Rapid Revision Cheat Sheet
Use in Week 12 only, and on the morning of the exam. Everything here is recall material — no explanation, no teaching. If a line doesn't immediately make sense, go back to the domain note.
0. The exam in numbers
| Fact | Value |
|---|---|
| Questions | 150 multiple-choice |
| Time | 240 minutes (1.6 min/question) |
| Scale | 200–800, pass at 450 |
| You may get wrong | Roughly one third |
| Domain weights | 18 / 18 / 12 / 26 / 26 |
| Biggest domains | D4 (26%) + D5 (26%) = 52% |
D1 Auditing Process 18 · D2 Governance & Management of IT 18 · D3 Acquisition/Development/Implementation 12 · D4 Operations & Business Resilience 26 · D5 Protection of Information Assets 26
1. The auditor's role — the rules that decide questions
- The auditor evaluates, advises, reports. Never designs, implements, approves or owns.
- Risk assessment comes first on anything new or uncertain.
- Business owns risk. IT owns systems. Audit owns assurance. The BIA owner is the business.
- If something is wrong and confirmed → report, escalate to the audit committee if management accepts the risk.
- Independence: in fact and in appearance. No self-review.
- Preventive > detective > corrective, unless risk/cost makes a compensating or detective control the right answer.
- Verify, don't assume. HR notifying IT of a leaver is not evidence that access was revoked.
- Auditor reviews technical tests; does not perform them.
2. Domain 1 — Auditing Process (18%)
ITAF (4th edition)
| Tier | Type | Language | Authority |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Standards | "must / shall" | Mandatory |
| 2 | Guidelines | "should" | Recommended |
| 3 | Tools & techniques | "may" | Optional |
Families: general standards · performance standards · reporting standards. External QAIP assessment at least every 5 years.
ITAF general standards — mnemonic CIO-CARD-Q
Charter · Independence & objectivity · Organisation & competence · Code of ethics · Audit planning (risk-based) · Risk & materiality · Due professional care · Quality assurance (QAIP)
The 7 ethics canons (condensed)
Standards & controls · objectivity/due diligence/professional care · serve stakeholder interest lawfully · confidentiality (no personal benefit, no inappropriate release) · competence (only take work you're qualified for) · disclose all significant facts · support professional education of stakeholders.
Audit risk
AR = IR × CR × DR. The auditor cannot change IR or CR — only DR, via Nature, Timing and Extent of testing. Lower acceptable AR → more testing → bigger sample. Residual risk = inherent risk − control effect.
Control classification
| Purpose | Examples |
|---|---|
| Preventive | Firewall, encryption, access control, SoD, input validation, mantraps |
| Detective | Logs, IDS, CCTV, reconciliation, exception reports, access reviews, mandatory vacation, job rotation |
| Corrective | Backup restore, patch, incident response, DR failover |
| Deterrent | Warning banners, visible guards, signage |
| Compensating | Manager review where SoD can't be split |
| Recovery | DR site, failover, redundancy |
Nature: administrative · technical/logical · physical Origin: general controls (org-wide) vs application controls (specific app)
Application controls
| Stage | Controls |
|---|---|
| Input | Batch control totals (financial, hash, record count), check digit, validity check, range check, limit check, reasonableness check, completeness check, duplicate check, sequence check, field format check, key verification |
| Processing | Run-to-run control totals, reconciliation, file integrity checks, program change controls, exception reports |
| Output | Reconciliation to input, distribution lists, output review by responsible user, retention |
Testing
| Type | Tests | Used for |
|---|---|---|
| Compliance | Whether a control operated as designed | Control reliance |
| Substantive | Whether data is materially accurate | Direct assurance |
If compliance testing fails → expand substantive testing.
Sampling
| Method | Question it answers |
|---|---|
| Attribute | Rate of compliance (yes/no) — compliance testing |
| Variable | Numerical/dollar accuracy — substantive testing |
| Statistical | Known, non-zero probability; results projectable |
| Non-statistical / judgemental | Auditor's judgement; not projectable |
| Stop-or-go | Halt early when error rate is low |
| Discovery | Find at least one occurrence (fraud) |
| Frequency-estimating | How often an attribute occurs |
Sample size increases with: higher confidence level · higher expected error rate · lower tolerable error rate · greater precision required · more critical/material population. Sampling risk = sample isn't representative. Non-sampling risk = human error in testing.
