Explanation:
End-user developed applications may not be subjected to an independent outside review by systems analysts and frequently are not created in the context of a formal development methodology. These applications may lack appropriate standards, controls, quality assurance procedures, and documentation. A risk of end-user applications is that management may rely on them as much as traditional applications. End-user computing (EUC) systems typically result in reduced application development and maintenance costs, and a reduced development cycle time. EUC systems normally increase flexibility and responsiveness to management’s information requests.

Explanation: inspections of code and design are a proven software quality technique. An advantage of this approach is that defects are identified before they propagate through the development life cycle. This reduces the cost of correction as less rework is involved. Allowing more time for testing may discover more defects; however, little is revealed as to why the quality problems are occurring and the cost of the extra testing, and the cost of rectifying the defects found will be greater than if they had been discovered earlier in the development process. The ability of the development staff can have a bearing on the quality of what is produced; however, replacing staff can be expensive and disruptive, and the presence of a competent staff cannot guarantee quality in the absence of effective quality management processes. Sign-off of deliverables may help detect defects if signatories are diligent about reviewing deliverable content; however, this is difficult to enforce.
Deliverable reviews normally do not go down to the same level of detail as software inspections.

Explanation:
Testing is crucial in determining that user requirements have been validated. The IS auditor should be involved in this phase and review error reports for their precision in recognizing erroneous data and review the procedures for resolving errors. A conceptual design specification is a document prepared during the requirements definition phase. A vendor contract is prepared during a software acquisition process. Program change requests would normally be reviewed as a part of the postimplementation phase.

Explanation:
The advantage of the top-down approach is that tests of major functions are conducted early, thus enabling the detection of interface errors sooner. The most effective testing approach is dependent on the environment being tested. Choices B and D are advantages of the bottom-up approach to system testing.

Explanation: A key objective in any software development project is to ensure that the developed software will meet the business objectives and the requirements of the user. The users should be involved in the requirements definition phase of a development project and user acceptance test specification should be developed during this phase. The other choices are generally performed during the system testing phase.

Explanation:
The top-down approach to testing ensures that interface errors are detected early and that testing of major functions is conducted early. A bottom-up approach to testing begins with atomic units, such as programs and modules, and works upward until a complete system test has taken place. Sociability testing and system tests take place at a later stage in the development process.

Explanation:
Poorly written code, especially in web-based applications, is often exploited by hackers using buffer overflow techniques. A brute force attack is used to crack passwords. A distributed denial- of-service attack floods its target with numerous packets, to prevent it from responding to legitimate requests. War dialing uses modem-scanning tools to hack PBXs.

Explanation: Selecting the right kind of data is key in testing a computer system. The data should not only include valid and invalid data but should be representative of actual processing; quality is more important than quantity. It is more important to have adequate test data than to complete the testing on schedule. It is unlikely that a random sample of actual data would cover all test conditions and provide a reasonable representation of actual data.

Explanation:
Historically, the waterfall model has been best suited to the stable conditions described in choice
A. When the degree of uncertainty of the system to be delivered and the conditions in which it will be used rises, the waterfall model has not been successful, in these circumstances, the various forms of iterative development life cycle gives the advantage of breaking down the scope of the overall system to be delivered, making the requirements gathering and design activities more manageable. The ability to deliver working software earlier also acts to alleviate uncertainty and may allow an earlier realization of benefits. The choice of a design and programming approach is not itself a determining factor of the type of software development life cycle that is appropriate. The use of new technology in a project introduces a significant element of risk. An iterative form of development, particularly one of the agile methods that focuses on early development of actual working software, is likely to be the better option to manage this uncertainty.

Explanation:
By evaluating the organization’s development projects against the CMM, an IS auditor determines whether the development organization follows a stable, predictable software process. Although the likelihood of success should increase as the software processes mature toward the optimizing level, mature processes do not guarantee a reliable product. CMM does not evaluate technical processes such as programming nor does it evaluate security requirements or other application controls.