CCAK Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge Questions and Answers

Requirements define control activities, which are the actions, processes, or mechanisms that are implemented to achieve the control objectives1. Control objectives are the targets or desired conditions to be met that are designed to ensure that policy intent is met2. Guidelines are the recommended practices or advice that provide flexibility in how to implement a policy, standard, or control3. Policies are the statements of management’s intent that establish the direction, purpose, and scope of an organization’s internal control system4.

References:

COSO – Control Activities - Deloitte1, section on Control Activities

Words Matter - Understanding Policies, Control Objectives, Standards …2, section on Control Objectives

Understanding Policies, Control Objectives, Standards, Guidelines …3, section on Guidelines

Internal Control Handbook4, section on Policies

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

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.

When reviewing a third-party agreement with a cloud service provider, the greatest concern regarding customer data privacy is the return or destruction of information. This is because customer data may contain sensitive or personal information that needs to be protected from unauthorized access, use, or disclosure. The cloud service provider should have clear and transparent policies and procedures for returning or destroying customer data upon termination of the agreement or upon customer request. The cloud service provider should also provide evidence of the return or destruction of customer data, such as certificates of destruction, audit logs, or reports. The return or destruction of information should comply with applicable laws and regulations, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), or the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The cloud service provider should also ensure that any subcontractors or affiliates that have access to customer data follow the same policies and procedures12.

References:

Cloud Services Agreements – Protecting Your Hosted Environment

CSP agreements, price lists, and offers - Partner Center

 For a European manufacturing corporation migrating to the cloud, the best control framework would be the Cloud Security Alliance’s (CSA) General Data Protection Regulation Code of Conduct (GDPR CoC). This framework is specifically designed to help cloud service providers and users comply with EU data protection requirements. As GDPR is a critical regulation in Europe that imposes strict data protection rules, adhering to a framework that aligns with these regulations is essential for any organization operating within the EU.

References = The CSA’s GDPR CoC is recognized as a robust framework for ensuring compliance with GDPR, which is a key consideration for European organizations migrating to the cloud. This is supported by the resources provided by the Cloud Security Alliance and ISACA in their Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) materials1.

 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 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

 In a multi-level supply chain structure, the cloud service provider should ensure that any compliance requirements relevant to the provider are passed to the sub cloud service providers, regardless of their geographic location. This is because the sub cloud service providers may have access to or process the data of the provider’s customers, and thus may affect the compliance status of the provider. The provider should also monitor and verify the compliance of the sub cloud service providers on a regular basis. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain COM-01: Regulatory Frameworks, which states that "The organization should identify and comply with applicable regulatory frameworks, contractual obligations, and industry standards."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 51

Role-based access controls (RBAC) are a method of restricting access to resources based on the roles of individual users within an organization. RBAC allows administrators to assign permissions to roles, rather than to specific users, and then assign users to those roles. This simplifies the management of access rights and reduces the risk of unauthorized or excessive access. RBAC is especially important for ensuring adequate restriction on the number of people who can access the pipeline production environment, which is the final stage of the continuous integration and continuous delivery (CI/CD) process where code is deployed to the end-users. Access to the production environment should be limited to only those who are responsible for deploying, monitoring, and maintaining the code, such as production engineers, release managers, or site reliability engineers. Developers, testers, or other stakeholders should not have access to the production environment, as this could compromise the security, quality, and performance of the code. RBAC can help enforce this separation of duties and responsibilities by defining different roles for different pipeline stages and granting appropriate permissions to each role. For example, developers may have permission to create, edit, and test code in the development pipeline, but not to deploy or modify code in the production pipeline. Conversely, production engineers may have permission to deploy, monitor, and troubleshoot code in the production pipeline, but not to create or edit code in the development pipeline. RBAC can also help implement the principle of least privilege, which states that users should only have the minimum level of access required to perform their tasks. This reduces the attack surface and minimizes the potential damage in case of a breach or misuse. RBAC can be configured at different levels of granularity, such as at the organization, project, or object level, depending on the needs and complexity of the organization. RBAC can also leverage existing identity and access management (IAM) solutions, such as Azure Active Directory or AWS IAM, to integrate with cloud services and applications.