Evidence reliability — most to least
- Auditor's direct observation / re-performance
- Externally generated, held by the auditor (bank confirmations)
- Externally generated, in client's possession
- Internally generated, strong control environment
- Internally generated, weak control environment
- Oral / management representation ← always near the bottom
Criteria: sufficiency (quantity) · relevance · reliability (source) · usefulness.
CAATs
Generalized audit software (ACL, IDEA) · test data · integrated test facility (ITF) · parallel simulation · embedded audit modules / SCARF · snapshot · mapping/tracing · source code review. Benefit: 100% population testing, efficiency. Risk: contaminating production data; needs IT cooperation.
Reporting — the 5 Cs
Criteria (the standard) · Condition (what was found) · Cause (why) · Consequence (impact/risk) · Corrective action (recommendation)
Opinions: unqualified · qualified · adverse · disclaimer Management accepts the risk → document it, confirm it's held at the right level, escalate/report to the audit committee. Never silently accept.
3. Domain 2 — Governance & Management of IT (18%)
Governance vs management
- Governance = EDM: Evaluate, Direct, Monitor → board / steering committee
- Management = Plan, Build, Run, Monitor → CIO / IT management
COBIT 2019 — 40 objectives in 5 domains
| Domain | Meaning | Count |
|---|---|---|
| EDM | Evaluate, Direct, Monitor (governance) | 5 |
| APO | Align, Plan, Organize | 14 |
| BAI | Build, Acquire, Implement | 11 |
| DSS | Deliver, Service, Support | 6 |
| MEA | Monitor, Evaluate, Assess | 4 |
6 governance system principles (provide stakeholder value · holistic approach · dynamic system · governance distinct from management · tailored · end-to-end) 7 components/enablers (processes · org structures · information flows · people/skills · culture, ethics & behaviour · services/infrastructure/apps · principles, policies & frameworks) Capability levels 0–5 (0 incomplete → 5 optimising). Goals cascade: stakeholder needs → enterprise goals → alignment goals → governance/management objectives.
ISO/IEC 38500 — 6 principles
Responsibility · Strategy · Acquisition · Performance · Conformance · Human behaviour + Evaluate-Direct-Monitor model.
Policy hierarchy
| Level | Mandatory? | Approved by |
|---|---|---|
| Policy | Yes | Top management / board |
| Standard | Yes | Management |
| Procedure | Yes (step-by-step) | Operational management |
| Guideline | No — recommended | Management |
Enterprise architecture
TOGAF ADM: Preliminary + Phases A–H, with Requirements Management at the centre. Zachman 6×6: What/How/Where/Who/When/Why × Planner/Owner/Designer/Builder/Subcontractor/Functioning enterprise. Domains: business · data · application · technology. EA is owned above IT and driven by business strategy.
ERM
- Risk appetite (how much risk we want) vs risk tolerance (acceptable deviation) vs risk capacity (max we can bear)
- Inherent risk (before controls) vs residual risk (after controls)
- Treatment: avoid · mitigate/reduce · transfer/share · accept
- KPI (performance) · KRI (risk) · KGI (goal)
- COSO ERM 2017: 5 components / 20 principles
- COSO ICIF 2013: 5 components / 17 principles — CRIME: Control environment · Risk assessment · Information & communication · Monitoring · control activitiEs
- ISO 31000 = general risk management
Three lines of defence
1st = management/operations · 2nd = risk & compliance · 3rd = internal audit
Laws & standards
| Framework | Focus |
|---|---|
| SOX §302/404/906 | CEO/CFO certification; IT general controls |
| GDPR | Controller vs processor · DPO · DPIA · 72-hour breach notice · €20m or 4% global turnover |
| HK PDPO (Cap. 486) | 6 Data Protection Principles; PCPD regulator |
| PCI DSS v4.0 | 12 requirements; contractual, not law; CDE |
| HIPAA | PHI, US healthcare |
| NIST CSF 2.0 | Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, Recover |
| NIST SP 800-53 | 20 control families (AC, AT, AU, CA, CM, CP, IA, IR, MA, MP, PE, PL, PM, PS, PT, RA, SA, SC, SI, SR) |
| ISO/IEC 27001 | ISMS requirements (PDCA) |
| ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A | 93 controls / 4 themes: organisational 37, people 8, physical 14, technological 34 |
| ISO/IEC 27002 | Control implementation guidance |
| ISO/IEC 27701 | Privacy information management |
| ISO/IEC 27017 / 27018 | Cloud security / cloud PII |
| ISO 22301 | Business continuity management |
| ITIL 4 | IT service management |
| ISO/IEC 20000 | IT service management standard |
| CMMI | Maturity levels 1–5 |
Data governance
Business data owner (accountable) · data steward (quality) · custodian (IT, operational). Classification (public/internal/confidential/restricted) must drive the control baseline. Retention, disposal, sovereignty, cross-border transfer.
