CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Questions and Answers

The standard operating procedure (SOP) statement that best illustrates appropriate risk register maintenance is to remove risk when mitigation results in residual risk within tolerance levels. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response or mitigation has been applied. Tolerance levels are the acceptable or allowable ranges of variation or deviation from the expected or desired outcomes or objectives. When the mitigation results in residual risk within tolerance levels, it means that the risk has been reduced or managed to an acceptable or satisfactory level, and that no further action or monitoring is required. Therefore, the risk can be removed from the risk register, as it is no longer a significant or relevant risk for the organization. The other options are not as appropriate as removing risk when mitigation results in residual risk within tolerance levels, as they are related to the transfer, acceptance, or change of the risk, not the removal of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

Data anonymization is the most important control to ensure the privacy of customer information when participating in an industry benchmarking study that involves providing customer transaction records for analysis. Data anonymization is the process of removing or modifying personally identifiable information (PII) from data sets, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc., so that the data cannot be traced back to specific individuals. Data anonymization protects the confidentiality and privacy of customers, while still allowing for meaningful analysis and comparison of data. Nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), data cleansing, and data encryption are also useful controls, but they do not eliminate the risk of data breaches or unauthorized access to PII. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

Nonrepudiation is the ability to prevent or deny the parties involved in an electronic transaction from disputing or rejecting the validity or authenticity of the transaction. Nonrepudiation ensures that the parties cannot claim that they did not send or receive the transaction, or that the transaction was altered or tampered with.

The tool that helps ensure compliance with a nonrepudiation policy requirement for electronic transactions is digital signatures, which are the electronic equivalents of handwritten signatures that are used to verify the identity and integrity of the sender and the content of the transaction. Digital signatures are generated by applying a cryptographic algorithm to the transaction, using the sender’s private key, which is a secret and unique code that only the sender knows and possesses. The digital signature can be verified by the receiver or any third party, using the sender’s public key, which is a code that is publicly available and corresponds to the sender’s private key. The digital signature can prove that the transaction was sent by the sender, and that the transaction was not altered or tampered with during the transmission.

The other options are not the tools that help ensure compliance with a nonrepudiation policy requirement for electronic transactions, because they do not provide the same level of verification and validation that digital signatures provide, and they may not be sufficient or effective to prevent or deny the parties from disputing or rejecting the transaction.

Encrypted passwords are the passwords that are converted into a secret or unreadable form, using a cryptographic algorithm, to protect them from unauthorized access or disclosure. Encrypted passwords can help to ensure the confidentiality and security of the passwords, but they are not the tools that help ensure compliance with a nonrepudiation policy requirement for electronic transactions, because they do not verify the identity and integrity of the sender and the content of the transaction, and they may not prevent or deny the parties from disputing or rejecting the transaction.

One-time passwords are the passwords that are valid or usable for only one session or transaction, and that are randomly generated or derived from a dynamic factor, such as time, location, or device. One-time passwords can help to enhance the security and authentication of the parties involved in the transaction, but they are not the tools that help ensure compliance with a nonrepudiation policy requirement for electronic transactions, because they do not verify the identity and integrity of the sender and the content of the transaction, and they may not prevent or deny the parties from disputing or rejecting the transaction.

Digital certificates are the electronic documents that contain the information and credentials of the parties involved in the transaction, such as their name, public key, expirationdate, etc., and that are issued and signed by a trusted authority or entity, such as a certificate authority or a digital signature provider. Digital certificates can help to establish and confirm the identity and trustworthiness of the parties involved in the transaction, but they are not the tools that help ensure compliance with a nonrepudiation policy requirement for electronic transactions, because they do not verify the identity and integrity of the sender and the content of the transaction, and they may not prevent or deny the parties from disputing or rejecting the transaction. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 197

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The primary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation is to ensure that risk is mitigated by the control. A control is a measure or action that is taken to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk, or to increase the likelihood or impact of an opportunity1. Testing the effectiveness of anew control before implementation means verifying whether the control can achieve its intended purpose and objective, and whether it can address the risk adequately and appropriately2. Testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation helps to avoid wasting resources, time, and effort on implementing a control that is ineffective, inefficient, or unsuitable for the risk scenario. It also helps to ensure that the control does not introduce new or unintended risks, or adversely affect other controls or processes3. The other options are not the primary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation, as they are either less relevant or less specific than ensuring that risk is mitigated by the control. Measuring efficiency of the control process is a secondary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Efficiency refers to the optimal use of resources to achieve the desired outcome4. Measuring efficiency of the control process means evaluating whether the control can achieve its objective with the least amount of cost, time, and effort. Measuring efficiency of the control process helps to optimize the performance and value of the control, but it is not the main reason for testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Confirming control alignment with business objectives is a tertiary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Alignment refers to the consistency and coherence of the control with the goals and strategies of the organization5. Confirming control alignment with business objectives means ensuring that the control supports and enables the achievement of the organization’s mission, vision, and values. Confirming control alignment with business objectives helps to integrate the control with the organization’s culture and governance, but it is not the primary reason for testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Complying with the organization’s policy is a quaternary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Policy refers to the set of principles and rules that guide the organization’s decisions and actions6. Complying with the organization’s policy means adhering to the standards and requirements that the organization has established for implementing and operating controls. Complying with the organization’s policy helps to ensure the quality and consistency of the control, but it is not the main objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

New risk exposures due to changes in the business environment are the possibilities and impacts of new or emerging threats or opportunities that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation, as a result of changes in the internal or external factors that influence the organization’s operations, such as technology, competition, regulation, or customer behavior12.

The most helpful tool in identifying new risk exposures due to changes in the business environment is a SWOT analysis, which is a technique that involves identifying and analyzing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) that are relevant to the organization’s situation, goals, and capabilities34.

A SWOT analysis is the most helpful tool because it helps the organization to scan and assess the business environment, and to identify and prioritize the new or emerging risk exposures that may arise from the changes in the environment34.

A SWOT analysis is also the most helpful tool because it helps the organization to align and adapt its strategy and actions to the changes in the environment, and to leverage its strengths and opportunities, and mitigate its weaknesses and threats34.

The other options are not the most helpful tools, but rather possible sources or inputs that may be used in a SWOT analysis. For example:

Standard operating procedures are documents that describe the routine tasks and processes that are performed by the organization, and the policies and standards that govern them56. However, these documents are not the most helpful tools because they may not reflect or capture the changes in the business environment, and they may need to be revised or updated to address the new or emerging risk exposures56.

Industry benchmarking is a technique that involves comparing and contrasting the performance and practices of the organization with those of the similar or leadingorganizations in the same or related industry, and identifying the gaps or opportunities for improvement78. However, this technique is not the most helpful tool because it may not provide a comprehensive or holistic view of the business environment, and it may not align with the organization’s specific situation, goals, or capabilities78.

Control gap analysis is a technique that involves assessing and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls that are designed and implemented to mitigate the risks, and identifying and addressing the areas or aspects that need to be improved or added . However, this technique is not the most helpful tool because it is reactive rather than proactive, and it may not identify or anticipate the new or emerging risk exposures that may result from the changes in the business environment . References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

2: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

3: SWOT Analysis - ISACA1

4: SWOT Analysis: What It Is and When to Use It2

5: Standard Operating Procedure - Wikipedia3

6: How to Write Effective Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)4

7: Benchmarking - Wikipedia5

8: Benchmarking: Definition, Types, Process, Advantages & Examples6

Control Gap Analysis - ISACA7

Control Gap Analysis: A Step-by-Step Guide8

Residual risk is the amount of risk that remains after the implementation of risk mitigation controls. If the fraud detection controls in an online payment system do not perform as expected, the residual risk will most likely change as a result, because the controls will not be able to reduce the impact or likelihood of the fraud risk as intended. The residual risk may increase or decrease depending on the performance of the controls, and the risk practitioner may need to adjust the risk response strategy accordingly. The other options are not as likely to change as the residual risk, because they are not directly affected by the performance of the controls, but rather depend on other factors, such as the source of the risk, the organization’s objectives, or the external environment, as explained below:

A. Impact is the extent or magnitude of the harm or loss caused by a risk. The impact of the fraud risk in an online payment system may not change as a result of the controls’ performance, becausethe impact is determined by the potential consequences of the fraud, such as financial losses, reputational damage, or legal liabilities, which are independent of the controls.

C. Inherent risk is the amount of risk that exists before the implementation of any risk mitigation controls. The inherent risk of the fraud risk in an online payment system may not change as a result of the controls’ performance, because the inherent risk is determined by the nature and characteristics of the risk, such as the type, source, or frequency of the fraud, which are independent of the controls.

D. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. The risk appetite of the organization may not change as a result of the controls’ performance, because the risk appetite is determined by the organization’s strategy, culture, and values, which are independent of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 32. What is Residual Risk? Definition, Examples, and More, Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com, Residual Risk: What It Is and How to Manage It

The key to controlling escalating costs when an organization is having new software implemented under contract is change management, which is the process of identifying, evaluating, approving, and implementing changes to the project scope, schedule, budget, or quality1. Change management can help to control escalating costs by:

Establishing a clear and agreed-upon baseline for the project deliverables, requirements, and expectations, and ensuring that they are aligned with the contract terms and conditions2.

Defining and enforcing a formal and consistent change control process, which includes the roles and responsibilities, the criteria and methods, and the documentation and communication of the changes3.

Assessing and prioritizing the proposed changes, and determining their impact and feasibility, and their alignment with the project objectives and constraints4.

Obtaining the approval and authorization of the relevant stakeholders, such as the project sponsor, the project manager, the contractor, or the customer, before implementing the changes5.

Monitoring and measuring the performance and outcome of the changes, and ensuring that they are delivered within the agreed scope, schedule, budget, and quality6.

References =

Change Management - CIO Wiki

Project Scope Management - CIO Wiki

Change Control - CIO Wiki

Change Impact Analysis - CIO Wiki

Change Approval - CIO Wiki

Change Evaluation - CIO Wiki

The primary concern for an organization planning to transfer and store its customer data with an offshore cloud service provider is data privacy. Data privacy is the protection of personal information fromunauthorized or unlawful access, use, disclosure, or transfer. Data privacy is governed by various laws, regulations, and standards that vary across different jurisdictions and sectors. An organization that transfers and stores its customer data with an offshore cloud service provider should ensure that the data privacy rights and obligations of the customers, the organization, and the cloud service provider are clearly defined and agreed upon, and that the data is protected according to the applicable data privacy requirements. An organization should also conduct due diligence and risk assessment on the offshore cloud service provider, and monitor and audit its performance and compliance on a regular basis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 127123

 The most important consideration when implementing ethical remote work monitoring is to inform the employees of how they are being monitored, because this respects their privacy rights and expectations, and ensures their consent and compliance with the monitoring policy. Informing the employees of how they are being monitored also helps to build trust and transparency between the employer and the employees, and reduces the potential legal or ethical issues that may arise from the monitoring activities. The other options are not the most important considerations, although they may also be relevant for ethical remote work monitoring. Monitoring only during official hours of business, reporting on nonproductive employees to management, and integrating multiple data monitoring sources into security incident response procedures are examples of operational or technical aspects of remote work monitoring, not ethical aspects. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the organization’s culture is the most critical element to maximize the potential for a successful security implementation, because it influences the behavior, attitude, and perception of the stakeholders towards security. The organization’s culture includes the values, beliefs, norms, and practices that are shared by the members of the organization. A positive and supportive culture can foster the awareness, commitment, and collaboration of the stakeholders in achieving the security objectives and complying with the security policies and standards. The other options are not the most critical elements, as they are less influential or less challenging than the organization’s culture. The organization’s knowledge is the collective understanding and expertise of the organization regardingsecurity, which can be enhanced through training and education. Ease of implementation is the degree of difficulty and complexity of implementing security, which can be reduced by using appropriate methods and tools. Industry-leading security tools are the best-in-class solutions and technologies that can provide effective and efficient security, which can be acquired through market research and evaluation. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 32.

An intrusion detection system (IDS) is a network security tool that monitors and analyzes network traffic for signs of malicious or suspicious activity, such as unauthorized access, data exfiltration, malware infection, or denial-of-service attack. An IDS can detect and alert the organization to potential threats based on predefined rules or signatures, or based on anomalies or deviations from normal network behavior. An IDS can also generate logs that record the details of the network events and incidents, such as the source, destination, content, and context of the network traffic. By analyzing the IDS logs, the organization can identify and validate the suspicious network activity, and determine its scope, impact, and root cause. The organization can also use the IDS logs to support the incident response and remediation process, and to improve the network security and resilience. The other options are less effective ways to ensure that suspicious network activity is identified. Analyzing server logs can provide some information about the network activity, but it may not be sufficient or timely to detect and validate the suspicious or malicious activity, as server logs only capture the events or activities that occur on the server, and not on the entire network. Using a third-party monitoring provider can help to outsource the network monitoring and analysis function, but it may not be the best option, as it may introduce additional risks, such as data privacy, vendor reliability, or service quality issues. Coordinating events with appropriate agencies can help to share information and resources with other organizations or authorities, such as law enforcement, regulators, or industry peers, but it may not be the best option, as it may depend on the availability and cooperation of theagencies, and it may not be feasible or desirable to disclose the network activity to external parties. References = Monitoring for Suspicious Network Activity: Key Tips to Secure Your Network 1

A risk heat map is a tool that shows the likelihood and impact of different risks on a matrix, using colors to indicate the level of risk. A risk heat map is most commonly used as part of an IT risk analysis to facilitate risk assessment, which is the process of estimating the probability and consequences of the risks, and comparing them against the risk criteria1. A risk heat map can help to visualize, communicate, and prioritize the risks, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of the risk response actions2. The other options are not the best choices for describing the purpose of a risk heat map, as they are either less specific or less relevant than risk assessment. Risk communication is the process of sharing and exchanging information about the risks among the stakeholders3. A risk heat map can support risk communication by providing a clear and concise representation of the risks, but it is not the main objective of the tool. Riskidentification is the process of finding, recognizing, and describing the risks that may affect the organization4. A risk heat map can help to identify the risks by categorizing them into different domains or sources, but it is not the primary function of the tool. Risk treatment is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate measures to modify the risk5. A risk heat map can help to guide the risk treatment by showing the risk ratings and thresholds, but it is not the core purpose of the tool. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, Page 47.

After a risk has been identified, the risk owner is in the best position to select the appropriate risk treatment option. The risk owner is the person or entity with the accountability and authority to manage a risk1. The risk owner is responsible for evaluating the risk, choosing the most suitable risk treatment option, implementing the risk treatment plan, and monitoring and reviewing the risk and its treatment2. The risk owner has the most knowledge and stake in the risk and its impact on the objectives and activities of the organization. The other options are not the best choices for selecting the risk treatment option, as they do not have the same level of accountability and authority as the risk owner. The risk practitioner is the person or entity with the knowledge and skills to perform the risk management activities1. The risk practitioner can assist the risk owner in identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating the risk, but the final decision and responsibility lies with the risk owner. The business process owner is the person or entity with the accountability and authority to manage a business process3. The business process owner may be affected by the risk or involved in the risk treatment, but the risk owner is the one who has the overall responsibility for the risk. The control owner is the person or entity with the accountability and authority to ensure that the controls are properly designed, implemented, and operated4. The control owner can provide input and feedback on the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, but the risk owner is the one who decides which controls are needed and how they are applied. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.3, Page 51.

When determining an appropriate risk assessment approach, the most important factor to understand is the value of information assets. This is because the value of information assets determines the potential impact of risks and the level of protection required. The value of information assets can be assessed based on their confidentiality, integrity, availability, and relevance to the business objectives and processes. A risk assessment approach should be aligned with the value of information assets and the risk appetite of the organization. The other options are not the most important factors to understand when determining a risk assessment approach, although they may influence the choice of methods and tools. The complexity of the IT infrastructure may affect the scope and depth of the risk assessment, but it does not indicate the level of risk or the priority of risk management. The management culture may affect the risk tolerance and the risk communication, but it does not reflect the value of information assets or the risk exposure. The threats and vulnerabilities may affect the likelihood and severity of risks, but they do not measure the value of information assets or the risk acceptance. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 582

 The PRIMARY basis for selecting a security control is the ability to mitigate risk, because it is the measure of how well the control can prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk, and how effectively the control can achieve the desired level of security and protection for the system and the data. The ability to mitigate risk is the most important criterion for selecting a security control, as it directly relates to the purpose and value of the control. The other options are not the primary basis, because:

Option A: To achieve the desired level of maturity is a goal of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The desired level of maturity is the state or condition of the security control that reflects its quality, consistency, and reliability, and it should be aligned with the organization’s security objectives and standards. The desired level of maturity is a result of selecting a security control, not a reason for selecting it.

