ensure that they have a complete and accurate copy of the source code that reflects their current needs and requirements.
Bringing the escrow version up to date can help the organization to avoid or reduce the risks and costs associated with using an outdated or incompatible version of the source code. For example, an older version of the source code may have bugs, errors, or vulnerabilities that could affect the functionality, security, or performance of the application. An older version of the source code may also lack some features, enhancements, or integrations that could improve the usability, efficiency, or value of the application. An older version of the source code may also not comply with some standards, regulations, or contracts that could affect the quality, reliability, or legality of the application1.
The other options are not as good as bringing the escrow version up to date for the organization. Option A, analyzing a new application that meets the current requirements, is a possible option but it may be more time-consuming, expensive, and risky than updating the existing application. The organization may have to go through a complex and lengthy process of selecting, acquiring, implementing, testing, and migrating to a new application, which could disrupt their operations and performance. The organization may also have to deal with compatibility, interoperability, or data quality issues when switching to a new application2. Option B, performing an analysis to determine the business risk, is a necessary step but not a recommendation for the organization. The organization should already be aware of the business risk of using an application whose vendor has gone out of business and whose escrow has an older version of the source code. The organization should focus on finding and implementing a solution to mitigate or eliminate this risk3. Option D, developing a maintenance plan to support the application using the existing code, is not a feasible option because it assumes that the organization has access to the existing code. However, this is not the case because the vendor has gone out of business and the escrow has an older version of the source code. The organization cannot support or maintain an application without having a complete and accurate copy of its source code.
References:
How Important Is Source Code Escrow - ISACA1
The What and Why of Source Code Escrow2
Unlocking Source Code In Escrow 2023: A Guide To Secure Software3
This means that the organization should obtain the source code from the escrow agent and compare it with the current version of the application that they are using. The organization should then identify and apply any changes or updates that are missing or different in the escrow version, so that it matches the current version.
This way, the organization can ensure that they have a complete and accurate copy of the source code that reflects their current needs and requirements.
Bringing the escrow version up to date can help the organization to avoid or reduce the risks and costs associated with using an outdated or incompatible version of the source code. For example, an older version of the source code may have bugs, errors, or vulnerabilities that could affect the functionality, security, or performance of the application. An older version of the source code may also lack some features, enhancements, or integrations that could improve the usability, efficiency, or value of the application. An older version of the source code may also not comply with some standards, regulations, or contracts that could affect the quality, reliability, or legality of the application1.
The other options are not as good as bringing the escrow version up to date for the organization. Option A, analyzing a new application that meets the current requirements, is a possible option but it may be more time-consuming, expensive, and risky than updating the existing application. The organization may have to go through a complex and lengthy process of selecting, acquiring, implementing, testing, and migrating to a new application, which could disrupt their operations and performance. The organization may also have to deal with compatibility, interoperability, or data quality issues when switching to a new application2. Option B, performing an analysis to determine the business risk, is a necessary step but not a recommendation for the organization. The organization should already be aware of the business risk of using an application whose vendor has gone out of business and whose escrow has an older version of the source code. The organization should focus on finding and implementing a solution to mitigate or eliminate this risk3. Option D, developing a maintenance plan to support the application using the existing code, is not a feasible option because it assumes that the organization has access to the existing code. However, this is not the case because the vendor has gone out of business and the escrow has an older version of the source code. The organization cannot support or maintain an application without having a complete and accurate copy of its source code.
References:
How Important Is Source Code Escrow - ISACA1
The What and Why of Source Code Escrow2
Unlocking Source Code In Escrow 2023: A Guide To Secure Software3
CISA-KR 문제 22
CFO는 월말 보고 중 일련의 재무 시스템 속도 저하로 인해 IT 용량 관리 감사를 요청했습니다. 이 감사를 프로그램에 포함하기 전에 고려해야 할 가장 중요한 것은 무엇입니까?
정답: B
Explanation
The most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program is whether the system's performance poses a significant risk to the organization. IT capacity management is a process that ensures that IT resources are sufficient to meet current and future business needs, and that they are optimized for cost and performance. A poor IT capacity management can result in system slowdowns, outages, failures, or breaches, which can affect the availability, reliability, security, and efficiency of IT services and business processes. Therefore, before conducting an audit of IT capacity management, the auditor should assess the potential impact and likelihood of these risks on the organization's objectives, reputation, compliance, and customer satisfaction.
