CCAK Sample Questions Answers

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISO 27017 Certification - Cloud Security Services | NQA

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

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

[Cloud Controls Matrix | Cloud Security Alliance]

[NIST Cloud Computing Synopsis and Recommendations]

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

References:

STAR Registry | CSA

STAR | CSA

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

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

 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

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.

 The cloud auditor should check if there is explicit documented approval from all customers whose data is affected by the transfer of production data to the test environment. This is because production data may contain sensitive or personal information that is subject to privacy and security regulations, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). Therefore, using production data for testing purposes without the consent of the data owners may violate their rights and expose the organization to legal and reputational risks. This is also stated in the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) control DSI-04: Production / Non-Production Environments12, which is part of the Data Security & Information Lifecycle Management 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, approval of the change by the change advisory board, refers to the process of reviewing and authorizing changes to the system or software before they are implemented in the production environment. This is a good practice for ensuring the quality and reliability of the system or software, but it does not address the issue of using production data for testing purposes. Option C, training for the librarian, refers to the process of providing adequate education and awareness to the staff who are responsible for managing and transferring data between different environments. This is a good practice for ensuring the competence and accountability of the staff, but it does not address the issue of obtaining consent from the data owners. Option D, verification that the hardware of the test and production environments are compatible, refers to the process of ensuring that the system or software can run smoothly and consistently on both environments. This is a good practice for ensuring the performance and functionality of the system or software, but it does not address the issue of protecting the privacy and security of the production data. References :=

Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, Chapter 6: Cloud Security Controls

Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA3

DSI-04: Production / Non-Production Environments - CSF Tools - Identity Digital1

DSI: Data Security & Information Lifecycle Management - CSF Tools - Identity Digital

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

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

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

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

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

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.

 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

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

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

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.

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

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.

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

References:

Open Certification Framework Working Group | CSA

STAR | CSA

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

References:

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

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

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

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]

The Cloud Controls Matrix (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 CCM provides guidance on which security controls should be implemented by which actor within the cloud supply chain, and maps the controls to industry-accepted security standards, regulations, and frameworks. The CCM can help cloud customers to assess the security posture of their cloud service providers, document their own responsibilities and requirements, and establish a baseline for cloud security assurance and compliance. References :=

Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) - CSA1

What is the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM)? - Cloud Security Alliance2

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

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

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

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

References:

Azure Security Control - Vulnerability Management | Microsoft Learn

How to Implement Enterprise Vulnerability Assessment - Gartner

 The 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.

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 …

An external audit is an appropriate tool and technique to support a customer’s verification of the cloud service provider’s claims regarding its responsibilities according to the shared responsibility model. An external audit is an independent and objective examination of the cloud service provider’s policies, procedures, controls, and performance by a qualified third-party auditor. An external audit can provide assurance that the cloud service provider is fulfilling its obligations and meeting the customer’s expectations in terms of security, compliance, availability, reliability, and quality. An external audit can also identify any gaps or weaknesses in the cloud service provider’s security posture and suggest recommendations for improvement.

An external audit can be based on various standards, frameworks, and regulations that are relevant to the cloud service provider’s industry and domain. For example, some common external audits for cloud service providers are:

ISO/IEC 27001: This is an international standard that specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS). An ISMS is a systematic approach to managing sensitive information so that it remains secure. An ISO/IEC 27001 certification demonstrates that the cloud service provider has implemented a comprehensive and effective ISMS that covers all aspects of information security, including risk assessment, policy development, asset management, access control, incident management, business continuity, and compliance.1

SOC 2: This is an attestation report that evaluates the cloud service provider’s security controls based on the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Trust Services Criteria. The Trust Services Criteria are a set of principles and criteria for evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of controls that affect the security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy of a system. A SOC 2 report provides assurance that the cloud service provider has implemented adequate controls to protect the customer’s data and systems.2

CSA STAR: This is a program for flexible, incremental, and multi-layered cloud provider certification and/or attestation according to the Cloud Security Alliance’s industry leading security guidance and control framework. The CSA STAR program consists of three levels of assurance: Level 1: Self-Assessment, Level 2: Third-Party Audit, and Level 3: Continuous Auditing. The CSA STAR program aims to provide transparency, assurance, and trust in the cloud ecosystem by enabling customers to assess and compare the security and compliance posture of cloud service providers.3

