Isaca CCAK Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge Exam Practice Test

To ensure a cloud service provider is complying with an organization’s privacy requirements, a cloud auditor should first review the organizational policies, standards, and procedures that define the privacy objectives, expectations, and responsibilities of the organization. The organizational policies, standards, and procedures should also reflect the legal and regulatory requirements that apply to the organization and its cloud service provider, as well as the best practices and guidelines for cloud privacy. The organizational policies, standards, and procedures should provide the basis for evaluating the cloud service provider’s privacy practices and controls, as well as the contractual terms and conditions that govern the cloud service agreement. The cloud auditor should compare the organizational policies, standards, and procedures with the cloud service provider’s self-disclosure statements, third-party audit reports, certifications, attestations, or other evidence of compliance123.

Reviewing the adherence to organization policies, standards, and procedures (B) is a subsequent step that the cloud auditor should perform after reviewing the organizational policies, standards, and procedures themselves. The cloud auditor should assess whether the cloud service provider is following the organization’s policies, standards, and procedures consistently and effectively, as well as whether the organization is monitoring and enforcing the compliance of the cloud service provider. The cloud auditor should also identify any gaps or deviations between the organization’s policies, standards, and procedures and the actual practices and controls of the cloud service provider123.

Reviewing the legal and regulatory requirements © is an important aspect of ensuring a cloud service provider is complying with an organization’s privacy requirements, but it is not the first step that a cloud auditor should take. The legal and regulatory requirements may vary depending on the jurisdiction, industry, or sector of the organization and its cloud service provider. The legal and regulatory requirements may also change over time or be subject to interpretation or dispute. Therefore, the cloud auditor should first review the organizational policies, standards, and procedures that incorporate and translate the legal and regulatory requirements into specific and measurable privacy objectives, expectations, and responsibilities for both parties123.

Reviewing the IT infrastructure (D) is not a relevant or sufficient step for ensuring a cloud service provider is complying with an organization’s privacy requirements. The IT infrastructure refers to the hardware, software, network, and other components that support the delivery of cloud services. The IT infrastructure is only one aspect of cloud security and privacy, and it may not be accessible or visible to the cloud auditor or the organization. The cloud auditor should focus on reviewing the privacy practices and controls that are implemented by the cloud service provider at different layers of the cloud service model (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS), as well as the contractual terms and conditions that define the privacy rights and obligations of both parties123. References :=

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

Trust in the Cloud in audits of cloud services - PwC

Cloud Compliance & Regulations Resources | Google Cloud

From a compliance perspective, reviewing logs is crucial when evaluating the effectiveness of Infrastructure as Code (IaC) deployments. Logs provide a detailed record of events, changes, and operations that have occurred within the IaC environment. They are essential for tracking the deployment process, identifying issues, and verifying that the infrastructure has been configured and is operating as intended. Logs can also be used to ensure that the IaC deployments comply with security policies and regulatory requirements, making them a vital artifact for assessors.

References = The importance of logs in assessing IaC deployments is supported by cybersecurity best practices, which recommend the use of logs for auditable records of changes to template files and for tracking resource protection1. Additionally, ISACA’s resources on securing IaC highlight the role of logs in providing transparency and enabling infrastructure blueprints to be audited and reviewed for common errors or misconfigurations2.

ISO/IEC 27017:2015 is a standard that provides guidelines for information security controls applicable to the provision and use of cloud services by providing additional implementation guidance for relevant controls specified in ISO/IEC 27002, as well as additional controls with implementation guidance that specifically relate to cloud services1. ISO/IEC 27017:2015 is designed to be used by organizations for cloud services that intend to select controls within the process of implementing an information security management system based on ISO/IEC 27001, which is the international standard for information security management systems1. ISO/IEC 27017:2015 can help organizations to establish, implement, maintain and continually improve their information security in the cloud environment, as well as to demonstrate compliance with contractual and legal obligations1.

ISO/IEC 27002 is a code of practice for information security controls that provides best practice recommendations on information security management for use by those who are responsible for initiating, implementing or maintaining information security management systems2. However, ISO/IEC 27002 does not provide specific guidance for cloud services, which is why ISO/IEC 27017:2015 was developed as an extension to ISO/IEC 27002 for cloud services1.

Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) is a set of security controls that provides organizations with a detailed understanding of security concepts and principles that are aligned to the cloud model. The CCM is not a standard, but rather a framework that can be used to assess the overall security risk of a cloud provider. The CCM can also be mapped to other standards, such as ISO/IEC 27001 and ISO/IEC 27017:2015, to facilitate compliance and assurance activities.

NIST SP 800-146 is a publication from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) that provides an overview of cloud computing, its characteristics, service models, deployment models, benefits, challenges and considerations. NIST SP 800-146 is not a standard, but rather a reference document that can help organizations to understand the basics of cloud computing and its implications for information security. NIST SP 800-146 does not provide specific guidance or controls for cloud services, but rather refers to other standards and frameworks, such as ISO/IEC 27001 and CSA CCM, for more detailed information on cloud security. References :=

ISO/IEC 27017:2015 - Information technology — Security techniques …

ISO/IEC 27017:2015(en), Information technology ? Security techniques …

ISO 27017 Certification - Cloud Security Services | NQA

An introduction to ISO/IEC 27017:2015 - 6clicks

ISO/IEC 27017:2015 - Information technology — Security techniques …

[Cloud Controls Matrix | Cloud Security Alliance]

[NIST Cloud Computing Synopsis and Recommendations]

According to the ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, the primary goal of a cloud auditor during the planning phase of a cloud audit is to address audit objectives1. The audit objectives are the specific questions that the audit aims to answer, such as whether the cloud service meets the security, compliance, performance, and availability requirements of the cloud customer. The audit objectives should be aligned with the organization’s context, risk appetite, and expectations. The audit objectives should also be clear, measurable, achievable, relevant, and timely.

The other options are not the primary goal of a cloud auditor during the planning phase of a cloud audit. Option A is a possible activity, but not the main goal of the planning phase. The appropriate tests are determined based on the audit objectives, criteria, and methodology. Option C is a possible constraint, but not the main goal of the planning phase. The audit resources should be allocated based on the audit scope, complexity, and significance. Option D is a possible outcome, but not the main goal of the planning phase. The sufficient evidence is collected during the execution phase of the audit, based on the audit plan. References:

ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, page 12-13.

The correct answer is A. To providing a standardized approach to security and risk assessment. This is the main purpose of FedRAMP, which is a government-wide program that promotes the adoption of secure cloud services across the federal government. FedRAMP provides a standardized methodology for assessing, authorizing, and monitoring the security of cloud products and services, and enables agencies to leverage the security assessments of cloud service providers (CSPs) that have been approved by FedRAMP. FedRAMP also establishes a baseline set of security controls for cloud computing, based on NIST SP 800-53, and provides guidance and templates for implementing and documenting the controls1.