Option B: The materiality of the risk is a factor of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The materiality of the risk is the degree or extent of the risk that affects the organization’s performance, reputation, and value, and it should be considered when selecting a security control, but it is not the only or the most important factor. The materiality of the risk is an input to selecting a security control, not an output of selecting it.

Option D: The cost of the control is a constraint of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The cost of the control is the amount of resources and expenditure that are required to implement and maintain the control, and it should be balanced with the benefit and effectiveness ofthe control, but it is not the only or the most important constraint. The cost of the control is a limitation of selecting a security control, not a motivation for selecting it. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 211.

The annualized loss expectancy (ALE) method of risk analysis is a quantitative method that estimates the expected monetary loss that can result from a risk over a one year period. The ALE is calculated by multiplying the single loss expectancy (SLE), which is the monetary loss from a single occurrence of a risk, by the annualized rate of occurrence (ARO), which is the frequency of the risk occurring in a year. The ALE can be used in a cost-benefit analysis to compare the cost of implementing a control or a risk response with the expected benefit of reducing the loss. The ALE can help to justify the investment in risk management and to prioritize the risks based on their financial impact. The other options are not accurate descriptions of the ALE method of risk analysis, as they involve different aspects or methods of risk analysis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2.1, pp. 60-61.

The most important component of effective security incident response is a documented communications plan. A communications plan defines the roles and responsibilities, channels and methods, frequency and timing, and content and format of the communications that take place during and after a security incident. A communications plan helps to ensure that the relevant stakeholders are informed and updated about the incident status and outcome, and that the incident response activities are coordinated and consistent. A communications plan also helps to manage the expectations and perceptions of the stakeholders, and to maintain the trust and reputation of the enterprise. Network time protocol synchronization, identification of attack sources, and early detection of breaches are also important components of effective security incident response, but they are not as important as a documented communications plan. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.2, page 1931

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 660.

 The next step after determining that a key control does not meet design expectations is to document the finding in the risk register, because this helps to record and track the information about the identified risk, such as its description, likelihood, impact, response, and status. A key control is a control that addresses a significant risk or supports a critical business process or objective. A control design expectation is a criterion or requirement that defines how the control should operate or perform to achieve its objective. If a key control does not meet its design expectation, it means that there is a gap, weakness, or deficiency in the control that may compromise its effectiveness or efficiency, and increase the risk exposure or impact. By documenting the finding in the risk register, the risk practitioner can communicate and report the risk issue to the relevant stakeholders, such as the risk owner, the management, or the auditor, and initiate the appropriate risk response actions, such as modifying the design of the control, implementing a compensating control, or accepting the risk. The other options are not the best next steps after determining that a key control does not meet design expectations. Invoking the incident response plan is a reactive measure that is triggered when a risk event occurs or is imminent, and requires immediate action to contain, mitigate, or recover from the incident. However, in this case, the risk event has not occurred yet, and there may be time to prevent or reduce it by improving the control design. Re-evaluating key risk indicators is a monitoring activity that measures and evaluates the level and impact of risks, and provides timely signals that something may be going wrong or needs urgent attention. However, in this case, the risk practitioner has already identified the risk issue, and needs to document and address it, rather than re-evaluate it. Modifying the design of the control is a possible risk response action that may be taken to improve the control and reduce the risk, but it is not the next step after determining that the key control does not meet design expectations. The next step is to document the finding in the risk register, and then decide on the best risk response action, which may or may not be modifying the design of the control, depending on the cost-benefit analysis, the risk assessment, and the risk response strategy. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 13

The level of risk in the IT risk profile is the aggregate measure of the likelihood and impact of IT-related risks that may affect the enterprise’s objectives and operations.

The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its goals. It is usually expressed as a range or a threshold, and it is aligned with the enterprise’s strategy and culture.

If the level of risk in the IT risk profile has decreased and is now below management’s risk appetite, it means that the enterprise has more capacity and opportunity to take on additional risks that may offer higher rewards or benefits.

The best recommendation in this situation is to optimize the control environment, which is the set of policies, procedures, standards, and practices that provide the foundation for managing IT risks and controls. Optimizing the control environment means enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of the controls, reducing the costs and complexity of compliance, and aligning the controls with the enterprise’s objectives and values.

Optimizing the control environment can help the enterprise to achieve the optimal balance between risk and return, and to leverage its risk management capabilities to create and protect value.

The other options are not the best recommendations, because they do not address the opportunity to improve the enterprise’s performance and resilience.

Realigning risk appetite to the current risk level may result in missing out on potential gains or advantages that could be obtained by taking more risks within the acceptable range.

Decreasing the number of related risk scenarios may reduce the scope and depth of risk analysis and reporting, and impair the enterprise’s ability to identify and respond to emerging or changing risks.

Reducing the risk management budget may compromise the quality and reliability of the risk management process and activities, and weaken the enterprise’s risk culture and governance. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 29-30, 34-35, 38-39, 44-45

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 145

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures the level and trend of a risk that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance1. A KRI threshold is a predefined value or range that indicates the acceptable or tolerable level of risk for the organization2. The organization’s risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that it is willing to take in order to meet its strategic goals3. Therefore, the most likely reason for senior management’s response is that the KRI threshold needs to be revised to better align with the organization’s risk appetite. This means that the current threshold is either too low or too high, resulting in false alarms or missed signals. By adjusting the threshold to reflect the organization’s risk appetite, senior management can ensure that the KRI provides relevant and actionable information for risk management and decision making. The other options are not the most likely reasons for senior management’s response, as they imply that the KRI is faulty, irrelevant, or misunderstood. The underlying data source for the KRI is using inaccurate data and needs to be corrected. This option assumes that the KRI is based on erroneous or unreliable data, which would affect its validity and reliability. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to verify the data quality and accuracy before using the KRI for risk monitoring and reporting. The KRI is not providing useful information and should be removed from the KRI inventory. This option assumes that the KRI is not aligned with the organization’s objectives, strategies, or risk profile, which would affect its usefulness and value. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to review and update the KRI inventory periodically to ensure that the KRIs are relevant and meaningful for risk management. Senior management does not understand the KRI and should undergo risk training. This option assumes that senior management lacks the knowledge or skills to interpret and use the KRI for risk management, which would affect their competence and confidence. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to have sufficient risk awareness and education to understand and apply the KRI for risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.4, Page 53.

A risk heat map is a graphical tool that displays the results of a risk analysis in a matrix format, using colors and symbols to indicate the level and priority of the risks. A risk heat map can show the distribution and comparison of the risks based on various criteria, such as likelihood, impact, category, source, etc.

A risk heat map is most commonly used as part of an IT risk analysis to facilitate risk assessment, which is the process of determining the significance and urgency of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Risk assessment involves measuring and comparing the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their magnitude and importance.

A risk heat map can help to facilitate risk assessment by providing a visual and intuitive representation of the risk profile, and highlighting the most critical and relevant risks that need to be addressed or monitored. A risk heat map can also help to communicate and report the risk analysis results to different stakeholders, and to support the decision making and planning for the risk response and treatment.

The other options are not the most common uses of a risk heat map as part of an IT risk analysis, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of a risk heat map, which is to facilitate risk assessment.

Risk identification is the process of finding and describing the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Risk identification involves defining the risk sources, events, causes, and impacts, and documenting them in a risk register. A risk heat map is not commonly used to facilitate risk identification, because it does not provide the detailed and comprehensive information that is needed to identify and describe the risks, and it may not cover all the relevant or potential risks that may exist or emerge.

Risk treatment is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate actions or plans to address the risks that have been identified, analyzed, and evaluated. Risk treatment involves choosing one of the following types of risk responses: mitigate, transfer, avoid, or accept. A risk heat map is not commonly used to facilitate risk treatment, because it does not provide the specific and feasible information that is needed to select and implement the risk responses, and it may not reflect the cost-benefit or feasibility analysis of the risk responses.

Risk communication is the process of exchanging and sharing the information and knowledge about the risks and their responses among the relevant stakeholders. Risk communication involves informing, consulting, and involving the stakeholders in the risk management process, and ensuring that they understand and agree on the risk objectives, criteria, and outcomes. A risk heat map is not commonly used to facilitate risk communication, because it does not provide the complete and accurate information that is needed to communicate and share the risks and their responses, and it may not address the different needs, expectations, and perspectives of the stakeholders. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 169

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

An IT risk management framework is a set of principles, processes, and practices that guide and support the identification, analysis, evaluation, treatment, monitoring, and communication of IT-related risks within an organization12.

The primary advantage of implementing an IT risk management framework is the establishment of a reliable basis for risk-aware decision making, which enables the organization to balance the potential benefits and adverse effects of using IT, and to allocate resources and prioritize actions accordingly12.

A reliable basis for risk-aware decision making consists of the following elements12:

A common language and understanding of IT risk, its sources, impacts, and responses

A consistent and structured approach to IT risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment

A clear and transparent governance structure and accountability for IT risk management

A comprehensive and up-to-date IT risk register and profile that reflects the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

A regular and effective IT risk monitoring and reporting process that provides relevant and timely information to stakeholders

A continuous and proactive IT risk improvement process that incorporates feedback and lessons learned

The other options are not the primary advantage, but rather possible outcomes or benefits of implementing an IT risk management framework. For example:

Compliance with relevant legal and regulatory requirements is an outcome of implementing an IT risk management framework that ensures the organization meets its obligations and avoids penalties or sanctions12.

Improvement of controls within the organization and minimized losses is a benefit of implementing an IT risk management framework that reduces the likelihood and impact of IT-related incidents and events12.

Alignment of business goals with IT objectives is a benefit of implementing an IT risk management framework that ensures the IT strategy and activities support the organization’s mission and vision12. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

2: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the percentage of successful changes is the most effective key performance indicator (KPI) for change management, as it measures the quality and effectiveness of the change management process and its alignment with the organization’s objectives and requirements. The percentage of successful changes helps to:

Evaluate the extent to which the changes have met the expected outcomes and benefits

Identify and analyze the root causes of any failed or problematic changes and implement corrective actions or improvement measures

Monitor and report the performance and progress of the change management process and its impact on the organization

Enhance the confidence and satisfaction of the stakeholders and customers with the change management process and its results

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Scenarios, pp. 107-1081

A technical vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in the design or implementation of an information system or resource that can be exploited or compromised by a threat or source of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A technical vulnerability may be caused by various factors, such as human error, system failure, process inefficiency, resource limitation, etc.

A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the technical vulnerabilities that exist or may arise in the organization’s information systems or resources, and determining their severity and impact. A vulnerability assessment can help the organization to assess and prioritize the risks, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the risks.

The best response to the scenario of a recently discovered technical vulnerability being actively exploited is to conduct a vulnerability assessment, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:

What is the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how does it affect the functionality or security of the information system or resource?

How is the technical vulnerability being exploited or compromised, and by whom or what?

What are the potential consequences or impacts of the exploitation or compromise of the technical vulnerability for the organization and its stakeholders?

How can the technical vulnerability be detected and reported, and what are the available or feasible options or solutions to address or correct it?

Conducting a vulnerability assessment can help the organization to improve and optimize the information system or resource quality and performance, and to reduce or eliminate the technical vulnerability. It can also help the organization to align the information system or resource with the organization’s objectives and requirements, and to comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the best responses to the scenario of a recently discovered technical vulnerability being actively exploited, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of conducting a vulnerability assessment, which is to identify and evaluate the technical vulnerability, and to determine its severity and impact.

Assessing the vulnerability management process is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the process that is used to identify, analyze, evaluate, and communicate the technical vulnerabilities, and to align them with the organization’s objectives and requirements. Assessing the vulnerability management process can help the organization to improve and optimize the process, and to reduce or eliminate the gaps or weaknesses in the process, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders.

Conducting a control self-assessment is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls that are intended to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the information systems and resources, using the input and feedback from the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the information systems activities or functions. Conducting a control self-assessment can help the organization to identify and document the control deficiencies, and to align them with the organization’s objectives and requirements, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders.

Reassessing the inherent risk of the target is a process of reevaluating and recalculating the amount and type of risk that exists in the absence of any controls, and that is inherent to the nature or characteristics of the target, which is the information system or resource that is affected by the technical vulnerability. Reassessing the inherent risk of the target can help the organization to understand and document the risk exposure or level, and to align it with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 195

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 The results of risk analyses should be presented in quantitative or qualitative terms based primarily on the requirements of management, because they are the intended audience and users of the risk information, and they have the authority and responsibility to make risk-based decisions. The requirements of management may vary depending on the purpose, scope, and context of the risk analysis, and the level of detail, accuracy, and reliability that they need. Quantitative risk analysis uses numerical data and mathematical models to estimate the probability and impact of risks, and to express the risk exposure and value in monetary or other measurable units. Qualitative risk analysis uses descriptive data and subjective judgments to assess the likelihood and severity of risks, and to rank the risks according to their relative importance or priority. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, and they can be used separately or together, depending on the situation and the availability of data and resources. However, the primary factor that determines the choice of the method is the requirements of management, as they are the ones who will use the risk information to support their objectives, strategies, and actions. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 141

In addition to the risk register, which is a tool to document and monitor the risks that affect the organization, a risk practitioner should review the business objectives of the organization to develop an understanding of its risk profile. The risk profile is a description of the set of risks that the organization faces in relation to its goals and strategies. By reviewing the business objectives, the risk practitioner can identify the sources, drivers, and consequences of the risks, as well as the alignment, prioritization, and tolerance of the risks. The business objectives also provide the context and criteria for evaluating and managing the risks. The other options are not the best choices to review for developing an understandingof the organization’s risk profile, as they do not capture the full scope and nature of the risks. The control catalog is a list of the existing controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks, but it does not reflect the effectiveness, efficiency, or sufficiency of the controls. The asset profile is a description of the resources and capabilities that the organization possesses or relies on, but it does not indicate the value, vulnerability, or interdependency of the assets. The key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the level and trend of the risks, but they do not explain the causes, impacts, or responses to the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, Page 49.

Compensating controls are additional or alternative controls that are implemented when the existing controls are found to be ineffective or do not meet the required standards. Compensating controls are designed to reduce the risk exposure to an acceptable level and ensure that the organization can still comply with the relevant regulations and industry best practices. For an organization that processes credit cards, compensating controls may include enhanced encryption, monitoring, auditing, or authentication mechanisms. By having compensating controls in place, the organization can maintain an effective overall control environment despite the deficiencies in the existing controls. The other options are not correct because they do not ensure that the overall control environment is effective. A control mitigation plan is a document that outlines the actions and resources needed to address the control deficiencies, but it does not guarantee that the compensating controls will be implemented or effective. Risk management is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating risks, but it does not directly affect the control environment. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk treatment, and it may or may not be acceptable depending on the risk appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 153-1541; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 632

Data processing is the activity of collecting, organizing, transforming, and analyzing data to produce useful information for decision making or other purposes12.

The role of the internal IT team in this situation is data processors, which are the people or entities that process data on behalf of the data controllers, who are the people or entities that determine the purposes and means of the data processing34.

Data processors are the role of the internal IT team because they are responsible for managing information through the applications that are used by the organization, and they act under the instructions and authority of the organization, which is the data controller34.

Data processors are also the role of the internal IT team because they have to comply with the data protection laws and regulations that apply to the data processing, and they have to ensure the security and confidentiality of the data34.

The other options are not the role of the internal IT team, but rather possible roles or terms that are related to data processing. For example:

Data custodians are the people or entities that have physical or logical control over the data, and they are responsible for implementing and maintaining the technical and administrative safeguards to protect the data56. However, this role is not the role of theinternal IT team because it is a subset or function of the data processor role, and it does not reflect the full scope of the data processing activities that the internal IT team performs56.

