Cyber Audit Authority

Cybersecurity Audit Terminology and Glossary

Cybersecurity audit practice operates within a dense lexicon of technical, regulatory, and procedural terms that carry precise meanings across frameworks, statutes, and professional standards. This page catalogs core terminology used by auditors, compliance officers, regulators, and information security professionals when scoping, conducting, and reporting on cybersecurity audits. Definitions are drawn from authoritative public sources including NIST, ISACA, and federal regulatory agencies. Accurate use of this terminology is foundational to producing audit reports that meet evidentiary and regulatory standards.

Definition and scope

A cybersecurity audit is a formal, structured examination of an organization's information systems, controls, policies, and procedures against a defined set of criteria — typically a framework, regulation, or internal standard. The scope of terminology in this field spans at least four overlapping domains: technical security concepts, audit methodology, regulatory compliance, and risk management.

Audit — A systematic, independent examination of records, controls, and practices to determine whether they conform to established criteria (ISACA Glossary).

Control — A safeguard or countermeasure to avoid, detect, counteract, or minimize security risks. NIST SP 800-53, Rev. 5 classifies controls into 20 families, including Access Control (AC), Audit and Accountability (AU), and Incident Response (IR) (NIST SP 800-53).

Audit Scope — The defined boundary of an audit engagement, specifying the systems, processes, locations, and timeframes under examination. Scope definition directly determines which evidence is collected and which findings are reportable. See the cybersecurity-audit-scope-definition reference for structural criteria.

Control Objective — A statement of the desired result or purpose to be achieved by implementing controls. PCI DSS structures its requirements around 12 high-level control objectives (PCI Security Standards Council).

Finding — A documented deficiency, gap, or non-conformity identified during an audit. Findings are classified by severity — typically Critical, High, Medium, or Low — based on potential impact and exploitability. The cybersecurity-audit-findings-remediation page addresses classification and remediation tracking.

Remediation — Corrective action taken to resolve an audit finding. Remediation plans include assigned ownership, target completion dates, and validation criteria.

Attestation — A formal declaration by an authorized party that controls are in place and operating effectively. SOC 2 Type II reports, issued under AICPA AT-C Section 205, constitute a common form of third-party attestation.

How it works

Audit terminology is applied across five discrete phases of the cybersecurity-audit-process-phases:

  1. Planning — Establishes audit objectives, scope, criteria, and team assignments. Key terms: engagement letter, audit charter, risk-based scoping, criteria selection.
  2. Fieldwork / Evidence Collection — Active testing and documentation gathering. Key terms: sampling, walkthrough, observation, inquiry, inspection, automated testing. Evidence standards are addressed at cybersecurity-audit-evidence-collection.
  3. Analysis — Evaluation of evidence against control criteria. Key terms: control gap, compensating control, residual risk, test of design, test of operating effectiveness.
  4. Reporting — Documentation of findings and conclusions. Key terms: audit opinion, management response, exception, qualified opinion, adverse opinion. Report structure is covered at cybersecurity-audit-report-structure.
  5. Follow-Up — Verification that remediation actions have been completed. Key terms: remediation validation, re-test, open finding, closed finding.

Key Contrast — Test of Design vs. Test of Operating Effectiveness:
A test of design evaluates whether a control, if operating as intended, would prevent or detect a material misstatement or security failure. A test of operating effectiveness verifies that the control actually functioned as designed over a defined period. SOC 2 Type I reports address design only; SOC 2 Type II reports address both design and operating effectiveness over a minimum 6-month period (AICPA).

Common scenarios

Specific terms appear with higher frequency depending on the regulatory environment or audit type:

HIPAA Audits — Terms include Administrative Safeguards, Physical Safeguards, Technical Safeguards, Business Associate Agreement (BAA), Minimum Necessary Standard, and Breach Notification Rule (45 CFR Parts 160 and 164, HHS). See hipaa-cybersecurity-audit.

PCI DSS Audits — Terms include Cardholder Data Environment (CDE), Qualified Security Assessor (QSA), Self-Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ), Report on Compliance (ROC), and Compensating Control Worksheet (CCW). PCI DSS v4.0, released in March 2022, introduced customized approach as an alternative compliance path (PCI SSC).

FedRAMP / CMMC Audits — Terms include Authorization Boundary, System Security Plan (SSP), Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M), Third Party Assessment Organization (3PAO), and Continuous Monitoring. CMMC 2.0 aligns its terminology directly to NIST SP 800-171 control families (CMMC, DoD).

SOX IT Audits — Terms include IT General Controls (ITGC), Application Controls, Segregation of Duties (SoD), Change Management Controls, and Management's Assessment of Internal Control under Section 404 (PCAOB).

Decision boundaries

Certain terms in cybersecurity audit practice carry classification implications — meaning the application of a term determines what actions, disclosures, or standards apply.

Vulnerability vs. Finding — A vulnerability is a weakness in a system that could be exploited; a finding is a documented conclusion within an audit engagement that a control has failed or is absent. Not all vulnerabilities become audit findings — only those within scope and relevant to defined criteria.

Internal Audit vs. External Audit — An internal audit is conducted by personnel employed by or reporting to the audited organization; an external audit is conducted by an independent third party. Regulatory frameworks including SOX and FedRAMP specify which type satisfies compliance obligations. The internal-vs-external-cybersecurity-audit page maps these distinctions by framework.

Penetration Test vs. Audit — A penetration test is an adversarial simulation intended to identify exploitable vulnerabilities; an audit evaluates controls against criteria. Penetration test results may serve as audit evidence but do not substitute for a full audit engagement. The cybersecurity-audit-vs-penetration-testing page addresses this distinction in detail.

Risk Assessment vs. Audit — A risk assessment identifies and prioritizes threats and vulnerabilities; an audit measures conformance with defined controls. Risk assessments inform audit scope but represent a distinct professional activity with separate deliverables (NIST SP 800-30, Rev. 1). See cybersecurity-audit-vs-risk-assessment.

Material Weakness vs. Significant Deficiency — Under PCAOB standards, a material weakness is a deficiency or combination of deficiencies in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility of a material misstatement; a significant deficiency is less severe but still warrants attention from those responsible for financial oversight (PCAOB AS 2201).

Auditor qualifications affect which terms and opinion types an individual is authorized to issue. Credential standards for cybersecurity auditors — including CISA, CISSP, and CISM designations — are addressed at cybersecurity-auditor-qualifications.

References

In the network

Network