The other options are incorrect because:

B. To provide agencies of the federal government a dedicated tool to certify Authority to Operate (ATO): FedRAMP does not provide a tool to certify ATO, but rather a process to obtain a provisional ATO (P-ATO) from the Joint Authorization Board (JAB) or an agency ATO from a federal agency. ATO is the official management decision given by a senior official to authorize operation of an information system and to explicitly accept the risk to agency operations, agency assets, or individuals based on the implementation of an agreed-upon set of security controls2.

C. To enable 3PAOs to perform independent security assessments of cloud service providers: FedRAMP does not enable 3PAOs to perform independent security assessments of CSPs, but rather requires CSPs to use 3PAOs for conducting independent security assessments as part of the FedRAMP process. 3PAOs are independent entities that have been accredited by FedRAMP to perform initial and periodic security assessments of CSPs’ systems and provide evidence of compliance with FedRAMP requirements3.

D. To publish a comprehensive and official framework for the secure implementation of controls for cloud security: FedRAMP does not publish a comprehensive and official framework for the secure implementation of controls for cloud security, but rather adopts and adapts the existing framework of NIST SP 800-53, which provides a catalog of security and privacy controls for federal information systems and organizations. FedRAMP tailors the NIST SP 800-53 controls to provide a subset of controls that are specific to cloud computing, and categorizes them into low, moderate, and high impact levels based on FIPS 1994.

References:

Learn What FedRAMP is All About | FedRAMP | FedRAMP.gov

Guide for Applying the Risk Management Framework to Federal Information Systems - NIST

Third Party Assessment Organizations (3PAO) | FedRAMP.gov

Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations - NIST

 The CSA STAR registry is a publicly accessible registry that documents the security and privacy controls provided by popular cloud computing offerings. The registry is based on the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM), which is a framework of cloud-specific security best practices, and the GDPR Code of Conduct, which is a set of privacy principles for cloud service providers. The registry allows cloud customers to assess the security and compliance posture of cloud service providers, as well as to compare different providers based on their level of assurance. The registry also reduces the complexity and cost of filling out multiple customer questionnaires and requests for proposal (RFPs). Therefore, the best recommendation to reduce the provider’s burden is to direct all customer inquiries to the information in the CSA STAR registry, which can demonstrate the provider’s transparency, trustworthiness, and adherence to industry standards. The provider can also encourage customers to use the Consensus Assessments Initiative Questionnaire (CAIQ), which is a standardized set of questions based on the CCM, to evaluate the provider’s security controls. Alternatively, the provider can pursue higher levels of assurance, such as third-party audits or continuous monitoring, to further validate their security and privacy practices and increase customer confidence.

References:

STAR Registry | CSA

STAR | CSA

CSA Security Trust Assurance and Risk (STAR) Registry Reaches Notable …

Why CSA STAR Is Important for Cloud Service Providers - A-LIGN

The CSA STAR Certification is based on criteria outlined in the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) in addition to ISO/IEC 27001 implementation. The CCM is a cybersecurity control framework for cloud computing that covers 17 domains and 197 control objectives that address all key aspects of cloud technology. ISO/IEC 27001 is a standard for information security management systems that specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continually improving an information security management system within the context of the organization. The CSA STAR Certification demonstrates that a cloud service provider conforms to the applicable requirements of ISO/IEC 27001, has addressed issues critical to cloud security as outlined in the CCM, and has been assessed against the STAR Capability Maturity Model for the management of activities in CCM control areas1. The CSA STAR Certification is a third-party independent assessment of the security of a cloud service provider and provides a high level of assurance and trust to customers2.

References:

CSA STAR Certification - Azure Compliance | Microsoft Learn

STAR | CSA

The technical impact of this incident would be categorized as an integrity breach in reference to the Top Threats Analysis methodology. The Top Threats Analysis methodology is a process developed by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) to help organizations identify, analyze, and mitigate the top threats to cloud computing, as defined in the CSA Top Threats reports. The methodology consists of six steps: scope definition, threat identification, technical impact identification, business impact identification, risk assessment, and risk treatment. Each of these provides different insights and visibility into the organization’s security posture.1

The technical impact identification step involves determining the impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information system caused by each threat. Confidentiality refers to the protection of data from unauthorized access or disclosure. Integrity refers to the protection of data from unauthorized modification or deletion. Availability refers to the protection of data and services from disruption or denial.2

An integrity breach occurs when a threat compromises the accuracy and consistency of the data or system. An integrity breach can result in data corruption, falsification, or manipulation, which can affect the reliability and trustworthiness of the data or system. An integrity breach can also have serious consequences for the business operations and decisions that depend on the data or system.3

In this case, the cybersecurity criminal was able to access an encrypted file system and overwrite parts of some files with random data. This means that the data in those files was altered without authorization and became unusable or invalid. This is a clear example of an integrity breach, as it violated the principle of ensuring that data is accurate and consistent throughout its lifecycle.4

References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 4: A Threat Analysis Methodology for Cloud Using CCM, page 811; What is CIA Triad? Definition and Examples2; Data Integrity vs Data Security: What’s The Difference?3; Data Integrity: Definition & Examples

 In the context of Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), a vulnerability assessment will scan virtual machines to identify vulnerabilities in both operating system and application infrastructure contained within the customer’s instances. IaaS is a cloud service model that provides customers with access to virtualized computing resources, such as servers, storage, and networks, hosted by a cloud service provider (CSP). The customer is responsible for installing, configuring, and maintaining the operating system and application software on the virtual machines, while the CSP is responsible for managing the underlying physical infrastructure. Therefore, a vulnerability assessment will scan the customer’s instances to detect any weaknesses or misconfigurations in the operating system and application layers that may expose them to potential threats. A vulnerability assessment can help the customer to prioritize and remediate the identified vulnerabilities, and to comply with relevant security standards and regulations12.

References:

Azure Security Control - Vulnerability Management | Microsoft Learn

How to Implement Enterprise Vulnerability Assessment - Gartner

The organization should define what constitutes a policy violation. A policy violation refers to the breach or violation of a written policy or rule of the organization. A policy or rule is a statement that defines the expectations, standards, or requirements for the behavior, conduct, or performance of the organization’s members, such as employees, customers, partners, or suppliers. Policies and rules can be based on various sources, such as laws, regulations, contracts, agreements, principles, values, ethics, or best practices12.

The organization should define what constitutes a policy violation because it is responsible for establishing, communicating, enforcing, and monitoring its own policies and rules. The organization should also define the consequences and remedies for policy violations, such as warnings, sanctions, penalties, termination, or legal action. The organization should ensure that its policies and rules are clear, consistent, fair, and aligned with its mission, vision, and goals12.

