CCAK Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge Questions and Answers

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

Traditional cloud compliance assurance approaches such as SOC2 attestations have the main limitation of providing a point-in-time snapshot of an organization’s compliance posture. This means that they only reflect the state of the organization’s security and compliance controls at a specific date or period, which may not be representative of the current or future state. Cloud environments are dynamic and constantly changing, and so are the threats and risks that affect them. Therefore, relying on traditional cloud compliance assurance approaches may not provide sufficient or timely assurance that the organization’s cloud services and data are adequately protected and compliant with the relevant requirements and standards.12

To overcome this limitation, some organizations adopt continuous cloud compliance assurance approaches, such as continuous monitoring, auditing, and reporting. These approaches enable the organization to collect, analyze, and report on the security and compliance status of its cloud environment in near real-time, using automated tools and processes. Continuous cloud compliance assurance approaches can help the organization to identify and respond to any changes, issues, or incidents that may affect its cloud security and compliance posture, and to maintain a high level of trust and transparency with its stakeholders, customers, and regulators.34

References := What is SOC 2? Complete Guide to SOC 2 Reports | CSA1; Guidance on cloud security assessment and authorization - ITSP.50.105 - Canadian Centre for Cyber Security2; Continuous Compliance: The Future of Cloud Security | CloudCheckr3; Continuous Compliance: How to Automate Cloud Security Compliance4

Continuous auditing is a method of auditing that provides assurance on the current state of controls and compliance in a cloud environment, rather than relying on periodic snapshots or attestations. Continuous auditing can leverage continuous monitoring data and automated tools to collect and analyze evidence of compliance, as well as alert auditors and stakeholders of any deviations or issues. Continuous auditing can complement point-in-time assurance approaches, such as certifications or audits, by providing more timely and frequent feedback on the effectiveness of controls and compliance in a cloud environment. References :=

• ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 821
• ISACA, Cloud Auditing Knowledge: Preparing for the CCAK Certificate Exam, 2021, p. 30

 The three layers of the Open Certification Framework (OCF) primarily help cloud service providers and cloud clients improve the level of transparency and assurance. The OCF is designed to provide a trusted and independent evaluation of cloud providers through a flexible, incremental, and multi-layered certification process. This framework enhances transparency by making it easier for consumers to understand and compare providers’ security and compliance capabilities. Additionally, it offers assurance by integrating with third-party assessment and attestation statements, thereby increasing the security baseline for all participants.

References = The benefits of the OCF in improving transparency and assurance are detailed in the Cloud Security Alliance’s documentation on the Open Certification Framework1.

 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

When auditing a public cloud, it is essential to review areas such as Identity and Access Management (IAM) and data protection. IAM involves ensuring that only authorized individuals have access to the cloud resources, and that their access is appropriately managed and monitored. This includes reviewing user authentication methods, access control policies, role-based access controls, and user activity monitoring1.

Data protection is another critical area to review. It involves ensuring that the data stored in the public cloud is secure from unauthorized access, breaches, and leaks. This includes reviewing data encryption methods, data backup and recovery processes, data privacy policies, and compliance with relevant data protection regulations1.

While the other options may also be relevant in certain contexts, they are not as universally applicable as IAM and data protection for auditing a public cloud. Source code reviews and hypervisor (option B), patching and configuration (option C), and vulnerability management and cybersecurity reviews (option D) are important but are more specific to certain types of cloud services or deployment models. References:

• Cloud Computing — What IT Auditors Should Really Know - ISACA

Customer management interfaces are the web portals or applications that allow customers to access and manage their cloud services, such as provisioning, monitoring, billing, etc. These interfaces are exposed to the public Internet and may be vulnerable to attacks such as phishing, malware, denial-of-service, or credential theft. If an attacker compromises a customer management interface, they can potentially access and manipulate the customer’s cloud resources, data, and configurations, leading to computing and data compromise for customers. This can result in data breaches, service disruptions, unauthorized transactions, or other malicious activities.

