A few days ago
Poppyseed

i need help with audit process flow:audit trail of all financial data.?

Compliane requires that all data changes be recorded in the history tables and that the auditing model employ a mechanism to audit any user on demand.Use a data model or a combination of auditing models to produce the following:Process flow diagram or flow chart of your auditing model,the data model of your auditing model and identification of all the components that will be involved in the auditing model.The models that i’m talking about are simple auditing model 1 or 2 and advanced auditing model. i’ve been trying to read to understand what is required but i have no clue. Somebody who has please assist me.Any suggestion is welcome

Top 2 Answers
A few days ago
Anonymous

Favorite Answer

You have a challenging assignment that may be in an academic theoretical reality that does not connect well to the real world.

I am a computer guy.

I am not an auditor.

I have been called upon to do data forensics.

i don’t know models terminology. I just know how to get the job done.

For assurance that all data changes be in the history, there needs to be a level of computer security assurance (computer dept has power to delete & insert records, without going through standard channels, does anyone keep track of that?), know resolution of downage (You in middle of updating something, your PC locks up, what happens to the data?), and archiving (we do not keep the data forever, how do we know it is the oldest that is written off?).

To audit on demand what any user has done, well the history needs to include identification of user, work station address, time stamp (user leaves work area, someone else does transaction on their work station … user’s password gets learned by someone who signs on from some place the user not have access, use their name to do the transaction).

Then there needs to be an understanding of the limitations of the software used to access the records.

For example, it is not unusual to match up … inventory reference #s associated with the changes … Ok what happens in the software if something being matched up is not there … like maybe a purchase order got closed, purged, so the transaction refers to some control that aint there … is that transaction also omitted from the inquiry?

If the audit team does not have a good understanding of the data base and software architecture being used by the company that they are auditing, then they have to rely on programs used by that company, without the ability to know about flaws or bugs in that software, that might cause people to not see the whole picture.

I can’t see that a flow chart is relevant here.

Flow charts are generally used when a person has a detailed understanding of a process, and some other people need to see a simiplified picture, or someone is designing a system, and this is used in a top down approach to help organize things.

A flow chart is not relevant to doing data forensics when you are trying to figure out what is going on, what did go on, you don’t know where the evidence will lead you.

We recently had an IRS audit.They wanted to know if I “changed the data” in a report delivered to the auditors.

Well I selected the data to go on the report.

I selected the arrangement of the data.

I made the columns line up nice.

I did various testing to make sure the report was accurate … in fact, more than 1/2 the time spent in preparing it was in detecting & fixing problems.

I did not mention that years ago I might have deleted some of the data upon which this report is based, because I just answering with respect to what I remember doing with the data in the last few days to get what was wanted for the IRS auditors.

After I passed it along, it occurrect to me that some of the vendor #s can get reassigned over time, so that when I linked the expense data to what vendor name that is, that’s the name for that # now being used, it might not be the name used years ago.

0

4 years ago
?
in case you seek you will locate the information. while one spouts issues as “information” that are purely no longer, they only haven’t any credibility. confident, Waslla has greater debt – via voter option to strengthen their city. the reality with regard to the debt. Sarah Palin equipped the city’s first vast activities complicated, on time, decrease than funds, and the bond would be paid off 2 years earlier than time table[4]. very like ny now has a sparkling stadium for the Yankees, Sarah Palin pushed via a lots needed activities complicated to strengthen the lives of the people of Wasilla. Nearing the top of its first finished 3 hundred and sixty 5 days of operation, the Wasilla Multi-Use activities complicated is boasting 20 to 50 p.c. will strengthen in off-ice makes use of provided on the 102,000 sq.-foot facility.[4] WASLLA voters agreed in 2002 to a nil.5-p.c. strengthen in the city sales tax to repay a $14.7 million bond to construct the multi-use facility. The undertaking “replaced into accomplished on time table and decrease than funds,” Mayor Dianne Keller pronounced, and the complicated opened its doorways March 6, 2004.[4] sales tax gross sales, that may in basic terms be used to pay the bond, is coming in quicker than envisioned. Keller pronounced she believes the ability would be paid off a minimum of two years earlier than the ten-3 hundred and sixty 5 days time table.[4]
0