Data owners are the people or entities that have legal rights or authority over the data, and they are responsible for defining and enforcing the policies and rules for the data access, use, and quality . However, this role is not the role of the internal IT team because it is a different or separate role from the data processor role, and it does not reflect the relationship or agreement between the organization and the internal IT team . References =

1: Data Processing - Wikipedia1

2: Data Processing: Definition, Steps, and Types2

3: Data Controller vs Data Processor: What’s the Difference?3

4: Data controller vs data processor: What are the differences and responsibilities?4

5: Data Custodian - Wikipedia5

6: Data Custodian: Definition, Role & Responsibilities6

Data Owner - Wikipedia

Data Owner: Definition, Role & Responsibilities

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the best way to validate the results of a vulnerability assessment is to perform a penetration test, which is a type of security testing that simulates an attack on the IT assets and processes to exploit the identified vulnerabilities and evaluate the potential impact and severity of the attack. Performing a penetration test helps to:

Confirm the existence and exploitability of the vulnerabilities detected by the vulnerability assessment

Measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing security controls and countermeasures

Identify and prioritize the risks and gaps in the security posture of the IT assets and processes

Recommend and implement appropriate remediation and mitigation actions to address the vulnerabilities and risks

Enhance the security awareness and resilience of the organization

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 36-371

End user acceptance testing is a process that verifies that a system or service meets the requirements and expectations of the end users, who are the actual or potential customers or beneficiaries of the system or service. End user acceptance testing is the final stage of testing before the system or service is deployed or released to the production environment. The results of end user acceptance testing are the most important consideration for a risk practitioner when making a system implementation go-live recommendation, as they indicate the quality, functionality, usability, and reliability of the system or service from the end user perspective. The results of end user acceptance testing can help to identify and resolve any defects, errors, or issues that may affect the performance, satisfaction, or acceptance of the system or service by the end users. The results of end user acceptance testing can also help to evaluate the benefits, value, and risks of the system or service for the end users and the organization. The other options are not the most important consideration for a risk practitioner when making a system implementation go-live recommendation, although they may be relevant and useful. The completeness of system documentation is a factor that affects the maintainability, supportability, and auditability of the system or service, but it does not measure the end user experience or satisfaction. The variances between planned and actual cost is a measure of the efficiency and budget management of the system or service development or implementation, but it does not reflect the end user needs or expectations. The availability of in-house resources is a resource that supports the system or service delivery and operation, but it does not ensure the end user acceptance or approval. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 180-1811; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 87

 Following a significant change to a business process, the risk practitioner should advise the risk owner to first conduct a risk analysis to evaluate the current level of risk exposure and compare it with the previous level. This will help to verify whether the change has indeed reduced the risk, and by how much. The risk analysis will also help to identify any new or residual risks that may have emerged as a result of the change. The other options are not the first actions to take, but rather the subsequent steps after conducting a risk analysis. Reviewing the key risk indicators, updating the risk register, and reallocating risk response resources are all important activities, but they depend on the outcome of the risk analysis. References = CRISC EXAM TOPIC 2 LONG; CRISC Q&A Domain 1; Managing Change Risk - Oliver Wyman

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are measurable values that demonstrate how effectively an organization is achieving its key objectives. KPIs can be used to evaluate the progress and performance of a risk management program, as well as to identify the areas for improvement and alignment with the organization’s strategy. KPIs can provide the most useful information when determining a risk management program’s maturity level, because they can reflect the extent to which the program is integrated, consistent, proactive, and value-adding. KPIs can also be compared with industry benchmarks or best practices to assess the program’s maturity level relative to other organizations. The other options are not as useful as KPIs, because they do not provide a clear and comprehensive picture of the risk management program’s maturity level, but rather focus on specific aspects or outputs of the program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 18.

The greatest security risk in this scenario is that data may be commingled with other tenants’ data on the public cloud infrastructure. Data commingling occurs when data from different sources or customers are mixed together without proper segregation or encryption. This may result in data leakage, unauthorized access, or loss of confidentiality and integrity. Data commingling is a common challenge in public cloud environments, where multiple customers share the same physical resources and network. System downtime, infrastructure management, and cloud provider certification are also potential risks in this scenario, butthey are not as great as data commingling. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.1, page 2451

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 638.

According to the CRISC 351-400 topic3 Flashcards, the administrative access represents a segregation of duties conflict, which should be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner. Segregation of duties is a principle that aims to prevent fraud, errors, or abuse of power by ensuring that no single person can perform incompatible functions, such as development, testing, and production. By having administrative access to a production application, a software developer can potentially modify the code, bypass the testing and approval process, and deploy the changes without proper authorization or documentation. This can compromise the integrity, availability, and security of the application, and expose the organization to operational, financial, legal, or reputational risks. Therefore, the answer is D. The administrative access represents a segregation of duties conflict. *References

 IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how IT-related events or incidents could adversely affect an organization’s objectives, assets, or operations. IT risk scenarios can help to identify, analyze, and prioritize IT risks, and to develop appropriate responses and controls1.

An enterprise-wide risk register is a document that records and tracks the significant risks that an organization faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. An enterprise-wide risk register can help to provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the organization’s risk profile, and to support the decision making and reporting of the risk management function2.

The best practice that facilitates the incorporation of IT risk scenarios into the enterprise-wide risk register is to develop IT risk scenarios in the context of organizational objectives. This means that IT risk scenarios should be aligned with and derived from the organization’s strategic goals, mission, vision, and values. IT risk scenarios should also consider the interdependencies and interactions between IT and other business domains, and the potential impact of IT risks on the organization’s performance and reputation3.

By developing IT risk scenarios in the context of organizational objectives, the organization can ensure that the IT risk scenarios are relevant, realistic, and meaningful for the enterprise-wide risk management. The organization can also ensure that the IT risk scenarios are consistent and comparable with other types of risk scenarios, such as financial, operational, or reputational risk scenarios. This can facilitate the integration and consolidation of IT risk scenarios into the enterprise-wide risk register, and enable a holistic and balanced assessment and reporting of the organization’s risks4.

The other options are not as effective as developing IT risk scenarios in the context of organizational objectives for incorporating IT risk scenarios into the enterprise-wide risk register. Developing key risk indicators (KRIs) for key IT risk scenarios can help to monitor and measure the IT risk exposure and performance, but it does not ensure that the IT risk scenarios are aligned with the organizational objectives or integrated with other risk scenarios. Assessing IT risk scenarios by the enterprise risk management team can help to validate and prioritize the IT risk scenarios, but it does not ensure that the IT risk scenarios are derived from the organizational objectives or consistent with other risk scenarios. Approving risk appetites for IT risk scenarios by key business stakeholders can help to establish the acceptable level of IT risk taking and tolerance, but it does not ensure that the IT risk scenarios are based on the organizational objectives or comparable with other risk scenarios. References =

IT Risk Scenario Development - ISACA

Risk Register - ISACA

Identifying Risks and Scenarios Threatening the Organization as an Enterprise - A New Enterprise Risk Identification Framework

Risk Register 2021-2022 - UNECE

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The GREATEST concern associated with business end users developing their own applications on end user spreadsheets and database programs is:

B. Controls are not applied to the applications.

When end users create their own applications, there is often a lack of formal controls that would typically be applied in a structured development environment. This can lead to issues with data integrity, security vulnerabilities, and non-compliance with organizational policies and standards.

The best answer is C. real-time monitoring of risk events and control exceptions. Real-time monitoring is a process of continuously collecting and analyzing data and information on the occurrence and impact of risk events and control exceptions, using automated tools and techniques, such as dashboards, alerts, or analytics12. Real-time monitoring can help to identify and respond to the risks and the issues as soon as they happen, and to prevent or mitigate the potential consequences. Real-time monitoring can also help to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the risk management process, and to provide timely and accurate reporting and communication to the stakeholders. Real-time monitoring is the best answer, because it represents a leading-edge practice in risk monitoring, as it leverages the latest technology and innovation, and it enables a proactive and agile approach to risk management. The other options are not the best answer, although they may be useful or necessary for risk monitoring. Procedures to monitor the operation of controls are a part of the risk monitoring process, but they are not the same as or a substitute for real-time monitoring, as they may not be able to capture and address the risks and the issues in a timely manner, and they may rely on manual or periodic methods, rather than automated or continuous ones. A tool for monitoring critical activities and controls is a resource or a device that supports the risk monitoring process, but it is not the same as or a substitute for real-time monitoring, as it may not be able to collect and analyze the data and information in real time, and it may depend on the quality and reliability of the tool. Monitoring activities for all critical assets is a scope or a coverage of the risk monitoring process, but it is not the same as or a substitute for real-time monitoring, as it may not be able to identify and respond to the risks and the issues as soon as they happen, and it may require a lot of resources and efforts. Performing a controls assessment is a process of evaluating and testing the design and operation of the controls, but it is not the same as or a substitute for real-time monitoring, as it may not be able to detect and report the risks and the issues in real time, and it may follow a predefined or scheduled plan, ratherthan a dynamic or adaptive one. References = Real-Time Risk Monitoring - ISACA, Real-Time Risk Monitoring: A Case Study - ISACA

Implementing mock phishing exercises is the most effective way to validate organizational awareness of cybersecurity risk, because it helps to measure and test the knowledge and behavior of the employees regarding the detection and prevention of phishing attacks, which are one of the most common and dangerous forms of cybersecurity risk. A phishing attack is a fraudulent attempt to obtain sensitive or confidential information, such as usernames, passwords, or credit card details, by impersonating a legitimate or trusted entity, such as a bank, a government agency, or a colleague, through email, phone, or other communication channels. A mock phishing exercise is a simulated phishing attack that is conducted by the organization or a third party to assess the level of awareness and readiness of the employees to recognize and respond to phishing attacks, and to provide feedback and training to improve their skills and knowledge. Implementing mock phishing exercises is the most effective way, as it helps to validate the actual and practical awareness of cybersecurity risk, and to identify and address the gaps or weaknesses in the employees’ awareness and behavior. Conducting security awareness training, updating the information security policy, and requiring two-factor authentication are all useful ways to enhance organizational awareness of cybersecurity risk, but they are not the most effective way, as they do not directly validate the awareness and behavior of the employees regarding phishing attacks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), risk management strategies are primarily adopted to achieve acceptable residual risk levels, which are the remaining risk levels after implementing risk response actions. Residual risk levels should be aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance, which are the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives and the acceptable variation in outcomes related to specific performance measures linked to objectives. Risk management strategies are the approaches or methods used to address risks, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, sharing, or acceptance. Risk management strategies should be based on a cost-benefit analysis of the alternatives available and the value of the assets at risk.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 166-1691

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the information and status of the identified risks and their responses. It includes the risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, priority, response, owner, action plan, status, etc.

Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors primarily helps to provide a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions, which are the decisions that are made based on the consideration and evaluation of the risks and their responses. Providing a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions helps to ensure that the decisions are consistent, appropriate, and proportional to the level and nature of the risks, and that they support the organization’s objectives and values. It also helps to optimize the balance between risk and return, and to create and protect value for the organization and its stakeholders.

The other options are not the primary benefits of periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of a risk register, which is to provide a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions.

Minimizing the number of risk scenarios for risk assessment means reducing the scope and depth of risk analysis and reporting, and impairing the organization’s ability to identify and respond to emerging or changing risks. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors does not necessarily minimize the number of risk scenarios for risk assessment, and it may not be a desirable or beneficial outcome for the organization.

Aggregating risk scenarios identified across different business units means combining or consolidating the risks that are identified by different parts or functions of the organization, and creating a holistic or integrated view of the organization’s risk profile. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors does not necessarily aggregate risk scenarios identified across different business units, and it may not be a sufficient or effective way to achieve a holistic or integrated view of the organization’s risk profile.

Building a threat profile of the organization for management review means creating or developing a summary or representation of the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, and presenting or reporting it to the senior management for their awareness and approval. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors does not necessarily build a threat profile of the organization for management review, and it may not be a comprehensive or reliable way to create or develop a summary or representation of the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 172

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), an effective control environment is best indicated by controls that manage risk within the organization’s risk appetite, as this reflects the alignment of thecontrol objectives and activities with the organization’s strategic goals and risk preferences. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Managing risk within the organization’s risk appetite helps to:

Balance the potential benefits and costs of risk-taking and risk response

Optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities

Enhance the value and performance of the organization

Foster a risk-aware culture that supports the organization’s vision and mission

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Risk Assessment Process, pp. 93-941

Enterprise architecture (EA) documentation provides the most useful information to trace the impact of aggregated risk across the organization’s technical environment, because it describes the structure and behavior of the organization’s IT systems, applications, infrastructure, and processes, and how they support and enable the organization’s strategy and objectives. EA documentation also defines the principles, standards, and guidelines that govern the design and implementation of the IT solutions and services. Aggregated risk is the total or combined level of risk that the organization faces from multiple or interrelated sources or scenarios. Aggregated risk may have a greater impact than the sum of the individual risks, due to the synergistic or compounding effects of the risks. The technical environment is the set of IT components and capabilities that support the organization’s business functions and processes. Tracing the impact of aggregated risk across the technical environment is a process of identifying and assessing the potential or actual consequences of the aggregated risk on the performance, functionality, or security of the IT systems, applications, infrastructure, or processes. EA documentation provides the most useful information, as it helps to understand and analyze the interdependencies and relationships of the IT components and capabilities, andto evaluate the effect of the aggregated risk on the alignment and integration of IT with the organization’s strategy and objectives. Business case documentation, organizational risk appetite statement, and organizational hierarchy are all possible sources of information to trace the impact of aggregated risk, but they are not the most useful information, as they do not provide a comprehensive and detailed view of the technical environment and its architecture. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 183

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the most important consideration when sharing risk management updates with executive management is ensuring relevance to organizational goals, as this helps to align risk management with business strategy and performance. The risk management updates should:

Highlight the key risks that may affect the achievement of the organizational goals and objectives

Demonstrate the value and benefits of risk management in supporting decision making and enhancing business resilience

Provide clear and concise information on the current risk profile, risk appetite, risk tolerance and risk exposure of the organization

Recommend appropriate risk response actions and resource allocation to address the identified risks

Communicate the roles and responsibilities of executive management in overseeing and governing risk management

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: IT Risk Reporting, pp. 221-2221

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), a contract associated with a cloud service provider must include ownership of responsibilities, as this defines the roles and obligations of both the cloudprovider and the customer in relation to the cloud services. The contract should specify who is responsible for:

Service delivery and performance

Data security and privacy

Compliance with regulations and standards

Incident management and reporting

Business continuity and disaster recovery

Change management and configuration control

Intellectual property rights and licensing

Termination and data egress

The contract should also include service level agreements (SLAs) that measure and monitor the quality and availability of the cloud services, as well as remedies and penalties for non-compliance. The contract should also address pricing and payment terms, dispute resolution mechanisms, and liability and indemnification clauses.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 173-1741

Risk events are specific occurrences or changes that have a potential impact on the achievement of objectives. They can be positive or negative, and they can be internal or external to the organization. Risk events provide the basis for developing realistic risk scenarios, which are hypothetical situations that illustrate the possible consequences of a risk event. Risk scenarios help to understand and communicate the nature, sources, and causes of risk, as well as the potential impact and likelihood of risk occurrence. Risk scenarios can also be used to test the effectiveness of risk responses and controls.

The other options are not as useful as risk events for developing realistic risk scenarios. A balanced scorecard (A) is a strategic management tool that measures the performance of the organization against its objectives, vision, and strategy. It does not provide specific information about risk events or their consequences. A risk appetite (B) is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. It does not describe the risk events or their scenarios, but rather the level of risk tolerance and acceptance. A risk map © is a graphical representation of the risk profile of the organization, showing the relationship between the likelihood and impact of different risks. It does not provide the details or context of the risk events or their scenarios, but rather the relative ranking and prioritization of risks.

 Building Key Risk Indicators (KRIs):

KRIs are metrics used to provide an early signal of increasing risk exposure in various areas of an organization.

