George Jones, ChangeMakers, Inc.Walt Wolenski, EDSRay Slocumb, Partner, PWCGary Richardson, UHBarry Rupert, UH
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
AgendaWelcome: Blake Ives
SOX: Review of Act: Barry Rupert
Introduction to Panel: Moderator: Gary Richardson, UH Panel Discussion
Upcoming Programs:Tentative DatesJanuary 15thFebruary 19thMarch 18thApril 15thMay 20th
January 15th
Sourcing Innovation Strategy
Jane C. LinderSenior Research FellowInstitute for Strategic ChangeAccenture
February 19th
Exporting Business Processes
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture. Stuart Morstead
ISANI Group
March 18th
IT in the Early 21st Century: What has changed and what has not changed - A managers Guide
Warren McFarlanProfessorHarvard Business School
April 15th
Valuing the IT Investment
Panel Discussion of Best Practice inResponding to the “Does Doesn’t IT Matter”Challenge
“As information Technology’s power and ubiquity have grown, its strategic importance has diminished. The way you approach IT investment and management will need to change dramatically.”
“IT Doesn’t Matter”
Nicholas Carr
Harvard Business Review, May 2003
Gary Richardson, ModeratorGeorge Jones, ChangeMakers, Inc.Walt Wolenski, EDSRay Slocumb, PWC
SOX Panel
Information Systems Research Center
November 20, 2003
Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002Overview
Information Systems Research Center
Disclaimer• Not intended as legal advice• Overview not a detailed review of the
Act and related rules• Rules are still being reviewed and
adopted• Check with your auditor or legal advisor
for final rules
Information Systems Research Center
Background• Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was a reaction to
corporate scandals and lack of investor confidence:– Enron– Arthur Andersen– MCI
• Typically what is referred to as SOX is actually a combination of:– Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 (H.R. 3763)– Pending and final rules of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (PCAOB)– Pending and final Rules of the SEC– Studies by the GAO and others that may result in new laws and/or
new rules• Violation of SOX is considered a violation of
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934
Information Systems Research Center
Title IX: White Collar Crime Penalty EnhancementOverview
• Establishes a maximum fine of $1,000,000 and a maximum prison sentence of 10 years for CEO’s and CFO’s that certify a financial statement knowing that it is not consistent with all of the sections of the Act.
• Establishes a maximum fine of $5,000,000 and a maximum prison sentence of 20 years for CEO’s and CFO’s that willfully certify a financial statement knowing that it is not consistent with all of the sections of the Act.
Information Systems Research Center
ScopeEntities that come under the purview of SOX include:• “Issuers” – as defined in section 3 of the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934 includes entities which:– Have securities registered under section 12 or– Are required to file reports under 15(d) or– Has or will file a registration statement that is or will become
effective and has not been withdrawn under the Securities Act of 1933.
• Layperson’s definition of “issuer”:– Any public company or company that plans to IPO– Alternatively, companies with more than $10 million in assets and
whose securities are held by more than 500 owners• Public accounting firms that perform audits for “issuers”• There may be special rules and/or rule effective dates for:
– Investment Companies– Foreign Private Issuers
Information Systems Research Center
Summary of ContentsTitle I Public Company Accounting Oversight BoardTitle II Auditor IndependenceTitle III Corporate ResponsibilityTitle IV Enhanced Financial DisclosuresTitle V Analyst Conflicts of InterestTitle VI Commission Resources and AuthorityTitle VII Studies and ReportsTitle VIII Corporate and Criminal Fraud AccountabilityTitle IX White-Collar Crime Penalty EnhancementsTitle X Corporate Tax ReturnsTitle XI Corporate Fraud and Accountability
Information Systems Research Center
Title I: Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
• Established by the Act• Organized as a nonprofit agency– not as a
government agency• Responsibilities
– Register and inspect public accounting firms– Establish standards for public accounting firms– Enforce compliance with the Act and Rules of the Board– Investigate firms and impose sanctions
Information Systems Research Center
Title III: Corporate ResponsibilityOverview
• Assigns the responsibility to appoint, compensate and oversee the public accounting firm that performs the audit to the audit committee.
