The third-party contract has not been reviewed by the legal department is the auditor's greatest concern because it poses a significant legal and financial risk to the client. A third-party contract is a legally binding agreement between the client and the outsourced payroll provider that defines the scope, terms, and conditions of the service. A third-party contract should be reviewed by the legal department to ensure that it complies with the applicable laws and regulations, protects the client's interests and rights, and specifies the roles and responsibilities of both parties. A third-party contract that has not been reviewed by the legal department may contain clauses that are unfavorable, ambiguous, or contradictory to the client, such as:
Inadequate or unclear service level agreements (SLAs) that do not specify the quality, timeliness, and accuracy of the payroll service.
Insufficient or vague security and confidentiality provisions that do not safeguard the client's data and information from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, or loss.
Unreasonable or excessive fees, penalties, or liabilities that may impose an undue financial burden on the client.
Limited or no audit rights that may prevent the client from verifying the effectiveness and compliance of the payroll provider's internal controls.
Inflexible or restrictive termination clauses that may limit the client's ability to cancel or switch to another payroll provider.
A third-party contract that has not been reviewed by the legal department may expose the client to various risks, such as:
Legal disputes or litigation with the payroll provider over contractual breaches or performance issues.
Regulatory fines or sanctions for noncompliance with tax, labor, or other laws and regulations related to payroll.
Financial losses or damages due to errors, fraud, or negligence by the payroll provider.
Reputation damage or customer dissatisfaction due to payroll errors or delays.
Therefore, an IS auditor should be highly concerned about a third-party contract that has not been reviewed by the legal department and recommend that the client seek legal advice before signing or renewing any contract with an outsourced payroll provider.
User access rights have not been periodically reviewed by the client is a moderate concern because it may indicate a lack of proper access control over the payroll system. User access rights are the permissions granted to users to access, view, modify, or delete data and information in the payroll system. User access rights should be periodically reviewed by the client to ensure that they are aligned with the user's roles and responsibilities, and that they are revoked or modified when a user changes roles or leaves the organization.
User access rights that are not periodically reviewed by the client may result in unauthorized or inappropriate access to payroll data and information, which may compromise its confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
Payroll processing costs have not been included in the IT budget is a minor concern because it may indicate a lack of proper planning and allocation of IT resources for payroll processing. Payroll processing costs are the expenses incurred by the client for using an outsourced payroll service, such as fees, charges, taxes, or penalties. Payroll processing costs should be included in the IT budget to ensure that they are adequately estimated, monitored, and controlled. Payroll processing costs that are not included in the IT budget may result in unexpected or excessive costs for payroll processing, which may affect the client's profitability and cash flow.
The third-party contract does not comply with the vendor management policy is a low concern because it may indicate a lack of alignment between the client's vendor management policy and its actual vendor selection and evaluation process. A vendor management policy is a set of guidelines and procedures that governs how the client manages its relationship with its vendors, such as how to select, monitor, evaluate, and terminate vendors. A vendor management policy should be consistent with the client's business objectives, risk appetite, and regulatory requirements. A third-party contract that does not comply with the vendor management policy may result in suboptimal vendor performance or service quality, but it does not necessarily imply a breach of contract or a violation of law.