 Importance of Representative Data Sets:

To ensure KRIs are accurate and meaningful, it is critical that the data used is representative of the entire population or relevant subset of activities being monitored.

Representative data ensures that the KRIs reflect the true state of risk and are not biased or incomplete.

 Impact on KRIs:

Using representative data sets improves the reliability and validity of KRIs, enabling better risk detection and management.

It ensures that the KRIs provide a realistic view of potential risk trends and patterns.

 Comparing Other Data Sources:

Business Process Owners:While they provide valuable insights, data from them alone may not be representative.

Industry Benchmark Data:Useful for comparisons but not specific to the organization’s unique context.

Data Automation Systems:Helpful for efficiency but must ensure the data is representative.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of using representative data to build effective KRIs (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.11 Data Collection Aggregation Analysis and Validation) ​​.

According to the ISACA Risk IT Framework, one of the key principles for effective risk management is to establish tone at the top and accountability. This means that senior management should set an example of ethical behavior and culture, and communicate the importance of ethics and compliance to the entire organization. Senior management should also ensure that the risk management process is aligned with the organization’s mission, vision, values, and code of conduct, and that ethical risks are identified, assessed, and treated appropriately. By demonstrating ethics in their day-to-day decision making, senior management can have the greatest positive impact on ethical compliance within the risk management process, as they can influence the attitudes, behaviors, and actions of all stakeholders.

References:

•ISACA, Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, 2019, p. 741

•ISACA, The Role of Ethics in Risk Management2

The primary purpose of using a framework for risk analysis is to improve consistency. A framework for risk analysis is a set of principles, standards, methods, and tools that guide and govern the risk analysis process. Risk analysis is the process of estimating the impact and likelihood of the risk events, and determining the level and nature of the risk exposure. A framework for risk analysis helps to improve consistency, which is the degree of uniformity and agreement among the risk analysis results and practices. Improving consistency helps to ensure that the risk analysis is performed in a systematic and structured way, and that the risk analysis results are comparable and reliable. Improving consistency also helps to reduce the bias, uncertainty, and variability in the risk analysis process, and to enhance the quality and accuracy of the risk analysis results. Improving accountability, helping define risk tolerance, and helping develop risk scenarios are not the primary purposes of using a framework for risk analysis, as they are either the benefits or the objectives of the risk analysis process, and they do not address the primary need of improving the quality and reliability of the risk analysis results. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

Role-based access controls (RBAC) are a type of preventive control that limit the access and actions of users based on their roles and responsibilities within the organization. RBAC can help to address the risk of malicious outsiders modifying application data by restricting their access to the data and the functions they can perform on it. RBAC can also enforce the principle of least privilege, which means that users only have the minimum level of access required to perform their tasks. RBAC can be implemented through policies, procedures, and technical mechanisms such as access control lists, encryption, and authentication. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.1, p. 178-179

 The best course of action for a newly hired risk practitioner who finds that the risk register has not been updated in the past year is to identify changes in risk factors and initiate risk reviews. This would help the risk practitioner to update the risk register with the current and relevant information on the risks facing the enterprise, such as their sources, drivers, indicators, likelihood, impact, and responses. It would also help the risk practitioner to evaluate the effectiveness of the existing controls, and to identify any new or emerging risks that need to be addressed. Identifying changes in risk factors and initiating risk reviews would enable the risk practitioner to maintain the accuracy and completeness of the risk register, and to provide valuable input for the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.1.1, page 2271

The most important factor to have in place to ensure the effectiveness of risk and security metrics reporting is an organizational reporting process. An organizational reporting process is a set of procedures that defines the roles, responsibilities, frequency, format, and distribution of the risk and security metrics reports. An organizational reporting process helps to ensure that the risk and security metrics are relevant, accurate, consistent, and timely, and that they provide useful information for decision making and performance improvement. An organizational reporting process also helps to align the risk and security metrics reporting with the enterprise’s objectives, strategies, and policies, and to communicate the risk and security status and issues to the appropriate stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 2421

A vulnerability report for the IT infrastructure is a document that identifies and evaluates the weaknesses or gaps in the IT systems, networks, or devices that could be exploited by threats or cause incidents. By analyzing the latest vulnerability report, one can conclude the existence and extent of control weaknesses in the IT infrastructure, because control weaknesses are the deficiencies or failures of the controls that are supposed to prevent, detect, or correct the vulnerabilities. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not directly concluded by analyzing the latest vulnerability report. The likelihood of a threat, the impact of technology risk, and the impact of operational risk are examples of risk factors or consequences that depend on the vulnerability and the threat, but they are not determined by the vulnerability report alone. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The most helpful way to mitigate the risk associated with an application under development not meeting business objectives is to include key stakeholders in the review of user requirements, because this ensures that the application is designed and developed according to the needs and expectations of the end users and the business owners. Including key stakeholders in the review of user requirements also helps to avoid scope creep, requirement changes, or miscommunication that may affect the quality, functionality, or usability of the application. The other options are not the most helpful ways to mitigate the risk, although they may also be useful in reducing the likelihood or impact of the risk. Identifying threats that may compromise enterprise architecture (EA), including diverse business scenarios in user acceptance testing (UAT), and performing risk assessments during the business case development stage are examples of preventive or detective controls that aim to identify and address the potential issues or problems that may arise during the application development process, but they do not address the alignment of the application with the business objectives. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

Differences in regulatory requirements are the most important factor for a multinational organization to consider when developing its security policies and standards. This is because different countries or regions may have different laws, regulations, or standards that govern the protection of information and data, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States, or the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) in Canada. A multinational organization must comply with the applicable regulatory requirements in each jurisdiction where it operates, or it may face legal, financial, or reputational risks. Therefore, the organization should develop its security policies and standards in a way that meets or exceeds the minimum regulatory requirements, and also aligns with its business objectives and risk appetite. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key elements of IT governance is to ensure compliance withexternal laws and regulations1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, differences in regulatory requirements is the correct answer to this question2.

Regional competitors’ policies and standards, ability to monitor and enforce compliance, and industry-standard templates are not the most important factors for a multinational organization to consider when developing its security policies and standards. These factors may be useful or relevant, but they are not as critical or mandatory as the differences in regulatory requirements. Regional competitors’ policies and standards may provide some insights or benchmarks, but they may not reflect the organization’s specific needs or risks. Ability to monitor and enforce compliance is an important aspect of implementing and maintaining security policies and standards, but it does not determine the content or scope of the policies and standards. Industry-standard templates may offer some guidance or best practices, but they may not cover all the regulatory requirements or the organization’s unique circumstances.

Performing a threat assessment is the best course of action for a risk practitioner upon learning that regulatory authorities have concerns with an emerging technology that the organization is considering, because it helps to identify and analyze the sources and types of threats that may exploit the vulnerabilities or weaknesses of the technology, and to estimate their likelihood and impact. A threat is a potential event or action that may cause harm or damage to the organization or its objectives, such as a natural disaster, a cyberattack, or a human error. A threat assessment is a process of systematically identifying and assessing the threats that an organization faces, and estimating their probability and severity. An emerging technology is a new or innovative technology that has the potential to disrupt or transform the existing markets, industries, or practices, such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, or biotechnology. An emerging technology may offer benefits such as competitive advantage, efficiency, or creativity, but it may also pose risks such as technical complexity, interoperability issues, regulatory uncertainty, or ethical dilemmas. Therefore, performing a threat assessment is the best course of action, as it helps to understand and evaluate the threats and their consequences, and to determine the appropriate controls or mitigating factors to reduce or eliminate them. Redesigning key risk indicators (KRIs), updating risk responses, and conducting a SWOT analysis are all possiblecourses of action to perform after performing a threat assessment, but they are not the best course of action, as they depend on the results and recommendations of the threat assessment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 87

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the most important time to involve business stakeholders in the development of bottom-up IT risk scenarios is when validating the risk scenarios, as they can provide valuable input on the relevance, completeness, and accuracy of the scenarios and their impact on the business objectives and processes2

1: CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 100001 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 97

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk and its associated controls1. The risk owner is also responsible for ensuring that the risk is within the acceptable level and that the risk response is effective and efficient2. Therefore, the most appropriate owner for a newly identified IT risk is the individual who has the authority to commit organizational resources to mitigate the risk, as they have the most interest and influence on the risk and its impact on the business objectives. The other options are not the most appropriate owners for a newly identified IT risk, as they may not have the authority or the accountability to manage the risk. The manager responsible for IT operations that will support the risk mitigation efforts may have the operational responsibility or the oversight of the risk management activities, but they may not have the authority to allocate the resources or approve the risk response. A project manager capable of prioritizing the risk remediation efforts may have the project management skills or the knowledge of the risk management process, but they may not have the accountability or the ownership of the risk or its outcomes. The individual with the most IT risk-related subject matter knowledge may have the technical expertise or the understanding of the risk and its causes, but they may not have the decision-making power or the responsibility to manage the risk or its controls. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 822

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the information and status of the identified risks and their responses. It includes the risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, priority, response, owner, action plan, status, etc.

A risk scenario is a description or representation of a possible or hypothetical situation or event that may cause or result in a risk for the organization. A risk scenario usually consists of three elements: a threat or source of harm, a vulnerability or weakness, and an impact or consequence.

Multiple risk practitioners are the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the identification, analysis, evaluation, and communication of the risks and their responses. They may include the risk owners, risk managers, risk analysts, risk consultants, risk auditors, etc.

A single risk register is a risk register that is shared or used by multiple risk practitioners across the organization, and that contains the information and status of all the risks and their responses that are relevant or applicable to the organization.

The most important consideration when multiple risk practitioners capture risk scenarios in a single risk register is using a consistent method for risk assessment, which is the process of determining the significance and urgency of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Risk assessment involves measuring and comparing the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their magnitude and importance.

Using a consistent method for risk assessment when multiple risk practitioners capture risk scenarios in a single risk register ensures that the risk scenarios are captured and recorded in a uniform and standardized way, and that they are comparable and compatible with each other. It alsohelps to avoid or reduce the inconsistencies, discrepancies, or conflicts that may arise from the different perspectives, assumptions, or judgments of the multiple risk practitioners, and to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and validity of the risk register.

The other options are not the most important considerations when multiple risk practitioners capture risk scenarios in a single risk register, because they do not address the main challenge or issue that may arise from the multiple risk practitioners capturing risk scenarios in a single risk register, which is the lack of consistency or standardization in the risk assessment method.

Aligning risk ownership and control ownership means ensuring that the individuals or groups that are accountable and responsible for the risks and their responses are clearly defined and assigned, and that they have the authority and resources to perform their roles and duties. Aligning risk ownership and control ownership is important when multiple risk practitioners capture risk scenarios in a single risk register, but it is not the most important consideration, because it does not ensure that the risk scenarios are captured and recorded in a uniform and standardized way, and that they are comparable and compatible with each other.

Developing risk escalation and reporting procedures means establishing and implementing the processes and guidelines for communicating and sharing the information and status of the risks and their responses among the relevant stakeholders, and for escalating or transferring the risks and their responses to the appropriate levels or parties when necessary or required. Developing risk escalation and reporting procedures is important when multiple risk practitioners capture risk scenarios in a single risk register, but it is not the most important consideration, because it does not ensure that the risk scenarios are captured and recorded in a uniform and standardized way, and that they are comparable and compatible with each other.

Maintaining up-to-date risk treatment plans means updating and revising the actions or plans that are selected and implemented to address or correct the risks and their responses, based on the changes or developments that may occur in the risk environment or performance. Maintaining up-to-date risk treatment plans is important when multiple risk practitioners capture risk scenarios in a single risk register, but it is not the most important consideration, because it does not ensure that the risk scenarios are captured and recorded in a uniform and standardized way, and that they are comparable and compatible with each other. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 178

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The security risk associated with wearable technology in the workplace is the possibility and impact of unauthorized access, disclosure, or use of the data or information that are collected, stored, or transmitted by the wearable devices, such as smartwatches, fitness trackers, or glasses, that are worn or used by the employees12.

The first step in managing the security risk associated with wearable technology in the workplace is to identify the potential risk, which is the process of recognizing and describing the sources,causes, and consequences of the risk, and the potential impacts on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation34.

Identifying the potential risk is the first step because it provides the basis and input for the subsequent steps of the risk management process, such as assessing, treating, monitoring, and communicating the risk34.

Identifying the potential risk is also the first step because it enables the organization to understand and prioritize the risk, and to allocate the appropriate resources and controls for the risk management process34.

The other options are not the first step, but rather possible subsequent steps that may depend on or follow the identification of the potential risk. For example:

Monitoring employee usage is a step that involves collecting and analyzing data and information on the frequency, duration, and purpose of the wearable devices that are used by the employees, and detecting and reporting any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate a security risk5 . However, this step is not the first step because it requires theidentification of the potential risk to provide the guidance and standards for the monitoring process5 .

Assessing the potential risk is a step that involves estimating and evaluating the likelihood and impact of the risk, and the level of risk exposure or tolerance for the organization34. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the identification of the potential risk to provide the information and data for the assessment process34.

Developing risk awareness training is a step that involves educating and training the employees and other stakeholders on the security risks and best practices associated with the wearable technology, and informing them of their roles, obligations, and responsibilities for the risk management process . However, this step is not the first step because it requires the identification of the potential risk to provide the content and objectives for the training process . References =

1: Wearable Devices in the Workplace: Security Threats and Protection1

2: 10 security risks of wearables | CSO Online2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

4: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

5: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA3

Continuous Monitoring: A New Approach to Risk Management - ISACA Journal4

What Is Security Awareness Training and Why Is It Important? - Kaspersky5

Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US

The average time to provision user accounts is the most useful indicator to measure the efficiency of an identity and access management (IAM) process, because it reflects how quickly and smoothly the process can grant access to the appropriate users. The average time to provision user accounts can be calculated by dividing the total time spent on provisioning user accounts by the number of user accounts provisioned in a given period. A lower average time indicates a more efficient IAM process, as it means that users can access the resources they need without unnecessary delays or errors. A higher average time may indicate problems or bottlenecks in the IAM process, such as manual steps, complex workflows, lack of automation, or insufficient resources. The average time to provision user accounts can also be compared across different applications, systems, or business units to identify areas for improvement or best practices. The other options are less useful indicators to measure the efficiency of an IAM process. The number of tickets for provisioning new accounts shows the demand for the IAM process, but not how well the process meets the demand. The password reset volume per month shows the frequency of password-related issues, but not how effectively the IAM process handles them. The average account lockout time shows the impact of account lockouts on user productivity, but not how efficiently the IAM process prevents or resolves them. References = Top Identity and Access Management Metrics 

Detailed Explanation:A data classification program helpsidentify appropriate controlsby categorizing data based on sensitivity and criticality. This ensures that data protection measures are aligned with its value and risk level, improving overall security posture.

A third-party security assessment report is the most helpful to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider, because it provides an independent and objective evaluation of the cloud provider’s security posture, policies, and practices. A third-party security assessment report can help to verify and validate the cloud provider’s compliance with the relevant standards, regulations, and best practices, such as ISO 27001, PCI DSS, NIST, or CSA. A third-party security assessment report can also help to identify and address any gaps, weaknesses, or vulnerabilities in the cloud provider’s security controls, and to provide recommendations and guidance for improvement. A third-party security assessment report can also help to increase the trust and confidence of the cloud customers, and to facilitate the due diligence and risk management processes. The other options are less helpful to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider. A control self-assessment is a process that enables the cloud provider to assess its own security controls, using a predefined framework or questionnaire. However, a control self-assessment may not be as reliable or comprehensive as a third-party security assessment report, as it may be biased, incomplete, or inaccurate, and it may not cover all the aspects or dimensions of security. Internal audit reports from the vendor are documents that provide the results and findings of the internal audits conducted by the cloud provider’s own auditors, to verify and validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the securitycontrols. However, internal audit reports from the vendor may not be as credible or trustworthy as a third-party security assessment report, as they may be influenced by the cloud provider’s interests, objectives, or agenda, and they may not follow the same standards or criteria as the external auditors. Service level agreement monitoring is a process that measures and evaluates the performance and availability of the cloud services, based on the predefined metrics and targets agreed between the cloud provider and the cloud customer. However, service level agreement monitoring may not be sufficient or relevant to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider, as it may not address the security aspects or requirements of the cloud services, such as confidentiality, integrity, or accountability, and it may not reflect the actual security risks or incidents that may occur in the cloud environment. References = Cloud Security Controls: Key Elements and 4 Control Frameworks 1

The control environment is the set of internal and external factors and conditions that influence and shape the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. It includes the organization’s culture, values, ethics, structure, roles, responsibilities, policies, standards, etc.