• Requires CEO and CFO to – certify fairness of financial statements – take responsibility for disclosure controls
• Makes it unlawful to fraudulently influence, coerce, mislead an auditor• Provides for the forfeiture of certain compensation following the
issuance of a “non-compliant” financial document• Provides the SEC with greater flexibility to remove management or
board members• Blocks insider trading during pension fund blackout periods• Requires attorneys to report evidence of material violations• Provides that disgorged profits will benefit the victims
Information Systems Research Center
Title III: Corporate ResponsibilityHighlights
Section 301: Public Company Audit Committees • Companies that are not compliant with SEC audit committee
requirements are subject to delisting• Audit committee is responsible for oversight of auditors
including the resolution of disagreements between management and auditors
• Audit committees must set up procedures to receive and address “whistleblower” complaints
• Employees and others may take concerns directly to the audit committee.
• Audit committee members are required to be independent and a disclosure is required in proxy statements
Information Systems Research Center
Title III: Corporate ResponsibilityHighlights
Section 302: Corporate Responsibility for Financial Reports • Principal executive and financial officers are required to:
– Certify that the content of each report is accurate, complete and fairly presented.
– Take responsibility for maintaining and evaluating disclosure controls and procedures.
• Certification affirms that officers have made required disclosures about– Fraud; – Significant deficiencies, and material weaknesses, and significant
changes in internal controls; and – Evaluation of the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures.
Information Systems Research Center
Title III: Corporate ResponsibilityHighlights
Section 302: Corporate Responsibility for Financial Reports (cont.)• Companies must establish and maintain an overall system of
disclosure controls and procedures so that the CEO and CFO can– Supervise and review periodic evaluations of the disclosure system– Report the results to security holders
• Effectiveness of disclosure controls and procedures must be assessed within 90 days prior to filing dates of quarterly and annual reports
• Failure to maintain adequate disclosure controls and procedures may result in SEC action even if it doesn’t lead to flawed financial statements
Information Systems Research Center
Title IV: Enhanced Disclosure RequirementsOverview
• Requires disclosure of material off balance sheet arrangements• Establishes standards for reporting pro forma financial information• Prohibits companies from making loans to directors or executives• Requires earlier disclosure of equity transactions by directors, officers,
and other insiders• Requires management to establish and maintain adequate internal
controls and procedures for financial reporting• Exempts investment companies from several of the disclosure
requirements• Requires disclosure of a code of ethics for senior financial officers• Requires companies to disclose whether at least one of the audit
committee members is a financial expert• Requires rapid disclosure of changes in financial condition
Information Systems Research Center
Title IV: Enhanced Disclosure RequirementsHighlights
Section 404: Management Assessment of Internal Controls• Requires management to establish and maintain adequate
internal controls and procedures for financial reporting• Requires that each annual report includes a statement:
– Describing management’s responsibility for internal controls and procedures for financial reporting.
– Documenting management’s assessment of the effectiveness of the controls and financial reporting procedures
– Incorporating the independent auditor’s review of management’s assessment of internal controls and financial reporting procedures
Information Systems Research Center
Title IV: Enhanced Disclosure RequirementsHighlights
Section 404: Management Assessment of Internal Controls (cont.)• Related SEC releases define internal controls and procedures
for financial reporting as controls that provide reasonable assurances that:– Transactions are properly authorized– Assets are safeguarded against unauthorized or improper use– Transactions are properly recorded to permit the preparation of
financial statements that are presented consistent with GAAP• To meet the assessment requirement, management must select
a suitable recognized framework for assessing the effectiveness of internal controls
Information Systems Research Center
Find more information on SOX at:• www.findlaw.com – for the text of the Act• www.pcaobus.org – for the current status of rules of
the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board• www.sec.gov – for the status of SOX related SEC
rules. Of particular interest is www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-8238.htm which contains “Final Rule: Management’s Reports on Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting and Certification of Disclosure in Exchange Act Periodic Reports”
• www.aicpa.org – for general information on SOX and its implications
• www.isaca.org – for “IT Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley” for a detailed discussion of this issue
Gary Richardson, ModeratorGeorge Jones, ChangeMakers, Inc.Walt Wolenski, EDSRay Slocumb, PWC
SOX Panel
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Where Was IT ?
The Implications of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
George P. JonesPrincipal
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Where Was IT?
“Where Was IT?” - - A Legitimate Question
The Sarbanes-Oxley Challenge for IT
Would a “Better” IT Organization assist in preventing financial wrongdoing and if so, what does “Better” mean?
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Where Was IT?