References:

• Cloud Computing - Security Benefits and Risks | PPT - SlideShare1, slide 10
• Cloud Security Risks: The Top 8 According To ENISA - CloudTweaks2, section on Management Interface Compromise
• Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, section 2.3.2.1 : https://www.isaca.org/-/media/info/ccak/ccak-study-guide.pdf

The control audit frequency for an organization’s business continuity management and operational resilience strategy should be conducted annually. This frequency is considered appropriate for most organizations to ensure that their business continuity plans and operational resilience strategies remain effective and up-to-date with the current risk landscape. Conducting these audits annually aligns with the best practices of reviewing and updating business continuity plans to adapt to new threats, changes in the business environment, and lessons learned from past incidents. References = The annual audit frequency is supported by industry standards and guidelines that emphasize the importance of regular reviews to maintain operational resilience. These include resources from professional bodies and industry groups that outline the need for periodic assessments to ensure the effectiveness of business continuity and resilience strategies

 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

A corrective control is a measure taken to correct or reduce the impact of an error, deviation, or unwanted activity1. Corrective control can be either manual or automated, depending on the type of control used. Corrective control can involve procedures, manuals, systems, patches, quarantines, terminations, reboots, or default dates1. A Business Continuity Plan (BCP) is an example of a corrective control.

Unsuccessful access attempts being automatically logged for investigation is an example of a corrective control because it is a response to a potential security incident that aims to identify and resolve the cause and prevent future occurrences2. Logging and investigating failed login attempts can help detect unauthorized or malicious attempts to access sensitive data or systems and take appropriate actions to mitigate the risk.

The other options are examples of preventive controls, which are designed to prevent problems from occurring in the first place3. Preventive controls can include:

• A central antivirus system installing the latest signature files before allowing a connection to the network: This is a preventive control because it prevents malware infection by blocking potentially harmful connections and updating the antivirus software regularly4.
• All new employees having standard access rights until their manager approves privileged rights: This is a preventive control because it prevents unauthorized access by enforcing the principle of least privilege and requiring approval for granting higher-level permissions5.
• Privileged access to critical information systems requiring a second factor of authentication using a soft token: This is a preventive control because it prevents credential theft or compromise by adding an extra layer of security to verify the identity of the user.

References:

• What is a corrective control? - Answers1, section on Corrective control
• Detective controls - SaaS Lens - docs.aws.amazon.com2, section on Unsuccessful login attempts
• Internal control: how do preventive and detective controls work?3, section on Preventive Controls
• What Are Security Controls? - F54, section on Preventive Controls
• The 3 Types of Internal Controls (With Examples) | Layer Blog5, section on Preventive Controls
• What are the 3 Types of Internal Controls? — RiskOptics - Reciprocity, section on Preventive Controls

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

External attestation and certification audit reports are considered the best method to demonstrate assurance in cloud services to multiple customers because they provide an independent verification of the cloud service provider’s controls and practices. These reports are conducted by third-party auditors and offer a level of transparency and trust that cannot be achieved through self-assessments or internal documents. They help ensure that the cloud provider meets industry standards and regulatory requirements, which is crucial for customers to assess the risk and compliance posture of their cloud service providers.

References = The importance of external attestation and certification audit reports is supported by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) and ISACA, which state that the CCAK credential prepares IT and security professionals to ensure that the right controls are in place and to mitigate the risks and costs of audit management and penalties for non-compliance1.

Cryptography and authentication are good candidates for continuous auditing, as they are critical aspects of cloud security that require constant monitoring and verification. Cryptography and authentication refer to the methods and techniques that ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data and communications in the cloud environment. Cryptography involves the use of encryption algorithms and keys to protect data from unauthorized access or modification. Authentication involves the use of credentials and tokens to verify the identity and access rights of users or devices. Continuous auditing can help to assess the effectiveness and compliance of cryptography and authentication controls, such as data encryption, key management, password policies, multifactor authentication, single sign-on, etc. Continuous auditing can also help to detect and alert any anomalies or issues that may compromise or affect cryptography and authentication, such as data breaches, key leakage, password cracking, unauthorized access, etc123.

Procedures (A) are not good candidates for continuous auditing, as they are not specific or measurable aspects of cloud security that can be easily automated or tested. Procedures refer to the steps or actions that are performed to achieve a certain objective or result in a specific domain or context. Procedures may vary depending on the type, nature, or complexity of the task or process involved. Continuous auditing requires a clear and consistent definition of the expected outcome or output, as well as the criteria or metrics to evaluate it. Procedures may not provide such a definition or criteria, and may require human judgment or interpretation to assess their effectiveness or compliance123.

Governance (B) is not a good candidate for continuous auditing, as it is not a specific or measurable aspect of cloud security that can be easily automated or tested. Governance refers to the framework or system that defines the roles, responsibilities, policies, standards, procedures, and practices for managing and overseeing an organization or a domain. Governance may involve multiple stakeholders, such as management, board of directors, regulators, auditors, customers, etc., who have different interests, expectations, or perspectives. Continuous auditing requires a clear and consistent definition of the expected outcome or output, as well as the criteria or metrics to evaluate it. Governance may not provide such a definition or criteria, and may require human judgment or interpretation to assess its effectiveness or compliance123.

