매달, 우리는 1000명 이상의 사람들이 시험 준비를 잘하고 시험을 잘 통과할 수 있도록 도와줍니다.
Certified Information Systems Auditor 온라인 연습
최종 업데이트 시간: 2026년02월14일
당신은 온라인 연습 문제를 통해 ISACA CISA 시험지식에 대해 자신이 어떻게 알고 있는지 파악한 후 시험 참가 신청 여부를 결정할 수 있다.
시험을 100% 합격하고 시험 준비 시간을 35% 절약하기를 바라며 CISA 덤프 (최신 실제 시험 문제)를 사용 선택하여 현재 최신 693개의 시험 문제와 답을 포함하십시오.
정답:
Explanation:
The most important thing for the auditor to confirm when sourcing the population data for testing accounts payable controls by performing data analytics is that the data is taken directly from the system. Taking the data directly from the system can help ensure that the data is authentic, complete, and accurate, and that it has not been manipulated or modified by any intermediary sources or processes. The other options are not as important as taking the data directly from the system, as they do not affect the validity or reliability of the data. There is no privacy information in the data is a privacy concern that can help protect the confidentiality and integrity of personal or sensitive data, but it does not affect the accuracy or completeness of the data. The data can be obtained in a timely manner is a logistical concern that can help facilitate the efficiency and effectiveness of the data analytics process, but it does not affect the authenticity or accuracy of the data. The data analysis tools have been recently updated is a technical concern that can helpenhance the functionality and performance of the data analytics tools, but it does not affect the validity or reliability of the data.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2
정답:
Explanation:
The most important task before implementing any associated email controls to prevent sensitive information from being emailed outside the organization by employees is to develop an information classification scheme. An information classification scheme is a framework that defines the categories and levels of sensitivity for different types of information, such as public, internal, confidential, or secret. An information classification scheme can help implement email controls by providing criteria and guidelines for identifying, labeling, handling, and protecting sensitive information in email attachments. The other options are not as important as developing an information classification scheme, as they do not address the root cause of the problem or provide the same benefits. Requiring all employees to sign nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) is a legal control that can help deter or penalize employees from disclosing sensitive information, but it does not prevent them from emailing it outside the organization. Developing an acceptable use policy for end-user computing (EUC) is a governance control that can help define and communicate the rules and expectations for using IT resources, such as email, but it does not prevent employees from emailing sensitive information outside the organization. Providing notification to employees about possible email monitoring is a transparency control that can help inform and warn employees about the potential consequences of emailing sensitive information outside the organization, but it does not prevent them from doing so.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2
정답:
Explanation:
The best recommendation to address the risk of privileged application accounts with passwords set to never expire in a 24/7 processing environment is to introduce database access monitoring into the environment. Database access monitoring is a security control that tracks and records all activities and transactions performed on a database, especially by privileged users or accounts. Database access monitoring can help address the risk of privileged application accounts with passwords set to never expire by detecting and alerting any unauthorized or abnormal access or actions on the database. The other options are not as effective as database access monitoring in addressing the risk, as they may cause disruption to the business or violate the access management policy. Modifying applications to no longer require direct access to the database is a complex and costly solution that may affect the functionality or performance of the applications, and it may not be feasible or practical in a 24/7 processing environment. Modifying the access management policy to make allowances for application accounts is a risky solution that may create exceptions or loopholes in the policy, and it may not comply with the best practices or standards for password management. Scheduling downtime to implement password changes is a disruptive solution that may affect the availability or continuity of the systems or applications, and it may not be acceptable or possible in a 24/7 processing environment.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.2.4
정답:
Explanation:
The primary reason for an IS auditor to conduct post-implementation reviews is to determine whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. A post-implementation review is an audit activity that evaluates whether a project has delivered its expected outcomes or benefits in accordance with its objectives, scope, budget, and schedule. A business case is a document that defines and justifies the need, value, and feasibility of a project. A post-implementation review can help assess whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved by comparing actual results with planned expectations and identifying any gaps or deviations. The other options are not primary reasons for conducting post-implementation reviews, as they do not measure whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. Ensuring key stakeholder sign-off has been obtained is a project closure activity that confirms that all project deliverables have been completed and accepted by key stakeholders, but it does not evaluate whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. Aligning project objectives with business needs is a project initiation activity that ensures that the project is aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and priorities, but it does not evaluate whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved. Documenting lessons learned to improve future project delivery is a project learning activity that captures and shares the knowledge, experience, and feedback gained from the project, but it does not evaluate whether project objectives in the business case have been achieved.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3
정답:
Explanation:
The best recommendation for a small IT web development company where developers must have write access to production is to remove production access from the developers. Production access is the ability to modify or update the live systems or applications that are used by customers or end users. Production access should be restricted to authorized and qualified personnel only, as any changes or errors in production can affect the functionality, performance, or security of the systems or applications. Developers should not have write access to production, as they may introduce bugs, vulnerabilities, or inconsistencies in the code that can compromise the quality or reliability of the systems or applications. The other options are not as effective as removing production access from the developers, as they do not address the root cause of the problem or provide the same benefits. Hiring another person to perform migration to production is a costly solution that can help segregate the roles and responsibilities of developers and migrators, but it does not remove production access from the developers. Implementing continuous monitoring controls is a good practice that can help detect and correct any issues or anomalies in production, but it does not remove production access from the developers. Performing a user access review for the development team is a detective control that can help verify and validate the access rights and privileges of developers, but it does not remove production access from the developers.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2
정답:
Explanation:
The best method to prevent wire transfer fraud by bank employees is system-enforced dual control. System-enforced dual control is a segregation of duties control that requires two or more individuals to perform or authorize a transaction or activity using a system that enforces this requirement.