The Mutual Funds Scandal
The MCI Allegations *
The Health South Fraud
……………………* MCI denies these particular allegations
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
The Sarbanes-Oxley Challenge
The Requirement for Disclosure
Bad News must be reported upwards
IT’s projects have potential financial impact
IT’s activity provides a cross company view
“See No Evil” is not allowed
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
The Sarbanes-Oxley Challenge The Internal Controls Report
Disclosure Reporting Controls• Company wide disclosure reporting mechanisms• IT organization’s own disclosure reporting
Financial Transaction Controls• Data related• Software (logic) related• Third Party product related IT must help evaluate, strengthen and monitor
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
What is a “Better” IT Organization?
Characteristics that define “Better”
Skills needed to support those characteristics
Training needed to support those skills
Organization and culture
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Objectives of “Better”
Able to help prevent and detect financial abuse
Responsive to requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Characteristics of “Better”
Knowledge of relevant law and regulations Knowledge of accounting rules Knowledge of business ethics
Able to ask the right questions
Able to make recommendations
Able to analyze relevant design and operations issues
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Characteristics of “Better”
Expertise in Financial Controls Financial control objectives Design of financial controls in systems Financial control reporting
Able to design and implement financial controls
Able to evaluate controls in third party products
Able to analyze controls and recommend improvements
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Characteristics of “Better”
Knowledge of the Company’s Business
What we do and how we operate
Understanding the significance of the operational numbers
Able to spot ‘interesting’ deviations
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Characteristics of “Better”
Healthy, Collaborative Relationships with Internal accounting Internal audit External audit
Treat as a priority activity Implement their recommendations Contribute recommendations
Financial Controls Operations Reporting
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Characteristics of “Better”
Familiar with the requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley
Responsibility of disclosure Control of disclosure Formal disclosure mechanisms Importance of internal controls
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Required Knowledge & Skills
Legal and regulatory environment Company’s contractual obligations Accounting standards Industry standards Business and professional ethics Design and implementation of financial controls
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Training Gaps
Sarbanes-Oxley requirements Industry legal and regulatory issues Financial accounting Business and professional ethics Accepted Industry practices Financial controls design & implementation
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Organization and Culture
“See No Evil” is not allowed Bad News MUST move up Requires an open management style without
retribution for bad news
Culture is the most difficult thing to change
Copyright © 2003, ChangeMakers, Inc
Conclusions
Sarbanes-Oxley Impact is more than technical, more than analytical, more than financial
SOX places a burden of responsibility on all employees, not just the accountants
SOX impacts IT priorities and “To do” list SOX will impact the role of IT in its users’
business and data SOX will challenge any IT organization whose
culture is one of containment
IT Strategies and SOXIT Strategies and SOX
The different acts within the legislation can be categorized into six major themes
Auditor Independence (II)
FinancialDisclosure Enhancements (IV)
Resources and Authority (VI)
Studies and Reports (VII)
Corporate Responsibility (III)
Analyst Conflicts of Interest (V)
PCAOB (I)
Corporate Accountability (XI)
Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability (VIII)
Tax Returns (X)
White Collar PenaltyEnhancements (IX)
Act Sections Themes
Increase oversight (101-109)
Auditor conflicts of Interest(201-209)
Mgmt assessment of controls(404)
Disclosures accountability(302)
Whistleblower protection(301)
Acceleration of disclosures(408-409)
IT Opportunity or Challenge
Meeting the requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley will require a significant effort by corporations
“…survey of mostly mid-cap companies...found that the average price to remain public has close to doubled…” – Foley & Larnder Law
“Enterprises will not be able to easily or inexpensively fulfill government-driven public disclosure tasks.” – Aberdeen Group
“…the IS organization must create near real-time reporting to meet requirements for greater transparency and quicker deadlines for report filing”- Gartner Group
Companies are taking various approaches to SOX compliance activities and initiatives
• Triage approach to changes • Strategic approach to changes
Albatross Opportunity
• Focus on legal compliance
• Duct tape and twine
• Budget from current initiatives
• Focus on business intelligence
• Systematic changes and upgrades
• Budget based on opportunity
Companies are approaching systematic remedies in a variety of manners
010203040506070
Source: AMR Research
Different sections of the act are driving or will drive changes in the financial organization
• Section 302 & 404
– Process mapping
– Systematic remedies
– Process changes
– Collaboration and teaming
• Section 409
– Systematic remedies
– Major process changes
Supporting the Sarbanes-Oxley work teams can provide a simple way to create positive impact
Who makes up the work team?