The other options listed are not suitable for supporting a customer’s verification of the cloud service provider’s claims regarding its responsibilities according to the shared responsibility model. An internal audit is an audit conducted by the cloud service provider itself or by an internal auditor hired by the cloud service provider. An internal audit may not be as independent or objective as an external audit, and it may not provide sufficient evidence or credibility to the customer. A contractual agreement is a legal document that defines the roles, responsibilities, expectations, and obligations of both the cloud service provider and the customer. A contractual agreement may specify the terms and conditions for service delivery, performance, availability, security, compliance, data protection, incident response, dispute resolution, liability, and termination. However, a contractual agreement alone does not verify or validate whether the cloud service provider is actually fulfilling its claims or meeting its contractual obligations. A security assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the security risks and vulnerabilities of a system or an organization. A security assessment may involve various methods such as vulnerability scanning, penetration testing, threat modeling, or risk analysis. A security assessment may provide useful information about the current state of security of a system or an organization, but it may not cover all aspects of the shared responsibility model or provide assurance that the cloud service provider is complying with its responsibilities on an ongoing basis.

Regarding cloud service provider agreements and contracts, unless otherwise stated, the provider is responsible only to the cloud customer. This means that the provider has a contractual obligation to deliver the agreed-upon services and meet the service level agreements (SLAs) with the cloud customer, who is the direct payer of the services. The provider is not responsible for any other parties, such as the cloud customer’s clients, end users, or regulators, unless explicitly specified in the contract. The cloud customer is responsible for ensuring that the provider’s services meet their own compliance and security requirements, as well as those of their stakeholders12.

References:

Shared responsibility in the cloud - Microsoft Azure

Cloud security shared responsibility model - NCSC

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

 A DDoS attack renders the customer’s cloud inaccessible for 24 hours, resulting in millions in lost sales is an example of financial business impact. Financial business impact refers to the extent of damage or harm that a threat can cause to the financial objectives and performance of the organization, such as revenue, profit, cash flow, or market share. A DDoS attack can cause a significant financial business impact by disrupting the normal operations and transactions of the organization, leading to loss of sales, customers, contracts, or opportunities. According to a report by Kaspersky, the average cost of a DDoS attack for small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) was $123,000 in 2019, while for enterprises it was $2.3 million.1 Therefore, it is important for organizations to implement appropriate security measures and contingency plans to prevent or mitigate the effects of a DDoS attack. References := The Future of Finance and the Global Economy: Facing Global … - IMF2; Kaspersky: Cost of a DDoS Attack1

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

 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

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

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

When an organization is moving to the cloud, responsibilities are shared based upon the cloud service provider’s model and accountability is maintained. This means that the organization remains accountable for the security and compliance of its data and applications in the cloud, even if some of the security responsibilities are delegated to the cloud service provider (CSP). The organization cannot transfer or avoid its accountability to the CSP or any other third party, as it is ultimately responsible for its own business outcomes, legal obligations, and reputation. Therefore, the organization must understand the shared responsibility model and which security tasks are handled by the CSP and which tasks are handled by itself. The organization must also monitor and audit the CSP’s performance and security, and mitigate any risks or issues that may arise12.

References:

Shared responsibility in the cloud - Microsoft Azure

Understanding the Shared Responsibilities Model in Cloud Services - ISACA

 The reason for designing the Consensus Assessments Initiative Questionnaire (CAIQ) is to help cloud service providers document their security and compliance controls. The CAIQ is a survey provided by the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA) that consists of a set of yes/no questions that correspond to the controls of the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM), which is a cybersecurity framework for cloud computing. The CAIQ allows cloud service providers to demonstrate their security posture and compliance status to potential customers and auditors, as well as to identify any gaps or risks that need to be addressed. The CAIQ also enables cloud customers to assess the security capabilities of different cloud service providers and compare them based on their needs and requirements123.

The other options are not directly related to the question. Option A, cloud users can use CAIQ to sign statement of work (SOW) with cloud access security brokers (CASBs), is incorrect because CAIQ is not a contract or an agreement, but a questionnaire that provides information about the security controls of a cloud service provider. A statement of work (SOW) is a document that defines the scope, deliverables, and terms of a project or service. A cloud access security broker (CASB) is a software tool or service that acts as an intermediary between cloud users and cloud service providers, providing visibility, data security, threat protection, and compliance4. Option B, cloud service providers can document roles and responsibilities for cloud security, is incorrect because CAIQ is not designed to document roles and responsibilities, but security and compliance controls. Roles and responsibilities for cloud security are defined by the shared responsibility model, which outlines how the security tasks and obligations are divided between the cloud service provider and the cloud customer5. Option D, cloud service providers need the CAIQ to improve quality of customer service, is incorrect because CAIQ is not a measure of customer service quality, but a measure of security control transparency. Customer service quality refers to how well a cloud service provider meets or exceeds the expectations and satisfaction of its customers6. References :=

What is CASB? - Cloud Security Alliance4

What is CAIQ? | CSA - Cloud Security Alliance1

Shared Responsibility Model - Cloud Security Alliance5

What is CAIQ? - Panorays2

What is the Consensus Assessments Initiative Questionnaire (CAIQ …3

What Is Customer Service Quality? - Salesforce.com

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).