Uncontrolled changes are changes or modifications to the control environment that are not planned, authorized, documented, or monitored, and that may have unintended or adverse consequences for the organization. Uncontrolled changes may be caused by various drivers or events, such as technological innovations, market trends, regulatory changes, customer preferences, competitor actions, environmental issues, etc.

The greatest concern when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment is an increase in the level of residual risk, which is the amount and type of risk that remains after the implementation and execution of the risk responses or controls. An increase in the level of residual risk means that the risk responses or controls are not effective or sufficient to mitigate or prevent the risks, and that the organization may face unacceptable or intolerable consequences if the risks materialize.

An increase in the level of residual risk is the greatest concern when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment, because it indicates that the organization’s risk profile and performance have deteriorated, and that the organization may not be able to achieve its objectives or protect its value. It also indicates that the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance have been violated, and that the organization may need to take corrective or compensating actions to restore the balance between risk and return.

The other options are not the greatest concerns when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment, because they do not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the organization.

A decrease in control layering effectiveness means a decrease in the extent or degree to which the organization uses multiple or overlapping controls to address the same or related risks, and to provide redundancy or backup in case of failure or compromise of one or more controls. A decrease in control layering effectiveness may indicate a weakness or gap in the organization’s control design or implementation, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the control layering is required or recommended by the organization’s policies or standards.

An increase in inherent risk means an increase in the amount and type of risk that exists in the absence of any risk responses or controls, and that is inherent to the nature or characteristics of the risk source, event, cause, or impact. An increase in inherent risk may indicate a change or variation in the organization’s risk exposure or level, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the inherent risk exceeds the organization’s risk appetite or tolerance.

An increase in control vulnerabilities means an increase in the number or severity of the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s risk responses or controls that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. An increase in control vulnerabilities may indicate a weakness or gap in the organization’s control design or implementation, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the control vulnerabilities are exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 174

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying controls to mitigate the inherent risk. Inherent risk is the risk that exists before considering the controls. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the level and impact of risks. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. The failure of the data loss prevention (DLP) system to detect outgoing emails containing credit card data would most impact the residual risk, because it would increase the likelihood and impact of data leakage, data loss, and data exfiltration incidents. These incidents could cause financial, reputational, legal, and regulatory damages to the organization. The failure of the DLP system would also affect the KRIs, as they would show a higher level of risk exposure and a lower level of control effectiveness. However, the KRIs are not the risk itself, but rather the indicators of the risk. The failure of the DLP system would not directly impact the inherent risk or the risk appetite, as they are independent of the controls. The inherent risk would remain the same, as it is based on the nature and value of the data and the threats and vulnerabilities that exist. The risk appetite would also remain the same, as it is based on the organization’s culture, strategy, and stakeholder expectations. Therefore, the most impacted factor would be the residual risk, as it reflects the actual risk level that the organization faces after applying the controls. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

A risk assessment is a process of measuring and comparing the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their significance and urgency. A risk assessment can help the organization to understand and document the risks that may affect its objectives and operations, and to support the decision making and planning for the risk management.

Performing a risk assessment would be the most helpful to understand the impact of a new technology system on an organization’s current risk profile, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:

What are the potential benefits and challenges of implementing the new technology system, and how do they align with the organization’s objectives and needs?

What are the existing or emerging risks that may affect the new technology system, and how do they relate to the organization’s current risk profile?

How likely and severe are the risks that may affect the new technology system, and what are the possible consequences or impacts for the organization and its stakeholders?

How can the risks that may affect the new technology system be mitigated or prevented, and what are the available or feasible options or solutions?

Performing a risk assessment can help the organization to understand the impact of the new technology system on its current risk profile by providing the following benefits:

It can enable the comparison and evaluation of the current and desired state and performance of the organization’s risk management function, and to identify and quantify the gaps or opportunities for improvement.

It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the alignment and integration of the new technology system with the organization’s risk management function, and for the compliance with the organization’s risk policies and standards.

It can support the implementation and monitoring of the new technology system, and for the allocation and optimization of the resources, time, and budget for the new technology system.

The other options are not the most helpful to understand the impact of a new technology system on an organization’s current risk profile, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that performing a risk assessment provides, and they may not be specific or applicable to the organization’s objectives and needs.

Hiring consultants specializing in the new technology means engaging or contracting external experts or professionals that have the skills and knowledge on the new technology system, and that can provide advice or guidance on the implementation and management of the new technology system. Hiring consultants specializing in the new technology can help the organization to enhance its competence and performance on the new technology system, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not measure and compare the likelihood and impact of the risks that may affect the new technology system, and it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization’s current risk profile.

Reviewing existing risk mitigation controls means examining and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls or countermeasures that are intended to reduce or eliminate the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Reviewing existing risk mitigation controls can help the organization to improve and optimize its risk management function, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not identify and prioritize the risks that may affect the new technology system, and it may not cover all the relevant or significant risks that may affect the new technology system.

Conducting a gap analysis means comparing and contrasting the current and desired state and performance of the organization’s objectives and operations, and identifying and quantifying the gaps or differences that need to be addressed or corrected. Conducting a gap analysis can help the organization to identify and document its improvement needs and opportunities, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not measure and compare the likelihood and impact of the risks that may affect the new technology system, and it may not be aligned or integrated with the organization’s current risk profile. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 208

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Risk exposure is the potential loss or negative impact that may result from a risk. Expressing risk exposure in business terms means translating the technical or quantitative aspects of risk into meaningful and understandable information for the risk owner and other stakeholders. This can help the risk owner to make risk-aware decisions, as it can provide a clear and consistent basis for comparing and prioritizing risks, evaluating the cost-benefit of risk responses, and aligning the risk management strategy with the business objectives and value. The other options are not as helpful as risk exposure expressed in business terms, because they do not provide a comprehensive and relevant view of the risk, but rather focus on specific or partial aspects of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 45.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks.

The most important factor to the effective monitoring of KRIs is determining threshold levels. This means that the acceptable or unacceptable values or ranges of the KRIs are defined and agreed upon by the relevant stakeholders.

Determining threshold levels helps to evaluate the actual performance and impact of the risks, compare them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identify any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and report them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.

The other options are not the most important factors to the effective monitoring of KRIs. They are either secondary or not essential for KRIs.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

 The effectiveness of an employee deprovisioning process can be measured by the number of days taken to remove access after staff separation dates, as this indicates how quickly and completely the organisation can revoke the privileges of former employees and reduce the risk of unauthorized access or data leakage. The number of days taken for IT to remove access after receipt of HR instructions is a measure of the efficiency of the IT department, but not the overall process. The number of termination requests processed per reporting period is a measure of the volume of the process, but not the quality or timeliness. The number of days taken for HR to provide instructions to IT after staff separation dates is a measure of the performance of the HR department, but not the entire process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 152.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk nomenclature and taxonomy is the set of terms and definitions that are used to describe and classify risks and their attributes. Risk nomenclature and taxonomy is the most important consideration when aligning IT risk management with the enterprise risk management (ERM) framework, as it helps to ensure a common and consistent understanding and communication of risks across the organization. Risk nomenclature and taxonomy also helps to integrate and harmonize the IT risk management processes and activities with the ERM framework, and to facilitatethe aggregation and reporting of risks at different levels of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 197.

The most important input when developing risk scenarios is the business objectives, as they provide the context and scope for the risk identification and analysis process. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the possible causes, events, and consequences of a risk. Risk scenarios help to understand and communicate the nature and impact of the risk, and to support the risk assessment and response planning. The business objectives are the goals and targets that the organization wants to achieve through its processes, functions, and projects. The business objectives define the expected outcomes and performance of the organization, and the criteria for measuring and evaluating the success or failure of the organization. The business objectives also reflect the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, and the needs and expectations of the stakeholders. The other options are not the most important inputs when developing risk scenarios, although they may be useful or relevant information. Key performance indicators are metrics that measure and monitor the progress and achievement of the business objectives, but they do not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. The organization’s risk framework is the set of principles, policies, and processes that guide and support the risk management activities across the organization, but it does not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. Risk appetite is the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or avoid in pursuit of its business objectives, but it does not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 58.

The first factor that should be considered when assessing risk associated with the adoption of emerging technologies is the organizational strategy. The organizational strategy defines the vision, mission, goals, and objectives of the enterprise, and provides the direction and guidance for its activities and decisions. The adoption of emerging technologies should be aligned with the organizational strategy, and support its achievement and performance. The organizational strategy also helps to determine the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise, and the criteria for evaluating the risks and benefits of the emerging technologies. Cost-benefit analysis, control self-assessment, and business requirements are also important factors to consider when assessing risk associated with the adoption of emerging technologies, but they are not the first factor to consider. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1.1, page 181

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 656.

Classifying information assets is a process of identifying and categorizing the data and information resources that are owned, controlled, or used by an organization, based on their value, sensitivity, and criticality.

Classifying information assets helps to determine the appropriate level of control that is needed to protect them from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction. Control level refers to the degree of protection or assurance that a control provides against a risk.

Classifying information assets also helps to communicate risk to senior management, assign risk ownership, and facilitate internal audit. These are other benefits of risk management that are not directly related to determining the appropriate level of control.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 11

Information Technology & Security, page 5

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 3

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks.

Reviewing KRIs is the most helpful way to determine the effectiveness of an organization’s IT risk mitigation efforts. This means that the organization monitors and evaluates the actual results and outcomes of the risk responses, compares them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identifies any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and reports them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.

The other options are not the most helpful ways to determine the effectiveness of an organization’s IT risk mitigation efforts. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

Defining risk response options is performed after a risk assessment is completed. A risk assessment is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that affect the enterprise’s objectives and operations. After a risk assessment is completed, the enterprise needs to define the risk response options, which are the actions that can be taken to address the risks. The risk response options include accepting, avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or exploiting the risks. Defining risk response options helps to select the most appropriate and effective strategy to manage the risks. Defining risk taxonomy, identifying vulnerabilities, and conducting an impact analysis are performed before or during a risk assessment, not after. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.4, page 541

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 644.

A risk owner should be the person accountable for the business process that is affected by the risk, as they have the authority, responsibility, and knowledge to manage the risk effectively. The risk owner should collaborate with the risk practitioner, who facilitates the risk management process, and the risk action owners, who implement the risk response actions. The risk owner should also ensure that the controls are adequate and functioning properly to mitigate the risk. The other options are not the best description of what a risk owner should be accountable for, as they are either too broad (the risk management process), too narrow (managing controls or implementing actions), or not directly related to the risk (the business process). References = Why Assigning a Risk Owner is Important and How to Do It Right; Definition of Risk Owner; What Is a Risk Owner in Project Management?

The risk scenario chart shows the initial and residual risk ratings, and the project cost, for four projects named Sierra, Tango, Uniform, and Victor. The initial risk rating is the level of risk before applying any controls or mitigation measures, while the residual risk rating is the level of risk after applying the controls or measures. The project cost is the amount of resources required to implement the project. These three factors can be used to determine the relative positions of the projects on a risk map, which is a graphical tool for displaying the risks based on their impact and likelihood. The risk map can help to prioritize and compare the risks, and to select the most appropriate risk response strategy. The other options are not the best answers, as they are not directly shown or derived from the risk scenario chart. The risk treatment options are the possible actions that can be taken to address the risks, such as accept, avoid, mitigate, or transfer. The capability of enterprise to implement is the ability of the organization to execute the risk response plan,considering the available resources, skills, and constraints. The multiple risk factors addressed by a chosen response are the various elements that contribute to or affect the risk, such as the threat sources, events, vulnerabilities, assets, and impacts. These factors are not explicitly stated or measured in the risk scenario chart, and may require further analysis or information. References = How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA; Identifying the Right Risk Scenarios to Measure with FAIR; How to write good risk scenarios and statements

 According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the business owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the achievement of the business objectives and the management of the associated risks. The business owner is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the IT services and solutions support the business needs and goals, and for accepting or rejecting the residual risks after the implementation of risk responses. Therefore, the business owner should own the risk associated with calculation errors, as they are the ones who will be affected by the potential impact of the errors on the financial data and decisions. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 194.

 The most likely cause for a risk practitioner to reassess risk scenarios is a change in the regulatory environment. A regulatory environment is the set of laws, rules, and standards that apply to an organization and its activities, such as data privacy, security, compliance, or governance. A change in the regulatory environment can occur due to various factors, such as new legislation, court rulings, enforcement actions, or industry trends. A change in the regulatory environment can affect the risk scenarios that the organization faces, as it may introduce new or modified risks, or alter the probability or impact of existing risks. For example, a new regulation may require the organization to implement additional or different controls, or to report or disclose more information, which may increase the cost, complexity, or vulnerability of the organization’s processes and systems. A change in the regulatory environment may also affect the risk appetite, tolerance, and capacity of the organization, as it may impose different requirements or expectations for the organization’s risk management performance and outcomes. Therefore, a risk practitioner should reassess the risk scenarios when there is a change in the regulatory environment, to ensure that the risk scenarios are accurate, complete, and relevant, and that the risk response strategies and plans are appropriate, effective, and compliant. The other options are not the most likely cause, although they may be related or influential to the risk scenarios. A change in the risk management policy is a change in the rules and guidelines that define how the organization manages its risks, such as the roles and responsibilities, the processes and procedures, the tools and techniques, or the reporting and communication. A change in the risk management policy can affect the risk scenarios, as it may change the way the organization identifies, analyzes, evaluates, and responds to the risks, but it does not directly create or modify the risks themselves. A major security incident is an event or situation that compromises the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the organization’s information or systems, such as a data breach, a denial-of-service attack, or a ransomware infection. A major security incident can affect the risk scenarios, as it may indicate or reveal the existence or severity of the risks, or trigger or escalate the consequences of the risks, but it is not a cause, rather it is an effect of the risks. An increase in intrusion attempts is an increase in the frequency or intensity of the unauthorized or malicious attempts to access or exploit the organization’s information or systems, such as phishing, malware, or brute-force attacks. An increase in intrusion attempts can affect the risk scenarios, as it may increase the likelihood or impact of the risks, or expose or exacerbate the vulnerabilities of the organization’s processes and systems, but it is not a cause, rather it is a manifestation of the risks. References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA, How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA, The Impact of Regulatory Change on Business - Deloitte

 According to the 10 Tips for Secure Online Transactions - SmartAsset article, multi-factor authentication is a security measure that requires users to provide more than one piece of evidence to verify their identity when logging in to an online account. For example, users may need to enter a password and a code sent to their phone or email, or use a biometric feature such as a fingerprint or a face scan. Multi-factor authentication can help secure online financial transactions from improper users, as it makes it harder for hackers to access the account even if they have the password. Multi-factor authentication can also alertusers to any suspicious login attempts and prevent unauthorized transactions. References = 10 Tips for Secure Online Transactions - SmartAsset

The most effective way to limit the impact of a ransomware attack is to have data backups. Data backups are copies of the data that are stored in a separate location or device, and can be used to restore the data in case of a loss or corruption. Data backups can help to recover the data that is encrypted or deleted by the ransomware, and to avoid paying the ransom to the attackers. Data backups also help to reduce the downtime and disruption caused by the ransomware attack, and to maintain the business continuity and availability of the data. Cyber insurance, cryptocurrency reserve, and end user training are not the most effective ways to limit the impact of a ransomware attack, as they may not prevent or recover the data loss, and may incur additional costs or risks for the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.1.1.1, page 2281

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 657.