Vendor management
SLA (service to customer) · OLA (internal) · UC (underpinning contract with supplier). SOC 1 = financial reporting controls · SOC 2 Type 1 = design at a point in time · SOC 2 Type 2 = design + operating effectiveness over a period · SOC 3 = public summary. SOC 2 Trust Services Criteria: security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, privacy. Check the period covered, the scope, and the complementary user entity controls (CUECs). The auditor reviews the contract and the vendor's assurance report — the auditor does not re-perform the vendor's audit.
Quality
QA = process-focused (are we building it right?) · QC = product-focused (is the output correct?) Cost of quality: prevention < appraisal < internal failure < external failure (external failure is the most costly).
4. Domain 3 — Acquisition, Development & Implementation (12%)
SDLC
Feasibility → Requirements → Design (logical → physical) → Development → Testing → Implementation → Post-implementation review Requirements definition most determines success; defects are cheapest to fix here.
Feasibility
Economic (NPV, IRR, payback, ROI) · technical · operational · legal/regulatory · schedule NPV preferred — it accounts for the time value of money across the whole life. Include ongoing operating cost (TCO), not just build cost.
Earned value
SV = EV − PV · CV = EV − AC · SPI = EV / PV · CPI = EV / AC (negative SV/CV = behind/over; <1.0 SPI/CPI = behind/over)
Methodologies
Waterfall · V-model · iterative · spiral (risk-driven) · agile/Scrum/Kanban/XP · DevOps/CI-CD · RAD · prototyping · JAD · OO Agile shifts control to: automated testing, CI, backlog control, product owner accountability, security in the backlog (secure SDLC, threat modelling).
Development controls
Developers must NEVER have production access (the classic correct answer) · separate dev/test/staging/prod environments · masked or synthetic test data — never production data in test · version control · code/peer review · change control board · phase gates · requirements traceability matrix · SoD between developer and deployer.
Testing
Unit → Integration → System → Regression → UAT → Performance/Load/Stress → Volume → Recovery → Security/Pen test → Parallel → Pilot UAT is validated against documented business requirements and is owned by the end user. The auditor reviews the test plan and results — never performs or signs off UAT. White box (full knowledge) · black box (none) · grey box (partial) · alpha (internal) · beta (external users)
Cutover strategies
| Strategy | Risk | Cost | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct / big bang | Highest | Lowest | Instant switch |
| Parallel | Lowest | Highest | Both run, results reconciled |
| Phased | Medium | Medium | By module/location |
| Pilot | Localised | Medium | One site/group first |
Data conversion
Mapping · cleansing · reconciliation of record counts and control totals before and after ← the critical control · field verification · legacy retention.
Post-implementation review
Timing: after stabilisation, typically 3–12 months post go-live. Purpose: were the business case benefits realised, requirements met, controls effective, costs within budget, lessons learned. PIR is independent — not the project team marking its own homework. It is not testing and not a security assessment.
5. Domain 4 — Operations & Business Resilience (26%)
Availability — the nines
| Availability | Downtime/year |
|---|---|
| 99% | ~3.65 days |
| 99.9% | ~8.76 hours |
| 99.99% | ~52.6 minutes |
| 99.999% | ~5.26 minutes |
Read whether the question counts scheduled downtime.
RAID
0 stripe (no redundancy) · 1 mirror · 5 stripe + distributed parity (1 disk) · 6 double parity (2 disks) · 10 mirror + stripe Redundancy ≠ backup. RAID does not protect against deletion, corruption or ransomware.