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

 ISO/IEC 27017:2015 is a standard that provides guidelines for information security controls applicable to the provision and use of cloud services by providing additional implementation guidance for relevant controls specified in ISO/IEC 27002, as well as additional controls with implementation guidance that specifically relate to cloud services1. ISO/IEC 27017:2015 is designed to be used by organizations for cloud services that intend to select controls within the process of implementing an information security management system based on ISO/IEC 270011. ISO/IEC 27001 is a standard that specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system within the context of the organization.

ISO/IEC 27002 is a standard that provides a code of practice for information security controls, but it does not provide specific guidance for cloud services. NIST SP 800-146 is a publication that provides an overview of cloud computing, its characteristics, service models, deployment models, and security considerations, but it does not provide a standard for selecting controls for cloud services. CSA CCM is a framework that provides detailed understanding of security concepts and principles that are aligned to the Cloud Security Alliance guidance in 13 domains, but it is not a standard that is based on ISO/IEC 27001. References:

ISO/IEC 27017:2015

[ISO/IEC 27001:2013]

[ISO/IEC 27002:2013]

[NIST SP 800-146]

[CSA CCM]

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

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

To qualify for CSA STAR attestation, the SOC 2 report must cover both the Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) and ISO/IEC 27001:2013 controls. The CSA STAR Attestation integrates SOC 2 reporting with additional cloud security criteria from the CSA CCM. This combination provides a comprehensive framework for assessing the security and privacy controls of cloud services, ensuring that they meet the rigorous standards required for STAR attestation. References = The information is supported by the Cloud Security Alliance’s resources, which outline the STAR program’s emphasis on transparency, rigorous auditing, and harmonization of standards as per the CCM. Additionally, the CSA STAR Certification process leverages the requirements of the ISO/IEC 27001:2013 management system standard together with the CSA Cloud Controls Matrix

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

 ISO/IEC 15027017 is a cloud-specific security standard that provides guidelines for information security controls applicable to the provision and use of cloud services. It is based on ISO/IEC 27002, which is a general standard for information security management, but it also includes additional controls and implementation guidance that specifically relate to cloud services. ISO/IEC 15027017 is intended to help both cloud service providers and cloud service customers to enhance the security and confidentiality of their cloud environment and to comply with relevant regulatory requirements and industry standards.12 References := ISO/IEC 27017:2015 - Information technology — Security techniques — Code of practice for information security controls based on ISO/IEC 27002 for cloud services1; Cloud Security Standards: ISO, PCI, GDPR and Your Cloud - Exabeam3; ISO/IEC 27017 - Wikipedia2

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

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

Accountability Issues in Cloud Computing (5 Step … - Medium1

Shared responsibility in the \uE000cloud\uE001 - Microsoft Azure2

Who Is Responsible for Cloud Security? - Security Intelligence3

What is CASB? - Cloud Security Alliance4

Cloud Computing: Auditing Challenges - ISACA5

What is Cloud Provider? - Definition from Techopedia

 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.

Regression testing is a type of software testing that confirms that a recent program or code change has not adversely affected existing features1 It involves re-running functional and non-functional tests to ensure that previously developed and tested software still performs as expected after a change2 Regression testing is suitable for large code sets in environments where time to completion is critical, as it can help detect and prevent defects, improve quality, and enable faster delivery of secure software. Regression testing can be automated to reduce manual errors, speed up feedback loops, and increase efficiency and reliability3

The other options are not correct because:

Option A is not correct because parallel testing is a type of software testing that involves testing multiple applications or subsystems concurrently to reduce the test time4 Parallel testing does not necessarily ensure the integration of security testing, as it depends on the quality and coverage of the test cases and scenarios used for each application or subsystem. Parallel testing may also introduce challenges such as synchronization, coordination, and communication among the testers and developers5

Option B is not correct because full application stack unit testing is a type of software testing that involves testing individual units or components of an application in isolation to verify their functionality, logic, interfaces, and performance6 Full application stack unit testing does not ensure the integration of security testing, as it does not consider the interactions and dependencies among the units or components, or the behavior of the application as a whole. Unit testing is typically performed by developers at an early stage of the software development life cycle, and may not cover all the security aspects or requirements of the application7

Option C is not correct because functional verification is a type of software testing that involves verifying that the software meets the specified requirements and satisfies the user needs. Functional verification does not ensure the integration of security testing, as it does not focus on how the software is designed or configured, or how it handles malicious or unexpected inputs. Functional verification is typically performed by quality assurance teams at a later stage of the software development life cycle, and may not detect all the security vulnerabilities or risks of the software.