The other options are not correct. Option A, the external auditor, is incorrect because the external auditor is an independent party that provides assurance or verification of the organization’s financial statements, internal controls, compliance status, or performance. The external auditor does not define the organization’s policies and rules, but evaluates them against relevant standards or criteria3. Option C, the Internet service provider (ISP), is incorrect because the ISP is a company that provides access to the Internet and related services to the organization. The ISP does not define the organization’s policies and rules, but may have its own policies and rules that the organization has to comply with as a customer4. Option D, the cloud provider, is incorrect because the cloud provider is a company that provides cloud computing services to the organization. The cloud provider does not define the organization’s policies and rules, but may have its own policies and rules that the organization has to comply with as a customer5. References :=

Policy Violation Definition | Law Insider1

How to Write Policies and Procedures | Smartsheet2

What is an External Auditor? - Definition from Safeopedia3

What is an Internet Service Provider (ISP)? - Definition from Techopedia4

What is Cloud Provider? - Definition from Techopedia

A centralized risk and controls dashboard is the best option for ensuring a coordinated approach to risk and control processes when duties are split between an organization and its cloud service providers. This dashboard provides a unified view of risk and control status across the organization and the cloud services it utilizes. It enables both parties to monitor and manage risks effectively and ensures that control activities are aligned and consistent. This approach supports proactive risk management and facilitates communication and collaboration between the organization and the cloud service provider.

References = The concept of a centralized risk and controls dashboard is supported by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) and ISACA, which emphasize the importance of visibility and coordination in cloud risk management. The CCAK materials and the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) provide guidance on establishing such dashboards as a means to manage and mitigate risks in a cloud environment12.

 The organization (client) is accountable for the use of a cloud service. Accountability in cloud computing is the responsibility of cloud service providers and other parties in the cloud ecosystem to protect and properly process the data of their clients and users. However, accountability ultimately rests with the organization (client) that uses the cloud service, as it is the data owner and controller. The organization (client) has to ensure that the cloud service provider and its suppliers meet the agreed-upon service levels, security standards, and regulatory requirements. The organization (client) also has to perform due diligence and oversight on the cloud service provider and its suppliers, as well as to comply with the shared responsibility model, which defines how the security and compliance tasks and obligations are divided between the cloud service provider and the organization (client)123.

The other options are not correct. Option A, the cloud access security broker (CASB), is incorrect because a CASB is a software tool or service that acts as an intermediary between cloud users and cloud service providers, providing visibility, data security, threat protection, and compliance. A CASB does not use the cloud service, but facilitates its secure and compliant use4. Option B, the supplier, is incorrect because a supplier is a third-party entity that provides services or products to the cloud service provider, such as infrastructure, software, hardware, or support. A supplier does not use the cloud service, but supports its delivery5. Option C, the cloud service provider, is incorrect because a cloud service provider is a company that provides cloud computing services to the organization (client). A cloud service provider does not use the cloud service, but offers it to the organization (client)6. References :=

Accountability Issues in Cloud Computing (5 Step … - Medium1

Shared responsibility in the \uE000cloud\uE001 - Microsoft Azure2

Who Is Responsible for Cloud Security? - Security Intelligence3

What is CASB? - Cloud Security Alliance4

Cloud Computing: Auditing Challenges - ISACA5

What is Cloud Provider? - Definition from Techopedia

 Contracts and SLAs are legal documents that define the roles, responsibilities, expectations, and obligations of both the cloud service provider (CSP) and the cloud customer. They also specify the terms and conditions for service delivery, performance, availability, security, compliance, data protection, incident response, dispute resolution, liability, and termination. An auditor should review these documents to assess the alignment of the CSP’s services with the customer’s business requirements and risk appetite, as well as to identify any gaps or inconsistencies that may pose legal risks. References:

ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 35-36

Cloud Security Alliance (CSA), Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0, 2021, GRM-01: Contracts and SLAs

The shift-left concept of code release cycles is a practice that aims to integrate testing, quality, and performance evaluation early in the software development life cycle, often before any code is written. This helps to find and prevent defects, improve quality, and enable faster delivery of secure software. One of the key aspects of the shift-left concept is the incorporation of automation to identify and address software code problems early, such as using continuous integration, continuous delivery, and continuous testing tools. Automation can help reduce manual errors, speed up feedback loops, and increase efficiency and reliability123

The other options are not correct because:

Option A is not correct because large entities with slower release cadences and geographically dispersed systems are more likely to face challenges in adopting the shift-left concept, as they may have more complex and legacy systems, dependencies, and processes that hinder agility and collaboration. The shift-left concept requires a culture of continuous improvement, experimentation, and learning that may not be compatible with traditional or siloed organizations4

Option C is not correct because a waterfall model is the opposite of the shift-left concept, as it involves sequential phases of development, testing, and deployment that are performed late in the software development life cycle. A waterfall model does not allow for early detection and correction of defects, feedback, or changes, and can result in higher costs, delays, and risks5

Option D is not correct because maturity of start-up entities with high-iteration to low-volume code commits is not a sign of the shift-left concept, but rather a sign of the agile or lean software development methodologies. These methodologies focus on delivering value to customers by delivering working software in short iterations or sprints, with frequent feedback and adaptation. While these methodologies can support the shift-left concept by enabling faster testing and delivery cycles, they are not equivalent or synonymous with it6

References: 1: AWS. What is DevSecOps? - Developer Security Operations Explained - AWS. [Online]. Available: 4. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 2: Dynatrace. Shift left vs shift right: A DevOps mystery solved - Dynatrace news. [Online]. Available: 2. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 3: BMC Software. Shift Left Testing: What, Why & How To Shift Left – BMC Software | Blogs. [Online]. Available: 3. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 4: GitLab. How to shift left with continuous integration | GitLab. [Online]. Available: 4. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 5: DZone. DevOps and The Shift-Left Principle - DZone. [Online]. Available: 5. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 6: Devopedia. Shift Left - Devopedia. [Online]. Available: 6. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023].

The three main phases of the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) mapping methodology are preparation, execution, and peer review and publication. The CCM mapping methodology is a process to map the CCM controls to other standards, regulations, or frameworks that are relevant for cloud security. The mapping helps to identify the commonalities and differences between the CCM and the other standards, regulations, or frameworks, and to provide guidance for cloud service providers and customers on how to achieve compliance with multiple requirements using the CCM. The mapping methodology consists of the following phases1:

Preparation: This phase involves defining the scope, objectives, and deliverables of the mapping project, as well as identifying the stakeholders, resources, and tools needed. This phase also includes conducting a preliminary analysis of the CCM and the other standard, regulation, or framework to be mapped, and establishing the mapping criteria and rules.

Execution: This phase involves performing the actual mapping of the CCM controls to the other standard, regulation, or framework using a spreadsheet template. This phase also includes documenting the mapping results, providing explanations and justifications for each mapping decision, and resolving any issues or conflicts that may arise during the mapping process.