The greatest concern associated with the transmission of healthcare data across the internet is unencrypted data, as this exposes the data to unauthorized access, interception, modification, or disclosure, which may compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data. Healthcare data is sensitive and personal information that may include medical records, diagnoses, treatments, prescriptions, insurance claims, and biometric data. Healthcare data is subject to various legal and regulatory requirements, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States, that mandate the protection and privacy of the data. Encryption is a method of transforming the data into an unreadable format that can only be accessed or restored by authorized parties who have the decryption key. Encryption helps to prevent or reduce the risk of data breaches, identity theft, fraud, or other malicious attacks. The other options are not the greatest concerns associated with the transmission of healthcare data across the internet, although they may pose some challenges or issues. Lack of redundant circuits is a concern for the reliability and continuity of the data transmission, but it does notaffect the security or privacy of the data. Low bandwidth connections is a concern for the speed and efficiency of the data transmission, but it does not affect the security or privacy of the data. Data integrity is a concern for the accuracy and completeness of the data, but it does not necessarily depend on the encryption of the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 156.

 The BEST way to enable mitigation of newly identified risk factors related to internet of Things (loT) is to introduce control procedures early in the life cycle, because it can help to prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk factors, and to ensure that the loT devices and systems are designed and developed with security and quality in mind. The control procedures should include requirements analysis, design review, testing, validation, and verification of the loT devices and systems. The other options are not as effective as introducing control procedures early in the life cycle, because:

Option B: Implementing loT device software monitoring is a good way to detect and respond to the risk factors related to loT, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors, which is the proactive and preventive approach. Software monitoring is a reactive and corrective measure that may not be able to prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk factors, especially if they are embedded in the hardware or firmware of the loT devices.

Option C: Performing periodic risk assessments of loT is a necessary way to identify and evaluate the risk factors related to loT, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors, which is the action-oriented and solution-focused approach. Risk assessment is an analytical and descriptive process that may not provide the specific and effective measures to address or mitigate the risk factors, especially if they are complex or dynamic.

Option D: Performing secure code reviews is a useful way to verify and improve the security and quality of the software of the loT devices and systems, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors related to loT, which may involve more than just the software aspect. The risk factors related to loT may also include the hardware, firmware, network, communication, data, and integration aspects, which may not be covered or resolved by the code reviews. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 214.

The programming project leader solely reviewing test results before approving the transfer to production would be a weakness in procedures for controlling the migration of changes to production libraries, because it violates the principle of segregation of duties, and it exposes the production libraries to the risk of unauthorized or erroneous changes. The programming project leader is responsible for developing and testing the changes, but not for approving and deploying them. The approval and deployment of the changes should be done by an independent and authorized party, such as the change control board or the operations manager. The other options are not weaknesses, but rather good practices, because:

Option B: Test and production programs being in distinct libraries is a good practice, because it prevents the accidental or intentional overwriting or mixing of the test and production programs, and it ensures the integrity and security of the production libraries.

Option C: Only operations personnel being authorized to access production libraries is a good practice, because it restricts the access and modification of the production libraries to the qualified and accountable staff, and it prevents the unauthorized or inappropriate access or modification of the production libraries by other parties.

Option D: A synchronized migration of executable and source code from the test environment to the production environment being allowed is a good practice, because it ensures the consistency and completeness of the changes, and it avoids the potential errors or discrepancies that may arise from the manual or partial migration of the changes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 215.

When updating a risk register with the results of an IT risk assessment, the risk practitioner should log the known risk scenarios, because they are the risk scenarios that have been identified and assessed in the IT risk assessment process. The risk register should document and track the known risk scenarios, their characteristics, their status, and their responses. The other options are not the ones that should be logged, because:

Option A: High impact scenarios are the risk scenarios that have a high potential impact on the business objectives and processes, but they are not the only ones that should be logged. The risk register should include all the known risk scenarios, regardless of their impact level.

Option B: High likelihood scenarios are the risk scenarios that have a high probability of occurrence, but they are not the only ones that should be logged. The risk register should include all the known risk scenarios, regardless of their likelihood level.

Option C: Treated risk scenarios are the risk scenarios that have been addressed by the risk response actions, but they are not the only ones that should be logged. The risk register should include all the known risk scenarios, regardless of their treatment status. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 108.

The best risk response for an identified high probability risk scenario involving a critical, proprietary business function with an annualized cost of control higher than the annual loss expectancy is to accept the risk. Accepting the risk means acknowledging the risk but choosing not to take any specific action to address it. This strategy is suitable when the cost of implementing controls exceeds the potential loss, as in this scenario. The organization recognizes the risk, but the cost-benefit analysis suggests that the potential loss is acceptable given the higher cost of control. The other options are not the best risk responses, as they may not be feasible, practical, or cost-effective in this scenario. Mitigating the risk means reducing the risk by implementing controls or measures to minimize its potential impact, but this would increase the cost of control, which is already higher than the annual loss expectancy. Transferring the risk means shifting the risk to another party, typically through insurance or contracts, but this may not be possible or advisable for a critical, proprietary business function, and it may also increase the overall cost burden. Avoiding the risk means eliminating the risk entirely by not engaging in the activity that poses the risk, but this may disrupt essential business operations and potentially result in other adverse consequences. References = CRISC Exam: Best Risk Response for High Probability Risk Scenario; Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips; Chapter 19: Summarizing Risk Management Concepts

 A business impact analysis (BIA) is the most helpful tool to management when determining the resources needed to mitigate a risk. A BIA is a process of identifying and evaluating the potential effects of disruptions or incidents on the critical functions and processes of an organization. A BIA helps to estimate the financial, operational, and reputational impacts of risks, as well as the recovery time objectives and recovery point objectives for each function and process. A BIA also helps to prioritize the functions and processes based on their importance and urgency, and to allocate the resources needed to protect, restore,and resume them. A BIA can provide valuable information to management for developing and implementing risk mitigation strategies and plans. The other options are not the most helpful tools to management when determining the resources needed to mitigate a risk, although they may be useful or complementary to the BIA. An internal audit is a process of evaluating and improving the effectiveness of the governance, risk management, and control systems of an organization, but it does not directly estimate the impacts of risks or the resources needed to mitigate them. A heat map is a graphical tool that displays the probability and impact of individual risks in a matrix format, but it does not provide the details of the functions and processes affected by the risks or the resources needed to protect them. A vulnerability report is a document that identifies and assesses the security weaknesses in an information system, but it does not measure the impacts of risks or the resources needed to mitigate them. References = Business Impact Analysis (BIA) | Ready.gov, Business Impact Analysis - ISACA, Business Impact Analysis - Risk Management from MindTools.com

Mapping granular scenarios to high-level register items ensures consistency and alignment across different levels of risk management. This approach supportsIntegrated Risk Management Frameworks.

After migrating a key financial system to a new provider, it was discovered that a developer could gain access to the production environment. This indicates that there is a risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction of sensitive data, such as financial records, transactions, reports, etc.

A control that could mitigate this risk is to remove the developer’s access to the production environment. This means that the developer would not be able to alter the source code or configuration of the financial system without proper authorization or approval.

The other options are not the best ways to mitigate the risk in this situation. They are either irrelevant or less effective than removing the developer’s access.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 14

Information Technology & Security, page 8

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 6

A risk heat map is the best tool to enable senior management to compare the ratings of risk scenarios, as it provides a visual representation of the risk level and priority of each risk scenario, based on the combination of the likelihood and impact ratings, and the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. Key risk indicators (KRIs), key performance indicators (KPIs), and control self-assessment (CSA) are not the best tools, as they are more related to the measurement, monitoring, or testing of the risk scenarios, respectively, rather than the comparison of the risk scenarios. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), establishing an organizational code of conduct is an example of a directive control, which is a type of control that guides or steers the behavior of individuals or processes to achieve desired outcomes. A directive control aims to influence or encourage compliance with the organization’s policies, standards, procedures, and guidelines. A directive control can also communicate the organization’s values, ethics, and expectations to its stakeholders. A directive control can take various forms, such as:

Codes of conduct or ethics

Policies or manuals

Training or awareness programs

Job descriptions or roles and responsibilities

Performance appraisals or incentives

Supervision or oversight

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Scenarios, pp. 105-1061

To reduce risk impact, the best course of action is to implement corrective measures, which are actions taken to eliminate or minimize the negative effects of a risk event after it has occurred12.

Corrective measures can include restoring normal operations, repairing or replacing damaged assets, recovering lost data, compensating affected stakeholders, and implementing lessons learned12.

Corrective measures can reduce risk impact by minimizing the duration, severity, and scope of the consequences of a risk event, as well as preventing recurrence or escalation of similar risks in the future12.

The other options are not the best course of action to reduce risk impact, but rather different types of risk responses that may have different objectives and effects. For example:

Creating an IT security policy is an example of a preventive measure, which is an action taken to avoid or reduce the likelihood of a risk event before it occurs12. A preventive measure can reduce risk exposure, but not risk impact.

Implementing detective controls is an example of a monitoring measure, which is an action taken to identify and measure the occurrence or status of a risk event during or after it occurs12. A monitoring measure can provide timely information and feedback, but not reduce risk impact.

Leveraging existing technology is an example of a mitigation measure, which is an action taken to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk event before it occurs12. A mitigation measure can reduce risk exposure, but not necessarily risk impact. References =

1: Risk Management Guide for Information Technology Systems, NIST Special Publication 800-30, July 2002

2: Project Risk Management Handbook, California Department of Transportation, June 2011

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the information and status of the identified risks and their responses. It includes the risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, priority, response, owner, action plan, status, etc.

A risk register update is a change or modification to the information or status of the risks and their responses in the risk register. It may be triggered by the occurrence or resolution of a risk event, the identification or evaluation of a new or emerging risk, the implementation or completion of a risk response, the monitoring or review of the risk performance, etc.

The most important risk register update for senior management to review is avoiding a risk that was previously accepted, which means that the organization has decided to eliminate or withdraw from the risk exposure or activity that may cause the risk, instead of tolerating or retaining the risk as before. This may indicate a significant change in the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, objectives, or environment, and it may have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value.

The other options are not the most important risk register updates for senior management to review, because they do not indicate a significant change or impact on the organization’s risk profile or performance.

Extending the date of a future action plan by two months means that the organization has postponed the implementation or completion of the planned actions or measures to address the risk, due to some reasons or constraints. This may indicate a delay or deviation from the expected or desired risk outcome, but it may not have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value, unless the risk is very urgent or critical.

Retiring a risk scenario no longer used means that the organization has removed or discarded the risk scenario that is no longer relevant or applicable to the organization’s objectives or operations, due to some changes or developments. This may indicate a reduction or improvement in the organization’s risk exposure or level, but it may not have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value, unless the risk scenario was very significant or influential.

Changing a risk owner means that the organization has assigned or transferred the responsibility and accountability for the risk and its response to a different person or role, due to some reasons or circumstances. This may indicate a change or improvement in the organization’s risk governance or culture, but it may not have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value, unless the risk owner was very ineffective or inappropriate. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 160

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator is a security risk that involves altering, deleting, or inserting data on a database without proper authorization or approval, by a person who has privileged access to the database, such as a database administrator12.

The best control to detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator is to review database activity logs, which are records that capture and store the details and history of the transactions or activities that are performed on the database, such as who, what, when, where, and how34.

Reviewing database activity logs is the best control because it provides evidence and visibility of the database operations, and enables the detection and reporting of any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator34.

Reviewing database activity logs is also the best control because it supports the accountability and auditability of the database operations, and facilitates the investigation and resolution of any unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator34.

The other options are not the best controls, but rather possible measures or techniques that may supplement or enhance the review of database activity logs. For example:

Reviewing database access rights is a measure that involves verifying and validating the permissions and privileges that are granted or revoked to the users or roles who can access or modify the data on the database56. However, this measure is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the database administrator has legitimate access rights to the data56.

Comparing data to input records is a technique that involves matching and reconciling the data on the database with the original or source data that are entered or imported into the database, and identifying and correcting any discrepancies or errors78. However, this technique is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the input records are also modified or compromised78.

Reviewing changes to edit checks is a technique that involves examining and evaluating the modifications or updates to the edit checks, which are rules or validations that are applied to the data on the database to ensure their accuracy, completeness, andconsistency9 . However, this technique is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the edit checks are bypassed or disabled9 . References =

1: Database Security: Attacks and Solutions | SpringerLink2

2: Unauthorised Modification of Data With Intent to Cause Impairment3

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia4

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva5

5: Database Access Control - Wikipedia6

6: Database Access Control: Best Practices for Database Security7

7: Data Reconciliation - Wikipedia8

8: Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection9

9: Edit Check - Wikipedia

Edit Checks: A Data Quality Tool

The most appropriate action for the risk manager to take after undertaking a risk assessment of a production system is to inform the process owner of the concerns and propose measures to reduce them, as the process owner has the authority and responsibility to manage the production system and its associated risks and controls, and to decide on the optimal risk response. Recommending a program that minimizes the concerns of that production system, informing the IT manager of the concerns and proposing measures to reduce them, and informing the development team of the concerns and together formulating risk reduction measures are not the most appropriate actions, as they may not involve the process owner, who is the key stakeholder and decision maker for the production system and its risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

 Understanding the Question:

The question seeks to identify which source provides the most useful information for evaluating the effectiveness of existing controls.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Previous audit reports:Provide historical data but might not reflect current risks.

B. Control objectives:These are standards to be achieved, not current evaluations.

C. Risk responses in the risk register:Useful but focused on specific responses rather than overall effectiveness.

D. Changes in risk profiles:Reflect current and emerging risks, providing a dynamic view of control effectiveness.

 Detailed Explanation:

Risk Profiles:Evaluating changes in risk profiles helps understand how effective existing controls are against current threats. If risk levels are increasing, it may indicate that controls are insufficient or need updating.

Proactive Adjustment:By monitoring changes in risk profiles, organizations can proactively adjust their controls to address new or evolving risks.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, discusses the importance of evaluating risk profiles to assess control effectiveness​​.

= Change management is the process of planning, implementing, and monitoring changes to IT systems, services, or infrastructure in a controlled and coordinated manner1. Change management controls are the policies, procedures, and tools that ensure changes are authorized, documented, tested, and reviewed before they are deployed to the production environment2.

Change-related exceptions are the deviations or violations from the established change management controls, such as unauthorized, untested, or failed changes3. Change-related exceptions pose a high risk to theorganization, as they can cause system instability, performance degradation, security breaches, data loss, or compliance issues3.

An increase in change-related exceptions per month would be the greatest concern for an IT risk practitioner, as it indicates a lack of effectiveness, efficiency, or compliance of the change management process and controls. An increase in change-related exceptions per month could result from:

Poor change planning, prioritization, or scheduling

Insufficient change approval, review, or communication

Inadequate change testing, validation, or verification

Lack of change monitoring, reporting, or auditing

Low change awareness, training, or support

An IT risk practitioner should investigate the root causes of the increase in change-related exceptions per month, and recommend corrective and preventive actions to improve the change management process and controls, such as:

Aligning the change management process with the organization’s goals, strategies, and risk appetite

Implementing a standardized and consistent change management methodology, such as ITIL or COBIT

Defining clear roles and responsibilities for change management stakeholders, such as change owners, change managers, change advisory boards, change implementers, and change users

Establishing clear and measurable criteria and thresholds for change authorization, classification, and evaluation

Leveraging tools and technologies to automate and streamline the change management process and controls, such as change management software, configuration management databases, or change management dashboards

Enhancing the change management culture and capabilities, such as change management awareness, training, support, or feedback

The other options are not as concerning as an increase in change-related exceptions per month, because they do not directly imply a risk to the organization’s IT systems, services, or infrastructure. Rolled backchanges below management’s thresholds, which are the changes that are reversed or undone due to errors, defects, or issues, may indicate a need for improvement in the change testing, validation, or verification processes, but they do not necessarily cause harm or damage to the production environment, as long as they are within the acceptable limits set by the management. The average implementation time for changes, which is the duration of the change deployment process, may affect the organization’s agility, efficiency, or productivity, but it does not necessarily compromise the quality, security, or reliability of the changes, as long as they are implemented according to the change management controls. The number of user stories approved for implementation, which are the requirements or features that are expressed from the perspective of the end users, may reflect the organization’s demand, innovation, or customer satisfaction, but it does not necessarily increase the risk of the changes, as long as they are managed and controlled by the change management process.

