The most important thing for incident management to focus on when addressing an issue that causes an outage is restoring the system to operational state as quickly as possible. Incident management is the process of detecting, investigating, and resolving incidents that disrupt or degrade a service or system. An incident is an unplanned event that affects the normal functioning or quality of a service or system. An outage is a type of incident that causes a complete loss of service or system availability. The main goal of incident management is to restore the service or system to its operational state as quickly as possible, minimizing the impact on users and business operations.
*The other options are not as important as option B. Analyzing the root cause of the outage to ensure the incident will not re-occur is a valuable activity, but not the most important thing for incident management to focus on when addressing an issue that causes an outage. Root cause analysis is a process of identifying and eliminating the underlying factors that caused an incident or problem. Root cause analysis can help to prevent or reduce the likelihood of similar incidents or problems in the future. However, root cause analysis is usually performed after the incident has been resolved and the service or system has been restored. Ensuring all resolution steps are fully documented prior to returning the system to service is a good practice, but not the most important thing for incident management to focus on when addressing an issue that causes an outage.
Documentation is a process of recording and maintaining information about an incident and its resolution steps. Documentation can help to improve communication, accountability, learning, and improvement within incident management. However, documentation should not delay or interfere with the restoration of the service or system. Rolling back the unsuccessful change to the previous state is a possible solution, but not the most important thing for incident management to focus on when addressing an issue that causes an outage.
Rolling back is a process of reverting a change that has been applied to a service or system that caused an incident or problem. Rolling back can help to restore the service or system to its previous state before the change was made.

In a controlled application development environment, the most important segregation of duties should be between the person who implements changes into the production environment and the application programmer. This segregation of duties ensures that no one person can create and deploy code without proper review, testing, and approval. This reduces the risk of errors, fraud, or malicious code being introduced into the production environment.
The other options are not as important as the segregation between the application programmer and the person who implements changes into production, but they are still relevant for achieving a secure and reliable application development environment. The segregation of duties between the person who implements changes into production and the systems programmer is important to prevent unauthorized or untested changes to system software or configuration. The segregation of duties between the person who implements changes into production and the computer operator is important to prevent unauthorized or uncontrolled access to production data or resources. The segregation of duties between the person who implements changes into production and the quality assurance (QA) personnel is important to ensure independent verification and validation of code quality and functionality.
References:
* ISACA CISA Review Manual 27th Edition (2019), page 247
* Segregation of Duties in an Agile Environment | AKF Partners3
* Separation of Duties: How to Conform in a DevOps World4

The associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a data loss prevention (DLP) audit is increased vulnerability due to anytime, anywhere accessibility. Mobile computing refers to the use of portable devices, such as laptops, tablets, smartphones, or wearable devices, that can access data and applications over wireless networks from any location6. Mobile computing enables greater flexibility, productivity, and convenience for users, but also poses significant security challenges for organizations. One of these challenges is increased vulnerability due to anytime, anywhere accessibility. This means that mobile devices are exposed to a higher risk of loss, theft, damage, or unauthorized access than stationary devices7. If mobile devices contain oraccess sensitive data withoutproper protection, such asencryption or authentication, they could result in data leakage or breach in case of compromise8. Therefore, an IS auditor should identify this risk as part of a DLP audit. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:
* A. The use of cloud negatively impacting IT availability is not an associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a DLP audit, as it is more related to cloud computing than mobile computing. Cloud computing refers to the delivery of computing services, such as data storage or processing, over the Internet from remote servers. Cloud computing may enable or support mobile computing by providing access to data and applications from any device or location, but it does not necessarily imply mobile computing. The use of cloud may negatively impact IT availability if there are disruptions or outages in the cloud service provider's network or infrastructure, but this is not a direct consequence of mobile computing.
* B. Increased need for user awareness training is not an associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a DLP audit, as it is more of a control or mitigation measure than a risk. User awareness training refers to educating users about security policies, procedures, and best practices for using mobile devices and protecting data. User awareness training may help to reduce the risk of data loss or breach due to mobile computing by increasing user knowledge and responsibility, but it does not eliminate or prevent the risk.
* D. Lack of governance and oversight for IT infrastructure and applications is not an associated risk of mobile computing that an IS auditor should identify during the planning phase of a DLP audit, as it is more of a general or organizational risk than a specific or technical risk. Governance and oversight refer to the establishment and implementation of policies, standards, and procedures for managing IT resources and aligning them with business objectives. Lack of governance and oversight for IT infrastructure and applications may affect the security and performance of mobile devices and data, but it is not a direct or inherent result of mobile computing. References: Mobile Computing - ISACA, Mobile Computing Device Threats, Vulnerabilities and Risk Factors Are Ubiquitous - ISACA, Data Loss Prevention-Next Steps -ISACA, [Cloud Computing - ISACA], [Cloud Computing Risk Assessment - ISACA], [User Awareness Training - ISACA], [Governance and Oversight - ISACA]

Audit observations are the findings and recommendations that result from an audit engagement. Audit observations should be first communicated with the auditee during fieldwork, which is the stage of the audit process where the auditor collects and analyzes evidence to evaluate the audit objectives1. Communicating audit observations during fieldwork has several benefits, such as2:
It allows the auditor to verify the accuracy and completeness of the observations, and to obtain additional information or clarification from the auditee if needed.
It enables the auditor to discuss the root causes, impacts, and risks of the observations, and to solicit the auditee's input on possible corrective actions and implementation timelines.
It helps to build rapport and trust between the auditor and the auditee, and to avoid surprises or disagreements at the end of the audit.
It facilitates timely resolution of audit observations, and reduces the risk of audit delays or disputes.
Therefore, option B is the correct answer.
Option A is not correct because communicating audit observations when drafting the report is too late, as it may lead to misunderstandings, conflicts, or revisions that could have been avoided if the observations were communicated earlier. Option C is not correct because communicating audit observations at the end of fieldwork is also not ideal, as it may not leave enough time for the auditor and the auditee to discuss and agree on the observations and recommendations. Option D is not correct because communicating audit observations within the audit report is the final step of the audit process, not the first.
References:
Audit Process Overview1
Communicating Internal Audit Findings: Best Practices for Success2

To ensure that management concerns are addressed, internal audit should recommend that the data quality team review the data reported to the regulatory body first. This is because this data set is the most relevant and critical to the issue that triggered the enhancement of the data quality program. The data reported to the regulatory body should be accurate, complete, consistent, and timely, as any discrepancies could result in fines, penalties, or reputational damage for the organization.Data with customer personal information is important for data quality, but it is not directly related to the regulatory reporting issue. Data supporting financial statements is important for data quality, but it may not be the same as the data reported to the regulatory body. Data impacting business objectives is important for data quality, but it may not be as urgent or sensitive as the data reported to the regulatory body. References:
* CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, pages 404-4051
* CISA Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 262