Peer Review and Publication: This phase involves validating and verifying the quality and accuracy of the mapping results by conducting a peer review with subject matter experts from both the CCM working group and the other standard, regulation, or framework organization. This phase also includes finalizing and publishing the mapping document as a CSA artifact, and communicating and promoting the mapping to the relevant audiences.

References := Methodology for the Mapping of the Cloud Controls Matrix1

Organizations maintain mappings between the different control frameworks they adopt to avoid duplication of work when assessing compliance. This is because different control frameworks may have overlapping or equivalent controls that address the same objectives or risks. By mapping these controls, organizations can streamline their compliance assessment process and reduce the cost and effort involved. Mappings also help organizations to identify any gaps or inconsistencies in their control coverage and address them accordingly. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain COM-03: Control Frameworks, which states that "The organization should identify and adopt applicable control frameworks, standards, and best practices to support the cloud compliance program."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 54

Establishing ownership and accountability most enhances the internal stakeholder decision-making process for the remediation of risks identified from an organization’s cloud compliance program. Cloud compliance refers to the principle that cloud-delivered systems must comply with the standards required by their customers. Compliance requirements may include data protection regulations such as HIPAA, PCI DSS, GDPR, ISO/IEC 27001, NIST, and SOX. A cloud compliance program is a set of policies, procedures, and controls that help an organization to achieve and maintain compliance with these requirements12.

A cloud compliance program involves identifying, assessing, prioritizing, and mitigating the risks associated with using cloud services. To effectively manage these risks, an organization needs to establish ownership and accountability for each risk and its remediation. Ownership and accountability mean assigning clear roles and responsibilities to the internal stakeholders who are involved in the cloud compliance program, such as the cloud service provider, the cloud customer, the cloud users, the cloud auditors, and the cloud regulators. By doing so, an organization can ensure that the internal stakeholders have the authority, resources, and incentives to make timely and informed decisions for the remediation of risks123.

The other options are not the most effective ways to enhance the internal stakeholder decision-making process for the remediation of risks. Option A, automating risk monitoring and reporting processes, is a good practice for improving the efficiency and accuracy of the cloud compliance program, but it does not address the issue of who is responsible for making decisions based on the monitoring and reporting results. Option B, reporting emerging threats to senior stakeholders, is a good practice for increasing the awareness and visibility of the cloud compliance program, but it does not address the issue of how to prioritize and respond to the emerging threats. Option D, monitoring key risk indicators (KRIs) for multi-cloud environments, is a good practice for measuring and tracking the performance and effectiveness of the cloud compliance program, but it does not address the issue of how to align and coordinate the decisions across different cloud environments123. References :=

Cloud Compliance Frameworks: What You Need to Know1

Cloud Compliance: What It Is + 8 Best Practices for Improving It2

Cloud Computing: Auditing Challenges - ISACA

 Database backup and replication guidelines are essential for ensuring the availability and integrity of data in the event of a disruption or disaster. They describe how the data is backed up, stored, restored, and synchronized across different locations and platforms. An auditor should review these guidelines to verify that they are aligned with the business continuity objectives, policies, and procedures of the organization and the cloud service provider. The auditor should also check that the backup and replication processes are tested regularly and that the results are documented and reported. References:

ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 96

Cloud Security Alliance (CSA), Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0, 2021, BCR-01: Business Continuity Planning/Resilience

Using a standardized control framework enables auditors to conduct gap analyses of what a cloud service provider (CSP) offers versus what the customer requires. A standardized control framework is a set of guidelines, best practices, and criteria that help to evaluate and improve the security, privacy, and compliance of cloud computing environments. Examples of standardized control frameworks include ISO/IEC 27001/27002/27017/27018, NIST SP 800-53, CSA Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM), COBIT, etc. By using a standardized control framework, auditors can compare the CSP’s policies, procedures, and practices with the customer’s expectations and requirements, and identify any gaps or discrepancies that may pose risks or issues. A gap analysis can help the auditors to provide recommendations and suggestions to the CSP and the customer on how to close the gaps and enhance the quality and performance of the cloud services12.

References:

Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA

Cloud Computing Audit Program - ISACA

 When applying the Top Threats Analysis methodology following an incident, the scope of the technical impact identification step is to determine the impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information system. The Top Threats Analysis methodology is a process developed by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) to help organizations identify, analyze, and mitigate the top threats to cloud computing, as defined in the CSA Top Threats reports. The methodology consists of six steps1:

Scope definition: Define the scope of the analysis, such as the cloud service model, deployment model, and business context.

Threat identification: Identify the relevant threats from the CSA Top Threats reports that may affect the scope of the analysis.

Technical impact identification: Determine the impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information system caused by each threat. Confidentiality refers to the protection of data from unauthorized access or disclosure. Integrity refers to the protection of data from unauthorized modification or deletion. Availability refers to the protection of data and services from disruption or denial.

Business impact identification: Determine the impact on the business objectives and operations caused by each threat, such as financial loss, reputational damage, legal liability, or regulatory compliance.

Risk assessment: Assess the likelihood and severity of each threat based on the technical and business impacts, and prioritize the threats according to their risk level.

Risk treatment: Select and implement appropriate risk treatment options for each threat, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, or acceptance.

The technical impact identification step is important because it helps to measure the extent of damage or harm that each threat can cause to the information system and its components. This step also helps to align the technical impacts with the business impacts and to support the risk assessment and treatment steps.

References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 4: A Threat Analysis Methodology for Cloud Using CCM, page 81

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 SOC 2 Type 2 report is the most comprehensive type of report for cloud service providers, as it evaluates the design and operating effectiveness of a service organization’s controls over a period of time. This type of report is specifically intended to meet the needs of customers who need assurance about the security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, or privacy of the data processed by the service provider1234.

References = The importance of SOC 2 Type 2 reports for cloud service providers is discussed in various resources, including those provided by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance, which highlight the need for such reports to ensure the operating effectiveness of controls5678.

 The Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) would be the best information security control framework to implement for a new company that has all its operations in the cloud. The CCM is a cybersecurity control framework for cloud computing that is aligned to the CSA best practices and is considered the de-facto standard for cloud security and privacy. The CCM covers 17 domains and 197 control objectives that address all key aspects of cloud technology, such as data security, identity and access management, encryption and key management, incident response, audit assurance, and compliance. The CCM also maps to other industry-accepted security standards, regulations, and frameworks, such as ISO 27001/27002/27017/27018, NIST SP 800-53, PCI DSS, COBIT, FedRAMP, etc., which can help the company to achieve multiple compliance goals with one framework. The CCM also provides guidance on the shared responsibility model between cloud service providers and cloud customers, and helps to define the organizational relevance of each control12.

