An employee is induced to reveal confidential IP addresses and passwords by answering questions over the phone. This is a social engineering attack method that exploits the trust or curiosity of the employee to obtain sensitive information that can be used to access or compromise the network. According to the web search results, social engineering is a technique that uses psychological manipulationto trick users into making security mistakes or giving away sensitive information1. Phishing, whaling, baiting, and pretexting are some of the common forms of social engineering attacks2. Social engineering attacks are often more effective and profitable than purely technical attacks, as they rely on human error rather than system vulnerabilities

The most important thing for an IS auditor to review when evaluating the accuracy of a spreadsheet that contains several macros is the formulas within macros. Macros are sequences of commands or instructions that can automate tasks or calculations in a spreadsheet. Formulas are expressions that perform calculations on values or data in a spreadsheet. The accuracy of a spreadsheet depends largely on whether the formulas within macros are correct, consistent, and complete. The IS auditor should review the formulas within macros to verify that they produce the expected results and do not contain any errors or inconsistencies. The other options are not as important as formulas within macros, as they do not directly affect the accuracy of a spreadsheet. Encryption of the spreadsheet is a security control that can protect the confidentiality and integrity of the spreadsheet, but it does not ensure its accuracy. Version history is a document control feature that can track and manage changes to the spreadsheet, but it does not verify its accuracy. Reconciliation of key calculations is a validation technique that can compare and confirm the results of calculations with other sources, but it does not evaluate the accuracy of formulas within macros. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

The most critical finding when reviewing an organization's information security management is no periodic assessments to identify threats and vulnerabilities. Periodic assessments are essential for ensuring that the organization's information security policies, procedures, standards, and controls are aligned with the current and emerging risks and threats that may affect its information assets. Without periodic assessments, the organization may not be aware of its actual security posture, gaps, or weaknesses, and may not be able to take appropriate measures to mitigate or prevent potential security incidents. No dedicated security officer, no official charter for the information security management system, and no employee awareness training and education program are also findings that may indicate some deficiencies in the organization's information security management, but they are not as critical as no periodic assessments to identify threats and vulnerabilities. References: ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition, page 343.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:IT application owners having sole responsibility for architecture approval (B) is a major concern because it indicates a lack of oversight and segregation of duties.
EA decisions should be reviewed by a cross-functional governance body to ensure alignment with security, compliance, and business objectives.
Other options:
* The CIO chairing the review board (A) may indicate centralized leadership but is not inherently a risk.
* EA governing non-IT projects (C) may indicate scope expansion but is not a security risk.
* Security requirements being reviewed (D) is a best practice and not a concern.
Reference: ISACA CISA Review Manual, IT Governance and Management of IT