Compliance personnel increase 267% (Foley & Lardner)
ControlControlOwner(s)Owner(s)
Internal Internal AuditAudit
ExternalExternalConsultantsConsultants
AccountingAccountingFirmFirm
Process Process OwnersOwners
SystemSystemOwnersOwners
CEO/CFOCEO/CFO
AuditAuditCommitteeCommittee
SOXSOXComplianceCompliance
TeamTeam
What Makes A Team Successful?
• The Law of the Big Picture– The goal is more important than the role
• The Law of the Compass– Vision gives team members direction
• The Law of the Scoreboard– The team can make adjustments when it knows where it
stands• The Law of Communication
– Interaction fuels action• The Law of Dividends
– Investing in the team compounds over time
From “The 17 Indisputable Laws of Teamwork – John C. Maxwell”
There are no other options but to succeed with SOX compliance…
Providing real-time visibility into SOX activities and initiatives can create near-term and long term benefits
• Visibility to status of reports
• Immediate awareness of problem areas through use of visual cues
• Dashboard metrics adjustable as internal processes are changed
• Customizable to track any metric related entity (controls, process, projects, etc)
• Track test dates• Track certification dates• Overall status• Assign ownership
www.eds.com/dwe
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 54PricewaterhouseCoopers
Introduction of Panel Members
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
Overview and Impact to IT
Insert
Worlds Image /
Client Specific Image
Here
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 55PricewaterhouseCoopers
Sarbanes-Oxley Act - Background
Public company accounting reform and investor protection act.
Passed in July 2002.
Legislative action in reaction to Enron, Worldcom, and other corporate scandals.
Bill written by Paul Sarbanes, U.S. Senator from Maryland, and Michael Oxley, U.S. Congressman from Ohio.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 56PricewaterhouseCoopers
Sarbanes-Oxley Act - Summary
The Act was signed into law on July 30, 2002 and includes eleven titled sections:
Title I Public Company Accounting Oversight BoardTitle II Auditor IndependenceTitle III Corporate ResponsibilityTitle IV Enhanced Financial Disclosures Title V Analyst Conflicts of InterestTitle VI Commission Resources and AuthorityTitle VII Studies and ReportsTitle VIII Corporate and Criminal Fraud AccountabilityTitle IX White Collar Crime Penalty EnhancementsTitle X Corporate Tax ReturnsTitle XI Corporate Fraud and Accountability
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 57PricewaterhouseCoopers
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
Requires quarterly certification by the CEO / CFO of all companies filing periodic reports under section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 regarding the completeness and accuracy of such reports as well as the nature and effectiveness of internal controls supporting the quality of information included in such reports.
Requires an annual report by management regarding internal controls and procedures for financial reporting, and an attestation as to the accuracy of that report by the company’s auditors.
Section 302
Section 404
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 58PricewaterhouseCoopers
Management’s Requirements under Section 404
Section 404 – Management Must Assess Internal Controls Annually (for fiscal years ending 6/15/04 and later) Internal control report states management’s
responsibility for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control structure and procedures for financial reporting.
Management must assess effectiveness of internal control structure and procedures for financial reporting as of the end of the most recent fiscal year.
Attestation by external auditor (Section 404 and 103).
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 59PricewaterhouseCoopers
The Final 404 Rule Provisions—Background
Final Rule Provisions Affect Company Actions Under Sections 404 and 302.
Section 404: Requires an annual report by management regarding the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and an attestation by the company’s auditors as to the accuracy of management’s assessment.
Section 302: Requires quarterly certification by the CEO / CFO regarding the completeness and accuracy of quarterly reports as well as the nature and effectiveness of disclosure controls and procedures (DC&P) supporting the quality of information included in such reports.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 60PricewaterhouseCoopers
Disclosure Controls and Procedures versus Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Disclosure Requirements
Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Internal Controls over Disclosure Requirements
LEGEND
Internal Accounting
Controls
Financial Reporting
Compliance&
Regulatory
Operations
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 61PricewaterhouseCoopers
Audit of Financial Statements vs. 404 Controls Attestation
Audit of Financial Statements Understanding and
consideration of internal controls only to develop the audit approach
Overall objective is the rendering of an opinion on the financial statements, not to opine on internal controls
Internal control reports have been very rare in practice and are the subject of different auditing standards
404 Attestation 100% controls-based approach
over the entire control environment
Must evaluate and test controls across business and functional areas to opine on effectiveness (broad and deep)
Lack of errors, historically, in financial statements is not de-facto evidence unto itself, of an appropriate internal control structure
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 62PricewaterhouseCoopers
COSO is an integrated framework for internal control which, when implemented, can provide a baseline to establish a control structure that
meetsSection 302 requirements and supports 404 attestation.