Whether system delays result in more frequent use of manual processing (option A) is not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is only one possible consequence of poor IT capacity management. Manual processing can introduce errors, delays, inefficiencies, and inconsistencies in the data and reports, which can affect the quality and accuracy of financial information. However, manual processing is not the only or the worst outcome of poor IT capacity management; there may be other more severe or frequent risks that need to be considered.
Whether stakeholders are committed to assisting with the audit (option C) is also not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is a factor that affects the feasibility and effectiveness of the audit, not the necessity or priority of it. Stakeholder commitment is important for ensuring that the auditor has access to relevant information, documents, data, and personnel, as well as for facilitating communication, collaboration, and feedback during the audit process. However, stakeholder commitment is not a sufficient reason to conduct an audit of IT capacity management; there must be a clear risk-based rationale for selecting this area for audit.
Whether internal auditors have the required skills to perform the audit (option D) is also not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is a factor that affects the quality and credibility of the audit, not the urgency or importance of it. Internal auditors should have the appropriate knowledge, skills, and experience to perform an audit of IT capacity management, which may include technical, business, analytical, and communication skills. However, internal auditors can also acquire or supplement these skills through training, coaching, consulting, or outsourcing. Therefore, internal auditors' skills are not a decisive factor for choosing this area for audit.
Therefore, option B is the correct answer.
References:
Guide to IT Capacity Management | Smartsheet
ISO 27001 capacity management: How to implement control A.12.1.3 - Advisera ISO 27002:2022 - Control 8.6 - Capacity Management
The most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program is whether the system's performance poses a significant risk to the organization. IT capacity management is a process that ensures that IT resources are sufficient to meet current and future business needs, and that they are optimized for cost and performance. A poor IT capacity management can result in system slowdowns, outages, failures, or breaches, which can affect the availability, reliability, security, and efficiency of IT services and business processes. Therefore, before conducting an audit of IT capacity management, the auditor should assess the potential impact and likelihood of these risks on the organization's objectives, reputation, compliance, and customer satisfaction.
Whether system delays result in more frequent use of manual processing (option A) is not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is only one possible consequence of poor IT capacity management. Manual processing can introduce errors, delays, inefficiencies, and inconsistencies in the data and reports, which can affect the quality and accuracy of financial information. However, manual processing is not the only or the worst outcome of poor IT capacity management; there may be other more severe or frequent risks that need to be considered.
Whether stakeholders are committed to assisting with the audit (option C) is also not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is a factor that affects the feasibility and effectiveness of the audit, not the necessity or priority of it. Stakeholder commitment is important for ensuring that the auditor has access to relevant information, documents, data, and personnel, as well as for facilitating communication, collaboration, and feedback during the audit process. However, stakeholder commitment is not a sufficient reason to conduct an audit of IT capacity management; there must be a clear risk-based rationale for selecting this area for audit.
Whether internal auditors have the required skills to perform the audit (option D) is also not the most important thing to consider before including an audit of IT capacity management in the program, as it is a factor that affects the quality and credibility of the audit, not the urgency or importance of it. Internal auditors should have the appropriate knowledge, skills, and experience to perform an audit of IT capacity management, which may include technical, business, analytical, and communication skills. However, internal auditors can also acquire or supplement these skills through training, coaching, consulting, or outsourcing. Therefore, internal auditors' skills are not a decisive factor for choosing this area for audit.
Therefore, option B is the correct answer.
References:
Guide to IT Capacity Management | Smartsheet
ISO 27001 capacity management: How to implement control A.12.1.3 - Advisera ISO 27002:2022 - Control 8.6 - Capacity Management
CISA-KR 문제 23
다음 중 데이터 분류 프로세스에서 가장 중요한 활동은 무엇입니까?
정답: C
Explanation
Determining accountability of data owners is the most important activity in the data classification process.
Data classification is a process that assigns categories or labels to data based on their value, sensitivity, criticality and risk to the organization. Data classification helps to determine the appropriate level of protection, access and retention for data. Determining accountability of data owners is an activity that identifies and assigns roles and responsibilities for data classification, protection and management to individuals or functions within the organization. Data owners are individuals or functions who have authority and responsibility for defining, classifying, protecting and managing data throughout their lifecycle.
Determining accountability of data owners is essential for ensuring that data are classified correctly and consistently, and that data classification policies and procedures are followed and enforced. The other options are not as important as option C, as they are dependent on or derived from the accountability of data owners.