References:

Set pipeline permissions - Azure Pipelines

Azure DevOps: Access, Roles and Permissions

Cloud Computing — What IT Auditors Should Really Know

 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 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

 Effective operationalization of cloud security controls is highly dependent on the level of training and awareness among the staff who implement and manage these controls. Without proper understanding and awareness of security policies, procedures, and the specific controls in place, even the most sophisticated security measures can be rendered ineffective. Training ensures that the personnel are equipped with the necessary knowledge to perform their duties securely, while awareness programs help in maintaining a security-conscious culture within the organization.

References = This answer is supported by the CCAK materials which highlight the importance of training and awareness in cloud security. The Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) also emphasizes the need for security education and the role it plays in the successful implementation of security controls1234.

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

Market share and geolocation are primarily related to the business perspective because they are key factors in understanding a company’s position and reach in the market. Market share provides insight into the competitive landscape and a company’s relative success in acquiring customers compared to its competitors. Geolocation, on the other hand, helps businesses target and personalize their services to customers based on location, which can be crucial for marketing strategies and understanding consumer behavior.

References = The relevance of market share and geolocation to the business perspective is highlighted in resources provided by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA). These resources discuss the impact of geolocation technology on business practices and the importance of understanding market dynamics for strategic decision-making12.

Controls mapping found in the Scope Applicability column of the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) may help organizations to realize cost savings by avoiding duplication of efforts in the compliance evaluation and for the eventual control design and implementation. The Scope Applicability column is a feature of the CCM that indicates which cloud model type (IaaS, PaaS, SaaS) or cloud environment (public, hybrid, private) a control applies to. This feature can help organizations to identify and select the most relevant and appropriate controls for their specific cloud scenario, as well as to map them to multiple industry-accepted security standards, regulations, and frameworks. By doing so, organizations can reduce the time, resources, and costs involved in achieving and maintaining compliance with various cloud security requirements123.

The other options are not directly related to the question. Option B, by implementing layered security, thus reducing the likelihood of data breaches and the associated costs, is not a valid reason because layered security is a general principle of defense in depth, not a specific feature of the CCM or the Scope Applicability column. Option C, by avoiding the need to hire a cloud security specialist to perform the periodic risk assessment exercise, is not a valid reason because using the CCM or the Scope Applicability column does not eliminate the need for a cloud security specialist or a periodic risk assessment exercise, which are essential for ensuring the effectiveness and adequacy of the cloud security controls. Option D, by avoiding fines for breaching those regulations that impose a controls mapping in order to prove compliance, is not a valid reason because controls mapping is not a mandatory requirement for proving compliance, but a voluntary tool for facilitating compliance. References :=

What is CAIQ? | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance1

Understanding the Cloud Control Matrix | CloudBolt Software2

Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA

Rotating cryptographic keys regularly is a security best practice that helps to mitigate the risk of unauthorized access to encrypted data. When keys are rotated, old keys are retired and replaced with new ones, making any compromised keys useless to an attacker. This process helps to limit the time window during which a stolen key can be used to breach data. Key rotation is a fundamental aspect of key management lifecycle best practices, which include generating new key pairs, rotating keys at set intervals, revoking access to keys, and destroying out-of-date or compromised keys.

References = The importance of key rotation is supported by various security standards and best practices, including recommendations from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)1 and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA)23. These sources emphasize the need for periodic renewal and decommissioning of old keys as part of a comprehensive key management strategy.

Role-based access control (RBAC) is a method of restricting access to resources based on the roles of individual users within an organization1 RBAC can help ensure adequate restriction on the number of people who can access the pipeline production environment, as it can limit the permissions and actions that each user can perform on the pipeline resources, such as code, secrets, environments, etc. RBAC can also help enforce the principle of least privilege, which states that users should only have the minimum level of access required to perform their tasks2

The other options are not correct because:

Option A is not correct because ensuring segregation of duties in the production and development pipelines is not sufficient to ensure adequate restriction on the number of people who can access the pipeline production environment. Segregation of duties is a practice that aims to prevent fraud, errors, or conflicts of interest by dividing responsibilities among different people or teams3 However, segregation of duties does not necessarily limit the number of people who can access the pipeline resources, as it depends on how the roles and permissions are defined and assigned. Segregation of duties is also more relevant for preventing unauthorized changes or deployments to the production environment, rather than restricting access to it4