Documentation quality (D) is not a good candidate for continuous auditing, as it is not a specific or measurable aspect of cloud security that can be easily automated or tested. Documentation quality refers to the degree to which the documents that describe or support an organization or a domain are accurate, complete, consistent, relevant, and understandable. Documentation quality may depend on various factors, such as the purpose, audience, format, style, language, structure, content, etc., of the documents involved. Continuous auditing requires a clear and consistent definition of the expected outcome or output, as well as the criteria or metrics to evaluate it. Documentation quality may not provide such a definition or criteria, and may require human judgment or interpretation to assess its effectiveness or compliance123. 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

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 framework developed by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) to help organizations identify, analyze, and mitigate the most critical threats to cloud computing. The methodology consists of six steps: threat identification, threat analysis, technical impact identification, business impact analysis, risk assessment, and risk treatment12.

The technical impact identification step is the third step of the methodology, and it aims to assess how the incident affected the security properties of the information system, namely confidentiality, integrity, and availability. 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. The technical impact identification step can help organizations to understand the severity and extent of the incident and its consequences on the information system12.

The other options are not within the scope of the technical impact identification step. Option A, determine the impact on the controls that were selected by the organization to respond to identified risks, is not within the scope because it is part of the risk treatment step, which is the sixth and final step of the methodology. Option C, determine the impact on the physical and environmental security of the organization, excluding informational assets, is not within the scope because it is not related to the information system or its security properties. Option D, determine the impact on the financial, operational, compliance, and reputation of the organization, is not within the scope because it is part of the business impact analysis step, which is the fourth step of the methodology. References :=

• Top Threats Analysis Methodology - CSA1
• Top Threats Analysis Methodology - 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

The most useful document for an auditor to review when seeking visibility into the cloud supply chain for a newly acquired Software as a Service (SaaS) solution is the SaaS provider contract. The contract is the legal agreement that defines the terms and conditions of the cloud service, including the roles, responsibilities, and obligations of the parties involved1. The contract should also specify the service level agreements (SLAs), security and privacy requirements, data ownership and governance, incident response and reporting, audit rights and access, and subcontracting or outsourcing arrangements of the SaaS provider2. By reviewing the contract, the auditor can gain insight into the cloud supply chain and assess the risks, controls, and compliance of the SaaS solution.

The other options are not as useful as the SaaS provider contract. Payments made by the service owner are the financial transactions that reflect the fees or charges incurred by using the SaaS solution. They may indicate the usage or consumption of the cloud service, but they do not provide much information about the cloud supply chain or its security and compliance aspects3. SaaS vendor white papers are the marketing or educational materials that describe the features, benefits, or best practices of the SaaS solution. They may provide some general or technical information about the cloud service, but they are not legally binding or verifiable4. Cloud compliance obligations register is a tool that helps customers identify and track their compliance requirements and obligations for using cloud services. It may help customers understand their own responsibilities and risks in relation to the cloud service, but it does not necessarily reflect the compliance status or performance of the SaaS provider5.

References:

• Cloud Services Due Diligence Checklist | Trust Center1, section on How to use the checklist
• Cloud Computing Security Considerations | Cyber.gov.au2, section on Contractual arrangements
• Cloud Computing Pricing Models: A Comparison - DZone Cloud3, section on Pricing Models
• What is a White Paper? Definition from WhatIs.com4, section on White Paper
• Cloud Compliance Obligations Register | Cyber.gov.au5, section on Cloud Compliance Obligations Register

This control specification aligns with the concept of independent audits, which are crucial for verifying that an organization adheres to its established policies, standards, procedures, and compliance obligations. The requirement for these reviews and assessments to be performed at least annually ensures ongoing compliance and the ability to address any areas of nonconformity. Independent audits provide an objective assessment and are essential for maintaining transparency and trust in the cloud services provided.

References = The Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) specifically mentions the need for independent assessments to be conducted annually as part of the Audit Assurance and Compliance domain, which is detailed in the CCM’s guidelines and related documents provided by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA)12.

