Test data will be representative of live processing; however, it is unlikely that all transaction types or error conditions will be tested in this way.

Section: Protection of Information Assets
Explanation/Reference:https://www.computerweekly.com/tip/Segregation-of-duties-Small-business-best-practices

The best way to prevent the misconfiguration from recurring is to grant user access using a role-based model. A role-based access control (RBAC) model is an access control method that assigns permissions to end-users based on their role within the organization1. RBAC provides fine-grained control, offering a simple, manageable approach to access management that is less error-prone than individually assigning permissions1. RBAC also enforces the principle of least privilege, which means that users only have the minimum access required to perform their tasks2.
A role-based model can help prevent segregation of duties (SoD) issues in an ERP system by restricting user access to conflicting activities within the application. SoD is a central issue for enterprises to ensure compliance with laws and regulations, and to reduce the risk of fraud and unauthorized transactions3. SoD requires that no single individual or group of individuals should have control over two or more parts of a process or an asset3. For example, a user who can create and approve purchase orders should not be able to process payments or modify vendor records.
By using a role-based model, user access provisioning is based on the needs of a group (e.g., accounting department) based on common responsibilities and needs1. This means each role has a given set of permissions, and individuals can be assigned to one or more roles. For example, you may designate a user as an accounts payable clerk, an accounts receivable clerk, or a financial manager, and limit access to specific resources or tasks. The user-role and role-permissions relationships make it easy to perform role assignment because individual users no longer have unique access rights, rather they have privileges that conform to the permissions assigned to their specific role or job function1.
The other options are not the best way to prevent the misconfiguration from recurring. Monitoring access rights on a regular basis (option A) is a detective control that can help identify SoD issues after they occur, but it does not prevent them from happening in the first place. Referencing a standard user-access matrix (option B) is a tool that can help document and analyze user access rights, but it does not ensure that the user access rights are configured correctly or consistently. Correcting the segregation of duties conflicts (option D) is a corrective action that can resolve SoD issues once they are detected, but it does not prevent them from happening again.
References: 3: Implementing Segregation of Duties: A Practical Experience Based on Best Practices 1: What is Role-Based Access Control (RBAC)? Examples, Benefits, and More 2: What is Azure role-based access control (Azure RBAC)?

An IS auditor does not have a finding unless it can be shown that the alternative hardware cannot support the live processing system. Even though the primary finding is the lack of a proven and communicated disaster recovery plan, it is essential that this aspect of recovery is included in the audit. If it is found to be inadequate, the finding will materially support the overall audit opinion. It is certainly not appropriate to take no action at all, leaving this important factor untested. Unless it is shown that the alternative site is inadequate, there can be no comment on the expenditure, even if this is considered a proper comment for the IS auditor to make. Similarly, there is no need for the configurations to be identical. The alternative site could actually exceed the recovery requirements if it is also used for other work, such as other processing or systems development and testing. The only proper course of action at this point would be to find out if the recovery site can actually cope with a recovery.