Isaca Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge CCAK Exam Dumps: Updated Questions & Answers (December 2025)

A corrective control is a measure taken to correct or reduce the impact of an error, deviation, or unwanted activity1. Corrective control can be either manual or automated, depending on the type of control used. Corrective control can involve procedures, manuals, systems, patches, quarantines, terminations, reboots, or default dates1. A Business Continuity Plan (BCP) is an example of a corrective control.

Unsuccessful access attempts being automatically logged for investigation is an example of a corrective control because it is a response to a potential security incident that aims to identify and resolve the cause and prevent future occurrences2. Logging and investigating failed login attempts can help detect unauthorized or malicious attempts to access sensitive data or systems and take appropriate actions to mitigate the risk.

The other options are examples of preventive controls, which are designed to prevent problems from occurring in the first place3. Preventive controls can include:

A central antivirus system installing the latest signature files before allowing a connection to the network: This is a preventive control because it prevents malware infection by blocking potentially harmful connections and updating the antivirus software regularly4.

All new employees having standard access rights until their manager approves privileged rights: This is a preventive control because it prevents unauthorized access by enforcing the principle of least privilege and requiring approval for granting higher-level permissions5.

Privileged access to critical information systems requiring a second factor of authentication using a soft token: This is a preventive control because it prevents credential theft or compromise by adding an extra layer of security to verify the identity of the user.

References:

What is a corrective control? - Answers1, section on Corrective control

Detective controls - SaaS Lens - docs.aws.amazon.com2, section on Unsuccessful login attempts

Internal control: how do preventive and detective controls work?3, section on Preventive Controls

What Are Security Controls? - F54, section on Preventive Controls

The 3 Types of Internal Controls (With Examples) | Layer Blog5, section on Preventive Controls

What are the 3 Types of Internal Controls? — RiskOptics - Reciprocity, section on Preventive Controls

 ISO/IEC 15027017 is a cloud-specific security standard that provides guidelines for information security controls applicable to the provision and use of cloud services. It is based on ISO/IEC 27002, which is a general standard for information security management, but it also includes additional controls and implementation guidance that specifically relate to cloud services. ISO/IEC 15027017 is intended to help both cloud service providers and cloud service customers to enhance the security and confidentiality of their cloud environment and to comply with relevant regulatory requirements and industry standards.12 References := ISO/IEC 27017:2015 - Information technology — Security techniques — Code of practice for information security controls based on ISO/IEC 27002 for cloud services1; Cloud Security Standards: ISO, PCI, GDPR and Your Cloud - Exabeam3; ISO/IEC 27017 - Wikipedia2

It is most important for the auditor to be aware that the client organization has a clear understanding of the provider’s suppliers. The provider’s suppliers are the third-party entities that provide services or products to the provider, such as infrastructure, software, hardware, or support. The provider’s suppliers may have a significant impact on the quality, security, reliability, and performance of the cloud services that the provider delivers to the client organization. Therefore, the auditor should ensure that the client organization knows who the provider’s suppliers are, what services or products they provide, what risks they pose, and what contractual or regulatory obligations they have123.

The other options are not correct. Option A, the client organization does not need to worry about the provider’s suppliers, as this is the provider’s responsibility, is incorrect because the client organization cannot rely solely on the provider to manage its suppliers. The client organization has to perform due diligence and oversight on the provider’s suppliers, as they may affect the client organization’s own security, compliance, and business objectives12. Option B, the suppliers are accountable for the provider’s service that they are providing, is incorrect because the suppliers are not directly accountable to the client organization, but to the provider. The provider is ultimately accountable to the client organization for its service delivery and performance12. Option C, the client organization and provider are both responsible for the provider’s suppliers, is incorrect because the responsibility for the provider’s suppliers depends on the shared responsibility model, which defines how the security and compliance tasks and obligations are divided between the provider and the client organization. The shared responsibility model may vary depending on the type and level of cloud service that the provider offers12. References :=