 Metrics around Platform as a Service (PaaS) development environments are frequently immature, as PaaS is a relatively new and evolving cloud service model that offers various tools and platforms for developing, testing, deploying, and managing cloud applications. PaaS metrics are often not well-defined, standardized, or consistent across different providers and platforms, and may not capture the full value and performance of PaaS services. PaaS metrics may also be difficult to measure, monitor, and compare, as they depend on various factors, such as the type, complexity, and quality of the applications, the level of customization and integration, the usage patterns and demand, and the security and compliance requirements. Therefore, PaaS metrics may not provide sufficient insight or assurance to cloud customers and auditors on the effectiveness, efficiency, reliability, and security of PaaS services12.

References:

• Cloud Computing Service Metrics Description - NIST
• Cloud KPIs You Need to Measure Success - VMware Blogs

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

According to the ISACA CCAK 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 cloud service. The management is responsible for ensuring that the cloud service meets the requirements and expectations of the community, as well as complying with any relevant laws and regulations. The auditor should also communicate the findings to the cloud service provider, as they are the secondary stakeholders and service providers for the cloud service. The cloud service provider should be aware of any issues or gaps identified by the auditor and work with the management to resolve them. The auditor should not report the findings to the public, shareholders, or interested parties, as they are not directly involved in the cloud service or its governance. The auditor should respect the confidentiality and privacy of the community and its data, and only disclose the findings to those who have a legitimate need to know. References :=

• ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 971
• ISACA, Cloud Auditing Knowledge: Preparing for the CCAK Certificate Exam, 2021, p. 36

Reputation-based trust is a category of trust in cloud computing that relies on the feedback, ratings, reviews, or recommendations of other users or third parties who have used or evaluated the cloud service provider or the cloud service. Reputation-based trust reflects the collective opinion and experience of the cloud community regarding the quality, reliability, security, and performance of the cloud service provider or the cloud service. Reputation-based trust can help potential customers to make informed decisions about choosing a cloud service provider or a cloud service based on the reputation score or ranking of the provider or the service. Reputation-based trust can also motivate cloud service providers to improve their services and maintain their reputation by meeting or exceeding customer expectations.

Reputation-based trust is one of the most common and widely used forms of trust in cloud computing, as it is easy to access and understand. However, reputation-based trust also has some limitations and challenges, such as:

• The accuracy and validity of the reputation data may depend on the source, method, and frequency of data collection and aggregation. For example, some reputation data may be outdated, incomplete, biased, manipulated, or falsified by malicious actors or competitors.
• The interpretation and comparison of the reputation data may vary depending on the context, criteria, and preferences of the customers. For example, some customers may value different aspects of the cloud service more than others, such as security, availability, cost, or functionality.
• The trustworthiness and accountability of the reputation system itself may be questionable. For example, some reputation systems may lack transparency, consistency, or standardization in their design, implementation, or operation.

Therefore, reputation-based trust should not be the only factor for trusting a cloud service provider or a cloud service. Customers should also consider other forms of trust in cloud computing, such as evidence-based trust, policy-based trust, or certification-based trust

According to the ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, a cloud auditor should use statistical sampling rather than judgment (nonstatistical) sampling when the probability of error must be objectively quantified1. Statistical sampling is a sampling technique that uses random selection methods and mathematical calculations to draw conclusions about the population from the sample results. Statistical sampling allows the auditor to measure the sampling risk, which is the risk that the sample results do not represent the population, and to express the confidence level and precision of the sample1. Statistical sampling also enables the auditor to estimate the rate of exceptions or errors in the population based on the sample1.

The other options are not valid reasons for using statistical sampling rather than judgment sampling. Option A is irrelevant, as generalized audit software is a tool that can facilitate both statistical and judgment sampling, but it is not a requirement for either technique. Option B is incorrect, as statistical sampling does not avoid sampling risk, but rather measures and controls it. Option D is illogical, as the tolerable error rate is a parameter that must be determined before conducting any sampling technique, whether statistical or judgmental. References:

• ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, page 17-18.

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

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.

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

Identity and access management (IAM) and data protection are the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are the key aspects of cloud security and compliance that affect both the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer. IAM and data protection refer to the methods and techniques that ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data and resources in the cloud environment. IAM involves the use of credentials, policies, roles, permissions, and tokens to verify the identity and access rights of users or devices. Data protection involves the use of encryption, backup, recovery, deletion, and retention to protect data from unauthorized access, modification, loss, or disclosure123.