Storage
DAS (direct attached) · NAS (file-level, network) · SAN (block-level, network)
Incident vs problem vs change vs event
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Event | Any observable occurrence |
| Incident | Unplanned interruption or degradation → restore service fast |
| Problem | The root cause of one or more incidents → prevent recurrence |
| Change | Addition/modification/removal affecting services |
Priority = impact × urgency. Escalation: functional vs hierarchical. Known error database. Root cause tools: 5 Whys, fishbone/Ishikawa, Pareto.
Change management
Types: standard (pre-approved) · normal · emergency CAB approves; ECAB for emergency; emergency changes get retrospective approval. Requires: impact/risk assessment, testing, back-out plan, segregation between developer, approver and deployer. Metrics: change success rate, % unplanned/emergency changes.
Patch management
Identify → assess/prioritise (exploitability + criticality) → test → deploy → verify. Goal is risk-based prioritisation, not 100% coverage. Unpatchable systems need documented compensating controls. Emergency/out-of-band patching for actively exploited flaws.
Logs
Highest-value sources: authentication (esp. failures), privilege escalation, admin activity, sensitive data access, configuration changes. Requirements: centralised off-host (a compromised host's local logs can't be trusted) · NTP clock sync · integrity (append-only/WORM/hashing) · retention per legal/regulatory · evidence of review. "Logs collected but never reviewed" = classic finding. Failed logins unmonitored = classic finding.
SLA / OLA / UC
SLA = to the customer · OLA = internal between teams · UC = with the external supplier. Breaches must trigger action, not just reporting.
Database
ACID: Atomicity · Consistency · Isolation · Durability DBA is highly privileged and can often bypass application controls → needs separation from app/security admin and DBA activity monitoring. Transaction log backup enables point-in-time recovery. DAM = database activity monitoring.
EUC & shadow IT
EUC risk: no change control, no version control, single-person dependency, formula errors, unauthorised data copies, no backup. Controls: inventory, version control, locked formulas, maker-checker, input validation, backup. Shadow IT: discovery + risk-based sanctioning beats blanket bans.
Business resilience — the metrics
| Metric | Meaning |
|---|---|
| MTD / MTPD | Maximum tolerable downtime — the business constraint |
| RTO | Target time to restore the service |
| RPO | Max acceptable data loss (in time) → drives backup frequency |
| WRT | Work recovery time — verify integrity and resume business processing |
| SDO | Service delivery objective — degraded service level during DR |
| MTTR / MTBF | Mean time to repair / between failures |
RTO must be < MTD. RTO + WRT must fit inside MTD. If not → the plan does not meet business requirements = finding. Availability = MTBF / (MTBF + MTTR)
BIA is owned by the BUSINESS, not IT and not audit.
Outputs: critical process list, RTO/RPO per process, dependency map, recovery priority order.
Recovery sites
| Site | Setup | Cost |
|---|---|---|
| Cold | Weeks | Lowest |
| Warm | Days | Medium |
| Hot | Hours | High |
| Mirrored / active-active | Near-zero | Highest |
| Reciprocal / mutual aid | Days | Low (weak assurance, hard to test) |
| Cloud DR / DRaaS | Hours | Variable |
Backup schemes
| Scheme | Backs up | Restore needs |
|---|---|---|
| Full | Everything | 1 set |
| Incremental | Changes since last backup of any type | Last full + all incrementals |
| Differential | Changes since last full | Last full + last differential |
| Mirror / replication | Real-time copy | Immediate |
| Snapshot | Point-in-time state | Fast, but not a substitute for backup |
| CDP | Continuous | Granular recovery |
3-2-1: 3 copies, 2 media types, 1 offsite. +1 offline/immutable, 0 errors verified. A backup that has never been restored is not a backup. Checking job logs is weak evidence; a restore test is strong evidence. Encrypt backups — and don't lose the key.
BCP vs DRP vs crisis management
| Plan | Owner | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| BCP | Business | Organisation-wide: people, facilities, suppliers, manual workarounds |
| DRP | IT | Systems, data, networks, infrastructure — a subset of the BCP |
| Crisis management / emergency response | Executive | Life safety first |
IT does not declare a disaster — the business does. ISO 22301 = BCM standard (PDCA). Plan review: at least annually and after significant change.