References: 1: Wikipedia. Regression testing - Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: 3. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 2: Katalon. What is Regression Testing? Definition, Tools, Examples - Katalon. [Online]. Available: 4. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 3: BMC Software. Shift Left Testing: What, Why & How To Shift Left – BMC Software | Blogs. [Online]. Available: 3. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 4: Guru99. What is Parallel Testing? with Example - Guru99. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 5: LambdaTest. Parallel Testing In Selenium WebDriver | LambdaTest Blog. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 6: Guru99. What is Unit Testing? Types & Examples - Guru99. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. 7: Software Testing Help. Unit Testing Vs Integration Testing: Difference Between These Two - SoftwareTestingHelp.com Blog. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. : Guru99. What is Functional Testing? Types & Examples - Guru99. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023]. : Software Testing Help. Functional Testing Vs Non-Functional Testing - SoftwareTestingHelp.com Blog. [Online]. Available: . [Accessed: 14-Apr-2023].

The optimal and most efficient mechanism to assess the controls that the provider is responsible for is to review third-party audit reports. Third-party audit reports are independent and objective assessments of the provider’s security, compliance, and performance, conducted by qualified and reputable auditors. Third-party audit reports can provide assurance and evidence that the provider meets the industry standards and best practices, as well as the contractual and legal obligations with the SaaS company. Third-party audit reports can also cover a wide range of controls, such as data security, encryption, identity and access management, incident response, disaster recovery, and service level agreements. Some examples of third-party audit reports are ISO 27001 certification, SOC 1/2/3 reports, CSA STAR certification, and FedRAMP authorization123.

Reviewing the provider’s published questionnaires (A) may not be optimal or efficient, as the published questionnaires may not be comprehensive or up-to-date, and may not reflect the actual state of the provider’s controls. The published questionnaires may also be biased or inaccurate, as they are produced by the provider themselves.

Directly auditing the provider © may not be feasible or necessary, as the independent contractor 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 independent contractor should rely on the third-party audit reports and certifications to assess the provider’s compliance with relevant standards and regulations.

Sending a supplier questionnaire to the provider (D) may not be optimal or efficient, as the supplier questionnaire may not cover all the aspects of the provider’s controls, and may not provide sufficient evidence or assurance of the provider’s security maturity. The supplier questionnaire may also take a long time to complete and verify, and may not be consistent with the industry standards and best practices. References :=

How to Evaluate Cloud Service Provider Security (Checklist)

Cloud service review process - Cloud Adoption Framework

How to choose a cloud service provider | Microsoft Azure

A Type 1 SOC report assesses whether controls are appropriately designed at a specific point in time, while a Type 2 SOC report tests the operating effectiveness of these controls over a period. For cloud auditing, Type 2 is often preferred for its comprehensive approach to both design and effectiveness over time. The CCAK curriculum emphasizes understanding these reports as critical tools in auditing cloud service providers (referenced in the CCAK content on Assurance and Transparency and the CSA STAR framework).

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

A cloud service provider (CSP) providing cloud services currently being used by the United States federal government should obtain FedRAMP Authorization to assure compliance to stringent government standards. FedRAMP is a government-wide program that provides a standardized approach to security assessment, authorization, and continuous monitoring for cloud products and services. FedRAMP enables agencies to leverage the security assessments of CSPs that have been approved by FedRAMP, and establishes a baseline set of security controls for cloud computing, based on NIST SP 800-53. FedRAMP also helps CSPs to demonstrate their compliance with relevant laws and regulations, such as FISMA, FIPS, and NIST standards. FedRAMP Authorization can be obtained through two paths: a provisional authorization from the Joint Authorization Board (JAB) or an authorization from an individual agency12.