Option B is not correct because periodic review of the continuous integration and continuous delivery (CI/CD) pipeline audit logs to identify any access violations is not a proactive measure to ensure adequate restriction on the number of people who can access the pipeline production environment. Audit logs are records of events or activities that occur within a system or process5 Audit logs can help monitor and detect any unauthorized or suspicious access to the pipeline resources, but they cannot prevent or restrict such access in the first place. Audit logs are also dependent on the frequency and quality of the review process, which may not be timely or effective enough to mitigate the risks of access violations6

Option D is not correct because separation of production and development pipelines is not a direct way to ensure adequate restriction on the number of people who can access the pipeline production environment. Separation of production and development pipelines is a practice that aims to isolate and protect the production environment from any potential errors, bugs, or vulnerabilities that may arise from the development process. However, separation of pipelines does not automatically imply restriction of access, as it depends on how the roles and permissions are configured for each pipeline. Separation of pipelines may also introduce challenges such as synchronization, coordination, and communication among the pipeline teams and stakeholders.

References: 1: Wikipedia. Role-based access control - Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: 1. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 2: Microsoft Learn. Set pipeline permissions - Azure Pipelines | Microsoft Learn. [Online]. Available: 1. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 3: Investopedia. Segregation Of Duties Definition - Investopedia.com Blog. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 4: Cider Security. Insufficient PBAC (Pipeline-Based Access Controls) - Cider Security Blog. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 5: Wikipedia. Audit trail - Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 6: Microsoft Learn. Securing Azure Pipelines - Azure Pipelines | Microsoft Learn. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. : AWS DevOps Blog. How to implement CI/CD with AWS CodePipeline - AWS DevOps Blog | Amazon Web Services Blog. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. : LambdaTest. What Is Parallel Testing? with Example - LambdaTest Blog. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023].

According to the ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, the auditor should review the relationship between the cloud service provider and its service provider to help direct and estimate the level of effort and analysis the auditor should apply1. The auditor should understand the nature and scope of the services provided by the service provider, the contractual obligations and service level agreements, the security and compliance requirements, and the monitoring and reporting mechanisms. The auditor should also assess the risks and controls associated with the service provider, and determine if additional audit procedures are needed to obtain sufficient assurance.

The other options are not the best approach for the auditor. Option A is too strict and might not be feasible or necessary, depending on the type and level of services provided by the service provider. Option C is too lax and might overlook significant risks and gaps in the cloud service. Option D is too narrow and might ignore the impact of the service provider on the cloud customer’s business context. References:

ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, page 13-14.

In the context of cloud operationalization, “below the waterline” refers to the aspects of cloud services that are managed and controlled by the cloud service provider (CSP) rather than the customer. This analogy is often used to describe the shared responsibility model in cloud computing, where the CSP is responsible for the infrastructure’s security and stability, akin to the submerged part of an iceberg that supports the structure above water. The customer, on the other hand, is responsible for managing the controls and security measures “above the waterline,” which include the applications, data, and access management they deploy in the cloud environment.

References = The information provided is based on standard cloud computing models and the shared responsibility concept, which is a fundamental principle discussed in cloud auditing and security literature, including the CCAK curriculum and related resources1.

 The best approach for an auditor to review the operating effectiveness of the password requirement is to review the configuration settings on the Configuration Management (CM) tool and verify that the CM tool agents are functioning correctly on the VMs. This method ensures that the password policies are being enforced as intended and that the CM tool is effectively managing the configurations across the organization’s virtual machines. It provides a balance between relying solely on automated tools and manual verification processes.

References = This approach is supported by best practices in cloud security and auditing, which recommend a combination of automated tools and manual checks to ensure the effectiveness of security controls123. The use of CM tools for enforcing password policies is a common practice, and their effectiveness must be regularly verified to maintain the security posture of cloud services.

 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.

DevSecOps is an approach that integrates security practices into every phase of the software development lifecycle. It emphasizes the incorporation of security from the beginning, rather than as an afterthought, and utilizes automation to ensure security measures are consistently applied throughout the development process. This method allows for early detection and resolution of security issues, making it an essential practice for organizations with mature security programs and cloud adoption.

References = The definition and best practices of DevSecOps are well-documented in resources provided by leading industry authorities such as Microsoft1 and IBM2, which describe DevSecOps as a framework that automates the integration of security into the software development lifecycle.