DR test hierarchy — least to most disruptive
Read-through → Walkthrough → Tabletop/simulation → Component/module → Parallel → Full interruption Parallel = recovery site runs alongside production, production unaffected. Full interruption = most realistic, highest risk, needs executive approval. The auditor observes, does not run it. Most common finding: "the plan exists but has never been tested."
6. Domain 5 — Protection of Information Assets (26%)
CIA + friends
Confidentiality · Integrity · Availability + authenticity · non-repudiation · accountability · privacy
Access control models
| Model | Basis | Note |
|---|---|---|
| DAC | Owner decides | Flexible, weaker |
| MAC | System labels | Strongest, least flexible |
| RBAC | Roles | Best fit for enterprises — usual "best" answer |
| ABAC | Attributes | Fine-grained |
| RuBAC | Rules | Firewalls |
AAA: Identification → Authentication → Authorisation → Accountability (audit trail) Factors: something you know / have / are / do. MFA needs two different types. Least privilege · need-to-know · separation of duties · mandatory vacation + job rotation (detective). Identity lifecycle: joiner–mover–leaver. Uncleaned ex-employee accounts = high-severity finding. Access reviews are performed by the business/system owner — not IT alone, not the auditor. PAM: vaulting, credential rotation, session recording, JIT access, break-glass accounts, no shared accounts.
Biometrics
FAR (false acceptance — security risk) · FRR (false rejection — inconvenience) · CER (crossover error rate — lower = better device)
Physical
Layered defence · perimeter · CCTV (detective) · mantraps · turnstiles · badge access · visitor escort. Fire suppression: water sprinklers damage electronics → clean agent/gas (FM-200, INERGEN, Novec) for data centres. UPS = short outages and conditioning. Generator = extended outages. A UPS is not a generator. Environmental: HVAC, humidity, positive air pressure, water detection, EMI shielding.
Network devices by layer
Hub L1 · Switch L2 (MAC) · Router L3 (IP) · Firewall L3–L4 · WAF L7 · IDS/IPS L3–L7 · Proxy L7 · Load balancer L4/L7 Firewall = preventive · IDS = detective · IPS = preventive. Default deny. Stale "any–any" rules = finding. DMZ · VLAN · micro-segmentation · air gap.
Wireless
WEP broken · WPA2 (CCMP/AES) · WPA3 (SAE). WPS is a weakness. SSID hiding is not security. Rogue AP / evil twin. 802.1X + EAP. Guest network isolation.
Encryption
| Algorithm | Type | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| AES | Symmetric | 128/192/256 — current standard |
| 3DES | Symmetric | Deprecated |
| DES | Symmetric | Broken |
| RSA | Asymmetric | 2048+ bits |
| ECC | Asymmetric | 256+ bits ≈ RSA 3072 — smaller keys |
| DH / ECDHE | Key agreement | Forward secrecy when ephemeral |
| SHA-256 / SHA-3 | Hash | Current |
| MD5, SHA-1 | Hash | Broken for collisions |
| HMAC | MAC | Integrity + authenticity |
| bcrypt / scrypt / Argon2 / PBKDF2 | Password hashing | Key stretching; salt defeats rainbow tables |
Digital signature = hash + sign with sender's PRIVATE key. Gives integrity, authenticity, non-repudiation — NOT confidentiality. Encryption at rest protects against media theft, NOT against a compromised application account. Key management is the weakest link — never store keys with the data. TLS 1.2+ only; SSLv3/TLS 1.0/1.1 deprecated. Hybrid encryption is how TLS works: asymmetric to exchange the symmetric session key, symmetric for bulk data.
PKI
CA · RA · certificate repository · validation authority · CRL/OCSP · CP & CPS X.509 fields: subject, issuer, validity, public key, serial number, extensions, key usage. Root CA key offline; chain of trust via intermediates. CRL = periodic list (staleness problem) · OCSP = real-time · OCSP stapling = efficient. A compromised CA is catastrophic (rogue certificates). Certificate expiry is a common outage cause.
