Isaca CCAK - Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge

Risk reduction is a risk treatment approach where controls are implemented to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk event. In this scenario, while the SaaS is still in use, the organization has chosen to limit exposure by avoiding the processing of secret customer data, thus reducing the risk of unauthorized disclosure. This aligns with ISACA’s guidance in CCAK, which emphasizes limiting risk exposure by controlling data handling and processing policies, a practice that is documented in CSA’s Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) guidelines for data protection and data minimization (CSA CCM Domain DSI-05, Data Security and Information Lifecycle Management).

=========================

A double blind penetration test is a type of pen test where the hacker has no prior knowledge of the target’s defenses, assets, or channels, and the target’s security team is not notified in advance of the scope of the audit and the test vectors. This mode simulates a real-world attack scenario, where both the attacker and the defender have to rely on their skills and resources to achieve their objectives. A double blind penetration test can help evaluate the effectiveness of the target’s security posture, detection and response capabilities, and incident management procedures12.

References:

What is Penetration Testing | Step-By-Step Process & Methods | Imperva

7 Types of Penetration Testing: Guide to Pentest Methods & Types

 The objective that is most appropriate to measure the effectiveness of password policy is newly created account credentials satisfy requirements. This is because password policy is a set of rules and guidelines that define the characteristics and usage of passwords in a system or network. Password policy aims to enhance the security and confidentiality of the system or network by preventing unauthorized access, data breaches, and identity theft. Therefore, the best way to evaluate the effectiveness of password policy is to check whether the newly created account credentials meet the requirements of the policy, such as length, complexity, expiration, and history. This objective can be measured by conducting periodic audits, reviews, or tests of the account creation process and verifying that the passwords comply with the policy standards. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain IAM-02: User ID Credentials, which states that "The organization should have a policy and procedures to manage user ID credentials for cloud services and data."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 4: A Threat Analysis Methodology for Cloud Using CCM, page 76

The most effective way to enhance the internal stakeholder decision-making process for the remediation of risks identified from an organization’s cloud compliance program is to establish ownership and accountability for each risk and its corresponding control. Ownership and accountability mean that the stakeholders who are responsible for managing, implementing, monitoring, and reporting on the cloud compliance program have clearly defined roles, responsibilities, expectations, and authorities. Ownership and accountability also mean that the stakeholders who are affected by or involved in the cloud compliance program have sufficient awareness, communication, collaboration, and feedback mechanisms. Establishing ownership and accountability helps to ensure that the risks and controls are properly identified, assessed, prioritized, treated, and reviewed in a timely and consistent manner. It also helps to foster a culture of trust, transparency, and accountability among the internal stakeholders and to align their goals and interests with the organization’s cloud compliance objectives.1 [2][2]

References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 521; Cloud Compliance: A Framework for Using Cloud Services While Maintaining Data Protection Compliance[

The shift-left concept of code release cycles is an approach that moves testing, quality, and performance evaluation early in the development process, often before any code is written. The goal of shift-left testing is to anticipate and resolve software defects, bugs, errors, and vulnerabilities as soon as possible, reducing the cost and time of fixing them later in the production stage. To achieve this, shift-left testing relies on automation tools and techniques that enable continuous integration, continuous delivery, and continuous deployment of code. Automation also facilitates collaboration and feedback among developers, testers, security experts, and other stakeholders throughout the development lifecycle. Therefore, the incorporation of automation to identify and address software code problems early is a sign that an organization has adopted a shift-left concept of code release cycles. References:

The ‘Shift Left’ Is A Growing Theme For Cloud Cybersecurity In 2022

Shift left vs shift right: A DevOps mystery solved

How to shift left with continuous integration

The auditor’s next course of action should be to review the contract and DR capability of the cloud service provider. The contract should specify the roles and responsibilities of both parties regarding disaster recovery, as well as the service level agreements (SLAs) and recovery time objectives (RTOs) for the critical application. The DR capability should demonstrate that the cloud service provider has a plan that is aligned with the organization’s requirements and expectations, and that it is tested annually and validated by independent auditors. The auditor should also verify that the organization has a process to monitor and review the cloud service provider’s performance and compliance with the contract and SLAs.

Planning an audit of the provider (B) may not be feasible or necessary, as the auditor may not have access to the provider’s environment or data, and may not have the authority or expertise to conduct such an audit. The auditor should rely on the provider’s audit reports and certifications to assess their compliance with relevant standards and regulations.

