hardMultiple Choice
CISA Practice Question: An IT auditor is reviewing the business…
An IT auditor is reviewing the business continuity plan (BCP) for a financial services firm. The plan includes a hot site that is shared with another organization under a reciprocal agreement. Which of the following findings should be of MOST concern to the auditor?
⚠ Common exam trap
The trap here is that candidates may focus on technical details like ISP diversity or testing frequency, but the core BCP principle is that a shared resource without guaranteed exclusive access is a fundamental design flaw that can render the entire plan ineffective during a concurrent disaster.
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
✓
The reciprocal agreement does not guarantee exclusive use of the hot site during a disaster
A reciprocal agreement for a shared hot site does not guarantee exclusive access during a disaster. If both organizations declare a disaster simultaneously, the site may become oversubscribed, leading to resource contention and potential failure of the BCP. This directly undermines the recovery capability, making it the most critical finding.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
The hot site uses a different internet service provider than the primary site
Why it's wrong here
Differing internet service providers actually improves resilience by removing a single point of network failure, so it is not a concern. It is tempting because diversity sounds like added complexity, yet provider diversity would be the correct finding to commend when reviewing network redundancy for any recovery site.
- ✗
The hot site has not been tested in the past 12 months
Why it's wrong here
A twelve-month testing gap is a documentation and maintenance weakness, yet the reciprocal hot site itself is the structural flaw: the other organisation's systems may be unavailable or already occupied during a regional event. Testing frequency would be the correct concern for a dedicated, solely owned recovery site.
- ✓
The reciprocal agreement does not guarantee exclusive use of the hot site during a disaster
Why this is correct
Reciprocal agreements offer no contractual guarantee of priority access; both parties may invoke the site simultaneously, leaving the firm without recovery capacity. This unenforceable exclusivity is the most serious finding, since the hot site may be unavailable when needed.
- ✗
The hot site is located in the same seismic zone as the primary site
Why it's wrong here
Sharing a seismic zone is a genuine risk, but a reciprocal agreement's dependency on another organisation's capacity and goodwill during a widespread disaster is the more fundamental exposure. Co-location in one seismic zone would be the primary concern for a standalone hot site without reciprocal sharing.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 934 original CISA practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. 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.