Patching and configuration (A) are not the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are not the key aspects of cloud security and compliance that affect both the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer. Patching and configuration refer 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. Configuration involves the use of settings or parameters to customize or optimize the functionality of the cloud components. Patching and configuration are mainly under the responsibility of the cloud service provider, as they own and operate the cloud infrastructure, platform, or software. The cloud service customer has limited or no access or control over these aspects123.

Vulnerability management and cyber security reviews (B) are not the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are not specific or measurable aspects of cloud security and compliance that can be easily audited or tested. Vulnerability management and cyber security reviews refer 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. Cyber security reviews involve the use of tools or techniques to evaluate, measure, benchmark, or improve the security capabilities or maturity of an organization or a domain. Vulnerability management and cyber security reviews are general or broad terms that encompass various aspects of cloud security and compliance, such as IAM, data protection, patching, configuration, etc. Therefore, they are not specific or measurable areas that can be audited or tested individually123.

Source code reviews and hypervisor (D) are not the areas that should be reviewed when auditing a public cloud, as they are not relevant or accessible aspects of cloud security and compliance for most cloud service customers. 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. Hypervisor refers to the software that allows the creation and management of virtual machines on a physical server. Source code reviews and hypervisor are mainly under the responsibility of the cloud service provider, as they own and operate the software applications or systems that deliver cloud services. The cloud service customer has 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

Management representation is a term used in audit parlance to refer to the statements made by management in response to specific inquiries or through the financial statements, as part of the audit evidence that the auditor obtains. Management representation can be oral or written, but the auditor usually obtains written representation from management in the form of a letter that attests to the accuracy and completeness of the financial statements and other information provided to the auditor. The management representation letter is signed by senior management, such as the CEO and CFO, and is dated the same date of audit work completion. The management representation letter confirms or documents the representations explicitly or implicitly given to the auditor during the audit, indicates the continuing appropriateness of such representations, and reduces the possibility of misunderstanding concerning the matters that are the subject of the representations12.

Management representation is not a person or group of persons representing executive management during audits (A), as this would imply that management is not directly involved or accountable for the audit process. Management representation is not a mechanism to represent organizational structure (B), as this would imply that management representation is a graphical or diagrammatic tool to show the hierarchy or relationships within an organization. Management representation is not a project management technique to demonstrate management’s involvement in key project stages ©, as this would imply that management representation is a method or practice to monitor or report on the progress or outcomes of a project.

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 first step to switch from the ISO/IEC 27002 control framework to the NIST 800-53 control framework is to map ISO/IEC 27002 and NIST 800-53 and detect gaps and commonalities. This step can help the organization to understand the similarities and differences between the two frameworks, and to identify which controls are already implemented, which controls need to be added or modified, and which controls are no longer applicable. Mapping can also help the organization to leverage the existing work done under ISO/IEC 27002 and avoid starting from scratch or discarding valuable information. Mapping can also help the organization to align with both frameworks, as they are not mutually exclusive or incompatible. In fact, NIST SP 800-53, Revision 5 provides a mapping table between NIST 800-53 and ISO/IEC 27001 in Appendix H-21. ISO/IEC 27001 is a standard for information security management systems that is based on ISO/IEC 27002, which is a code of practice for information security controls2.

References:

• NIST SP 800-53, Revision 5 Control Mappings to ISO/IEC 27001
• ISO - ISO/IEC 27002:2013 - Information technology — Security techniques — Code of practice for information security controls

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.

It is most important for an auditor to be aware that an inventory of assets within a cloud environment is fundamental for the security management program. An inventory of assets is a list of all the hardware, software, data, and services that are owned, used, or managed by an organization in the cloud. An inventory of assets helps the organization to identify, classify, and prioritize its cloud resources and to implement appropriate security controls and policies to protect them. An inventory of assets also helps the organization to comply with relevant regulations, standards, and contracts that may apply to its cloud environment.12

An auditor should be aware of the importance of an inventory of assets in the cloud because it provides a baseline for assessing the security posture and compliance status of the organization’s cloud environment. An auditor can use the inventory of assets to verify that the organization has a clear and accurate understanding of its cloud resources and their characteristics, such as location, ownership, configuration, dependencies, vulnerabilities, and risks. An auditor can also use the inventory of assets to evaluate whether the organization has implemented adequate security measures and processes to protect its cloud resources from threats and incidents. An auditor can also use the inventory of assets to identify any gaps or weaknesses in the organization’s security management program and to provide recommendations for improvement.34

References := Why is IT Asset Inventory Management Critical? - Fresh Security1; Use asset inventory to manage your resources’ security posture2; The importance of asset inventory in cybersecurity3; The Importance Of Asset Inventory In Cyber Security And CMDB - Visore4