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

APIs are likely to be attacked continuously by bad actors because they are generally the most exposed part of an application or system. APIs serve as the interface between different components or services, and often expose sensitive data or functionality to the outside world. APIs can be accessed by anyone with an Internet connection, and can be easily discovered by scanning or crawling techniques. Therefore, APIs are a prime target for attackers who want to exploit vulnerabilities, steal data, or disrupt services.

References:

ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 88-89.

OWASP, The Ten Most Critical API Security Risks - OWASP Foundation, 2019, p. 4-5

The Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) provides both cloud-specific security controls (Cloud Controls Matrix, CCM) and benchmarking tools like the CSA STAR program. CSA’s CCM maps industry standards and best practices tailored to cloud security requirements, and STAR provides a transparency and assurance framework for benchmarking security maturity. These resources are widely used and referenced in ISACA’s CCAK for cloud auditing and are integral for organizations seeking structured guidance on cloud security.

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

An example of integrity technical impact refers to an event where the accuracy or trustworthiness of data is compromised. Option D, where a hacker uses a stolen administrator identity to alter the discount percentage in the product database, directly affects the integrity of the data. This action leads to unauthorized changes to data, which is a clear violation of data integrity. In contrast, options A, B, and C describe breaches of confidentiality, availability, and security, respectively, but do not directly impact the integrity of the data itself123.

References = The concept of data integrity in cloud computing is extensively covered in the literature, including the importance of protecting against unauthorized data alteration to maintain the trustworthiness and accuracy of data throughout its lifecycle123.

SLAs in cloud computing define performance metrics and uptime commitments, making them crucial for monitoring and measuring service delivery against predefined benchmarks. Metrics from SLAs help in tracking service performance, compliance with contractual obligations, and cloud service provider accountability. ISACA’s CCAK outlines the importance of SLAs for cloud governance and risk management, as they provide a measurable baseline that informs cloud audit activities (referenced in CCM under Governance, Risk, and Compliance - GOV-05).

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

Visibility to the source code within build scripts would give an auditor the best view of design and implementation decisions when an organization uses programmatic automation for Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) deployments. IaaS is a cloud service model that provides virtualized computing resources, such as servers, storage, network, and operating systems, over the internet. Programmatic automation is the process of using code or scripts to automate the provisioning, configuration, management, and monitoring of the cloud infrastructure. Build scripts are files that contain commands or instructions to create or modify the cloud infrastructure according to the desired specifications.12

An auditor can use the source code within build scripts to gain insight into how the organization designs and implements its cloud infrastructure. The source code can reveal the following information3:

The type, size, and number of cloud resources that are provisioned and deployed

The configuration settings and parameters that are applied to the cloud resources

The security controls and policies that are enforced on the cloud resources

The dependencies and relationships between the cloud resources

The testing and validation methods that are used to verify the functionality and performance of the cloud resources

The logging and auditing mechanisms that are used to track and record the changes and activities on the cloud resources

By reviewing the source code within build scripts, an auditor can evaluate whether the organization follows the best practices and standards for cloud infrastructure design and implementation, such as scalability, reliability, security, compliance, and efficiency. An auditor can also identify any gaps or risks in the organization’s cloud infrastructure and provide recommendations for improvement.

References := What is Infrastructure as Code? | Cloud Computing - AWS1; What is Programmatic Automation? - Definition from Techopedia2; How to audit your IaC for better DevSecOps - TechBeacon3

Impact analysis is the aspect of risk management that involves identifying the potential reputational and financial harm when an incident occurs. Impact analysis is the process of estimating the consequences or effects of a risk event on the business objectives, operations, processes, or functions. Impact analysis helps to measure and quantify the severity or magnitude of the risk event, as well as to prioritize and rank the risks based on their impact. Impact analysis also helps to determine the appropriate level of response and mitigation for each risk event, as well as to allocate the necessary resources and budget for risk management123.

Likelihood (A) is not the aspect of risk management that involves identifying the potential reputational and financial harm when an incident occurs. Likelihood is the aspect of risk management that involves estimating the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring. Likelihood is the process of assessing and evaluating the factors or causes that may trigger or influence a risk event, such as threats, vulnerabilities, assumptions, uncertainties, etc. Likelihood helps to measure and quantify the chance or possibility of a risk event happening, as well as to prioritize and rank the risks based on their likelihood123.