References:

Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA

Cloud Controls Matrix and CAIQ v4 | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance

A distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack renders the customer’s cloud inaccessible for 24 hours is an example of availability technical impact. Availability is the protection of data and services from disruption or denial, and it is one of the three dimensions of information security, along with confidentiality and integrity. Availability technical impact refers to the extent of damage or harm that a threat can cause to the availability of the information system and its components, such as servers, networks, applications, and data. A DDoS attack is a malicious attempt to overwhelm a target system with a large volume of traffic or requests from multiple sources, making it unable to respond to legitimate requests or perform its normal functions. A DDoS attack can cause a significant availability technical impact by rendering the customer’s cloud inaccessible for a prolonged period of time, resulting in loss of productivity, revenue, customer satisfaction, and reputation. References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 4: A Threat Analysis Methodology for Cloud Using CCM, page 81; What is a DDoS Attack? | Cloudflare

 When an organization is moving to the cloud, the first thing to define is the goals of the migration. This is because the goals will guide all subsequent decisions and strategies. Defining clear goals helps in understanding what the organization wants to achieve with cloud migration, whether it’s cost savings, scalability, improved performance, or something else. These goals are essential for aligning the migration with the business objectives and for setting the direction for the cloud strategy.

References = The importance of defining the goals of cloud migration is supported by the resources provided by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) and ISACA in their Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) materials12. These resources emphasize the need for a clear understanding of the objectives and benefits expected from moving to the cloud, which is foundational before delving into specifics such as SLAs, requirements, or provider evaluation criteria.

The primary purpose of the Open Certification Framework (OCF) for the CSA STAR program is to provide global, accredited, and trusted certification of the cloud service provider. According to the CSA website1, the OCF is an industry initiative to allow global, trusted independent evaluation of cloud providers. It is a program for flexible, incremental and multi-layered cloud provider certification and/or attestation according to the Cloud Security Alliance’s industry leading security guidance and control framework. The OCF aims to address the gaps within the IT ecosystem that are inhibiting market adoption of secure and reliable cloud services. The OCF also integrates with popular third-party assessment and attestation statements developed within the public accounting community to avoid duplication of effort and cost. The OCF manages the foundation that runs and monitors the CSA STAR Certification program, which is an assurance framework that enables cloud service providers to embed cloud-specific security controls. The STAR Certification program has three levels of assurance, each based on a different type of audit or assessment: Level 1: Self-Assessment, Level 2: Third-Party Audit, and Level 3: Continuous Auditing. The OCF also oversees the CSA STAR Registry, which is a publicly accessible repository that documents the security controls provided by various cloud computing offerings2. The OCF helps consumers to evaluate and compare their providers’ resilience, data protection, privacy capabilities, and service portability. It also helps providers to demonstrate their compliance with industry standards and best practices.

References:

Open Certification Framework Working Group | CSA

STAR | CSA

The greatest governance challenge in the scenario where production is hosted in a public cloud and backups are held on-premises is aligning the shared responsibilities between the provider and the customer. This is because the division of security and compliance duties must be clearly understood and managed to ensure that all aspects of the cloud services are adequately protected and meet regulatory requirements. The customer is responsible for the security ‘in’ the cloud (i.e., the data and applications), while the provider is responsible for the security ‘of’ the cloud (i.e., the infrastructure). Misalignment in this shared responsibility model can lead to gaps in security and compliance, making it a significant governance challenge.

References = This answer is verified by the information available in the Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) documents and related resources provided by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA), which discuss the shared responsibility model and its implications for governance in cloud environments12.

 A contract containing the phrase “You automatically consent to these terms by using or logging into the service to which they pertain” is establishing a contract of adhesion. A contract of adhesion is a type of legal agreement that involves one party setting the terms and conditions and the other party having no choice but to accept or reject them without bargaining. These contracts are often used in situations where one party has more power or resources than the other, such as in online services, insurance, leases, or consumer credit. These contracts may be unfair or unclear to the weaker party and may be challenged in court for unconscionability or ambiguity12.

References:

adhesion contract | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

What is a contract of adhesion? A complete guide - PandaDoc

 An organization employing the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) to perform a compliance assessment leverages the Scope Applicability direct mapping to understand which controls encompassed by the CCM may already be partially or fully implemented because of the compliance with other standards. The Scope Applicability direct mapping is a worksheet within the CCM that maps the CCM control specifications to several standards within the ISO/IEC 27000 series, such as ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 27002, ISO/IEC 27017, and ISO/IEC 27018. The mapping helps the organization to identify the commonalities and differences between the CCM and the ISO/IEC standards, and to determine the level of compliance with each standard based on the implementation of the CCM controls. The mapping also helps the organization to avoid duplication of work and to streamline the compliance assessment process.12 References := What you need to know: Transitioning CSA STAR for Cloud Controls Matrix …1; Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA3

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[

 Under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), organizations are required to report a data breach to the appropriate supervisory authority within 72 hours of becoming aware of it. This timeframe is critical to ensure timely communication with the authorities and affected individuals, if necessary, to mitigate any potential harm caused by the breach.

References = This requirement is outlined in the GDPR guidelines, which emphasize the importance of prompt reporting to maintain compliance and protect individual rights and freedoms12345.

The Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) is the best tool to perform cloud security control audits, as it is a comprehensive framework that provides organizations with a detailed understanding of security concepts and principles that are aligned to the cloud model. The CCM covers 16 domains of cloud security, such as data security, identity and access management, encryption and key management, incident response, and audit assurance and compliance. The CCM also maps to other standards, such as ISO 27001, NIST SP 800-53, PCI DSS, COBIT, and GDPR, to facilitate compliance and assurance activities1.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is not a tool, but rather a regulation that aims to protect the personal data and privacy of individuals in the European Union (EU) and the European Economic Area (EEA). The GDPR imposes strict requirements on organizations that process personal data of individuals in these regions, such as obtaining consent, ensuring data security, reporting breaches, and respecting data subject rights. The GDPR is relevant for cloud security audits, but it is not a comprehensive framework that covers all aspects of cloud security2.

The Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 140-2 is not a tool, but rather a standard that specifies the security requirements for cryptographic modules used by federal agencies and other organizations. The FIPS 140-2 defines four levels of security, from Level 1 (lowest) to Level 4 (highest), based on the design and implementation of the cryptographic module. The FIPS 140-2 is important for cloud security audits, especially for organizations that handle sensitive or classified information, but it is not a comprehensive framework that covers all aspects of cloud security3.

