ISACA CISA Certified Information Systems Auditor Exam Questions and Answers – 35

The latest ISACA CISA (Certified Information Systems Auditor) certification actual real practice exam question and answer (Q&A) dumps are available free, which are helpful for you to pass the ISACA CISA exam and earn ISACA CISA certification.

CISA Question 3631

Question

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

A. Compliance Audit
B. Financial Audit
C. Integrated Audit
D. Forensic audit

Answer

D. 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.

CISA Question 3632

Question

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

A. Compliance Audit
B. Financial Audit
C. Integrated Audit
D. Forensic audit

Answer

C. Integrated 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.

CISA Question 3633

Question

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

A. Compliance Audit
B. Financial Audit
C. Operational Audit
D. Forensic audit

Answer

C. Operational 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.

CISA Question 3634

Question

Which of the following audit assess accuracy of financial reporting?

A. Compliance Audit
B. Financial Audit
C. Operational Audit
D. Forensic audit

Answer

B. Financial 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 futureoriented, 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.

CISA Question 3635

Question

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

A. Compliance Audit
B. Financial Audit
C. Operational Audit
D. Forensic audit

Answer

A. Compliance 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 futureoriented, 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.

CISA Question 3636

Question

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

A. OS Upgrade
B. Backup and restore
C. Contingency planning
D. System Monitoring

Answer

D. 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.

CISA Question 3637

Question

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

A. Physical access control like locks and door
B. User login screen which allows only authorize user to access website
C. Encrypt the data so that only authorize user can view the same
D. Duplicate checking of a calculations

Answer

C. Encrypt the data so that only authorize user can view the same

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.

CISA Question 3638

Question

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

A. Deterrent
B. Preventive
C. Detective
D. Compensating

Answer

D. 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

CISA Question 3639

Question

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

A. Deterrent
B. Preventive
C. Detective
D. Compensating

Answer

C. Detective

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.
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

CISA Question 3640

Question

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

A. Deterrent
B. Preventive
C. Corrective
D. Recovery

Answer

D. 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.
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