Cloud
Service models: IaaS · PaaS · SaaS → the split of responsibility moves with the model Deployment: public · private · hybrid · community Essential characteristics: on-demand self-service · broad network access · resource pooling · rapid elasticity · measured service Risks: multi-tenancy isolation failure · data residency/sovereignty · loss of governance & visibility · lock-in · insecure APIs · provider insider risk · lawful access/jurisdiction · provider viability & exit · fourth parties · shadow cloud Assurance: SOC 2 Type 2 (read the period + CUECs) · ISO/IEC 27017 & 27018 · CSA STAR · right-to-audit clause · BYOK/HYOK · CASB · CSPM
Virtualisation
Type 1 bare-metal hypervisor · Type 2 hosted. VM escape breaks all isolation — the hypervisor is a high-value target. Watch: VM sprawl · snapshot/image sprawl (leaked data & credentials) · resource contention · insecure APIs. Containers: image/registry security, orchestration (K8s) hardening, immutable infrastructure, secrets management.
Mobile & IoT
BYOD / COPE / CYOD. MDM/EMM/MAM: enrolment, policy, remote wipe (corporate vs full — matters on personal devices), containerisation, encryption, jailbreak detection. IoT: default/hardcoded credentials · no patching · long lifecycles · insecure protocols · segment IoT/OT away from corporate networks. OT/ICS: availability and safety before confidentiality. You cannot secure what you have not inventoried.
DLP
Three states: at rest · in motion · in use. Data classification is a prerequisite — DLP without it produces noise. Actions: monitor → warn → block → encrypt. High false positives; requires tuning. Insider threat + UEBA. Exfiltration vectors: email, web uploads, USB, cloud sync, printing, screenshots, GenAI/LLM prompt leakage.
Security awareness
Measure behaviour, not completion. Track phishing click rate and report rate over time. Role-based training for privileged users and developers. New joiners and contractors must be covered. "We sent an email" is not a programme.
Attacks → controls
| Attack | Primary control |
|---|---|
| Phishing / BEC | Awareness, MFA, DMARC, payment call-back verification |
| Malware / ransomware | EDR (behavioural — signatures fail on new variants), patching, immutable/offline backups |
| MITM / ARP / DNS spoofing | Encryption, DNSSEC, network segmentation, 802.1X |
| DDoS | Rate limiting, scrubbing, CDN, redundancy |
| SQL injection / XSS / CSRF | Input validation, parameterised queries, output encoding, WAF (see OWASP Top 10) |
| Credential stuffing / spraying | MFA, lockout, credential monitoring, no password reuse |
| Privilege escalation | Least privilege, patching, PAM, monitoring |
| Insider threat | SoD, least privilege, UEBA, DLP, mandatory vacation |
| APT | Long dwell time, stealth, specific target → monitoring, threat intel, segmentation |
| Supply chain | Vendor risk assessment, SBOM, contractual controls |
| Deepfake / AI voice fraud | Out-of-band verification, call-back procedures, no AI-only authorisation |
| Zero-day | Defence in depth, segmentation, behavioural detection |
For anything, name the preventive, the detective and the corrective control — that's how ISACA frames it.
Security testing
Vulnerability assessment = identify and report weaknesses. Penetration test = exploit them to prove impact. Both are point-in-time — a clean pen test is not proof of security. Types: authenticated vs unauthenticated · internal vs external · black/white/grey box · blind/double-blind. Written authorisation / rules of engagement are mandatory — testing without authorisation may be illegal. The auditor reviews scope, methodology, tester independence and remediation tracking. The auditor does NOT run the pen test. Red team / blue team / purple team.
Monitoring
SIEM (aggregate, normalise, correlate, alert) — untuned SIEM = alert fatigue. SOAR · SOC tiers · UEBA · threat intelligence / IOCs · CASB · CSPM. Logs must ship off-host in near real time; NTP sync is essential. Auditor's key test: is anyone reviewing the alerts, and is there documented review and follow-up? "Alerts not triaged within SLA" = finding.
Incident response — NIST SP 800-61
1. Preparation → 2. Detection & Analysis → 3. Containment, Eradication & Recovery → 4. Post-Incident Activity (lessons learned) Containment comes BEFORE eradication, and both before recovery. Incident response plan: roles, severity classification, escalation/on-call, communication plan (internal + external), evidence procedures, contacts (legal, forensics, insurer, PR, law enforcement). Declaration authority must be defined. Coordinates with BCP/DRP. Notification timeframes: GDPR — 72 hours to the supervisory authority where feasible; data subjects without undue delay if high risk. Post-incident: RCA, lessons learned, corrective actions tracked to closure, plan update, report to management/board. Metrics: MTTD · MTTR · % detected internally vs by a third party. (Detection matters most — you cannot respond to what you did not detect.)