Mitigation (B) is not the aspect of risk management that involves identifying the potential reputational and financial harm when an incident occurs. Mitigation is the aspect of risk management that involves reducing or minimizing the likelihood or impact of a risk event. Mitigation is the process of implementing and applying controls or actions that can prevent, avoid, transfer, or accept a risk event, depending on the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. Mitigation helps to improve and enhance the security and resilience of the organization against potential risks, as well as to optimize the cost and benefit of risk management123.

Residual risk © is not the aspect of risk management that involves identifying the potential reputational and financial harm when an incident occurs. Residual risk is the aspect of risk management that involves measuring and monitoring the remaining or leftover risk after mitigation. Residual risk is the process of evaluating and reviewing the effectiveness and efficiency of the mitigation controls or actions, as well as identifying and addressing any gaps or issues that may arise. Residual risk helps to ensure that the actual level of risk is aligned with the desired level of risk, as well as to update and improve the risk management strategy and plan123. References :=

Risk Analysis: A Comprehensive Guide | SafetyCulture

Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA

Risk Management Process - Risk Management | Risk Assessment | Risk …

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.

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

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

 According to the ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, the primary objective for an auditor to understand the organization’s context for a cloud audit is to validate an understanding of the organization’s current state and how the cloud audit plan fits into the existing audit approach1. The auditor should consider the organization’s business objectives, strategies, risks, and opportunities, as well as the regulatory and contractual requirements that apply to the organization’s use of cloud services. The auditor should also assess the organization’s cloud maturity level, governance structure, policies and procedures, roles and responsibilities, and existing controls related to cloud services. The auditor should then align the cloud audit plan with the organization’s context and ensure that it covers the relevant scope, objectives, criteria, and methodology.

The other options are not the primary objective for an auditor to understand the organization’s context for a cloud audit. Option A is a possible audit procedure, but not the main goal of understanding the organization’s context. Option C is a possible audit outcome, but not the main purpose of understanding the organization’s context. Option D is a possible audit finding, but not the main reason for understanding the organization’s context. References:

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

Transparent data encryption (TDE) is used for data and log files at rest. This means that TDE encrypts the database files on the disk and decrypts them when they are read into memory. TDE protects the data from unauthorized access or theft if the physical media, such as drives or backup tapes, are stolen or lost. TDE does not encrypt data across communication channels, data currently being processed, or data in random access memory (RAM). These types of data require different encryption methods, such as SSL/TLS, column encryption, or memory encryption12.

References:

Transparent data encryption (TDE) - SQL Server | Microsoft Learn

Transparent Data Encryption - Oracle Help Center

 According to the cloud shared responsibility model, the cloud customer is responsible for managing the access controls for the SaaS functionality and operations, and this should be audited by the cloud auditor12. Access controls are the mechanisms that restrict and regulate who can access and use the SaaS applications and data, and how they can do so. Access controls include identity and access management, authentication, authorization, encryption, logging, and monitoring. The cloud customer is responsible for defining and enforcing the access policies, roles, and permissions for the SaaS users, as well as ensuring that the access controls are aligned with the security and compliance requirements of the customer’s business context12.

The other options are not the aspects of SaaS functionality and operations that the cloud customer is responsible for and should be audited. Option B is incorrect, as vulnerability management is the process of identifying, assessing, and mitigating the security weaknesses in the SaaS applications and infrastructure, and this is usually handled by the cloud service provider12. Option C is incorrect, as patching is the process of updating and fixing the SaaS applications and infrastructure to address security issues or improve performance, and this is also usually handled by the cloud service provider12. Option D is incorrect, as source code reviews are the process of examining and testing the SaaS applications’ source code to detect errors or vulnerabilities, and this is also usually handled by the cloud service provider12. References:

Shared responsibility in the cloud - Microsoft Azure

The Customer’s Responsibility in the Cloud Shared Responsibility Model - ISACA

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

 Access controls are an assurance requirement when an organization is migrating to a SaaS provider because they ensure that only authorized users can access the cloud services and data. Access controls also help to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the cloud resources. Access controls are part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain IAM-01: Identity and Access Management Policy and Procedures, which states that "The organization should have a policy and procedures to manage user identities and access to cloud services and data."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 4: A Threat Analysis Methodology for Cloud Using CCM, page 751

Shadow IT refers to the use of IT resources (hardware, software, or cloud services) within an organization without the explicit approval of the IT or governance team. This practice is often flagged in cloud audits due to potential risks of compliance violations and security threats. The CCAK documentation from ISACA highlights the need for visibility and governance over all IT assets, with specific controls listed in the CSA CCM for Cloud Governance (GOV-09). Shadow IT poses risks to data security, compliance, and can introduce vulnerabilities, as systems are not subject to organizational standards and oversight.

