1. Introduction

A. The auditee is a large multinational bank with operations in several countries. The bank’s IT infrastructure includes servers, databases, applications, and network devices located in various locations. The bank’s SOC is responsible for monitoring the bank’s IT infrastructure for security incidents and responding to such incidents. The SOC is staffed by a team of experienced security analysts who work in shifts to ensure 24/7 coverage.

B. The audit firm, XYZ, is a leading provider of IT audit services with extensive experience in auditing the security of financial institutions. The team assigned to this project consists of five members, including a team leader, two security experts, and two IT auditors.

2. Auditee Environment

The bank’s IT infrastructure consists of servers, databases, applications, and network devices located in various locations. The SOC is responsible for monitoring the bank’s IT infrastructure for security incidents and responding to such incidents. The bank has implemented several security measures, including firewalls, intrusion detection and prevention systems, antivirus software, and data loss prevention systems. The bank is subject to several regulatory requirements, including the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), and has established several internal policies and procedures, including an Information Security Policy.

3. Background

The bank has experienced several security incidents in the recent past, including data breaches and network outages. Management is concerned about the effectiveness of the SOC in detecting and responding to such incidents in a timely and effective manner. Therefore, the bank has engaged the audit firm to assess the effectiveness of the SOC.

4. Situation

The audit firm conducted an initial assessment of the SOC and identified several areas of concern, including inadequate staffing levels, lack of documented policies and procedures, and inadequate training of security analysts. The audit firm also identified several control weaknesses, including inadequate monitoring of security incidents and inadequate response to security incidents.

5. Terms and Scope of assignment

The audit firm was engaged to assess the effectiveness of the SOC in ensuring the security of the bank’s IT infrastructure. The scope of the assignment included a review of the SOC’s staffing levels, policies and procedures, training programs, monitoring and response capabilities, and compliance with regulatory requirements.

6. Logistic arrangements required

The audit firm required access to the bank’s IT infrastructure, including the SOC and all relevant servers, databases, applications, and network devices. The audit firm also required access to relevant documentation, including policies and procedures, training materials, and incident reports. The audit firm used several Computer Aided Audit Tools (CAATs), including vulnerability scanners and penetration testing tools, to assess the effectiveness of the SOC’s monitoring and response capabilities.
7. Methodology and Strategy adapted for execution of assignment The audit firm adopted a risk-based approach to the assignment, focusing on areas that posed the greatest risk to the security of the bank’s IT infrastructure. The audit firm used a structured methodology based on the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing and the National Institute of Standards and Technology Cybersecurity Framework. The audit firm developed a detailed audit plan, including detailed audit procedures and testing methods.

8. Documents reviewed

During the audit, the following documents were reviewed:
• Security policies and procedures, including incident response plan and disaster recovery plan
• Logs of security incidents and events
• Vulnerability scan reports
• Penetration test reports
• Access control logs and reports
• Network diagrams and architecture
• Business continuity and contingency plans
• Security awareness and training materials
• Third-party security assessment reports
These documents were analyzed to identify any control weaknesses, vulnerabilities, and gaps in the security posture of the Security Operations Centre.

9. References

The audit was performed in accordance with the following standards, guidelines, and best practices:
• ISO 27001: Information Security Management System
• NIST SP 800-53: Security and Privacy Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations
• SANS Institute’s Critical Security Controls for Effective Cyber Defense
• COBIT 2019: Control Objectives for Information and Related Technology
10. Deliverables The following deliverables were provided as part of the audit:
• Draft Security Operations Centre Audit Report
• Final Security Operations Centre Audit Report
• Executive Summary
• Detailed findings and recommendations

11. Format of Report/Findings and Recommendations

The audit report is structured as follows:
• Introduction: Provides an overview of the audit and the scope of the assignment.
• Executive Summary: Summarizes the findings and recommendations.
• Background: Provides information about the client and the need for the assignment.
• Audit Approach and Methodology: Provides details of the audit approach and methodology used.
• Security Operations Centre Environment: Provides details of the Security Operations Centre environment, including the technology infrastructure, policies and procedures, and regulatory requirements.
• Findings: Provides details of the findings of the audit, including control weaknesses, vulnerabilities, and gaps.
• Recommendations: Provides recommendations for addressing the control weaknesses, vulnerabilities, and gaps identified in the findings.
• Conclusion: Provides an overall summary of the assignment.
The findings and recommendations are presented in a standard format that includes a description of the issue, the potential impact, the root cause, and the recommendation for addressing the issue.

12. Summary/Conclusion

In conclusion, the audit of the Security Operations Centre (SOC) of the bank revealed that the bank has a well-established SOC with an appropriate governance structure in place. However, there were some areas of concern that require attention to further enhance the SOC’s effectiveness in detecting, preventing, and responding to cyber threats.
The audit found that the SOC’s incident response plan was not comprehensive and lacked specific procedures for handling different types of incidents. The SOC team also lacked proper training in incident response and handling, and there were gaps in communication and collaboration with other departments within the bank.
Furthermore, the audit found that the SOC’s monitoring and alerting capabilities were not adequate, and there were several instances where alerts were not reviewed or escalated appropriately. There was also a lack of formalized processes for managing and tracking incidents.
Recommendations were provided to the bank to address the identified weaknesses, including updating the incident response plan to include specific procedures for handling different types of incidents, providing SOC team members with adequate training, improving communication and collaboration with other departments within the bank, enhancing monitoring and alerting capabilities, and implementing formalized processes for managing and tracking incidents.
Overall, the audit provided valuable insights into the bank’s SOC operations, and the recommendations provided can help the bank improve its cyber resilience posture and better protect its assets and customers from cyber threats.