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.
Incident response planning is one of the most critical components of a mature cybersecurity program. No matter how many controls are in place, security incidents are inevitable. What determines the severity of their impact is how effectively an organization can detect, contain, and recover from them. A strong incident response plan allows organizations to react swiftly and in coordination, minimizing damage, reducing downtime, preserving evidence, and maintaining stakeholder trust. Proper planning also supports compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, including mandates under the General Data Protection Regulation, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, and the NIST Special Publication on incident handling. Auditors review the existence, scope, and quality of incident response capabilities. The CISA exam frequently presents scenarios involving mishandled incidents or lack of planning, challenging candidates to assess how organizations prepare for and manage cybersecurity events.
An incident response plan, or IRP, is more than a document—it is a structured, operational framework for responding to security events. At a minimum, it must define what constitutes an incident and establish severity levels to prioritize response. Roles and responsibilities must be clearly outlined across IT, security, business, and leadership functions. This includes defining who detects, who investigates, who approves containment actions, and who communicates externally. Escalation paths ensure that significant incidents receive timely attention from the appropriate decision-makers. A communication plan details who needs to be informed, when, and by what method. The IRP must also integrate with related functions, such as business continuity, disaster recovery, legal, compliance, and human resources. Auditors review IRPs to confirm that all key elements are present, role assignments are clear, and escalation criteria are defined. CISA candidates should know the structure of a good IRP and how each component supports effective response.
The incident response lifecycle, as defined in the NIST SP 800-61 framework, provides a reliable structure for building and evaluating IRPs. The lifecycle consists of four major phases: preparation, detection and analysis, containment and eradication, and post-incident activity. Preparation includes all proactive measures taken before an incident occurs—training staff, defining response processes, and configuring tools. Detection and analysis involve identifying potential incidents, assessing their impact, and determining whether an incident meets the criteria for escalation. Containment and eradication aim to stop the threat, remove malicious components, and recover systems to a secure state. Post-incident activity ensures that lessons are captured, control weaknesses are addressed, and improvements are made. CISA candidates must understand each phase, including its purpose, key activities, and supporting controls. The exam may test your ability to sequence steps or evaluate whether an organization has covered the full lifecycle in its planning.
Effective preparation begins with establishing an incident response team and equipping them with the tools, training, and authority needed to act. This team may be called an incident response team, computer security incident response team, or computer emergency response team, depending on the organization. Preparation also includes developing playbooks—predefined procedures for handling common threats such as phishing, malware infections, ransomware, and insider misuse. These playbooks help streamline response and reduce decision-making during high-stress events. Logging and monitoring systems must be configured to support timely detection and provide sufficient forensic detail. Tabletop exercises and simulation drills reinforce training and identify gaps in procedures, tooling, or decision-making. Auditors assess whether preparation steps are documented, whether team roles are understood, and whether the organization has rehearsed its response before a real incident occurs. The CISA exam may present a scenario in which lack of preparation worsened the outcome of an incident.
The detection and analysis phase begins when a potential security event is identified. Organizations must define detection thresholds—criteria for what types of alerts, reports, or anomalies qualify as potential incidents. These thresholds are typically based on indicators from security information and event management systems, endpoint detection tools, user reports, and automated alerts. Once an alert is received, incidents must be categorized by severity and scope. Triage involves verifying whether an event is truly malicious, understanding which systems are affected, and determining what level of response is required. Incident tracking systems or ticketing platforms help organize analysis and support documentation. Auditors review detection procedures, verify that classification rules are consistently applied, and examine whether alerts are resolved or escalated according to policy. CISA scenarios may test your understanding of incident classification, including how to differentiate between false alarms and legitimate security breaches.
Communication is a critical part of incident response, yet it is frequently overlooked or mismanaged. An IRP must define who needs to be notified during each phase of an incident. This includes technical teams, executive leadership, legal advisors, compliance officers, and external stakeholders such as regulators, customers, and media contacts. Contact lists must be maintained and accessible even during outages. Pre-approved message templates can help ensure that initial communications are accurate and timely. Escalation procedures should define when to involve legal counsel, notify regulators, or engage law enforcement. Regulatory requirements often impose breach notification deadlines, such as seventy-two hours under GDPR. Failure to notify within the required timeframe can result in legal penalties and reputational damage. Auditors evaluate whether communication plans are documented, tested, and integrated into incident workflows. CISA exam questions may present communication failures and expect you to recommend improvements based on policy and compliance needs.
During the containment, eradication, and recovery phase, the priority is to stop the incident from spreading, remove the root cause, and restore normal operations. Containment may involve isolating affected endpoints, disabling compromised accounts, or blocking malicious IP addresses. The strategy may differ based on incident type and severity. For example, immediate containment may be necessary for ransomware, while more controlled containment may apply in data exfiltration cases to preserve evidence. Eradication includes removing malware, closing exploited vulnerabilities, and reviewing access logs for persistence mechanisms. Recovery involves restoring systems from backups, validating data integrity, and resuming services. Post-recovery monitoring ensures that the threat is fully removed and that no re-infection occurs. Auditors assess how long containment took, whether eradication steps were verified, and whether restoration was performed securely. On the exam, candidates may be asked to evaluate a recovery timeline or identify weaknesses in the containment process.
Post-incident analysis is an opportunity to learn from mistakes and strengthen defenses. A formal post-mortem review should be conducted with all relevant stakeholders, including IT, security, business leaders, and compliance teams. The review must document the timeline of events, root cause, systems affected, response actions taken, and areas for improvement. Control gaps, miscommunications, or delays identified during response must be turned into corrective actions. This may include revising detection rules, updating response playbooks, or improving training. Lessons learned should be communicated to all relevant teams, and tracking of follow-up tasks ensures that improvements are not forgotten. Auditors review post-incident documentation, assess whether findings led to meaningful changes, and verify that similar incidents are less likely to occur in the future. The CISA exam may include scenarios where post-incident reviews were skipped or ineffective, and ask candidates how to strengthen continuous improvement efforts.
Testing and updating the incident response plan is just as important as writing it. Plans must be tested regularly through simulations, live drills, or surprise scenarios to ensure that procedures are current and that staff know their roles. Contact lists must be reviewed and kept accurate. Tools used during incident response—such as forensics software, ticketing systems, or communication channels—must be validated and accessible. Updates to the plan should reflect evolving threats, new technology deployments, organizational changes, and recent incidents. Testing should include third-party coordination if vendors or partners are part of the incident response chain. Documentation of test results, version history, and update logs are all necessary for demonstrating preparedness. Auditors verify that tests are conducted with appropriate frequency, that issues discovered during testing are addressed, and that the plan reflects current realities. On the CISA exam, candidates may be asked to assess whether IRPs are actively maintained or simply sit unused.
For CISA candidates, the ability to evaluate an organization’s incident response readiness is essential. You must understand the key components of an IRP, the phases of the incident lifecycle, and how preparation supports rapid and effective containment. Expect exam questions on role assignments, notification failures, classification errors, and audit documentation. You may be asked to evaluate whether tabletop exercises were performed or whether post-incident reviews were followed up with corrective actions. Auditors play a key role in ensuring that incident response is not an afterthought. It must be built into governance, integrated with monitoring, and validated through regular testing. Strong response planning does not prevent incidents—but it ensures they are handled with speed, coordination, and confidence. In today's threat landscape, the difference between a minor disruption and a major crisis often comes down to how well the organization is prepared to respond.
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.