mediumMultiple Choice
CISA Practice Question: An IS auditor is reviewing the logical access…
An IS auditor is reviewing the logical access controls of a financial application. Which of the following is the BEST way to verify that user access rights are appropriate?
⚠ Common exam trap
Test-takers frequently choose Option C (re-performing transactions) because it sounds like a direct test of control effectiveness, but it only detects unauthorized access after the fact and does not verify the appropriateness of the access rights themselves.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Compare the user access rights with the job descriptions and responsibilities.
Comparing user access rights directly against job descriptions and responsibilities is the most effective method to verify that access is appropriate based on the principle of least privilege. This approach ensures that each user's permissions align with their actual job functions, which is the core objective of a logical access control review. Interviewing or reviewing lists alone does not validate the appropriateness of access against business roles.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Interview the IT security manager about the access control process.
Why it's wrong here
Interviews yield management's assertions and opinions about the access process, not evidence that rights are actually appropriate. They are tempting because they efficiently reveal process intent and would be correct as a preliminary step to understand controls before testing them directly.
- ✗
Review the access control list for each user.
Why it's wrong here
An access control list shows what rights are configured, not whether they match each user's current job duties. Reviewing ACLs alone cannot detect excessive or stale entitlements. It is tempting because ACL review is a standard control test, and it would suffice when verifying that documented access was actually implemented as approved.
- ✗
Re-perform a sample of transactions to detect unauthorized access.
Why it's wrong here
Re-performing transactions tests application processing and transaction integrity, not whether user access rights match job roles. It is tempting because reperformance is a valid substantive audit technique, and would be correct when verifying calculation accuracy or detecting unauthorised transaction processing.
- ✓
Compare the user access rights with the job descriptions and responsibilities.
Why this is correct
Job descriptions define what access each role legitimately requires, so comparing granted rights against them tests whether access aligns with actual duties. This detects excessive or stale privileges, directly verifying appropriateness rather than merely confirming that controls exist.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This CISA question is part of Courseiva's 934-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This CISA practice question is part of Courseiva's free ISACA certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the CISA exam.