 The effect of applicable statutory requirements should have priority in planning the scope and objectives of a cloud audit, as they are the mandatory and enforceable rules that govern the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer. Statutory requirements may vary depending on the jurisdiction, industry, or sector of the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer, as well as the type, location, and sensitivity of the data processed or stored in the cloud. Statutory requirements may include laws, regulations, standards, or codes that relate to data protection, privacy, security, compliance, governance, taxation, or liability. The cloud auditor should identify and understand the applicable statutory requirements that affect the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer, and assess whether they are met and adhered to by both parties. The cloud auditor should also verify that the contractual terms and conditions between the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer reflect and comply with the applicable statutory requirements123.

Applicable industry good practices (A) are important for planning the scope and objectives of a cloud audit, but they are not as high priority as applicable statutory requirements. Industry good practices are the recommended or accepted methods or techniques for achieving a desired outcome or result in a specific domain or context. Industry good practices may include frameworks, guidelines, principles, or best practices that are developed by professional bodies, associations, or organizations that have expertise or authority in a certain field or area. Industry good practices may help the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer to improve their performance, quality, efficiency, or effectiveness in delivering or using cloud services. However, industry good practices are not mandatory or enforceable, and they may vary or change over time depending on the evolution of technology or business needs123.

Organizational policies and procedures © are important for planning the scope and objectives of a cloud audit, but they are not as high priority as applicable statutory requirements. Organizational policies and procedures are the internal rules and guidelines that define the objectives, expectations, and responsibilities of an organization regarding its operations, activities, processes, or functions. Organizational policies and procedures may include mission statements, vision statements, values statements, strategies, goals, plans, standards, manuals, handbooks, or instructions that are specific to an organization. Organizational policies and procedures may help the organization to align its actions and decisions with its purpose and direction, as well as to ensure consistency and accountability among its members or stakeholders. However, organizational policies and procedures are not mandatory or enforceable outside the organization, and they may differ or conflict among different organizations123.

Applicable corporate standards (D) are important for planning the scope and objectives of a cloud audit, but they are not as high priority as applicable statutory requirements. Corporate standards are the internal rules and guidelines that define the minimum level of quality, performance, reliability, or compatibility that an organization expects from its products, services, processes, or systems. Corporate standards may include specifications, criteria, metrics, indicators, benchmarks, or baselines that are specific to an organization. Corporate standards may help the organization to measure and evaluate its outputs or outcomes against its objectives or expectations, as well as to identify and address any gaps or issues that may arise. However, corporate standards are not mandatory or enforceable outside the organization, and they may differ or conflict among different organizations123. 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

According to the CCAK Study Guide, the business continuity management and operational resilience strategy of the cloud customer should be formulated jointly with the cloud service provider, as they share the responsibility for ensuring the availability and recoverability of the cloud services. The strategy should cover all aspects of business continuity and resilience planning, taking inputs from the assessed impact and risks, to consider activities for before, during, and after a disruption. These activities include prevention, mitigation, response, recovery, restoration, and improvement. The strategy should also define the roles and responsibilities of both parties, the communication channels and escalation procedures, the testing and exercising plans, and the review and update mechanisms1

The other options are not correct because:

• Option B is not correct because the strategy should not only be developed within the acceptable limits of the risk appetite, but also aligned with the business objectives and stakeholder expectations of both parties. The risk appetite is only one of the factors that influence the strategy formulation1
• Option C is not correct because the strategy should not only cover the activities required to continue and recover prioritized activities within identified time frames and agreed capacity, but also consider the activities for before and after a disruption, such as prevention, mitigation, improvement, etc. The strategy should also include other elements such as roles and responsibilities, communication channels, testing plans, etc1

References: 1: ISACA, Cloud Security Alliance. Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide. 2021. pp. 83-84.

 The BSI Criteria Catalogue C5 is a document that has been provided by the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) in Germany to support customers in selecting, controlling, and monitoring their cloud service providers (CSPs). The C5 stands for Cloud Computing Compliance Criteria Catalogue and specifies minimum requirements for secure cloud computing. The C5 is primarily intended for professional CSPs, their auditors, and customers of the CSPs. The C5 covers 17 domains and 114 control objectives that address all key aspects of cloud security, such as data protection, identity and access management, encryption and key management, incident response, audit assurance, and compliance. The C5 also maps to other industry-accepted security standards, regulations, and frameworks, such as ISO 27001/27002/27017/27018, NIST SP 800-53, CSA Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM), COBIT, GDPR, etc. The C5 helps customers to evaluate and compare the security and compliance posture of different CSPs, and to verify that the CSPs meet their contractual obligations and legal requirements12.