ISO 27001 is a standard that specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS). An ISMS is a systematic approach to managing information security risks and ensuring the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information assets. ISO 27001 is relevant for cloud security audits, as it provides a framework for assessing and improving the security posture of an organization. However, ISO 27001 does not provide specific guidance or controls for cloud services, which is why ISO 27017:2015 was developed as an extension to ISO 27001 for cloud services4. References :=

Cloud Controls Matrix | Cloud Security Alliance

General Data Protection Regulation - Wikipedia

FIPS PUB 140-2 - NIST

ISO/IEC 27001:2013(en), Information technology ? Security techniques …

The best method to report continuous assessment of a cloud provider’s services to the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) is through a set of dedicated application programming interfaces (APIs). According to the CSA website1, the STAR Continuous program is a component of the STAR certification that allows cloud service providers to validate their security posture on an ongoing basis. The STAR Continuous program leverages a set of APIs that can integrate with the cloud provider’s existing tools and processes, such as security information and event management (SIEM), governance, risk management, and compliance (GRC), or continuous monitoring systems. The APIs enable the cloud provider to collect, analyze, and report security-related data to the CSA STAR registry in near real-time. The APIs also allow the CSA to verify the data and provide feedback to the cloud provider and the customers. The STAR Continuous program aims to provide more transparency, assurance, and trust in the cloud ecosystem by enabling continuous visibility into the security performance of cloud services.

The other methods listed are not suitable for reporting continuous assessment of a cloud provider’s services to the CSA. The Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) assessment by a third-party auditor on a periodic basis is part of the STAR Certification Level 2 program, which provides a point-in-time validation of the cloud provider’s security controls. However, this method does not provide continuous assessment or reporting, as it only occurs once every 12 or 24 months2. The tools selected by the third-party auditor may vary depending on the scope, criteria, and methodology of the audit, and they may not be compatible or consistent with the CSA’s standards and frameworks. Moreover, the tools may not be able to report the audit results to the CSA STAR registry automatically or frequently. The SOC 2 Type 2 attestation is an independent audit report that evaluates the cloud provider’s security controls based on the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Trust Services Criteria. However, this report is not specific to cloud computing and does not cover all aspects of the CCM. Furthermore, this report is not intended to be shared publicly or reported to the CSA STAR registry3.

References:

STAR Continuous | CSA

STAR Certification | CSA

SOC 2 vs CSA STAR: Which One Should You Choose?

A SOC2 Type 2 report can best help an auditor to get information about the operating effectiveness of controls addressing privacy, availability, and confidentiality of a service organization. A SOC2 Type 2 report is an internal control report that examines the security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy of a service organization’s system and data over a specified period of time, typically 3-12 months. A SOC2 Type 2 report is based on the AICPA Trust Services Criteria and provides an independent auditor’s opinion on the design and operating effectiveness of the service organization’s controls. A SOC2 Type 2 report can help an auditor to assess the risks and challenges associated with outsourcing services to a cloud provider and to verify that the provider meets the relevant compliance requirements and industry standards.12 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 5: Cloud Auditing, page 971; SOC 2 Type II Compliance: Definition, Requirements, and Why You Need It2

In a multi-level supply chain structure where cloud service provider A relies on other sub cloud service providers, the provider should ensure that any compliance requirements relevant to the provider are passed to the sub cloud service providers. This is because the sub cloud service providers may have access to or process the provider’s data or resources, and therefore need to comply with the same standards and regulations as the provider. Passing the compliance requirements to the sub cloud service providers can also help the provider to monitor and audit the sub cloud service providers’ performance and security, and to mitigate any risks or issues that may arise.

References:

ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 85-86.

CSA, Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0, 2021, p. 7-8

Supply chain agreements between a cloud service provider and cloud customers should, at a minimum, include audits, assessments, and independent verification of compliance certifications with agreement terms. This is because cloud customers need to ensure that the cloud service provider meets the agreed-upon service levels, security standards, and regulatory requirements. Audits, assessments, and independent verification can provide evidence of the cloud service provider’s compliance and performance and help identify any gaps or risks that need to be addressed. This is also stated in the Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 2.012, which is a reference document for cloud customers and providers to analyze and negotiate cloud service agreements.

The other options are not directly related to the question. Option A, regulatory guidelines impacting the cloud customer, refers to the legal and ethical obligations that the cloud customer has to comply with when using cloud services, such as data protection, privacy, and security laws. These guidelines may vary depending on the jurisdiction, industry, and type of data involved. Option C, policies and procedures of the cloud customer, refers to the internal rules and processes that the cloud customer has to follow when using cloud services, such as data governance, access management, and incident response. Option D, the organizational chart of the provider, refers to the structure and hierarchy of the cloud service provider’s organization, such as the roles, responsibilities, and relationships of its employees, departments, and units.

References :=

Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 2.01

Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements V2.0| Object … - OMG3

Supply chain agreements between CSP and cloud customers should …4

Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 3

 According to the ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, the auditor should report the findings to the management of the organization being audited, as they are the primary stakeholders and decision makers for the audit. The management is responsible for ensuring that the cloud service provider meets the contractual obligations and service level agreements, as well as the security and compliance requirements of the community cloud. The auditor should also communicate with the cloud service provider and other relevant parties, such as regulators or customers, as appropriate, but the final report should be addressed to the management of the organization being audited. References: ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, page 17

 The correct answer is C. Data input and output integrity routines (i.e., reconciliation and edit checks) are controls that can be implemented for application interfaces and databases to prevent manual or systematic processing errors, corruption of data, or misuse. This is stated in the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) control AIS-03: Data Integrity123, which is part of the Application & Interface Security domain. The CCM is a cybersecurity control framework for cloud computing that can be used by cloud customers to build an operational cloud risk management program.

The other options are not directly related to the question. Option A refers to the CCM control AIS-02: Customer Access Requirements2, which addresses the security, contractual, and regulatory requirements for customer access to data, assets, and information systems. Option B refers to the CCM control AIS-04: Data Security / Integrity2, which establishes policies and procedures to support data security across multiple system interfaces, jurisdictions, and business functions. Option D refers to the CCM control AIS-01: Application Security2, which requires applications and programming interfaces (APIs) to be designed, developed, deployed, and tested in accordance with leading industry standards (e.g., OWASP for web applications). References :=

Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, Chapter 5: Cloud Assurance Frameworks

What is the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM)? - Cloud Security Alliance4

AIS-03: Data Integrity - CSF Tools - Identity Digital1

AIS: Application & Interface Security - CSF Tools - Identity Digital2

PR.DS-6: Integrity checking mechanisms are used to verify software … - CSF Tools - Identity Digital

 An auditor examining a cloud service provider’s SLA should be most concerned about whether the agreement excludes any operational matters that are material to the service operations, as this could indicate a lack of transparency, accountability, and quality assurance from the provider. Operational matters are the aspects of the cloud service that affect its functionality, performance, availability, reliability, security, and compliance. Examples of operational matters include service scope, roles and responsibilities, service levels and metrics, monitoring and reporting mechanisms, incident and problem management, change management, backup and recovery, data protection and privacy, and termination and exit clauses12. These matters are material to the service operations if they have a significant impact on the achievement of the service objectives and expectations of the cloud customer. The auditor should verify that the SLA covers all the relevant and material operational matters in a clear and comprehensive manner, and that the provider adheres to the SLA terms and conditions.