Labeling the data appropriately is an activity that applies the categories or labels assigned by data owners to data based on their classification criteria. Identifying risk associated with the data is an activity that assesses the potential impact and likelihood of loss, disclosure, modification or destruction of data based on their classification level. Determining the adequacy of privacy controls is an activity that evaluates whether the controls implemented to protect personal or sensitive data are sufficient and effective based on their classification level. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) , Chapter 5: Protection of Information Assets, Section 5.3: Data Classification.
Determining accountability of data owners is the most important activity in the data classification process.
Data classification is a process that assigns categories or labels to data based on their value, sensitivity, criticality and risk to the organization. Data classification helps to determine the appropriate level of protection, access and retention for data. Determining accountability of data owners is an activity that identifies and assigns roles and responsibilities for data classification, protection and management to individuals or functions within the organization. Data owners are individuals or functions who have authority and responsibility for defining, classifying, protecting and managing data throughout their lifecycle.
Determining accountability of data owners is essential for ensuring that data are classified correctly and consistently, and that data classification policies and procedures are followed and enforced. The other options are not as important as option C, as they are dependent on or derived from the accountability of data owners.
Labeling the data appropriately is an activity that applies the categories or labels assigned by data owners to data based on their classification criteria. Identifying risk associated with the data is an activity that assesses the potential impact and likelihood of loss, disclosure, modification or destruction of data based on their classification level. Determining the adequacy of privacy controls is an activity that evaluates whether the controls implemented to protect personal or sensitive data are sufficient and effective based on their classification level. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) , Chapter 5: Protection of Information Assets, Section 5.3: Data Classification.
CISA-KR 문제 24
새로운 전자 상거래 시스템에 대한 데이터베이스 제어를 검토하는 IS 감사자는 데이터베이스 구성에서 보안 취약점을 발견했습니다. 다음 중 IS 감사인이 취해야 할 다음 조치는 무엇입니까?
정답: A
Explanation
When an IS auditor discovers a security weakness in the database configuration, the next course of action should be to identify existing mitigating controls. This involves assessing whether any controls are already in place to address the weakness and mitigate the risk. Understanding the current state of controls helps the auditor determine the severity of the issue and whether additional corrective actions are necessary1. References: 1(https://www.isaca.org/resources/insights-and-expertise/audit-programs-and-tools)
When an IS auditor discovers a security weakness in the database configuration, the next course of action should be to identify existing mitigating controls. This involves assessing whether any controls are already in place to address the weakness and mitigate the risk. Understanding the current state of controls helps the auditor determine the severity of the issue and whether additional corrective actions are necessary1. References: 1(https://www.isaca.org/resources/insights-and-expertise/audit-programs-and-tools)
CISA-KR 문제 25
IS 감사인이 향후 감사의 범위에서 지원되지 않는 오래된 기술을 사용하는 산업 제어 시스템(ICS)을 검토하고 있습니다. 감사인은 무엇을 가장 중요한 관심사로 간주해야 합니까?
정답: B
Explanation
The most significant concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an industrial control system (ICS) that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit is that there is a greater risk of system exploitation. System exploitation is an attack that occurs when an unauthorized entity or individual takes advantage of a vulnerability or weakness in a system to compromise its security or functionality. System exploitation can cause harm or damage to the system or its users, such as data loss, corruption, theft, manipulation, denial of service (DoS), etc. An ICS that uses older unsupported technology poses a high risk of system exploitation, as older technology may have known or unknown vulnerabilities or defects that have not been patched or fixed by the vendor or manufacturer, and unsupported technology may not receive any updates or support from the vendor or manufacturer in case of issues or incidents. Attack vectors are evolving for industrial control systems is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. Attack vectors are methods or pathways that attackers use to gain access to or attack a system. Attack vectors are evolving for industrial control systems, as attackers are developing new techniques or tools to target ICSs that are increasingly connected and complex. However, this concern may not be specific to older unsupported technology, as it may affect any ICS regardless of its technology level. Disaster recovery plans (DRPs) are not in place is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. DRPs are documents that outline the technical and operational steps for restoring the IT systems and infrastructure that support critical functions or processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. DRPs are not in place, as they may affect the availability and continuity of the ICS and its functions or processes in case of a failure or incident. However, this concern may not be related to older unsupported technology, as it may apply to any ICS regardless of its technology level.
Technical specifications are not documented is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. Technical specifications are documents that describe the technical characteristics or requirements of a system or component, such as functionality, performance, design, etc. Technical specifications are not documented, as they may affect the understanding, maintenance, and improvement of the ICS and its components. However, this concern may not be associated with older unsupported technology, as it may affect any ICS regardless of its technology level.
