Certified: The ISACA CISA Prepcast

Welcome to The Bare Metal Cyber CISA Prepcast. This series helps you prepare for the exam with focused explanations and practical context.
Security frameworks provide a structured and repeatable way for organizations to protect their information assets. These frameworks help organizations align their technical controls with business goals, risk appetite, and regulatory obligations. In environments that are large, complex, or heavily regulated, frameworks serve as a roadmap for developing, assessing, and improving security posture. They provide clarity on what needs to be protected, how it should be protected, and how progress can be measured over time. For auditors and security professionals, frameworks also support assessments, certifications, and benchmarking. The CISA exam regularly includes questions about major frameworks, how they are applied, and what role they play in securing systems and ensuring compliance. Understanding the distinctions among framework types and how they are used in practice is critical for success in this domain.
It is important to understand the differences between frameworks, standards, and guidelines, as these terms are often used interchangeably but serve distinct roles. A framework is a broad structure that helps guide strategy, planning, and the integration of controls across an enterprise. Examples include the NIST Cybersecurity Framework and COBIT, both of which provide high-level models for how security and governance should be organized. Standards are more specific and formal. They define how particular processes or technologies should be implemented. ISO 27001 is a good example of a security standard that specifies how an information security management system should be built and maintained. Guidelines are more flexible. They offer recommendations that can be adapted to fit an organization’s unique circumstances. While frameworks help shape direction, standards define structure, and guidelines support execution. CISA candidates must be able to distinguish between these types and understand which to apply in a given context.
One of the most widely recognized standards in the world is ISO 27001, which sets out the criteria for building and maintaining an information security management system. This standard focuses on the principles of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. It requires organizations to perform a structured risk assessment, select appropriate controls, and continuously monitor and improve their security practices. Certification under ISO 27001 is often pursued by organizations that want to demonstrate a formal commitment to information security to regulators, clients, or partners. ISO 27002 complements this standard by offering guidance on how to implement the controls listed in Annex A of ISO 27001. It provides practical direction for areas such as access control, encryption, physical security, and supplier management. For auditors, reviewing adherence to these standards involves checking whether policies exist, whether controls are in place, and whether there is evidence that the organization is monitoring and improving over time.
The NIST Cybersecurity Framework is another influential model, particularly in the United States. It is widely adopted across government and private sectors and is valued for its flexibility and alignment with risk management principles. The framework is organized around five core functions: identify, protect, detect, respond, and recover. Each function includes categories and subcategories that help organizations evaluate their current capabilities and identify areas for improvement. One of the strengths of the NIST framework is that it supports continuous improvement and allows organizations to assess their maturity over time. It can also be mapped to other standards and frameworks, such as ISO 27001, COBIT, and the Center for Internet Security Controls. CISA candidates may encounter questions that ask them to apply NIST concepts to specific scenarios or determine whether an organization’s implementation supports its security objectives. Knowing the functions and structure of the framework is key to answering such questions effectively.
COBIT, which stands for Control Objectives for Information and Related Technologies, is another core framework with a focus on governance and IT management. Unlike other models that focus primarily on technical controls, COBIT provides a holistic view that connects IT processes with enterprise goals, performance management, and stakeholder needs. COBIT includes detailed guidance on how to align IT with business objectives, manage risk, and measure process maturity. It also offers control objectives across a wide range of domains, including security, compliance, and operations. One of COBIT’s strengths is its ability to bridge the gap between strategic management and operational implementation. Auditors often use COBIT as a lens through which to evaluate whether IT controls are appropriate, whether they support risk reduction, and whether they align with business priorities. On the CISA exam, candidates should be prepared to assess how well a security program maps to COBIT principles and whether governance practices are adequately addressed.
The Center for Internet Security Controls, also known as the CIS Critical Security Controls, offers a practical, prioritized approach to implementing security. The CIS model includes a set of eighteen control categories that are designed to protect systems from common threats. These controls are highly prescriptive, meaning they offer detailed instructions for how to implement them. They are often adopted by small to mid-sized organizations or by those seeking a rapid improvement in their security posture. The CIS controls include asset inventory, secure configuration, vulnerability management, controlled use of administrative privileges, and incident response, among others. They provide a concrete way to apply essential security practices and are often used as a baseline before moving to more complex or comprehensive frameworks. On the exam, CISA candidates should understand how these controls support basic cyber hygiene and how they can be tailored to meet the resource and risk constraints of different organizations.
In addition to general-purpose frameworks, there are several industry-specific standards that auditors must be aware of. The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard, known as PCI-DSS, governs how organizations handle credit card data. It defines twelve control domains and requires strict controls over network security, access management, encryption, and logging. HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, applies to healthcare organizations and mandates administrative, physical, and technical safeguards to protect patient data. Financial institutions may fall under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, while educational institutions are subject to FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. In the public sector, systems may be governed by FISMA, the Federal Information Security Management Act. Each of these standards shares the same core principles—protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of sensitive data—but they differ in how those protections are enforced. CISA exam questions may require you to match an organization or scenario to the appropriate standard or identify gaps in how a sector-specific standard is applied.
When frameworks are used properly, they become tools that guide both planning and improvement. Organizations can use frameworks to assess their current control environment, identify where gaps exist, and develop action plans for remediation. Risk plays a central role in this process. Controls should be prioritized based on the likelihood and impact of associated risks. For example, an organization that handles sensitive customer data may need to focus on encryption and access control, while a company with critical uptime requirements may prioritize availability and incident response. Frameworks can also be scaled to fit the size and complexity of an organization. A small nonprofit may use a simplified version of the NIST framework, while a global bank might maintain full compliance with multiple frameworks simultaneously. Auditors review whether frameworks are actively used—not just named in policies but integrated into planning, measurement, and improvement processes. CISA candidates should know how to evaluate framework adoption as more than a checkbox.
Despite their value, adopting frameworks is not without challenges. Organizations that over-customize a framework may lose its integrity or comparability. In some cases, important control requirements may be modified or removed entirely in the name of flexibility. Lack of leadership support can prevent the framework from being implemented effectively or result in superficial compliance. Selecting a framework without considering risk can also lead to wasted effort or misaligned controls. If a framework is chosen simply because it is popular, without understanding whether it fits the organization's needs, it may not deliver value. Another common pitfall is failing to update the framework mapping after major system changes, mergers, or architectural redesigns. When the environment changes but the framework is not updated, the result is a misalignment between control intent and technical reality. Auditors are expected to evaluate both how well the framework has been implemented and how well it is maintained over time.
For the CISA candidate, the essential takeaway is that frameworks, standards, and guidelines are more than documentation. They are living tools that support consistent, risk-aligned protection of information assets. You must understand which frameworks serve which purposes and how they relate to different industries and risk environments. Be ready to evaluate how a framework has been selected, whether it has been customized responsibly, and whether it is actually being followed. Exam questions may test your knowledge of specific frameworks such as ISO, NIST, COBIT, CIS, or PCI-DSS. They may also ask how a framework supports maturity assessments or whether it aligns with control objectives. In audits, the presence of a framework is not enough. You are expected to determine whether that framework results in controls that are implemented, enforced, and improved. Effective frameworks enhance security by enabling scale, consistency, and clarity—not just by existing in policy documents.
Thanks for joining us for this episode of The Bare Metal Cyber CISA Prepcast. For more episodes, tools, and study support, visit us at Baremetalcyber.com.