Greatest Access Control Concern in Accounts Payable Module
Which of the following observations should be of GREATEST concern to an IS auditor assessing access controls for the accounts payable module of a finance system?
Community Votes
100% of anonymous learners picked answer B. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Community Insight
The question tests prioritization of access control risks, where candidates often overlook direct fraud vectors like vendor master data manipulation in favor of broader configuration issues.
This CISA question tests segregation of duties within financial applications. The analysis confirms that allowing AP staff to modify vendor banking details poses the highest fraud risk.
Option A is frequently chosen because writable shared drives violate data integrity best practices, but it lacks the immediate, high-impact fraud potential of unauthorized vendor bank detail changes.
Community Discussion (4 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
Option B represents the greatest concern because it directly violates the segregation of duties principle fundamental to financial application controls. When accounts payable personnel can both process payments and modify vendor banking information, they can easily create fictitious vendors and redirect company funds without detection. This combination of privileges eliminates independent verification and creates an immediate, high-impact fraud vector that auditors must prioritize above other configuration issues.Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A describes writable payment files on a shared drive, which introduces data integrity risks but typically lacks the direct financial diversion capability of master data manipulation. Option C involves auditor access to create purchase orders, which threatens audit independence but does not compromise the operational security of the finance module itself. Option D highlights a mismatch between delegation limits and policy, representing a governance gap that requires remediation but poses a lower immediate threat than unchecked payment routing authority.Community Comment Notes
Learners consistently emphasize that updating vendor bank details bypasses the critical separation between payment execution and master data maintenance. pLulu noted that this setup "poses a significant risk of fraud or error" by enabling unauthorized account changes that divert funds. Another participant correctly pointed out that while writable shared drives allow pre-processing modification, the direct access to alter banking information carries a much higher consequence for organizational assets. Finally, blehbleh highlighted that option B is the only choice explicitly referencing access controls for AP staff to modify vendor records.Exam Strategy
When evaluating access control findings, prioritize scenarios that enable direct financial loss or fraud over general compliance gaps. Always apply the segregation of duties principle to identify conflicting roles within transactional workflows.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is option A less concerning than B?
Writable shared drives risk file tampering, but they lack the direct, high-impact fraud vector of unauthorized vendor bank updates that bypass segregation of duties.
Does auditor access to create POs violate independence?
Yes, but it affects audit objectivity rather than the AP module's operational access controls. The question specifically targets finance system risks.
Related Analysis
Practice All CISA Questions
Access 400 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full CISA Practice Test →