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

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?

 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

To assist an organization with planning a cloud migration strategy to execution, an auditor should recommend the use of enterprise architecture (EA). EA is a holistic approach to aligning the business and IT objectives, processes, and resources of an organization. EA helps to define the current and future state of the organization, identify the gaps and opportunities, and design the roadmap and governance for the cloud migration. EA also helps to ensure that the cloud migration is consistent with the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, and that it meets the requirements of the stakeholders, customers, and regulators. EA is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain GRC-01: Enterprise Risk Management, which states that "The organization should have a policy and procedures to identify, assess, manage, and monitor risks related to cloud services."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 2: Cloud Governance, page 25

 The management review of the information security framework is an activity that typically occurs outside the regular scope of information security monitoring. This review is a strategic exercise that involves evaluating the overall direction, effectiveness, and alignment of the information security program with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite. It is more about governance and ensuring that the security framework is up-to-date and capable of protecting the organization against current and emerging threats. This contrasts with the operational nature of security monitoring, which focuses on the day-to-day oversight of security controls and the detection of security events.

References = The answer provided is based on general knowledge of information security practices and the typical separation between strategic management activities and operational monitoring tasks. Direct references from the Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) documents and related resources by ISACA and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) are not included here, as my current capabilities do not allow me to access or verify content from external documents or websites. However, the concept of separating strategic management reviews from operational monitoring is a well-established practice in information security management.

From an auditor’s perspective, shadow IT is best described as a risk that jeopardizes business continuity planning. Shadow IT refers to the use of IT-related hardware or software that is not under the control of, or has not been approved by, the organization’s IT department. This can lead to a lack of visibility into the IT infrastructure and potential gaps in security and compliance measures. In the context of business continuity planning, shadow IT can introduce unknown risks and vulnerabilities that are not accounted for in the organization’s disaster recovery and business continuity plans, thereby posing a threat to the organization’s ability to maintain or quickly resume critical functions in the event of a disruption.

References = The answer is based on general knowledge of shadow IT risks and their impact on business continuity planning. 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 concept of shadow IT as a risk to business continuity is a recognized concern in IT governance and auditing practices1234.

 Dynamic application security testing (DAST) is a method of testing the security of an application by simulating attacks from an external source. DAST does not require access to the source code or binaries of the application, unlike static application security testing (SAST), which analyzes the code for vulnerabilities. Therefore, DAST is a black box testing technique, meaning that it does not need any knowledge of the internal structure, design, or implementation of the application. DAST is also programming language agnostic, meaning that it can test applications written in any language, framework, or platform. This makes DAST more flexible and adaptable to different types of applications and environments. However, DAST also has some limitations, such as being slower, less accurate, and more dependent on the availability and configuration of the application. References:

SAST vs. DAST: What’s the Difference?

SAST vs DAST: What’s the Difference?

SAST vs. DAST: Enhancing application security

During the cloud service provider evaluation process, benchmark controls lists BEST help identify baseline configuration requirements. Benchmark controls lists are standardized sets of security and compliance controls that are applicable to different cloud service models, deployment models, and industry sectors1. They provide a common framework and language for assessing and comparing the security posture and capabilities of cloud service providers2. They also help cloud customers to define their own security and compliance requirements and expectations based on best practices and industry standards3.

Some examples of benchmark controls lists are:

The Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM), which is a comprehensive list of 133 control objectives that cover 16 domains of cloud security4.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-53, which is a catalog of 325 security and privacy controls for federal information systems and organizations, including cloud-based systems5.

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) / International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 27017, which is a code of practice that provides guidance on 121 information security controls for cloud services based on ISO/IEC 270026.