COSO Is Currently the Only Recognized Internal Control Framework
While Internal Control was not defined in the Act, the COSO definition has been accepted by the US government and its agencies, incorporated in US auditing standards (AU 319), and is a generally accepted integrated framework for control infrastructure. Under regulations for Section 404, the SEC will use AU319 as the reference.
Internal Control is defined as a process, effected by an entity’s board of directors, management and other personnel, designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives in the following categories: Effectiveness and efficiency of operations Reliability of financial reporting Compliance with applicable laws and regulations
COSO identifies five components of control that need to be in place and integrated to ensure the achievement of each of the objectives.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 63PricewaterhouseCoopers
The Five Components under the COSO Framework
Control Activities Policies/procedures that ensure
management directives are carried out.
Range of activities including approvals, authorizations, verifications, recommendations, performance reviews, asset security and segregation of duties.
Monitoring Assessment of a control
system’s performance over time.
Combination of ongoing and separate evaluation.
Management and supervisory activities.
Internal audit activities.
Control Environment Sets tone of organization-
influencing control consciousness of its people.
Factors include integrity, ethical values, competence, authority, responsibility.
Foundation for all other components of control.
Information and Communication
Pertinent information identified, captured and communicated in a timely manner.
Access to internal and externally generated information.
Flow of information that allows for successful control actions from instructions on responsibilities to summary of findings for management action.
Risk Assessment Risk assessment is the
identification and analysis of relevant risks to achieving the entity’s objectives-forming the basis for determining control activities.
All five components must be in place for a control to be effective.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 64PricewaterhouseCoopers
Introduction of Panel Members
Impact on Information Technology
Insert
Worlds Image /
Client Specific Image
Here
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 65PricewaterhouseCoopers
Sarbanes-Oxley Act – Role of IT
“Some controls … might have a pervasive effect on achieving many overall objectives of the control criteria. For example, information technology general controls over program development, program changes, computer operations, and access to programs and data help ensure that specific controls over the processing of transactions are operating effectively.” – PCAOB’s Proposed Auditing Standard for Section 404
“With widespread reliance on information systems, controls are needed over all such systems: financial, compliance and operational, large and small… Two broad groupings of information systems control activities can be used. The first is general controls -- which apply to many if not all application systems and help ensure their continued, proper operation. The second category is application controls, which include computerized steps within the application software and related manual procedures to control the processing of various types of transactions. Together, these controls serve to ensure completeness, accuracy and validity of the financial and other information in the system.” – COSO Report: Internal Control - Integrated Framework
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 66PricewaterhouseCoopers
Controls over the IT environment
Most Business Processes are either partially or wholly enabled by IT
Achieving control objectives is often dependant on IT based controls
Many controls depend on data generated by IT systems
IT controls need to be considered at 2 levels:
– Controls over the IT environment (General Controls)
– Controls over individual applications (Application Controls)
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 67PricewaterhouseCoopers
General computer controls (GCC) - Definition
Controls used to manage and control the information technology activities and computer environment. Comprised of 4 major areas:
Information security – both physical and logical access Maintenance of existing systems (program change controls)Computer operationsDevelopment and implementation of new systems
The controls within the GCC environment are considered “pervasive”. They help assure that assure that specific controls over processing of transactions are operating effectively.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 68PricewaterhouseCoopers
General computer controls (GCC) – Information security
Examples of controls in this area include: Authentication of users (e.g, log-in ids and passwords) Password controls (e.g., password expiry, minimum
length, etc.) Security administration (new user set-up, removing
terminated employees, password resets, etc.) Security monitoring Physical security of computers and business facility
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 69PricewaterhouseCoopers
General computer controls (GCC) – Program change controls
Examples of controls in this area include: All program change requests are appropriate and
authorized Segregation of duties exists between those that make
the changes and those that move the changes to the live processing environment
Version control exists so that two programmers are not modifying the same program which would result in lost changes or conflicts
Testing of the changes to ensure they are accurate Sign off by the business users who requested the
changes to ensure the changes meet the business needs
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 70PricewaterhouseCoopers
General computer controls (GCC) – Computer operations
Examples of controls in this area include: Computer systems are monitored Job scheduling (batch programs) are monitored Computer systems are protected against fire/flood Backups of data are taken daily A disaster recovery plan (DRP) exists and has been
tested recently
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 71PricewaterhouseCoopers
General computer controls (GCC) – Development & implementation of new systems
Relevant when the company implements new applications or systems.