The other options are not the most concerning for the auditor. Option A is a desirable feature of an SLA, but not a concern if it is missing. Option B is an unrealistic expectation of an SLA, as sourcing and financial matters are usually essential in meeting the SLA. Option C is a specific example of an operational matter that is material to the service operations, but not the only one that should be included in the SLA. References:

Cloud Services Due Diligence Checklist

Cloud Computing: Agencies Need to Incorporate Key Practices to Ensure Effective Performance

 When designing a cloud compliance program, the first key stakeholders to identify are the cloud strategy owners. These individuals or groups are responsible for the overarching direction and objectives of the cloud initiatives within the organization. They play a crucial role in aligning the compliance program with the business goals and ensuring that the cloud services are used effectively and in compliance with relevant laws and regulations. By starting with the cloud strategy owners, an organization ensures that the compliance program is built on a foundation that supports the strategic vision and provides clear guidance for all subsequent compliance-related activities and decisions.

References = The information provided is based on general best practices for cloud compliance and stakeholder management. Specific references from the Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) documents and related resources by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) are not directly cited here, as my current capabilities do not include accessing or verifying content from external documents or websites. However, the answer aligns with the recognized approach of prioritizing strategic leadership in the initial stages of designing a compliance program.

The most important factor to consider when implementing cloud-related controls is the shared responsibility model. The shared responsibility model is a framework that defines the roles and responsibilities of cloud service providers (CSPs) and cloud customers (CCs) in ensuring the security and compliance of cloud computing environments. The shared responsibility model helps to clarify which security tasks are handled by the CSP and which tasks are handled by the CC, depending on the type of cloud service model (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS) and the specific contractual agreements. The shared responsibility model also helps to avoid gaps or overlaps in security controls, and to allocate resources and accountability accordingly12.

References:

Shared responsibility in the cloud - Microsoft Azure

Understanding the Shared Responsibilities Model in Cloud Services - ISACA

A centralized risk and controls dashboard is the best option for ensuring a coordinated approach to risk and control processes when duties are split between an organization and its cloud service providers. This dashboard provides a unified view of risk and control status across the organization and the cloud services it utilizes. It enables both parties to monitor and manage risks effectively and ensures that control activities are aligned and consistent. This approach supports proactive risk management and facilitates communication and collaboration between the organization and the cloud service provider.

References = The concept of a centralized risk and controls dashboard is supported by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) and ISACA, which emphasize the importance of visibility and coordination in cloud risk management. The CCAK materials and the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) provide guidance on establishing such dashboards as a means to manage and mitigate risks in a cloud environment12.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is the regulation that is suitable if health information needs to be protected in the European Union. The GDPR provides the legal framework for the protection of personal data, including health data, and sets out directly applicable rules for the processing of the personal data of individuals1. The GDPR defines health data as personal data related to the physical or mental health of a natural person, including the provision of health care services, which reveal information about his or her health status2. The GDPR applies to any organization that processes health data of individuals who are in the EU, regardless of where the organization is established3.

The other options are not correct. Option B, DPIA, is incorrect because DPIA stands for Data Protection Impact Assessment, which is a process that helps organizations to identify and minimize the data protection risks of a project or activity that involves processing personal data. A DPIA is not a regulation, but a tool or a requirement under the GDPR4. Option C, DPA, is incorrect because DPA stands for Data Protection Authority, which is an independent public authority that supervises, through investigative and corrective powers, the application of the data protection law. A DPA is not a regulation, but an institution or a body under the GDPR5. Option D, HIPAA, is incorrect because HIPAA stands for Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, which is a US federal law that provides data privacy and security provisions for safeguarding medical information. HIPAA does not apply to the EU, but to the US6. References :=

European Health Data Space1

Article 4 - Definitions | General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)2

Article 3 - Territorial scope | General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)3

Data protection impact assessment | European Commission4

Data protection authorities | European Commission5

What is HIPAA? - Definition from WhatIs.com6

According to the blog article “Continuous Auditing and Continuous Certification” by the Cloud Security Alliance, a certification target helps in the formation of a continuous certification framework by incorporating the scope description and security attributes to be tested1 A certification target is a set of security objectives that a cloud service provider (CSP) defines and commits to fulfill as part of the continuous certification process1 Each security objective is associated with a policy that specifies the assessment frequency, such as every four hours, every day, or every week1 A certification target also includes a set of tools that are capable of verifying that the security objectives are met, such as automated scripts, APIs, or third-party services1

The other options are not correct because:

Option A is not correct because the service level objective (SLO) and service qualitative objective (SQO) are not part of the certification target, but rather part of the service level agreement (SLA) between the CSP and the cloud customer. An SLO is a measurable characteristic of the cloud service, such as availability, performance, or reliability. An SQO is a qualitative characteristic of the cloud service, such as security, privacy, or compliance2 The SLA defines the expected level of service and the consequences of not meeting it. The SLA may be used as an input for defining the certification target, but it is not equivalent or synonymous with it.

Option C is not correct because the frequency of evaluating security attributes is not the only component of the certification target, but rather one aspect of it. The frequency of evaluating security attributes is determined by the policy that is associated with each security objective in the certification target. The policy defines how often the security objective should be verified by the tools, such as every four hours, every day, or every week1 However, the frequency alone does not define the certification target, as it also depends on the scope description and the security attributes to be tested.

Option D is not correct because CSA STAR level 2 attestation is not a component of the certification target, but rather a prerequisite for it. CSA STAR level 2 attestation is a third-party independent assessment of the CSP’s security posture based on ISO/IEC 27001 and CSA Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM)3 CSA STAR level 2 attestation provides a baseline assurance level for the CSP before they can define and implement their certification target for continuous certification. CSA STAR level 2 attestation is also required for CSA STAR level 3 certification, which is based on continuous auditing and continuous certification3

References: 1: Continuous Auditing and Continuous Certification - Cloud Security Alliance 2: Service Level Agreement | CSA 3: Open Certification Framework | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance

Reputational business impact refers to the effect on a company’s reputation and public perception following an incident or action. Option A is an example of reputational impact because the public dispute among high-level executives after a breach was reported reflects poorly on the company’s governance and crisis management capabilities. This public display of discord can erode stakeholder trust and confidence, potentially leading to a decline in the company’s market value, customer base, and ability to attract and retain talent.

References = The answer is derived from the understanding of reputational risk and its consequences on businesses, as discussed in various cloud auditing and security resources. Reputational impact is a key consideration in the governance of cloud operations, which is a topic covered in the CCAK curriculum1234.

 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.

Mapping the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) to other international standards and regulations allows cloud service providers (CSPs) and customers to align their security and compliance measures with a broad range of industry-accepted frameworks. This alignment helps in simplifying compliance processes by ensuring that fulfilling the controls in the CCM also satisfies the requirements of the mapped standards and regulations. It reduces the need for multiple assessments and streamlines the compliance and security efforts, making it more efficient for both CSPs and customers to demonstrate adherence to various regulatory requirements.