References:

• BSI - C5 criteria catalogue - Federal Office for Information Security
• Germany C5 - Azure Compliance | Microsoft Learn

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

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

A detective control is a type of internal control that seeks to uncover problems in a company’s processes once they have occurred1. Examples of detective controls include physical inventory checks, reviews of account reports and reconciliations, as well as assessments of current controls1. Detective controls use platform telemetry to detect misconfigurations, vulnerabilities, and potentially malicious activity in the cloud environment2.

In a Software as a Service (SaaS) service provider, privileged access monitoring is a detective control that can help identify unauthorized or suspicious activities by users who have elevated permissions to access or modify cloud resources, data, or configurations. Privileged access monitoring can involve logging, auditing, alerting, and reporting on the actions performed by privileged users3. This can help detect security incidents, compliance violations, or operational errors in a timely manner and enable appropriate responses.

Data encryption, incident management, and network segmentation are examples of preventive controls, which are designed to prevent problems from occurring in the first place. Data encryption protects the confidentiality and integrity of data by transforming it into an unreadable format that can only be decrypted with a valid key1. Incident management is a process that aims to restore normal service operations as quickly as possible after a disruption or an adverse event4. Network segmentation divides a network into smaller subnetworks that have different access levels and security policies, reducing the attack surface and limiting the impact of a breach1.

References:

• Detective controls - SaaS Lens - docs.aws.amazon.com3, section on Privileged access monitoring
• Detective controls | Cloud Architecture Center | Google Cloud2, section on Detective controls
• Internal control: how do preventive and detective controls work?4, section on SaaS Solutions to Support Internal Control
• Detective Control: Definition, Examples, Vs. Preventive Control1, section on What Is a Detective Control?

 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

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

This situation poses a significant concern for a cloud auditor because it indicates a potential gap in the technical team’s ability to effectively manage and secure the IaaS platform provided by the alternative vendor. Without proper training on the specific features, security practices, and operational procedures of the new platform, the organization may face increased risks of misconfiguration, security vulnerabilities, and inefficiencies in cloud operations. It is crucial for the technical team to have a comprehensive understanding of all platforms in use to ensure they can maintain the security and performance standards required for a robust cloud environment.

References = The concern is based on common cloud auditing challenges, such as controlling and monitoring user access, and ensuring the IT team is equipped to manage the cloud environment effectively12. Additionally, best practices suggest that network segmentation, user authentication, and access control are critical areas to address in a cloud audit3. These principles are widely recognized in the field of cloud security and compliance.

According to the CSA website, the primary purpose of the Open Certification Framework (OCF) for the CSA STAR program is to provide global, accredited, trusted certification of cloud providers1 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 framework2 The OCF aims to address the gaps within the IT ecosystem that are inhibiting market adoption of secure and reliable cloud services, such as the lack of simple, cost effective ways to evaluate and compare providers’ resilience, data protection, privacy, and service portability2 The OCF also aims to promote industry transparency and reduce complexity and costs for both providers and customers3

The other options are not correct because:

• Option A is not correct because facilitating an effective relationship between the cloud service provider and cloud client is not the primary purpose of the OCF for the CSA STAR program, but rather a potential benefit or outcome of it. The OCF can help facilitate an effective relationship between the provider and the client by providing a common language and framework for assessing and communicating the security and compliance posture of the provider, as well as enabling trust and confidence in the provider’s capabilities and performance. However, this is not the main goal or objective of the OCF, but rather a means to achieve it.
• Option B is not correct because ensuring understanding of true risk and perceived risk by the cloud service users is not the primary purpose of the OCF for the CSA STAR program, but rather a possible implication or consequence of it. The OCF can help ensure understanding of true risk and perceived risk by the cloud service users by providing objective and verifiable information and evidence about the provider’s security and compliance level, as well as allowing comparison and benchmarking with other providers in the market. However, this is not the main aim or intention of the OCF, but rather a result or effect of it.
• Option D is not correct because enabling the cloud service provider to prioritize resources to meet its own requirements is not the primary purpose of the OCF for the CSA STAR program, but rather a potential advantage or opportunity for it. The OCF can enable the cloud service provider to prioritize resources to meet its own requirements by providing a flexible, incremental and multi-layered approach to certification and/or attestation that allows the provider to choose the level of assurance that suits their business needs and goals. However, this is not the main reason or motivation for the OCF, but rather a benefit or option for it.