Reviewing the security white paper of the provider © may not be sufficient or relevant, as the security white paper may not cover the specific aspects of disaster recovery for the critical application, or may not reflect the current state of the provider’s security controls and practices. The security white paper may also be biased or outdated, as it is produced by the provider themselves.

Reviewing the provider’s audit reports (D) may be helpful, but not enough, as the audit reports may not address the specific requirements and expectations of the organization for disaster recovery, or may not cover the latest changes or incidents that may affect the provider’s DR capability. The audit reports may also have limitations or qualifications that may affect their reliability or validity. References :=

Audit a Disaster Recovery Plan | AlertFind

ISACA Introduces New Audit Programs for Business Continuity/Disaster …

How to Maintain and Test a Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Plan

 The greatest concern to the auditor should be that the customer cannot monitor its cloud subscription on its own and must rely on the provider for monitoring purposes. This situation can lead to a lack of transparency and control over the security and compliance posture of the cloud services being used. It is crucial for customers to have the ability to independently monitor their systems to ensure that they are secure and compliant with relevant regulations and standards.

References = This concern is highlighted in the Cloud Security Alliance’s (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) and the Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) materials, which emphasize the importance of continuous monitoring and the customer’s ability to audit and ensure the security of their cloud services1.

 A dot release of the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) indicates a technical change (revision, addition, or deletion) of a number of controls that is smaller than 10% compared to the previous full release. A dot release is a minor update to the CCM that reflects the feedback from the cloud security community and the changes in the cloud technology landscape. A dot release does not change the domain structure or the overall scope of the CCM, but rather improves the clarity, accuracy, and relevance of the existing controls. A dot release is denoted by a decimal number after the major version number, such as CCM v4.1 or CCM v4.2. The current version of the CCM is v4.0, which was released in October 20211.

The other options are incorrect because:

A. a revision of the CCM domain structure: A revision of the CCM domain structure is a major change that affects the organization and categorization of the controls into different domains. A revision of the CCM domain structure requires a full release, not a dot release, and is denoted by an integer number, such as CCM v3 or CCM v42.

C. the introduction of new control frameworks mapped to previously published CCM controls: The introduction of new control frameworks mapped to previously published CCM controls is an additional feature that enhances the usability and applicability of the CCM. The introduction of new control frameworks mapped to previously published CCM controls does not require a dot release or a full release, but rather an update to the mapping table that shows the relationship between the CCM controls and other industry-accepted security standards, regulations, and frameworks3.

D. technical change (revision, addition, or deletion) of a number of controls that is greater than 10% compared to the previous full release: A technical change (revision, addition, or deletion) of a number of controls that is greater than 10% compared to the previous full release is a significant change that affects the content and scope of the CCM. A technical change (revision, addition, or deletion) of a number of controls that is greater than 10% compared to the previous full release requires a full release, not a dot release, and is denoted by an integer number, such as CCM v3 or CCM v42.

References:

Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA

The CSA Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) V4: Raising the cloud security bar

Cloud Security Alliance Releases New Cloud Controls Matrix Auditing Guidelines

The most important audit scope document when conducting a review of a cloud service provider is the document that defines the processes and systems to be audited. This document should clearly identify the objectives, criteria, and boundaries of the audit, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the audit team and the cloud service provider. The document should also specify the scope of the cloud service provider’s services, such as the service model, deployment model, geographic location, data classification, and compliance requirements. The document should also describe the scope of the audit evidence, such as the types, sources, methods, and sampling techniques of data collection and analysis. The document should also state the expected deliverables, timelines, and reporting formats of the audit. The document should be agreed upon by both parties before the audit commences.

The document that defines the processes and systems to be audited is essential for ensuring that the audit is relevant, reliable, consistent, and complete. It helps to establish a common understanding and expectation between the auditor and the auditee, as well as to avoid any misunderstandings or conflicts during or after the audit. It also helps to focus the audit on the key risks and controls related to the cloud service provider’s operations and performance. It also helps to ensure that the audit complies with the applicable standards, frameworks, and regulations.

References:

Cloud Audits and Compliance: What You Need To Know - Linford & Company LLP

How to audit the cloud | ICAEW

Auditing Cloud Computing: A Security and Privacy Guide