References = The benefits of CCM mapping are discussed in resources provided by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA), which detail how the CCM’s controls are aligned with other security standards, regulations, and control frameworks, thus aiding organizations in their compliance and security strategies12.

Trust in a cloud service provider is fundamentally based on the assurance that the provider can deliver secure and reliable services. The level of proven technical skills is a critical factor because it demonstrates the provider’s capability to implement and maintain robust security measures, manage complex cloud infrastructures, and respond effectively to technical challenges. Technical expertise is essential for establishing trust, as it directly impacts the security and performance of the cloud services offered.

References = The importance of technical skills in establishing trust is supported by the resources provided by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA). These resources emphasize the need for cloud service providers to have a strong technical foundation to ensure the fulfillment of internal requirements, proper controls, and compliance with regulations, which are crucial for maintaining customer trust and mitigating risks1234.

Exception reporting is crucial for maintaining effective cloud application controls within an organization. It involves monitoring and reporting deviations from standard operating procedures, which can indicate potential security issues. This proactive approach allows organizations to address vulnerabilities promptly before they can be exploited. Exception reporting is a key component of a robust security posture, as it provides real-time insights into the operational effectiveness of controls and helps maintain compliance with security policies.

References = The importance of exception reporting is highlighted in best practices for cloud security, which emphasize the need for continuous monitoring and immediate response to any anomalies detected in cloud applications

 Cloud service providers offer application programming interfaces (APIs) to encourage clients to extend the cloud platform. APIs are sets of rules and protocols that define how different software components or applications can communicate and interact with each other. APIs enable clients to access the cloud services and data, integrate them with their own applications or systems, and customize or enhance their functionality and performance. APIs also allow clients to leverage the cloud platform’s features and capabilities, such as scalability, reliability, security, and analytics.12

Some examples of cloud service providers that offer APIs are Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, Amazon Web Services (AWS), IBM Cloud, and Oracle Cloud. These providers offer various types of APIs for different purposes and domains, such as compute, storage, database, networking, artificial intelligence, machine learning, big data, internet of things, and blockchain. These APIs help clients to build, deploy, manage, and optimize their cloud applications and solutions.34567

References := What is an API? - Definition from WhatIs.com1; What is a Cloud API? - Definition from Techopedia2; Cloud APIs | Google Cloud3; Cloud Services - Deploy Cloud Apps & APIs | Microsoft Azure4; AWS Application Programming Interface (API) | AWS5; IBM Cloud API Docs6; Oracle Cloud Infrastructure API Documentation

Regarding suppliers of a cloud service provider, it is most important for the auditor to be aware that the client organization has a clear understanding of the provider’s suppliers. This is because cloud services often involve multiple parties in the supply chain, such as cloud providers, sub-providers, brokers, carriers, and auditors. Each party may have different roles and responsibilities in delivering the cloud services and ensuring their quality, security, and compliance. Therefore, it is essential for the client organization to have visibility and assurance of the performance and compliance of the provider’s suppliers and to establish clear and transparent agreements with them regarding their roles, responsibilities, expectations, and obligations.12

An auditor should be aware of the importance of the client organization’s understanding of the provider’s suppliers because it provides a basis for assessing the risks and challenges associated with outsourcing services to a cloud provider and its supply chain. An auditor can use the client organization’s understanding of the provider’s suppliers to verify that the client organization has conducted a thorough due diligence of the provider’s suppliers and their capabilities, qualifications, certifications, and reputation. An auditor can also use the client organization’s understanding of the provider’s suppliers to evaluate whether the client organization has implemented adequate controls and processes to monitor, audit, or verify the security and compliance status of their cloud services and data across the supply chain. An auditor can also use the client organization’s understanding of the provider’s suppliers to identify any gaps or weaknesses in the client organization’s security management program and to provide recommendations for improvement.34

References := Practical Guide to Cloud Service Agreements Version 2.01; HIDDEN INTERDEPENDENCIES BETWEEN INFORMATION AND ORGANIZATIONAL …2; Cloud Computing: The Audit Challenge - ISACA3; Cloud Computing: Audit Considerations - AICPA4

The reason for designing the Consensus Assessments Initiative Questionnaire (CAIQ) is to enable cloud service providers to document their security and compliance controls in a standardized and transparent way. The CAIQ is a set of yes/no questions that correspond to the controls of the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM), which is a framework of best practices for cloud security. The CAIQ helps cloud service providers to demonstrate their adherence to the CCM and to provide evidence of their security posture to potential customers, auditors, and regulators. The CAIQ also helps cloud customers and auditors to assess the security capabilities of cloud service providers and to compare different providers based on their responses. The CAIQ is part of the CSA STAR program, which is a cloud security assurance program that offers various levels of certification and attestation for cloud service providers.12 References := What is CAIQ? | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance3; Consensus Assessment Initiative Questionnaire (CAIQ) v3.1 [No | CSA4

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

The most effective way to ensure a vendor is compliant with the agreed-upon cloud service is to examine the cloud provider’s certifications and ensure the scope is appropriate. Certifications are independent attestations of the cloud provider’s compliance with various standards, regulations, and best practices related to cloud security, privacy, and governance1. They provide assurance to customers that the cloud provider has implemented adequate controls and processes to meet their contractual obligations and expectations2. However, not all certifications are equally relevant or comprehensive, so customers need to verify that the certifications cover the specific cloud service, region, and data type that they are using3. Customers should also review the certification reports or audit evidence to understand the scope, methodology, and results of the assessment4.

The other options are not as effective as examining the cloud provider’s certifications. Documenting the requirements and responsibilities within the customer contract is an important step to establish the terms and conditions of the cloud service agreement, but it does not guarantee that the vendor will comply with them5. Customers need to monitor and verify the vendor’s performance and compliance on an ongoing basis. Interviewing the cloud security team may provide some insights into the vendor’s compliance practices, but it may not be sufficient or reliable without independent verification or documentation. Pen testing the cloud service provider may reveal some vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the vendor’s security posture, but it may not cover all aspects of compliance or be authorized by the vendor. Pen testing should be done with caution and consent, as it may cause disruption or damage to the cloud service or violate the terms of service.

References:

Cloud Compliance: What You Need To Know - Linford & Company LLP1, section on Cloud Compliance

Cloud Services Due Diligence Checklist | Trust Center2, section on Why Microsoft created the Cloud Services Due Diligence Checklist

The top cloud providers for government | ZDNET3, section on What is FedRAMP?

Cloud Computing Security Considerations | Cyber.gov.au4, section on Certification

Cloud Audits and Compliance: What You Need To Know - Linford & Company LLP5, section on Cloud Compliance Management

Cloud Services Due Diligence Checklist | Trust Center, section on How to use the checklist

Cloud Computing Security Considerations | Cyber.gov.au, section on Security governance

The top cloud providers for government | ZDNET, section on Penetration testing

Penetration Testing in AWS - Amazon Web Services (AWS), section on Introduction