System-enforced dual control can prevent wire transfer fraud by requiring independent verification and approval of payment requests, amounts, and recipients by different bank employees using a system that does not allow any single employee to complete the transaction alone. The other options are not as effective as system-enforced dual control in preventing wire transfer fraud, as they do not involve independent checks or approvals using a system. Independent reconciliation is a detective control that can help compare and confirm payment records with bank statements, but it does not prevent wire transfer fraud from occurring. Re-keying of wire dollar amounts is an input control that can help detect any errors or discrepancies in payment amounts, but it does not prevent wire transfer fraud from occurring. Two-factor authentication control is an access control that can help verify the identity and authorization of bank employees, but it does not prevent wire transfer fraud from occurring.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2
정답:
Explanation:
The IS auditor should inform audit management of the earlier involvement in designing the application. This is to ensure that there is no conflict of interest or bias that may affect the objectivity or independence of the audit. Audit management can then decide whether to assign a different auditor or to proceed with the same auditor with appropriate safeguards. The other options are not appropriate for the IS auditor to do in this situation. Refusing the assignment to avoid conflict of interest is an extreme measure that may not be necessary or feasible, especially if there are no other qualified auditors available. Using the knowledge of the application to carry out the audit is risky, as it may lead to overlooking or ignoring potential issues or errors in the application. Modifying the scope of the audit is not advisable, as it may compromise the quality or completeness of the audit.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.1
정답:
Explanation:
The best recommendation for an organization that is unable to add new servers on demand in a cost-efficient manner is to build a virtual environment. A virtual environment is a technology that allows multiple virtual machines to run on a single physical server, sharing its resources and capabilities. A virtual environment can help the organization add new servers on demand in a cost-efficient manner by reducing the need for hardware acquisition, maintenance, and power consumption. The other options are not as effective as building a virtual environment, as they do not address the root cause of the problem or provide the same benefits. Increasing the capacity of existing systems is a short-term solution that can help improve the performance and availability of the current servers, but it does not enable the organization to add new servers on demand in a cost-efficient manner. Upgrading hardware to newer technology is a costly solution that can help enhance the functionality and reliability of the servers, but it does not enable the organization to add new servers on demand in a cost-efficient manner. Hiring temporary contract workers for the IT function is an irrelevant solution that can help supplement the IT staff’s skills and knowledge, but it does not enable the organization to add new servers on demand in a cost-efficient manner.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1
정답:
Explanation:
The best recommendation to facilitate compliance with the regulation that requires organizations to report significant security incidents to the regulator within 24 hours of identification is to include the requirement in the incident management response plan. An incident management response plan is a document that defines the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and tools for managing security incidents effectively and efficiently. Including the requirement in the incident management response plan can help ensure that security incidents are identified, classified, reported, and escalated in accordance with the regulation. The other options are not as effective as including the requirement in the incident management response plan, as they do not address all aspects of incident management or compliance. Establishing key performance indicators (KPIs) for timely identification of security incidents is a monitoring technique that can help measure and improve the performance of incident management processes, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation. Enhancing the alert functionality of the intrusion detection system (IDS) is a technical control that can help detect and notify security incidents faster, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation. Engaging an external security incident response expert for incident handling is a contingency measure that can help augment the organization’s internal capabilities and resources for managing security incidents, but it does not ensure compliance with the regulation.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2
정답:
Explanation:
The best recommendation to prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers by accounts payable employees is dual control. Dual control is a segregation of duties control that requires two or more individuals to perform or authorize a transaction or activity. Dual control can prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers by requiring independent verification and approval of payment requests, amounts, and recipients by different accounts payable employees. The other options are not as effective as dual control in preventing fraudulent electronic funds transfers, as they do not involve independent checks or approvals. Periodic vendor reviews are detective controls that can help identify any irregularities or anomalies in vendor payments, but they do not prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers from occurring. Independent reconciliation is a detective control that can help compare and confirm payment records with bank statements, but it does not prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers from occurring. Re-keying of monetary amounts is an input control that can help detect any errors or discrepancies in payment amounts, but it does not prevent fraudulentelectronic funds transfers from occurring.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2
정답:
Explanation:
The most important thing for an IS auditor to review when evaluating the accuracy of a spreadsheet that contains several macros is the formulas within macros. Macros are sequences of commands or instructions that can automate tasks or calculations in a spreadsheet. Formulas are expressions that perform calculations on values or data in a spreadsheet. The accuracy of a spreadsheet depends largely on whether the formulas within macros are correct, consistent, and complete. The IS auditor should review the formulas within macros to verify that they produce the expected results and do not contain any errors or inconsistencies. The other options are not as important as formulas within macros, as they do not directly affect the accuracy of a spreadsheet. Encryption of the spreadsheet is a security control that can protect the confidentiality and integrity of the spreadsheet, but it does not ensure its accuracy. Version history is a document control feature that can track and manage changes to the spreadsheet, but it does not verify its accuracy. Reconciliation of key calculations is a validation technique that can compare and confirm the results of calculations with other sources, but it does not evaluate the accuracy of formulas within macros.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2
정답:
Explanation:
The primary concern when negotiating a contract for a hot site is the availability of the site in the event of multiple disaster declarations. A hot site is a fully equipped alternative facility that can be used to resume business operations in the event of a disaster. However, if multiple clients of the hot site provider declare a disaster at the same time, there may be a shortage of resources or capacity to accommodate all of them. Therefore, the contract should specify the terms and conditions for ensuring the availability and priority of the hot site for the organization. The other options are not as important as availability, as they do not affect the ability to use the hot site in a disaster situation. Coordination with the site staff in the event of multiple disaster declarations is a logistical issue that can be resolved by communication and planning. Reciprocal agreements with other organizations are alternative arrangements that can be used to share resources or facilities in a disaster, but they may not be as reliable or suitable as a hot site. Complete testing of the recovery plan is a good practice that can help validate and improve the effectiveness of the recovery plan, but it is not a concern for negotiating a contract for a hot site.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4, Section 4.2.3
정답:
Explanation:
The IS auditor’s best course of action in this situation is to present observations for discussion only. Observations are factual statements or findings that are based on the audit evidence collected and analyzed during the audit. Observations can be presented to management for discussion and feedback, but they should not be considered as final conclusions or recommendations until the audit is completed and the audit report is issued. The other options are not appropriate for presenting the findings to date, as they may compromise the audit quality or integrity. Reviewing working papers with the auditee is not advisable, as working papers are confidential documents that contain the auditor’s notes, calculations, and opinions that may not be relevant or accurate for management’s review. Requesting the auditee provide management responses is premature, as management responses should be obtained after the audit report is issued and the audit findings andrecommendations are finalized. Requesting management wait until a final report is ready for discussion is impractical, as management may have a legitimate interest or need to know the audit progress and results as soon as possible.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.3
정답:
Explanation:
The IS auditor’s best course of action in this situation is to determine whether the alternative controls sufficiently mitigate the risk. Alternative controls are different from those originally discussed and agreed with the audit function, but they may still achieve the same objective of addressing the audit issue or reducing the risk to an acceptable level. The IS auditor should evaluate whether the alternative controls are appropriate, effective, and sustainable before closing the audit finding or escalating it to senior management. The other options are not appropriate for resolving this situation, as they do not consider whether the alternative controls are adequate or reasonable. Re-prioritizing the original issue as high risk and escalating to senior management is a drastic step that may undermine the relationship between the auditor and management, and it should be done only after exhausting other means of resolving the issue. Scheduling a follow-up audit in the next audit cycle is unnecessary, as follow-up activities should be performed as soon as possible after management has implemented corrective actions. Postponing follow-up activities and escalating the alternative controls to senior audit management is premature, as follow-up activities should be completed before reporting any findings or recommendations to senior audit management.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2, Section 2.4
정답:
Explanation:
The most effective method to verify that a service vendor keeps control levels as required by the client is to conduct periodic on-site assessments using agreed-upon criteria. On-site assessments can provide direct evidence of whether the vendor’s controls are operating effectively and consistently in accordance with the client’s expectations and requirements. Agreed-upon criteria can ensure that the assessments are objective, relevant, and reliable. The other options are not as effective as on-site assessments in verifying the vendor’s control levels. Periodically reviewing the SLA with the vendor can help monitor whether the vendor meets its contractual obligations and service standards, but it does not provide assurance of whether the vendor’s controls are adequate or sufficient. Conducting an unannounced vulnerability assessment of vendor’s IT systems can help identify any weaknesses or gaps in the vendor’s security controls, but it may violate the terms and conditions of the vendor-client relationship or cause operational disruptions. Obtaining evidence of the vendor’s CSA can provide some indication of whether the vendor’s controls are self-monitored and reported, but it does not verify whether the vendor’s controls are independent or accurate.
Reference: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 5, Section 5.4