The best recommendation to prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers by accounts payable employees is dual control. Dual control is a segregation of duties control that requires two or more individuals to perform or authorize a transaction or activity. Dual control can prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers by requiring independent verification and approval of payment requests, amounts, and recipients by different accounts payable employees. The other options are not as effective as dual control in preventing fraudulent electronic funds transfers, as they do not involve independent checks or approvals. Periodic vendor reviews are detective controls that can help identify any irregularities or anomalies in vendor payments, but they do not prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers from occurring. Independent reconciliation is a detective control that can help compare and confirm payment records with bank statements, but it does not prevent fraudulent electronic funds transfers from occurring. Re-keying of monetary amounts is an input control that can help detect any errors or discrepancies in payment amounts, but it does not prevent fraudulentelectronic funds transfers from occurring. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3, Section 3.2

The best approach to optimize resources when both internal and external audit teams are reviewing the same IT general controls area is to leverage the work performed by external audit for the internal audit testing. This can avoid duplication of efforts, reduce audit costs and enhance coordination between the audit teams. The internal audit team should evaluate the quality and reliability of the external audit work before relying on it.
Ensuring both the internal and external auditors perform the work simultaneously is not an efficient use of resources, as it would create redundancy and possible interference. Requesting that the external audit team leverage the internal audit work may not be feasible or acceptable, as the external audit team may have different objectives, standards and independence requirements. Rolling forward the general controls audit to the subsequent audit year is not a good practice, as it would delay the identification and remediation of any control weaknesses in a high-risk area. References: ISACA, CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, 2018, page
247

A preventive control is a control that aims to deter or prevent undesirable events from occurring. A fingerprint-based access control system for the building is an example of a preventive control for physical access, as it restricts unauthorized persons from entering the premises. Keeping log entries for all visitors to the building, installing CCTV cameras for all ingress and egress points, and implementing a centralized logging server to record instances of staff logging into workstations are examples of detective controls, which are controls that aim to discover or detect undesirable events that have already occurred.
References: IS Audit and Assurance Tools and Techniques, CISA Certification | Certified Information Systems Auditor | ISACA

The best way to evaluate the effectiveness of a newly developed application is to review acceptance testing results. Acceptance testing is a process of verifying that the application meets the specified requirements and expectations of the users and stakeholders. Acceptance testing results can provide evidence of the functionality, usability, reliability, performance, security and quality of the application. Performing a post- implementation review, analyzing load testing results, and performing a secure code review are also important activities for evaluating an application, but they are not as comprehensive or conclusive as acceptance testing results.
References: Info Technology & Systems Resources | COBIT, Risk, Governance ... - ISACA, IT Governance and Process Maturity