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.
Domain One is more than just the starting point in your CISA study—it is the structural foundation upon which the entire exam is built. It introduces the concepts and practices that define information systems auditing, which makes it essential to your understanding of how governance, risk, and controls are assessed in complex environments. The domain carries significant weight in the exam and is known for featuring nuanced scenario questions that test your ability to apply audit principles in realistic situations. Through its emphasis on planning, execution, and reporting, Domain One gives you the tools to evaluate the full audit lifecycle—from initial scoping through evidence collection and final communication—and it plays a vital role in helping you transition from theoretical knowledge to the kind of practical insight expected from a systems auditor. More than any other domain, it links high-level audit frameworks with the operational and business realities that professionals face every day.
To succeed in Domain One, you must understand what an information systems audit actually is, which starts with its core objective: to evaluate whether IT controls are effectively designed and operating as intended to manage risk, ensure compliance, and support business objectives. Unlike financial audits, which primarily focus on accounting accuracy and regulatory financial compliance, IS audits are broader in scope and typically include control assessments, systems integrity evaluations, and operational process reviews. Where financial auditors follow established accounting standards, IS auditors examine whether organizational systems support confidentiality, integrity, and availability in line with governance policies and risk appetites. The scope of an IS audit frequently includes technical components—like access control systems or disaster recovery plans—but it also addresses business impact, because the function of IT is always tied to the organization's strategic goals. As a result, IS auditors must be fluent in both technical environments and business operations, able to see how the design and failure of systems affect risk, compliance, and enterprise value.
Any audit engagement conducted under ISACA's framework must also align with its ethical standards and professional guidelines, which serve not only as exam content but as practical anchors for decision-making throughout your audit career. ISACA’s Code of Professional Ethics stresses integrity, objectivity, and confidentiality, and these values are not theoretical—they directly influence how you gather evidence, report findings, and interact with stakeholders. Independence is a central expectation for IS auditors, and understanding the boundaries that ensure objectivity—such as avoiding conflicts of interest and reporting outside lines of influence—is critical both for exam questions and real-world credibility. ISACA provides auditing standards and guidance materials that help structure engagements, such as defining audit objectives, risk assessments, and control evaluations in line with industry best practices. You may also be expected to reference frameworks like COBIT or ISO when structuring engagements or aligning control reviews, and the exam will often present scenarios where the correct answer reflects not just what you can do, but what you should do, ethically and professionally. How you manage evidence—ensuring that it is complete, untampered, and appropriately stored—often comes down to ethics, not just policy.
Understanding the types of audits and assessments is central to Domain One because different engagement types serve different goals, and your ability to select the appropriate approach is frequently tested. Internal audits are typically ongoing and support organizational improvement, while external audits often serve regulatory or stakeholder requirements and are usually conducted by third parties. Compliance audits measure adherence to specific laws or policies, operational audits examine efficiency and effectiveness of business functions, and financial audits focus on reporting accuracy—each type of audit brings a different lens to risk. You may also encounter readiness reviews, which assess an organization’s preparedness for an upcoming certification or regulatory evaluation, and security assessments, which focus on identifying control weaknesses in technical systems. Some organizations also use control self-assessments, or CSAs, to enable internal teams to evaluate their own risk controls, while gap analyses help identify discrepancies between current and desired control states. On the exam, expect questions that present a scenario and ask which audit type best fits, requiring you to interpret intent, scope, and stakeholder needs rather than simply identify definitions.
Risk-based audit planning is one of the most foundational activities in Domain One, and it represents the starting point of almost every audit engagement. This process begins by identifying and prioritizing risks that could affect the organization’s operations, assets, or compliance obligations, and those risks drive decisions about what to audit, when to audit it, and how much effort to allocate. Preliminary risk assessments help define areas of concern, and these assessments are often based on organizational context, past incidents, or external developments. Once risks are identified, audit objectives are crafted to address them directly, ensuring that resources—such as time, staffing, and technical tools—are focused where they are needed most. Control frameworks like COBIT or ISO three one thousand are used to map control coverage to identified risks, helping auditors ensure that key areas are not overlooked. An important distinction within this process is the difference between inherent risk, which is the risk present before controls are applied, and residual risk, which is what remains after controls are in place; understanding this difference is frequently tested in scenario-based questions that ask how you would plan or revise an audit in light of changing risk profiles.