References = What is Change Management? | ITIL | AXELOS, Change Management Controls: Definition, Types, and Best Practices, Change Management Exceptions: Definition, Causes, and Impacts, ITIL Change Management: Best Practices & Processes - BMC Software, COBIT 2019: Change Enablement

 The best course of action for a risk practitioner upon learning that a control under internal review may no longer be necessary is to obtain approval to retire the control. This will help to ensure that the control is removed in a controlled and documented manner, and that the relevant stakeholders are informed and agree with the decision. Retiring unnecessary controls can also help to optimize the control environment, reduce costs and complexity, and improve efficiency and performance. Updating the status of the control as obsolete, consulting the internal auditor for a second opinion, and verifying the effectiveness of the original mitigation plan are not the best courses of action, as they may not address the root cause of the control’s obsolescence, and may delay or complicate the control retirement process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.2, page 1071

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 649.

A private cloud is a type of cloud computing deployment that provides the consumer exclusive access to a pool of computing resources that are owned, managed, and operated by the consumer or a third-party provider on behalf of the consumer.

A private cloud provides the consumer the greatest degree of control over the environment, because the consumer can customize and configure the resources according to their specific needs and preferences, and can apply their own security and governance policies and standards.

The other options are not the types of cloud computing deployment that provide the consumer the greatest degree of control over the environment. They are either shared or limited by the provider’s settings and rules.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 23

Information Technology & Security, page 17

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 15

A new risk scenario without controls means that there is a potential threat or event that could adversely affect the organization’s objectives, and there are no existing measures to prevent or reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk. Therefore, the most appropriate action is to include the new risk scenario in the current risk assessment, so that the risk practitioner can analyze the risk, evaluate its severity and priority, and recommend suitable controls to mitigate the risk. By including the new risk scenario in the current riskassessment, the risk practitioner can ensure that the risk register is updated and reflects the current risk profile of the organization. The other options are not appropriate because they either ignore the new risk scenario, delay the risk assessment process, or remove valuable information from the risk register. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 95.

The application risk profile should be updated when reviewing functional requirements. This will help to identify and assess the potential risks that may arise from the changes to the application, and to plan and implement appropriate risk responses. Updating the application risk profile at this stage will also help to ensure that the changes are aligned with the organization’s objectives, policies, and standards, and that they meet the stakeholders’ expectations and needs. Updating the application risk profile after user acceptance testing, upon release to production, or during backlog scheduling are not the best points to update the risk profile, as they may be too late or too early to capture the relevant risks and their impacts. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.1, page 511

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 655.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, peer reviews are the process of evaluating the quality and validity of risk analysis by independent experts or colleagues. Peer reviews are conducted to ensure that the risk analysis is consistent, objective, and reliable, and that it follows the established standards and methods. The primary reason for conducting peer reviews of risk analysis is to minimize subjectivity of assessments, as peer reviews can help to reduce personal biases, preferences, and assumptions that may affect the risk analysis outcomes. Peer reviews can also help to identify and correct any errors, gaps, or inconsistencies in the risk analysis, and to improve the risk analysis skills and knowledge of the reviewers and the reviewees. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 209.

A security awareness training program is an educational program that aims to equip the organization’s employees with the knowledge and skills they need to protect the organization’s data and sensitive information from cyber threats, such as hacking, phishing, or other breaches12.

A risk-aware culture is a culture that values and promotes the understanding and management of risks, and encourages the behaviors and actions that support the organization’s risk objectives and strategy34.

The best indication of an improved risk-aware culture following the implementation of a security awareness training program for all employees is an increase in the number of incidents reported, which is the frequency or rate of security incidents that are detected and communicated by the employees to the appropriate authorities or channels56.

An increase in the number of incidents reported is the best indication because it shows that the employees have gained the awareness and confidence to recognize and report the security incidents that may affect the organization, and that they have the responsibility and accountability to contribute to the organization’s risk management and security posture56.

An increase in the number of incidents reported is also the best indication because it enables the organization to respond and recover from the security incidents more quickly and effectively, and to prevent or reduce the recurrence or escalation of similar incidents in the future56.

The other options are not the best indication, but rather possible outcomes or consequences of an improved risk-aware culture or a security awareness training program. For example:

A reduction in the number of help desk calls is an outcome of an improved risk-aware culture or a security awareness training program that indicates the employees have become more self-reliant and proficient in solving or preventing the common or minor IT issues or problems . However, this outcome does not measure the employees’ awareness or reporting of security incidents, which may be more serious or complex .

An increase in the number of identified system flaws is a consequence of an improved risk-aware culture or a security awareness training program that indicates the employees have become more vigilant and proactive in finding and reporting the vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the IT systems or processes . However, this consequence does not measure the employees’ awareness or reporting of security incidents, which may exploit or leverage the system flaws .

A reduction in the number of user access resets is an outcome of an improved risk-aware culture or a security awareness training program that indicates the employees have become more careful and responsible in managing and protecting their user credentials or accounts . However, this outcome does not measure the employees’ awareness or reporting of security incidents, which may compromise or misuse the user access . References =

1: Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US5

2: What Is Security Awareness Training and Why Is It Important? - Kaspersky6

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

4: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

5: Security Incident Reporting and Response, University of Toronto, 2017

6: Security Incident Reporting and Response, ISACA, 2019

IT Help Desk Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 2, 2018

IT Help Desk Best Practices, ISACA Now Blog, February 12, 2018

System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, University of Toronto, 2017

System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, ISACA, 2019

User Access Management and Control, University of Toronto, 2017

User Access Management and Control, ISACA, 2019

A risk response action plan is a document that outlines the specific tasks, resources, timelines, and deliverables for the risk responses, which are the actions or strategies that are taken to address the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation12.

The most useful tool when measuring the progress of a risk response action plan is an up-to-date risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the significant risks that the organization faces, and the responses and actions that are taken to address them34.

An up-to-date risk register is the most useful tool because it provides a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and the status and performance of the risk responses and actions34.

An up-to-date risk register is also the most useful tool because it enables the monitoring and evaluation of the risk response action plan, and the identification and communication of any issues or gaps that need to be resolved or improved34.

The other options are not the most useful tools, but rather possible metrics or indicators that may be used to measure the progress of a risk response action plan. For example:

Percentage of mitigated risk scenarios is a metric that measures the proportion of risk scenarios that have been reduced or eliminated by the risk responses and actions56. However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not capture the residual or emerging risks that may arise after the risk responses and actions56.

Annual loss expectancy (ALE) changes is a metric that measures the difference between the expected annual losses before and after the risk responses and actions78. However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not reflect the qualitative or intangible impacts of the risks or the risk responses and actions78.

Resource expenditure against budget is a metric that measures the amount of resources and funds that have been spent or allocated for the risk responses and actions, compared to the planned or estimated budget . However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not indicate the effectiveness or efficiency of the risk responses and actions . References =

1: Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips1

2: How to Create the Ultimate Risk Response Plan | Wrike2

3: Risk Register Template and Examples | Prioritize and Manage Risk3

4: Risk Register Examples for Cybersecurity Leaders4

5: Risk Scenarios Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

6: Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, ISACA, 2019

7: Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) - Definition and Examples5

8: Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) Calculator6

Project Budgeting: How to Estimate Costs and Manage Budgets7

Project Budget Template - Download Free Excel Template8

 A common risk taxonomy is a framework that defines and categorizes the sources, types, and impacts of risks within an organization1. It helps to establish a consistent and shared understanding of risk across the organization, and to facilitate effective risk identification, assessment, reporting, and communication2. A common risk taxonomy also enables comparison and aggregation of risks at different levels and domains, and supports alignment of risk management with business objectives and strategies3. Using key performance indicators (KPIs) and key risk indicators (KRIs) are important for measuring and monitoring risk and performance, but they are not the most important factor when discussing risk within an organization. KPIs and KRIs should be derived from the common risk taxonomy and aligned with theorganization’s risk appetite and tolerance4. Creating a risk communication policy is also important for ensuring that risk information is communicated to the right stakeholders at the right time and in the right format, but it is not the most important factor either. A risk communication policy should be based on the common risk taxonomy and the risk roles and responsibilities within the organization5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: Risk Taxonomy, pp. 25-29.

 A risk profile is a summary of the key risks that affect an organization, a business unit, a process, or a project. A risk profile can help stakeholders understand the current and potential exposure to various sources of uncertainty, and prioritize the risk response accordingly. A risk profile should be aligned with the business objectives, which are the desired outcomes or results that the organization or the business unit wants to achieve. Updating the risk profile with risk assessment results best enables the risk profile to serve as an effective resource to support business objectives, because it ensures that the risk profile reflects the most accurate and up-to-date information about the risks and their impacts. Risk assessment is the process of analyzing and evaluating the likelihood and consequences of the identified risks, and comparing them with the risk criteria and appetite. Risk assessment results can provide valuable insights into the risk level, trend, and exposure, and help identify the most critical and relevant risks that need attention and action. Updating the risk profile with risk assessment results can help align the risk profile with the business objectives, by showing how the risks may affect the achievement of the objectives, and how the risk response can support or enhance the objectives. Updating the risk profile with risk assessment results can also help communicate and justify the risk profile to the business stakeholders, and obtain their feedback and approval. References = Risk Management Essentials: How to Develop a Risk Profile (TRN2-J07), Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA, Using Risk Assessment to Support Decision Making - ISACA.

From a risk management perspective, the primary benefit of using automated system configuration validation tools is that they reduce the inherent risk, which is the risk that exists before any controls are applied. Automated system configuration validation tools can help to ensure that the system settings are consistent, compliant, and secure, and that they match the predefined standards and policies. This can reduce the likelihood and impact of errors, misconfigurations, vulnerabilities, or deviations that may compromise the system’s functionality, performance, or integrity. The other options are not the primary benefits of using automated system configuration validation tools, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of doing so. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the controls are applied, and it may not be directly affected by the automated system configuration validation tools. Staff costs and operational costs are related to the efficiency and economy of the system configuration process, but they are not the main risk management objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 150.

The organization’s information security manager is responsible for IT security controls that are outsourced to an external service provider. The information security manager is accountable for ensuring that the security policies and standards of the organization are followed by the service provider, and that the security objectives and requirements are met. The information security manager is also responsible for monitoring and evaluating the security performance and compliance of the service provider, and for managing the security risks and incidents that may arise from the outsourcing arrangement. The organization’s risk function, the service provider’s IT management, and the service provider’s information security manager are not responsible for IT security controls that are outsourced, as they have different roles and responsibilities in the outsourcing process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.2, page 2461

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 651.

 The best way to facilitate the development of effective IT risk scenarios is to utilize a cross-functional team. A cross-functional team is a group of people with different skills, expertise, and perspectives who work together to achieve a common goal. A cross-functional team can help to create realistic, comprehensive, and relevant IT risk scenarios by bringing diverse knowledge, experience, and insights from various domains and functions. A cross-functional team can also help to identify and address the interdependencies, interactions, and impacts of IT risks across the organization. The other options are not the best ways to facilitate the development of effective IT risk scenarios, although they may be useful or necessary depending on the context and nature of the IT risks. Participation by IT subject matter experts is important, but it is not sufficient, as IT risks may affect or be affected by non-IT factors and stakeholders. Integration of contingency planning is a part of the risk response process, which follows the risk scenario development process, but it is not the same as creating the risk scenarios. Validation by senior management is a quality assurance step that ensures the accuracy and completeness of the risk scenarios, but it is not the same as facilitating the development of the risk scenarios. References = Six Steps to Using Risk Scenarios for Improved Risk Management, IT Risk Scenarios - Morland-Austin, IT Risk Resources | ISACA

Vulnerable firmware that lacks updates is a significant security risk, as it can be exploited by attackers. Addressing this issue aligns withSecure IoT Deployment Practicesto reduce exposure.

The primary reason for an organization to include an acceptable use banner when users log in is to reduce the likelihood of insider threat, as it informs the users of the policies, rules, and expectations for the use of the organization’s IT resources, and deters them from engaging in unauthorized or malicious activities. The other options are not the primary reasons, as they are more related to the detection, prevention, or mitigation of insider threat, respectively, rather than the reduction of the likelihood of insider threat. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

 The most important element of a successful risk awareness training program is customizing content for the audience, because this ensures that the training is relevant, engaging, and effective for the learners. Customizing content for the audience means tailoring the training materials and methods to suit the specific needs, preferences, and characteristics of the target group, such as their roles, responsibilities, knowledge, skills, attitudes, and learning styles. Customizing content for the audience can help to achieve the following benefits:

Increase the motivation and interest of the learners, as they can see the value and applicability of the training to their work and goals.

Enhance the comprehension and retention of the learners, as they can relate the training content to their prior knowledge and experience, and use examples and scenarios that are familiar and realistic to them.

Improve the transfer and application of the learners, as they can practice and apply the training content to their actual work situations and challenges, and receive feedback and support that are relevant and useful to them. References = Implementing risk management training and awareness (part 1) 1

The risk practitioner’s best course of action after identifying risk scenarios related to noncompliance with new industry regulations is to escalate to senior management, as they have the authority and responsibility to decide on the appropriate risk response and allocate the necessary resources. Transferring the risk, implementing monitoring controls, and recalculating the risk are possible risk responses, but they require senior management approval and direction. References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit, page 19; CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 107.

Ensuring Timely Recovery of Critical Business Operations:

Primary Focus: The primary focus of a Disaster Recovery Management (DRM) framework is to ensure that critical business operations can be recovered and resumed in a timely manner after a disruption.

Business Continuity: Timely recovery of operations is essential for maintaining business continuity and minimizing the impact of disruptions on the organization’s ability to deliver products and services.

Recovery Objectives: Establishing clear recovery time objectives (RTOs) and recovery point objectives (RPOs) ensures that critical operations are prioritized and recovery efforts are aligned with business needs.

Comparison with Other Options:

Restoring IT and Cybersecurity Operations: While important, this is part of the broader goal of recovering critical business operations.

Assessing Impact and Probability of Disaster Scenarios: This is a preparatory step that informs the DRM framework but is not the primary focus.

Determining Capacity for Alternate Sites: This is a component of the DRM strategy but supports the primary focus of ensuring timely recovery.

Best Practices:

Comprehensive Planning: Develop comprehensive disaster recovery plans that prioritize the recovery of critical business operations.

Regular Testing: Regularly test and update disaster recovery plans to ensure they remain effective and aligned with business objectives.

Cross-Functional Collaboration: Involve all relevant business units in disaster recovery planning to ensure a coordinated and effective response.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Emphasizes the importance of focusing on the recovery of critical business operations to ensure business continuity.

ISACA Guidelines: Recommend prioritizing the timely recovery of critical operations as the primary goal of disaster recovery management efforts.

The most important characteristic of an effective risk management program is that risk ownership is assigned. Risk ownership is the accountability and authority to manage a risk1. Assigning risk ownership means identifying and assigning the person or entity who is responsible for evaluating, treating, monitoring, and reporting on a specific risk2. Assigning risk ownership is essential for ensuring that the risk management program works effectively and efficiently, as it helps to:

Clarify the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups involved in risk management and internal control;

Ensure that the risks are managed in accordance with the organization’s objectives, strategies, and risk appetite;

Provide guidance and support to the risk owners in identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks;

Monitor and evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the risk owners and the risk response actions;

Communicate and report on the risk status and issues to the relevant stakeholders and authorities. The other options are not the most important characteristic of an effective risk management program, as they are either less relevant or less specific than assigning risk ownership. Risk response plans are documented. This option is a consequence or outcome of an effective risk management program, not a characteristic of it. Risk response plans are the actions or measures that are taken to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk3. Documenting risk response plans means recording and maintaining the details and outcomes of the risk responseactions, such as the objectives, scope, resources, timelines, performance indicators, and results4. Documenting risk response plans can help to improve the consistency and transparency of the risk management process, as well as to support the monitoring and evaluation of the risk response actions. However, documenting risk response plans is not the most important characteristic of an effective risk management program, as it does not address the accountability and authority for managing the risk. Controls are mapped to key risk scenarios. This option is a specific or narrow example of an effective risk management program, not a general or broad characteristic of it. Controls are the measures or actions that are taken to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk, or to increase the likelihood or impact of an opportunity5. Mapping controls to key risk scenarios means linking the controls to the specific situations or events that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance6. Mapping controls to key risk scenarios can help to enhance the design and implementation of the controls, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls in mitigating the risk. However, mapping controls to key risk scenarios is not the most important characteristic of an effective risk management program, as it does not cover the other aspects of risk management, such as risk identification, assessment, treatment, and monitoring. Key risk indicators are defined. This option is a component or element of an effective risk management program, not a characteristic of it. Key risk indicators are the metrics that measure thelevel and trend of a risk that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance7. Defining key risk indicators means establishing and maintaining the criteria and methods for measuring and reporting on the risk8. Defining key risk indicators can help to enhance the risk identification, assessment, and reporting processes, as well as to support the risk decision making and prioritization. However, defining key risk indicators is not the most important characteristic of an effective risk management program, as it does not indicate the accountability and authority for managing the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 85.