References: 1: Open Certification Framework Working Group | CSA 2: Open Certification Framework | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance 3: Why your cloud services need the CSA STAR Registry listing

The most relevant question in the cloud compliance program design phase is who owns the cloud governance strategy. Cloud governance is a method of information and technology (I&T) governance focused on accountability, defining decision rights and balancing benefit, risk and resources in an environment that embraces cloud computing. Cloud governance creates business-driven policies and principles that establish the appropriate degree of investments and control around the life cycle process for cloud computing services1. Therefore, it is essential to identify who owns the cloud governance strategy in the organization, as this will determine the roles and responsibilities, decision-making authority, reporting structure, and escalation process for cloud compliance issues. The cloud governance owner should be a senior executive who has the vision, influence, and resources to drive the cloud compliance program and align it with the business objectives2.

References:

• Building Cloud Governance From the Basics - ISACA
• [Cloud Governance | Microsoft Azure]

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.

An independent auditor report is a method that can be used by a cloud service provider (CSP) with a cloud customer that does not want to share security and control information. An independent auditor report is a document that provides assurance on the CSP’s security and control environment, based on an audit conducted by a qualified third-party auditor. The audit can be based on various standards or frameworks, such as ISO 27001, SOC 2, CSA STAR, etc. The independent auditor report can provide the cloud customer with the necessary information to evaluate the CSP’s security and control posture, without disclosing sensitive or proprietary details. The CSP can also use the independent auditor report to demonstrate compliance with relevant regulations or contractual obligations.

References:

• ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 83-84.
• ISACA, Cloud Computing Audit Program, 2019, p. 6-7.

 An example of availability technical impact is a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack that renders the customer’s cloud inaccessible for 24 hours. Availability technical impact refers to the effect of a cloud security incident on the protection of data and services from disruption or denial. Availability is one of the three security properties of an information system, along with confidentiality and integrity.

Option A is an example of availability technical impact because it shows how a DDoS attack, which is a type of cyberattack that overwhelms a system or network with malicious traffic and prevents legitimate users from accessing it, can cause a severe and prolonged disruption of the customer’s cloud services. Option A also implies that the customer’s organization depends on the availability of its cloud services for its core business operations.

The other options are not examples of availability technical impact. Option B is an example of confidentiality technical impact, which refers to the effect of a cloud security incident on the protection of data from unauthorized access or disclosure. Option B shows how a breach of customer personal data from an unsecured server, which is a type of data leakage or exposure attack that exploits the lack of proper security controls on a system or network, can cause a violation of the privacy and security of the customer’s data. Option C is an example of integrity technical impact, which refers to the effect of a cloud security incident on the protection of data from unauthorized modification or deletion. Option C shows how an administrator inadvertently clicking on phish bait, which is a type of social engineering or phishing attack that tricks a user into clicking on a malicious link or attachment, can expose the company to a ransomware attack, which is a type of malware or encryption attack that locks or encrypts the data and demands a ransom for its release. Option D is also an example of integrity technical impact, as it shows how a hacker using a stolen administrator identity, which is a type of identity theft or impersonation attack that exploits the credentials or privileges of a legitimate user to access or manipulate a system or network, can alter the discount percentage in the product database, which is a type of data tampering or corruption attack that affects the accuracy and reliability of the data. References :=

• OWASP Risk Rating Methodology | OWASP Foundation1
• OEE Factors: Availability, Performance, and Quality | OEE2
• The Effects of Technological Developments on Work and Their …

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.

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

 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.

 When developing a cloud compliance program, the primary reason for a cloud customer to determine how those services will fit within its policies and procedures is to ensure that the cloud services are aligned with the customer’s business objectives, risk appetite, and compliance obligations. Cloud services may have different characteristics, features, and capabilities than traditional on-premises services, and may require different or additional controls to meet the customer’s security and compliance requirements. Therefore, the customer needs to assess how the cloud services will fit within its existing policies and procedures, such as data classification, data protection, access management, incident response, audit, and reporting. The customer also needs to identify any gaps or conflicts between the cloud services and its policies and procedures, and implement appropriate measures to address them. By doing so, the customer can ensure that the cloud services are used in a secure, compliant, and effective manner12.

References:

• ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 19-20.
• Cloud Compliance Frameworks: What You Need to Know

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.