The other options are incorrect because:

A. CSA STAR Level Certificate: CSA STAR is a program for security assurance in the cloud that encompasses key principles of transparency, rigorous auditing, and harmonization of standards. CSA STAR Level Certificate is one of the certification options offered by CSA STAR, which is based on the ISO/IEC 27001 standard and the CSA Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM). CSA STAR Level Certificate is not specific to the US federal government standards, and does not guarantee compliance with FedRAMP requirements3.

B. Multi-Tier Cloud Security (MTCS) Attestation: MTCS is a cloud security standard developed by the Singapore government to provide greater clarity and transparency on the level of security offered by different CSPs. MTCS defines three levels of security controls for CSPs: Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3, with Level 3 being the most stringent. MTCS Attestation is a voluntary self-disclosure scheme for CSPs to declare their conformance to the MTCS standard. MTCS Attestation is not applicable to the US federal government standards, and does not ensure compliance with FedRAMP requirements4.

C. ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Certification: 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. ISO/IEC 27001 Certification is an independent verification that an organization conforms to the ISO/IEC 27001 standard. ISO/IEC 27001 Certification is not exclusive to cloud computing or the US federal government standards, and does not cover all aspects of FedRAMP requirements5.

References:

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

How to Become FedRAMP Authorized | FedRAMP.gov

STAR | CSA

Multi-Tiered Cloud Security Standard (MTCS SS)

ISO - ISO/IEC 27001 — Information security management

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.

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

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.

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

According to the ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, the cloud customer is the entity that retains accountability for the business outcome of the system or the processes that are supported by the cloud service1. The cloud customer is also responsible for ensuring that the cloud service meets the legal, regulatory, and contractual obligations that apply to the customer’s business context1. The cloud customer should also perform due diligence and risk assessment before selecting a cloud service provider, and establish a clear and enforceable contract that defines the roles and responsibilities of both parties1.

The cloud user is the entity that uses the cloud service on behalf of the cloud customer, but it is not necessarily accountable for the compliance of the service1. The cloud service provider is the entity that makes the cloud service available to the cloud customer, but it is not accountable for the compliance of the customer’s business context1. The certification authority (CA) is an entity that issues digital certificates to verify the identity or authenticity of other entities, but it is not accountable for the compliance of the cloud service2. References:

ISACA Cloud Auditing Knowledge Certificate Study Guide, page 10-11.

Certification authority - Wikipedia

The cloud service provider is responsible for the patching of the hypervisor layer in all three cloud deployment models (IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS). The hypervisor layer is the software that allows the creation and management of virtual machines on a physical server. The hypervisor layer is part of the cloud infrastructure, which is owned and operated by the cloud service provider. The cloud service provider is responsible for ensuring that the hypervisor layer is secure, reliable, and up to date with the latest patches and updates. The cloud service provider should also monitor and report on the status and performance of the hypervisor layer, as well as any issues or incidents that may affect it.

The cloud service customer is not responsible for the patching of the hypervisor layer, as they do not have access or control over the cloud infrastructure. The cloud service customer only has access and control over the cloud resources and services that they consume from the cloud service provider, such as virtual machines, storage, databases, applications, etc. The cloud service customer is responsible for ensuring that their own cloud resources and services are secure, compliant, and updated with the latest patches and updates.

The patching of the hypervisor layer is not a shared responsibility between the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer, as it is solely under the domain of the cloud service provider. The shared responsibility model in cloud computing refers to the division of security and compliance responsibilities between the cloud service provider and the cloud service customer, depending on the type of cloud deployment model. For example, in IaaS, the cloud service provider is responsible for securing the physical infrastructure, network, and hypervisor layer, while the cloud service customer is responsible for securing their own operating systems, applications, data, etc. In PaaS, the cloud service provider is responsible for securing everything up to the platform layer, while the cloud service customer is responsible for securing their own applications and data. In SaaS, the cloud service provider is responsible for securing everything up to the application layer, while the cloud service customer is responsible for securing their own data and user access.

Patching on hypervisor layer is required, as it is essential for maintaining the security, reliability, and performance of the cloud infrastructure. Patching on hypervisor layer can help prevent vulnerabilities, bugs, errors, or exploits that may compromise or affect the functionality of the virtual machines or other cloud resources and services. Patching on hypervisor layer can also help improve or enhance the features or capabilities of the hypervisor software or hardware. References :=

Patching process - AWS Prescriptive Guidance

What is a Hypervisor in Cloud Computing and Its Types? - Simplilearn

In all three cloud deployment models, (IaaS, PaaS, and … - Exam4Training

Reference Architecture: App Layering | Citrix Tech Zone

Hypervisor - GeeksforGeeks

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

 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