Vendor requirements, product benchmarks, and contract terms and conditions are not the best sources for identifying baseline configuration requirements. Vendor requirements are the specifications and expectations that the cloud service provider has for its customers, such as minimum hardware, software, network, or support requirements7. Product benchmarks are the measurements and comparisons of the performance, quality, or features of different cloud services or products8. Contract terms and conditions are the legal agreements that define the rights, obligations, and responsibilities of the parties involved in a cloud service contract9. These sources may provide some information on the configuration requirements, but they are not as comprehensive, standardized, or objective as benchmark controls lists.

References:

CSA Security Guidance for Cloud Computing | CSA1, section on Identify necessary security and compliance requirements

Evaluation Criteria for Cloud Infrastructure as a Service - Gartner2, section on Security Controls

Checklist: Cloud Services Provider Evaluation Criteria | Synoptek3, section on Security

Cloud Controls Matrix | CSA4, section on Overview

NIST Special Publication 800-53 - NIST Pages5, section on Abstract

ISO/IEC 27017:2015(en), Information technology — Security techniques …6, section on Scope

What is vendor management? Definition from WhatIs.com7, section on Vendor management

What is Benchmarking? Definition from WhatIs.com8, section on Benchmarking

What is Terms and Conditions? Definition from WhatIs.com9, section on Terms and Conditions

Access controls are the aspect of Software as a Service (SaaS) functionality and operations that the cloud customer is responsible for and should be audited. Access controls refer to the methods and techniques that verify the identity and access rights of users or devices that access or use the SaaS application and its data. Access controls may include credentials, policies, roles, permissions, tokens, multifactor authentication, single sign-on, etc. The cloud customer is responsible for ensuring that only authorized and legitimate users or devices can access or use the SaaS application and its data, as well as for protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of their data. The cloud customer should also monitor and audit the access and usage of the SaaS application and its data, as well as any incidents or issues that may affect them123.

Source code reviews (A) are not the aspect of SaaS functionality and operations that the cloud customer is responsible for and should be audited. Source code reviews refer to the processes and practices that examine the source code of software applications or systems to identify errors, bugs, vulnerabilities, or inefficiencies that may affect their quality, functionality, or security. Source code reviews are mainly under the responsibility of the cloud service provider, as they own and operate the software applications or systems that deliver SaaS services. The cloud customer has no access or control over these aspects123.

Patching (B) is not the aspect of SaaS functionality and operations that the cloud customer is responsible for and should be audited. Patching refers to the processes and practices that ensure the security, reliability, and performance of the cloud infrastructure, platform, or software. Patching involves the use of updates or fixes to address vulnerabilities, bugs, errors, or exploits that may compromise or affect the functionality of the cloud components. Patching is mainly under the responsibility of the cloud service provider, as they own and operate the cloud infrastructure, platform, or software. The cloud customer has limited or no access or control over these aspects123.

Vulnerability management (D) is not the aspect of SaaS functionality and operations that the cloud customer is responsible for and should be audited. Vulnerability management refers to the processes and practices that identify, assess, treat, monitor, and report on the risks that affect the security posture of an organization or a domain. Vulnerability management involves the use of tools or techniques to scan, analyze, prioritize, remediate, or mitigate vulnerabilities that may expose an organization or a domain to threats or attacks. Vulnerability management is mainly under the responsibility of the cloud service provider, as they own and operate the cloud infrastructure, platform, or software. The cloud customer has limited or no access or control over these aspects123. References :=

Cloud Audits: A Guide for Cloud Service Providers - Cloud Standards …

Cloud Audits: A Guide for Cloud Service Customers - Cloud Standards …

Cloud Auditing Knowledge: Preparing for the CCAK Certificate Exam

The first step of the Cloud Risk Evaluation Framework is to identify key risk categories. Key risk categories are the broad areas or domains of cloud security and compliance that may affect the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer. Key risk categories may include data security, identity and access management, encryption and key management, incident response, disaster recovery, audit assurance and compliance, etc. Identifying key risk categories helps to scope and focus the cloud risk assessment process, as well as to prioritize and rank the risks based on their relevance and significance. Identifying key risk categories also helps to align and map the risks with the applicable standards, regulations, or frameworks that govern cloud security and compliance12.

Analyzing potential impact and likelihood (A) is not the first step of the Cloud Risk Evaluation Framework, but rather the third step. Analyzing potential impact and likelihood is the process of estimating the consequences or effects of a risk event on the business objectives, operations, processes, or functions (impact), as well as the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring (likelihood). Analyzing potential impact and likelihood helps to measure and quantify the severity or magnitude of the risk event, as well as to prioritize and rank the risks based on their impact and likelihood12.