Cloud Computing: Auditing Challenges - ISACA1

Cloud Computing: Audit Considerations - ISACA2

Top 16 Cloud Computing Companies & Service Providers 2023 - Datamation

According to the CCAK Study Guide, the business continuity management and operational resilience strategy of the cloud customer should be formulated jointly with the cloud service provider, as they share the responsibility for ensuring the availability and recoverability of the cloud services. The strategy should cover all aspects of business continuity and resilience planning, taking inputs from the assessed impact and risks, to consider activities for before, during, and after a disruption. These activities include prevention, mitigation, response, recovery, restoration, and improvement. The strategy should also define the roles and responsibilities of both parties, the communication channels and escalation procedures, the testing and exercising plans, and the review and update mechanisms1

The other options are not correct because:

Option B is not correct because the strategy should not only be developed within the acceptable limits of the risk appetite, but also aligned with the business objectives and stakeholder expectations of both parties. The risk appetite is only one of the factors that influence the strategy formulation1

Option C is not correct because the strategy should not only cover the activities required to continue and recover prioritized activities within identified time frames and agreed capacity, but also consider the activities for before and after a disruption, such as prevention, mitigation, improvement, etc. The strategy should also include other elements such as roles and responsibilities, communication channels, testing plans, etc1

References: 1: ISACA, Cloud Security Alliance. Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide. 2021. pp. 83-84.

In a multi-level supply chain structure where cloud service provider A relies on other sub cloud service providers, the provider should ensure that any compliance requirements relevant to the provider are passed to the sub cloud service providers. This is because the sub cloud service providers may have access to or process the provider’s data or resources, and therefore need to comply with the same standards and regulations as the provider. Passing the compliance requirements to the sub cloud service providers can also help the provider to monitor and audit the sub cloud service providers’ performance and security, and to mitigate any risks or issues that may arise.

References:

ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 85-86.

CSA, Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0, 2021, p. 7-8

An independent auditor report is a method that can be used by a cloud service provider (CSP) with a cloud customer that does not want to share security and control information. An independent auditor report is a document that provides assurance on the CSP’s security and control environment, based on an audit conducted by a qualified third-party auditor. The audit can be based on various standards or frameworks, such as ISO 27001, SOC 2, CSA STAR, etc. The independent auditor report can provide the cloud customer with the necessary information to evaluate the CSP’s security and control posture, without disclosing sensitive or proprietary details. The CSP can also use the independent auditor report to demonstrate compliance with relevant regulations or contractual obligations.

References:

ISACA, Certificate of Cloud Auditing Knowledge (CCAK) Study Guide, 2021, p. 83-84.

ISACA, Cloud Computing Audit Program, 2019, p. 6-7.

A Type 1 SOC report assesses whether controls are appropriately designed at a specific point in time, while a Type 2 SOC report tests the operating effectiveness of these controls over a period. For cloud auditing, Type 2 is often preferred for its comprehensive approach to both design and effectiveness over time. The CCAK curriculum emphasizes understanding these reports as critical tools in auditing cloud service providers (referenced in the CCAK content on Assurance and Transparency and the CSA STAR framework).

=========================

Rotating cryptographic keys regularly is a security best practice that helps to mitigate the risk of unauthorized access to encrypted data. When keys are rotated, old keys are retired and replaced with new ones, making any compromised keys useless to an attacker. This process helps to limit the time window during which a stolen key can be used to breach data. Key rotation is a fundamental aspect of key management lifecycle best practices, which include generating new key pairs, rotating keys at set intervals, revoking access to keys, and destroying out-of-date or compromised keys.

References = The importance of key rotation is supported by various security standards and best practices, including recommendations from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)1 and the Cloud Security Alliance (CSA)23. These sources emphasize the need for periodic renewal and decommissioning of old keys as part of a comprehensive key management strategy.

 In a multi-level supply chain structure, the cloud service provider should ensure that any compliance requirements relevant to the provider are passed to the sub cloud service providers, regardless of their geographic location. This is because the sub cloud service providers may have access to or process the data of the provider’s customers, and thus may affect the compliance status of the provider. The provider should also monitor and verify the compliance of the sub cloud service providers on a regular basis. This is part of the Cloud Control Matrix (CCM) domain COM-01: Regulatory Frameworks, which states that "The organization should identify and comply with applicable regulatory frameworks, contractual obligations, and industry standards."1 References := CCAK Study Guide, Chapter 3: Cloud Compliance Program, page 51