Real-time replication to a second data center means that any changes made to the primary data center are immediately copied to the secondary data center. This can improve data availability and performance, but also introduces the risk of propagating malicious or erroneous changes to the backup data center. If a cybersecurity attack compromises the primary data center, it may also affect the secondary data center, making it difficult or impossible to recover from the attack using the replicated data. Therefore, option C is the greatest risk associated with this change.
Option A is not correct because version control issues are more likely to occur with batch processing backup, which may create inconsistencies between different versions of the data. Option B is not correct because real- time replication may reduce system performance at the primary data center, but it may also improve system performance at the secondary data center by reducing latency and network traffic. Option D is not correct because although real-time replication may increase IT investment cost, this is not a risk but a trade-off that the organization has to consider.
References:
Data Replication: The Basics, Risks, and Best Practices1
Best Practices for Data Replication Between Data Centers2
The Good, Bad, and Ugly of Data Replication3

The security architecture of an online application is a design that describes how various security components and controls are integrated and configured to protect the application from internal and external threats. When auditing the security architecture of an online application, an IS auditor should first review the location of the firewall within the network, as this determines how effectively the firewall can filter and monitor the traffic between different network segments and zones. The firewall standards, configuration, and firmware version are also important aspects to review, but they are secondary to the location of the firewall.

Restricting program functionality according to user security profiles is the best control for ensuring appropriate segregation of duties within an accounts payable department. An IS auditor should verify that the access rights and permissions of the accounts payable staff are based on their roles and responsibilities, and that they are not able to perform incompatible or conflicting functions such as creating, approving, or paying invoices. This will help to prevent fraud, errors, or abuse of authority within the accounts payable process.
The other options are less effective controls for ensuring segregation of duties, as they may involve audit trails, access restrictions, or user identification. References:
* CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 6, Section 6.31
* CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database,Question ID 223

The best metric to measure the alignment of IT and business strategy is the percentage of enterprise risk assessments that include IT-related risk. This metric indicates how well the organization identifies and manages the IT risks that could affect its strategic objectives and performance. A high percentage of enterprise risk assessments that include IT-related risk shows that the organization considers IT as an integral part of its business strategy and aligns its IT resources and capabilities with its business needs and goals
. References: : CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: Governance and Management of IT, Section 2.2: IT Strategy, page 67 : CISA Online Review Course, Module 2: Governance and Management of IT, Lesson 2.2: IT Strategy

The first thing that an IS auditor should do when a follow-up audit reveals some management action plans have not been initiated is to escalate the lack of plan completion to executive management. This is because the failure to implement the agreed management action plans may indicate that the management is not taking the audit findings and recommendations seriously, or that they are accepting too much risk by not addressing the identified issues. Escalating the lack of plan completion to executive management can help to raise awareness and accountability, as well as to seek support and intervention to ensure that the management action plans are executed in a timely and effective manner12.
Confirming whether the identified risks are still valid is not the first thing to do, although it may be a useful step to reassess the current situation and the potential impact of not implementing the management action plans. However,confirming the validity of the risks does not address the root causeof why the management action plans have not been initiated, nor does it provide any assurance or remediation for the unresolved issues34.
Providing a report to the audit committee is not the first thing to do, although it may be a necessary step to communicate and document the results of the follow-up audit. However, providing a report to the audit committee does not guarantee that the management action plans will be initiated, nor does it resolve any conflicts or challenges that may prevent the management from implementing them34.
Requesting an additional action plan review to confirm the findings is not the first thing to do, although it may be a prudent step to verify and validate the accuracy and completeness of the follow-up audit. However, requesting an additional review may delay or defer the implementation of the management action plans, as well as consume more internalaudit resources and time