A network vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses and exposures in a network that could be exploited by attackers to compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the network or its resources. A network vulnerability assessment typically involves scanning the network devices, such as routers, switches, firewalls, servers, and workstations, using automated tools that compare the device configurations, software versions, and patch levels against a database of known vulnerabilities. A network vulnerability assessment can also include manual testing and verification of the network architecture, design, policies, and procedures. One of the main objectives of a network vulnerability assessment is to detect and report any misconfiguration and missing updates in the network devices that could pose a security risk1.
Misconfiguration refers to any deviation from the recommended or best practice settings for the network devices, such as weak passwords, open ports, unnecessary services, default accounts, or incorrect permissions. Missing updates refer toany outdated or unsupported software or firmware that has not been patched with the latest security fixes or enhancements from the vendors2. Misconfiguration and missing updates are common sources of network vulnerabilities that can be exploited by attackers to gain unauthorized access, executemalicious code, causedenial of service, or escalate privileges on the network devices3.
Therefore, an IS auditor should expect to see misconfiguration and missing updates in a network vulnerability assessment. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:
* B. Malicious software and spyware are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are more related to the content and behavior of the network traffic rather than the configuration and patch level of the network devices. Malicious software and spyware are programs that infect or monitor the network devices or their users for malicious purposes, such as stealing data, displaying ads, or performing remote commands. Malicious software and spyware can be detected by other security tools, such as antivirus software, firewalls, or intrusion detection systems4.
* C. Zero-day vulnerabilities are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are unknown or undisclosed vulnerabilities that have not been reported or patched by the vendors or the security community. Zero-day vulnerabilities are rare and difficult to discover, as they require advanced techniques and skills to exploit them. Zero-day vulnerabilities can be detected by other security tools, such as intrusion prevention systems, anomaly detection systems, or artificial intelligence systems5.
* D. Security design flaws are not usually detected by a network vulnerability assessment, as they are more related to the logic and functionality of the network rather than the configuration and patch level of the network devices. Security design flaws are errors or weaknesses in the network architecture, design, policies, or procedures that could compromise the security objectives of the network. Securitydesign flaws can be detected by other security methods, such as security reviews, audits, or assessments6. References: Network VulnerabilityAssessment - ISACA, Network Vulnerability Scanning - NIST, Network Vulnerabilities - SANS, Malware - ISACA, Zero-Day Attacks
- ISACA, Security Design Principles - NIST

The most appropriate control to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system is to enforce an internal data access policy. A data access policy defines who can access what data, under what conditions and for what purposes. It also specifies the roles and responsibilities of data owners, custodians and users, as well as the security measures and controls to protect data confidentiality, integrity and availability. By enforcing a data access policy, the organization can ensure that only authorized personnel can retrieve confidential informationfrom the business application system. Applying single sign-on for access control, implementing segregation of duties and enforcing the use of digital signatures are also useful controls, but they are not sufficient to prevent unauthorized data retrieval without a clear and comprehensive data access policy. References:
* CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, page 2301
* CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription2

Evidence collection is the process of identifying, acquiring, preserving, and documenting digital evidence from various sources, such as computers, networks, mobile devices, or cloud services, that can be used to support the investigation and prosecution of cybercrimes. Evidence collection is an IS auditor's primary focus when evaluating the response process for cybercrimes, because it determines the quality and validity of the evidence that can be used to prove or disprove the facts of the case, identify the perpetrators, and recover the losses. Evidence collection should follow the standards and best practices for digital forensics, such as ISO
/IEC 270371, which provide guidelines for ensuring the integrity, authenticity, reliability, and admissibility of the evidence2.
The other possible options are:
* A. Communication with law enforcement: This is the process of reporting, cooperating, and coordinating with law enforcement agencies that have the jurisdiction and authority to investigate and prosecute cybercrimes. Communication with law enforcement is an important aspect of the response process for cybercrimes, but it is not an IS auditor's primary focus when evaluating it. Communication with law enforcement depends on the legal and regulatory requirements, the nature and severity of the incident, and the organizational policies and procedures. Communication with law enforcement should be done after evidence collection, to avoid compromising or contaminating the evidence3.
* B. Notification to regulators: This is the process of informing and updating the relevant regulatory bodies or authorities that oversee or supervise the organization's activities or industry sector about the cybercrime incident. Notification to regulators is an important aspect of the response process for cybercrimes, but it is not an IS auditor's primary focus when evaluating it. Notification to regulators depends on the legal and regulatory requirements, the nature and impact of the incident, and the organizational policies and procedures. Notification to regulators should be doneafter evidence collection, to avoid disclosing sensitiveor confidential information4.
* C. Root cause analysis: This is the process of identifying and analyzing the underlying factors or causes that led to or contributed to the cybercrime incident. Root cause analysis is an important aspect of the response process for cybercrimes, but it is not an IS auditor's primary focus when evaluating it. Root cause analysis helps to prevent or mitigate future incidents, improve security controls and processes, and learn from mistakes. Root cause analysis should be done after evidence collection, to avoid interfering with or affecting theinvestigation5.