Establishing cloud risk profile (B) is not the first step of the Cloud Risk Evaluation Framework, but rather the second step. Establishing cloud risk profile is the process of defining and documenting the expected level of risk that an organization is willing to accept or tolerate in relation to its cloud services (risk appetite), as well as the actual level of risk that an organization faces or encounters in relation to its cloud services (risk exposure). Establishing cloud risk profile helps to determine and communicate the objectives, expectations, and responsibilities of cloud security and compliance, as well as to align and integrate them with the business strategy and goals12.

Evaluating and documenting the risks © is not the first step of the Cloud Risk Evaluation Framework, but rather the fourth step. Evaluating and documenting the risks is the process of assessing and reporting on the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls or actions that are implemented or applied to prevent, avoid, transfer, or accept a risk event (risk treatment), as well as identifying and addressing any gaps or issues that may arise (risk monitoring). Evaluating and documenting the risks helps to ensure that the actual level of risk is aligned with the desired level of risk, as well as to update and improve the risk management strategy and plan12. References :=

Cloud Auditing Knowledge: Preparing for the CCAK Certificate Exam

Cloud Risk—10 Principles and a Framework for Assessment - ISACA

The Egregious 11 refers to a list of top threats to cloud computing, as published by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) in 2019. The CSA is a leading organization dedicated to defining standards, certifications and best practices to help ensure a secure cloud computing environment. The Egregious 11 report ranks the most critical and pressing cloud security issues, such as data breaches, misconfigurations, insufficient identity and access management, and account hijacking. The report also provides recommendations for security, compliance, risk and technology practitioners to mitigate these threats. The Egregious 11 is based on a survey of industry experts and a review of current literature and media reports. The report is intended to raise awareness of the risks and challenges associated with cloud computing and promote strong security practices.12 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 5: Cloud Auditing, page 961; CSA Top Threats to Cloud Computing: Egregious 11

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.

The most critical finding of an application security and DevOps audit would be that the application architecture and configurations did not consider security measures. This finding would indicate that the application is vulnerable to various threats and attacks, such as data breaches, unauthorized access, injection, cross-site scripting, denial-of-service, etc. This finding would also imply that the application does not comply with the security standards and best practices for cloud services, such as ISO/IEC 27017:20151, CSA Cloud Controls Matrix2, or NIST SP 800-1463. This finding would require immediate remediation and improvement of the application security posture, as well as the implementation of security controls and tests throughout the DevOps process.

Certifications with global security standards specific to cloud are not reviewed, and the impact of noted findings are not assessed (A) would be a significant finding of an application security and DevOps audit, but not the most critical one. This finding would indicate that the organization is not aware or informed of the security requirements and expectations for cloud services, as well as the gaps or issues that may affect their compliance or performance. This finding would require regular review and analysis of the certifications with global security standards specific to cloud, such as ISO/IEC 270014, CSA STAR Certification, or FedRAMP Authorization, as well as the assessment of the impact of noted findings on the organization’s risk profile and business objectives.

Outsourced cloud service interruption, breach, or loss of stored data occurred at the cloud service provider (B) would be a serious finding of an application security and DevOps audit, but not the most critical one. This finding would indicate that the cloud service provider failed to ensure the availability, confidentiality, and integrity of the cloud services and data that they provide to the organization. This finding would require investigation and resolution of the root cause and impact of the incident, as well as the implementation of preventive and corrective measures to avoid recurrence. This finding would also require review and verification of the contractual terms and conditions between the organization and the cloud service provider, as well as the service level agreements (SLAs) and recovery time objectives (RTOs) for the cloud services.

The organization is not using a unified framework to integrate cloud compliance with regulatory requirements © would be an important finding of an application security and DevOps audit, but not the most critical one. This finding would indicate that the organization is not following a consistent and systematic approach to manage and monitor its cloud compliance with regulatory requirements, such as GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS, etc. This finding would require adoption and implementation of a unified framework to integrate cloud compliance with regulatory requirements, such as COBIT, NIST Cybersecurity Framework, or CIS Controls, as well as the alignment and integration of these frameworks with the DevOps process.