The most significant concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an industrial control system (ICS) that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit is that there is a greater risk of system exploitation. System exploitation is an attack that occurs when an unauthorized entity or individual takes advantage of a vulnerability or weakness in a system to compromise its security or functionality. System exploitation can cause harm or damage to the system or its users, such as data loss, corruption, theft, manipulation, denial of service (DoS), etc. An ICS that uses older unsupported technology poses a high risk of system exploitation, as older technology may have known or unknown vulnerabilities or defects that have not been patched or fixed by the vendor or manufacturer, and unsupported technology may not receive any updates or support from the vendor or manufacturer in case of issues or incidents. Attack vectors are evolving for industrial control systems is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. Attack vectors are methods or pathways that attackers use to gain access to or attack a system. Attack vectors are evolving for industrial control systems, as attackers are developing new techniques or tools to target ICSs that are increasingly connected and complex. However, this concern may not be specific to older unsupported technology, as it may affect any ICS regardless of its technology level. Disaster recovery plans (DRPs) are not in place is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. DRPs are documents that outline the technical and operational steps for restoring the IT systems and infrastructure that support critical functions or processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. DRPs are not in place, as they may affect the availability and continuity of the ICS and its functions or processes in case of a failure or incident. However, this concern may not be related to older unsupported technology, as it may apply to any ICS regardless of its technology level.
Technical specifications are not documented is a possible concern for an IS auditor when reviewing an ICS that uses older unsupported technology in the scope of an upcoming audit, but it is not the most significant one. Technical specifications are documents that describe the technical characteristics or requirements of a system or component, such as functionality, performance, design, etc. Technical specifications are not documented, as they may affect the understanding, maintenance, and improvement of the ICS and its components. However, this concern may not be associated with older unsupported technology, as it may affect any ICS regardless of its technology level.
프리미엄 번들
DumpTop 에서 공유하는 최신 CISA-KR 시험 덤프는 CISA-KR 시험패스를 도와드릴수 있습니다! DumpTop 은 최근 업데이트된 CISA-KR 시험자료를 제공해드립니다. DumpTop CISA-KR 덤프도 시험문제 변경에 따라 업데이트되었으며 오답도 수정되었습니다. DumpTop CISA-KR 덤프 최신버전을 공유받아보세요.
(1605 Q&As 덤프, 30%OFF할인코드: KrDump)
- 다른 버전
- 2293ISACA.CISA-KR.v2026-08-27.q676
- 4330ISACA.CISA-KR.v2026-08-15.q712
- 6837ISACA.CISA-KR.v2026-05-16.q709
- 2711ISACA.CISA-KR.v2026-05-06.q261
- 4577ISACA.CISA-KR.v2026-03-16.q665
- 6537ISACA.CISA-KR.v2026-03-07.q651
- 10973ISACA.CISA-KR.v2025-04-07.q633
- 5657ISACA.CISA-KR.v2025-04-03.q628
- 4717ISACA.CISA-KR.v2025-04-02.q544
- 5260ISACA.CISA-KR.v2025-03-31.q534
- 6640ISACA.CISA-KR.v2025-03-28.q617
- 4263ISACA.CISA-KR.v2025-03-19.q581
- 5394ISACA.CISA-KR.v2025-03-03.q807
- 5978ISACA.CISA-KR.v2024-02-07.q421
- 5914ISACA.CISA-KR.v2023-10-24.q329
- 5707ISACA.CISA-KR.v2023-07-31.q266
- 3775ISACA.CISA-KR.v2023-06-23.q324
- 최근 업로드
- 171PaloAltoNetworks.XSIAM-Analyst.v2026-10-15.q75
- 171Splunk.SPLK-1002.v2026-10-15.q187
- 130Workday.Workday-Adaptive-Planning.v2026-10-15.q23
- 139AIChE.CCPSC.v2026-10-15.q37
- 201API.API-571.v2026-10-15.q131
- 128Microsoft.AB-210.v2026-10-14.q58
- 127Huawei.H12-893_V1.0.v2026-10-14.q46
- 164UiPath.UiPath-ADPv1.v2026-10-14.q114
- 184Salesforce.MCE-Dev-201.v2026-10-14.q64
- 139PMI.PMI-RMP.v2026-10-14.q125
[×]
PDF 파일 다운로드
메일 주소를 입력하시고 다운로드 하세요. ISACA.CISA-KR.v2024-01-31.q392 모의시험 시험자료를 다운 받으세요.