Audit project management is another essential area in Domain One, encompassing the planning, coordination, and oversight of all resources and tasks involved in executing an audit successfully. A well-managed audit begins with a clearly defined timeline, budget, and team structure, and effective planning ensures that scope changes, schedule delays, or unexpected obstacles are addressed in a structured and professional manner. Establishing audit objectives, setting scope boundaries, and determining evaluation criteria are core to launching any engagement, and these elements must be approved by the appropriate stakeholders, such as audit committees or business leadership. Identifying those stakeholders early helps ensure clear communication pathways and decision-making authority throughout the project. When scope or schedule changes occur—as they often do—having a change management plan in place allows the audit team to document and adjust expectations transparently, which maintains audit integrity and credibility. Finally, tracking progress through milestones, addressing emerging risks, and resolving logistical issues are all part of effective audit oversight, and the exam may ask how you would manage a project that is falling behind, facing access issues, or encountering scope misalignment.
Fieldwork and evidence collection form the heart of the audit execution phase, where audit plans turn into tangible observations, interviews, and test results. Evidence comes in many forms—documentary evidence like policies and logs, observational evidence such as witnessing a procedure, and analytical evidence like trend analysis or performance metrics—and each has strengths and limitations depending on the audit objective. To be usable, evidence must be sufficient, meaning enough of it exists; reliable, meaning it can be trusted; and relevant, meaning it applies directly to the audit criteria, and understanding how to evaluate evidence against these standards is critical to forming supportable conclusions. Common audit techniques include structured interviews with key personnel, walkthroughs of processes to observe task execution, and re-performance, which involves redoing a process or control to validate that it works as claimed. Documentation of this evidence must be thorough and clearly tied to findings, because incomplete or ambiguous records undermine the audit’s credibility and usefulness. Occasionally, you’ll encounter evidence that is missing, contradictory, or inconclusive, and the exam may test your ability to determine whether such evidence is adequate for forming a conclusion or whether additional procedures are required to support your assertions.
Sampling and testing techniques allow auditors to form reasonable conclusions about large populations without examining every item, and your ability to apply these techniques correctly is frequently evaluated in the exam. Statistical sampling uses formal models and probability to ensure objectivity, while judgmental sampling relies on auditor experience and risk awareness to target high-priority items; knowing when each approach is appropriate depends on audit objectives, population characteristics, and risk sensitivity. Determining sample size and selecting items for review must follow logical criteria to avoid bias, and auditors must be able to justify their selections, especially in cases where sampling methods are challenged. Once samples are selected, control testing involves designing procedures that simulate how a control functions and evaluating whether it achieves the intended objective, such as preventing unauthorized access or identifying errors. When exceptions or failures are discovered, auditors must analyze their cause, frequency, and impact, and determine whether they reflect isolated issues or systemic weaknesses. Errors in testing, such as poor documentation, biased selection, or misinterpreting results, can distort audit conclusions, so the exam will often ask you to spot flawed testing logic or recommend corrective actions for sampling deficiencies.
Reporting and follow-up complete the audit lifecycle, transforming evidence and findings into actionable insights and documented outcomes. Audit reports must be structured with clarity, objectivity, and relevance, typically including a summary of scope, methodology, key findings, risk implications, and formal recommendations, and the tone must be professional, evidence-based, and tailored to the audience’s level of technical understanding. Communicating findings is more than just stating what was discovered—it involves explaining why the issue matters, what risks it creates, and what steps can be taken to mitigate it, and this context helps stakeholders respond appropriately. Engagement with stakeholders should continue after the report is delivered, especially during resolution planning, where timelines, owners, and follow-up actions are established to address identified gaps. Auditors are often tasked with validating remediation efforts, which may involve reviewing new documentation, observing revised procedures, or retesting controls to ensure closure criteria are met. Throughout this process, detailed and organized documentation remains essential, not only for accountability and audit trail purposes, but also for future audits, compliance reviews, or external investigations that may revisit the same issues or rely on your findings as baseline information.
Ultimately, Domain One is not just the foundation of the CISA exam—it is the foundation of the IS audit profession, and mastery of its concepts equips you with the mindset and skillset to operate effectively in any audit-related role. The ability to evaluate systems, assess risk, structure engagements, and communicate findings is central not only to passing the exam, but to influencing IT governance in meaningful ways throughout your career. This domain builds fluency in applying industry frameworks, interpreting risk data, and adapting to new audit challenges with structure and confidence. It prepares you to lead audits, advise executives, and contribute to organizational improvement by identifying where systems and processes are vulnerable or misaligned. The tools and thinking patterns you develop here will appear again in every other domain of the exam, and your ability to apply them confidently—especially in judgment-based questions—will be key to your success. The better your foundation in Domain One, the stronger your performance across the board, and with each step forward, you move closer to mastering the audit process and earning the credential that proves it.
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.