Examples of controls in this area include: Converted account balances are reconciled Testing has occurred Training has occurred Data integrity controls are in place In general, an effective Systems Development
Lifecycle (SDLC) and implementation methodology should be followed.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 72PricewaterhouseCoopers
Application Controls
Application Control Objectives (CAVR)
Completeness Controls that assist management in ensuring financial transactions and data are complete.
Accuracy Controls that assist management in ensuring financial transactions and data are accurate.
Validity Controls that assist management in ensuring financial transactions and data are valid.
Restricted Access Controls that assist management in ensuring financial transactions and are restricted to the appropriate personnel and are segregated from incompatible duties.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 73PricewaterhouseCoopers
Summary Application Control Types
xPrerecorded Input
xPhysical Locks
xProgrammed Checks
xxxxComputer Matching
xComputer Sequence Check
xxBatch/Control Totals
xxxxOne-for One Checking
Restricted AccessValidityAccuracyCompleteness
xPrerecorded Input
xPhysical Locks
xProgrammed Checks
xxxxComputer Matching
xComputer Sequence Check
xxBatch/Control Totals
xxxxOne-for One Checking
Restricted AccessValidityAccuracyCompleteness
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 74PricewaterhouseCoopers
Linkage between Controls and Financial Statements
BusinessRisks
related to achieving Objectives
………………
Business Process A CompletenessAccuracyValidityRestricted Access
Business Process B CompletenessAccuracyValidityRestricted Access
Business Process C CompletenessAccuracyValidityRestricted Access
Account Balances and Transactions
Account Balances and Transactions
General Computer Controls
Account Balances and Transactions
Financial Statement Assertions
CompletenessAccuracyRights & ObligationsExistence / OccurrenceValuation / AllocationPresentation / DisclosureCutoff
Business Objectives
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 75PricewaterhouseCoopers
What guidance is available to help IT meet SOX requirements?
Several standards exist that provide guidance on internal controls from an IT perspective
Application controls: COSO – Internal Control: Integrated Framework COBIT – Control Objectives for Information and
Related TechnologyGeneral computer controls:
COBIT ISO 17799 – Information Security Management ITIL – IT Infrastructure Library SAC – Systems Auditability and Control (IIA)
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 76PricewaterhouseCoopers
Information Criteria Effectiveness Efficiency Confidentiality Integrity Availability Compliance Reliability
COBIT is a framework well-suited to the needs of SOX 404
Domains PO: Planning & Organization AI: Acquisition & Implementation DS: Delivery & Support M: Monitoring
Processes (example): AI 1: Identify automated solutions AI 2: Acquire and maintain application software AI 3: Acquire and maintain technology
infrastructure AI 4: Develop and maintain procedures AI 5: Install and accredit systems AI 6: Manage Changes
Control Objectives
IT Resources People Application systems Technology Facilities Data
COBIT Overview
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 77PricewaterhouseCoopers
IT Governance Institute: Control Objectives for Sarbanes-Oxley
Discussion document issued in October 2003
Based on COBIT
Maps COBIT to COSO
Proposes IT control objectives that are relevant to Sarbanes-Oxley
Control objectives are a subset of COBIT controls objectives COBIT has 318 control objectives ITGI proposes 136 for Sarbanes-Oxley
Discussion document can be obtained at www.isaca.org
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 78PricewaterhouseCoopers
Summary
IT plays a key role in a company’s internal control framework, and therefore has a key role to play in compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley
IT controls include general controls, which ensure the continued, proper operation of computer systems, and application controls, which control the processing of transactions within computer applications.
General controls have a pervasive impact on the overall control environment, and are therefore very important.
Automated application controls must be considered as part of the relevant business process, requiring communication between IT and the business.