Forensics & evidence
Order of volatility (RFC 3227), most → least:
- CPU registers & cache
- Routing table, ARP cache, process table, memory
- Temporary file systems
- Disk
- Remote logging & monitoring data
- Physical configuration & network topology
- Archival media
- Printed / offline documents
Capture the most volatile first. Chain of custody: who, what, when, where, why, and every transfer and access. Tamper-evident seals. Unique IDs. Hash the image (SHA-256) to prove no alteration. Never analyse the original — work on a forensic copy. Write blockers. Live vs dead-box forensics: live captures volatile data but alters the system. Cloud forensics challenges: another jurisdiction, no physical access, provider cooperation, short log retention, multi-tenancy. Anti-forensics: log wiping, timestomping, encryption, steganography, slack space. Auditor's duty: preserve, do not contaminate, document, and escalate — involve legal counsel and forensic specialists. Do NOT investigate the crime yourself.
Media sanitisation — NIST SP 800-88
Clear · Purge · Destroy. Degaussing (magnetic only) · overwriting · crypto-erasure · physical destruction. Get a certificate of destruction.
7. Frameworks in one line each
| Framework | One line |
|---|---|
| COBIT 2019 | IT governance & management — 40 objectives, 5 domains |
| ITAF | IS audit standards (Tier 1 mandatory / 2 should / 3 may) |
| COSO ICIF 2013 | Internal control over financial reporting — 5 components / 17 principles |
| COSO ERM 2017 | Enterprise risk management — 5 components / 20 principles |
| ISO/IEC 38500 | Corporate governance of IT — 6 principles |
| ISO/IEC 27001 | ISMS requirements (+ Annex A: 93 controls / 4 themes) |
| ISO/IEC 27002 | Security control implementation guidance |
| ISO/IEC 27701 | Privacy information management |
| ISO/IEC 27017 / 27018 | Cloud security / cloud PII |
| ISO 22301 | Business continuity management |
| ISO 31000 | Risk management |
| ISO/IEC 20000 | IT service management |
| ITIL 4 | IT service management practice |
| NIST CSF 2.0 | Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, Recover |
| NIST SP 800-53 | 20 control families |
| NIST SP 800-61 | Incident handling |
| NIST SP 800-88 | Media sanitisation |
| NIST SP 800-115 | Security testing & assessment |
| TOGAF | Enterprise architecture (ADM: Preliminary + A–H) |
| Zachman | EA taxonomy (6×6) |
| CMMI | Maturity levels 1–5 |
| PCI DSS v4.0 | Payment cards — 12 requirements, contractual |
8. Mnemonic index
| Mnemonic | Stands for |
|---|---|
| CIO-CARD-Q | ITAF general standards |
| CRIME | COSO ICIF components |
| EDM-APO-BAI-DSS-MEA | COBIT 2019 domains |
| 5 Cs | Criteria, Condition, Cause, Consequence, Corrective action |
| AR = IR × CR × DR | Audit risk model |
| ACID | Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, Durability |
| AAA | Identification, Authentication, Authorisation (+ Accountability) |
| CIA | Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability |
| RTO + WRT ≤ MTD | The recovery constraint |
| 3-2-1 (+1-0) | Backup rule |
| GIPDRR | NIST CSF 2.0 functions |
9. Final 10 lines to read before you walk in
- D4 + D5 = 52%. They decide your result.
- The auditor assesses and reports — never designs, implements or approves.
- Risk assessment comes first.
- Business owns risk and the BIA. IT owns systems. Audit owns assurance.
- RTO + WRT must fit inside MTD, or the plan fails the business requirement.
- A backup never restored is not a backup.
- Digital signatures give integrity and non-repudiation, not confidentiality.
- Containment before eradication before recovery. Capture the most volatile evidence first.
- Logs collected but never reviewed is a finding.
- Answer every question. There is no penalty for being wrong.