Global standards related to risk management are documents that provide the principles, guidelines, and best practices for managing risk in a consistent, effective, and efficient manner across different organizations, sectors, and regions12.

The primary reason for a risk practitioner to use global standards related to risk management is to continuously improve risk management processes, which are the activities and tasks that enable the organization to identify, analyze, evaluate, treat, monitor, and communicate the risks that may affect its objectives, performance, and value creation34.

Continuously improving risk management processes is the primary reason because it helps the organization to enhance its risk management capabilities and maturity, and to adapt to the changing risk environment and stakeholder expectations34.

Continuously improving risk management processes is also the primary reason because it supports the achievement of the organization’s goals and the delivery of value to the stakeholders, which are the ultimate purpose and outcome of risk management34.

The other options are not the primary reason, but rather possible benefits or objectives that may result from using global standards related to risk management. For example:

Building an organizational risk-aware culture is a benefit of using global standards related to risk management that involves creating and maintaining a shared understanding, attitude, and behavior towards risk among the organization’s employees and leaders, and fostering a culture of accountability, transparency, and learning34. However, this benefit is not the primary reason because it is an enabler and a consequence of continuously improving risk management processes, rather than a driver or a goal34.

Complying with legal and regulatory requirements is an objective of using global standards related to risk management that involves meeting and exceeding the expectations and obligations of the external authorities or bodies that govern or oversee the organization’s activities and operations, such as laws, regulations, standards, or contracts34. However, thisobjective is not the primary reason because it is a constraint and a challenge of continuously improving risk management processes, rather than a motivation or a benefit34.

Identifying gaps in risk management practices is an objective of using global standards related to risk management that involves assessing and comparing the current and desiredstate of the organization’s risk management processes, and identifying the areas or aspects that need to be improved or addressed34. However, this objective is not the primary reason because it is a step and a tool of continuously improving risk management processes, rather than a reason or a result34. References =

1: ISO - ISO 31000 — Risk management1

2: Risk Management Standards2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

4: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

Conducting phishing exercises would best help minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats, because they can help to raise awareness and educate employees about the common techniques and tactics used by social engineers, such as sending deceptive emails or text messages that ask for sensitive information or direct users to malicious websites. Phishing exercises are simulated attacks that test the employees’ ability to recognize and respond to social engineering attempts, and provide feedback and guidance on how to improve their security behavior. By conducting phishing exercises, the organization can measure and improve the employees’ level of security awareness and resilience, and reduce the likelihood and impact of falling victim to social engineering attacks. The other options are less effective ways to minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats. Enforcing employees’ sanctions can help to deter and punish employees who violate the security policies or procedures, but it may not prevent or reduce the occurrence of social engineering attacks, as they may target employees who are unaware, careless, or coerced by the attackers. Enforcing segregation of duties can help to prevent or limit the damage caused by social engineering attacks, by restricting the access and authority of employees to perform certain tasks or functions, but it may not address the root cause or source of the attacks, which is the human factor. Reviewing the organization’s risk appetite can help to define and communicate the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, but it may not directly affect or influence the employees’ behavior or attitude toward social engineering threats, which may depend on their individual or situational factors. References = How to Prevent and Mitigate Social Engineering Attacks 1

The risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access is that the former employees or unauthorized parties may use the accounts to access or manipulate the organization’s information systems or resources, and cause harm or damage to the organization and its stakeholders, such as data loss, data breach, system failure, fraud, etc.

The first step to address the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access is to disable user access, which means to revoke or remove the permissions or privileges that allow the accounts to access or use the organization’s information systems or resources. Disabling user access can help the organization to address the risk by providing the following benefits:

It can prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and reduce or eliminate the potential harm or damage that they may cause for the organization and its stakeholders.

It can ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the organization’s information systems or resources, and protect them from unauthorized access or manipulation.

It can provide useful evidence and records for the verification and validation of the organization’s access control function, and for the compliance with the organization’s access control policies and standards.

The other options are not the first steps to address the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access, because they do not provide the same level of urgency and effectiveness that disabling user access provides, and they may not be sufficient or appropriate to address the risk.

Performing a risk assessment is a process of measuring and comparing the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their significance and urgency. Performing a risk assessment can help the organization to understand and document the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access, but it is not the first step to address the risk, because it does not prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and it may not be timely or feasible to perform a risk assessment before disabling user access.

Developing an access control policy is a process of defining and describing the rules or guidelines that specify the expectations and requirements for the organization’s access control function, such as who can access what, when, how, and why. Developing an access control policy can help the organization to establish and communicate the boundaries and objectives for the organization’s access control function, but it is not the first step to address the risk, because it does not prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and it may not be relevant or applicable to the existing or emerging risk scenarios that may affect the organization’s access control function.

Performing a root cause analysis is a process of identifying and understanding the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in a problem or incident that has occurred or may occur in the organization. Performing a root cause analysis can help the organization to address and correct the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access, and prevent or reduce its recurrence or impact, but it is not the first step to address the risk, because it does not prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and it may not be timely or feasible to perform a root cause analysis before disabling user access. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 207

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 A cost-benefit analysis is a technique that compares the costs and benefits of different risk response strategies, such as mitigating, transferring, avoiding, or accepting risks. A cost-benefit analysis can help justify investment in risk response strategies by showing the expected return on investment, the net present value, the break-even point, and the cost-effectiveness of each option. A cost-benefit analysis can also help prioritize the most optimal risk response strategies based on the available resources, the risk appetite, and the stakeholder expectations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.4: Risk Response Selection, p. 156-157.

An IT risk assessment is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT-related risks and their potential impacts on the organization’s objectives and performance1. Identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment is the process of determining and engaging the persons or entities that have an interest or influence in the IT risk management, such as the IT users, owners, managers, or providers2. The primary benefit of identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment is to define the risk assessment scope, which is theboundary or extent of the IT risk assessment, such as the IT systems, processes, or functions that are included or excluded from the assessment3. By identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment, the organization can ensure that the risk assessment scope is relevant, realistic, and aligned with the organization’s strategy, vision, and mission, and that it reflects the current and emerging IT risks and their potential consequences. Identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment can also help to establish and communicate the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders, and to enforce the accountability and performance of the IT risk management. Obtaining funding support, selecting the risk assessment framework, and establishing inherent risk are not the primary benefits of identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment, as they do not provide the same level of insight and relevance as defining the risk assessment scope. Obtaining funding support is the process of securing and providing the necessary funds or resources that are required to support or enable the IT risk assessment4. Obtaining funding support can enhance the quality and performance of the IT risk assessment, but it is not the primary benefit of identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment, as it does not determine or influence the boundary or extent of the IT risk assessment. Selecting the risk assessment framework is the process of choosing or developing a set of principles, methods, and tools that guide and facilitate the IT risk assessment5. Selecting the risk assessment framework can improve the reliability and consistency of the IT risk assessment, but it is not the primary benefit of identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment, as it does not define or affect the scope or coverage of the IT risk assessment. Establishing inherent risk is the process of assessing the level of risk that exists before any controls or mitigating factors are considered. Establishing inherent risk can help to understand and prioritize the IT risks and their impacts, but it is not the primary benefit of identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment, as it does not specify or limit the scope or range of the IT risk assessment. References = 1: IT Risk Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics2: Stakeholder Requirements - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics3: Risk Assessment Scope - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics4: Funding Support - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics5: Risk Assessment Framework - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : [Inherent Risk - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2: Risk Analysis, pp. 67-69.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Risk Evaluation, pp. 77-79.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1: RiskResponse Options, pp. 113-115.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Key Risk Indicators, pp. 181-185.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

Continuous risk management process improvement is the practice of evaluating and enhancing the risk management process on a regular basis, to ensure that it is effective, efficient, and aligned with the business objectives and strategy. Continuous risk management process improvement can help identify and address the gaps, weaknesses, or opportunities for improvement in the risk management process, and ensure that the process is responsive and adaptable to the changing risk environment. The most effective method for continuous risk management process improvement is periodic assessments, which are systematic and objective evaluations of the risk management process, performed at predefined intervals or after significant events. Periodic assessments can help measure and monitor the performance and maturity of the risk management process, using criteria such as the risk management framework, standards, policies, procedures, methods, tools, roles, responsibilities, and results. Periodic assessments can also help identify and analyze the strengths, weaknesses, threats, and opportunities of the risk management process, and provide feedback and recommendations for improvement. Periodic assessments can also help communicate and report the status and progress of the risk management process to the stakeholders, and obtain their input and support for improvement actions. References = Continuous Risk Management Guidebook, p. 7-8, ISO 31000: risk management and its continuous improvement, How Continuous Monitoring Drives Risk Management.

 The most important requirement to include in an outsourcing contract to help ensure sensitive data stored with a service provider is secure is a third-party assessment report of control environment effectiveness. This will help to verify that the service provider has implemented adequate security controls and practices to protect the data, and that they comply with the enterprise’s security policies and standards. A third-party assessment report also provides an independent and objective assurance of the service provider’s security posture and performance. Incidents related to data loss, risk assessment results, and cyber insurance policy are also important requirements to include in an outsourcing contract, but they are not as important as a third-party assessment report. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.2, page 2461

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 643.

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a measurable value that demonstrates how effectively an organization is achieving its objectives. In the context of disaster recovery planning (DRP), a KPI should reflect the ability of the organization to recover its critical business processes and applications within the predefined time frames and service levels. One of the most important KPIs for DRP is the percentage of applications that met the recovery time objective (RTO) during DRP testing. The RTO is the maximum acceptable length of time that a business process or application can be down after a disaster. By measuring the percentage of applications that met the RTO during DRP testing, the organization can evaluate the performance and reliability of its DRP, identify any gaps or weaknesses, and implement corrective actions to improve its readiness and resilience. The other options are not the best KPIs for DRP, as they do not directly measure the effectiveness of the recovery process. The number of users that participated in the DRP testing is a measure of the involvement and awareness of the staff, but not of the outcome of the testing. The number of issues identified during DRP testing is a measure of the quality and completeness of the DRP, but not of the actual recovery time. The percentage of issues resolved as a result of DRP testing is a measure of the improvement and maturity of the DRP, but not of the current recovery capability. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3.3, Page 138.

The most important outcome of reviewing the risk management process is assuring that the risk profile supports the IT objectives, because this ensures that the organization is managing its IT-related risks in alignment with its business goals and priorities. The risk profile is a summary of the key risks that the organization faces, their likelihood, impact, and response strategies. The IT objectives are the specific and measurable outcomes that the organization expects to achieve from its IT investments and activities. Byreviewing the risk management process, the organization can evaluate whether the risk profile is accurate, complete, and up-to-date, and whether the risk responses are effective, efficient, and consistent with the IT objectives. The review can also identify any gaps, issues, or opportunities for improvement in the risk management process, and provide recommendations for enhancing the process and its outcomes. The review can also help to communicate and report the value and performance of the risk management process to the senior management, the board of directors, and other stakeholders. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

A critical patch is a software update that fixes a security vulnerability or a bug that may affect the performance, functionality, or reliability of a system or a network. A critical patch implementation is a process that applies the software update to the system or network in a timely and effective manner. The failure of a critical patch implementation is a situation where the software update is not applied or not applied correctly, which may expose the system or network to various threats, such as data theft, data corruption, data leakage, or denial of service. The failure of a critical patch implementation would be reflected in an organization’s risk profile by increasing the residual risk. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response, which means the risk that is not avoided, transferred, or mitigated by the existing controls or measures. The failure of a critical patch implementation would increase the residual risk, as it would reduce the effectiveness or efficiency of the existing controls or measures that are supposed to address the security vulnerability or the bug. The failure of a critical patch implementation would also increase the likelihood or impact of the potential threats, as well as the exposure or consequences of the system or network. The other options are not the correct changes that would be reflected in an organization’s risk profile after the failure of a critical patch implementation, although they may be affected or related. Risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is not willing to accept. Risk tolerance may be decreased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the organization may become more cautious or conservative in accepting the risk, but it is not a direct or immediate change in the risk profile. Inherent risk is the risk that exists in the absence of any controls or measures, which means the risk that is inherent to the system or network or the environment. Inherent risk may be increased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the system or network may become more vulnerable or susceptible to the threats, but it is not a change in the risk profile, as the risk profile considers the existing controls or measures. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite may be decreasedby the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the organization may become less willing orable to accept the risk, but it is not a change in the risk profile, as the risk profile reflects the actual or current risk level, not the desired or expected risk level. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 972; What is a Critical Patch? - Definition from Techopedia3; What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia4

A risk assessment of a production system is a process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating the risks that may affect the performance, quality, or safety of the production system, which is a system that transforms inputs into outputs using various resources, processes, and technologies12.

The most appropriate action for the risk manager to take after undertaking a risk assessment of a production system is to inform the process owner of the concerns and propose measures to reduce them, which is a process of communicating and consulting with the person who is responsible for the design, operation, and improvement of the production system, and suggesting possible risk responses that can prevent, mitigate, transfer, or accept the risks34.

This action is the most appropriate because it ensures the involvement and collaboration of the process owner, who has the authority and accountability to implement and monitor the risk responses, and who can provide feedback and input on the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed measures34.

This action is also the most appropriate because it supports the risk management process and objectives, which are to identify and address the risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s goals and the delivery of value to the stakeholders34.

The other options are not the most appropriate actions, but rather possible alternatives or supplements that may have some limitations or drawbacks. For example:

Recommending a program that minimizes the concerns of the production system is an action that involves designing and planning a set of coordinated and interrelated activities and tasks that aim to reduce the likelihood or impact of the risks34. However, this action is notthe most appropriate because it does not involve the process owner, who is the key stakeholder and decision maker for the production system, and who may have different views or preferences on the risk responses34.

Informing the development team of the concerns, and together formulating risk reduction measures is an action that involves communicating and consulting with the group of people who are responsible for creating, testing, and deploying the products or services that are produced by the production system, and jointly developing possible risk responses34. However, this action is not the most appropriate because it does not involvethe process owner, who is the primary owner and user of the production system, and who may have different needs or expectations on the risk responses34.

Informing the IT manager of the concerns and proposing measures to reduce them is an action that involves communicating and consulting with the person who is responsible for managing and overseeing the IT resources, processes, and systems that support the production system, and suggesting possible risk responses34. However, this action is not the most appropriate because it does not involve the process owner, who is the main stakeholder and beneficiary of the production system, and who may have different requirements or constraints on the risk responses34. References =

1: Risk Assessment for the Production Process1

2: Risk Assessment for Industrial Equipment2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

4: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the security management function is responsible for ensuring that effective cybersecurity controls are established and maintained. The security management function should:

Define the cybersecurity strategy and objectives aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and business goals

Establish and maintain the cybersecurity policies, standards, procedures and guidelines

Implement and monitor the cybersecurity controls and processes

Coordinate and communicate with other stakeholders, such as risk owners, IT management, enterprise risk function, internal and external auditors, regulators and third parties

Report on the cybersecurity performance and risk posture to senior management and the board

Continuously improve the cybersecurity capabilities and maturity

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Management Roles and Responsibilities, pp. 29-301

A change management process is a set of procedures and activities that aim to ensure that changes in an organization’s IT systems and services are implemented in a controlled and coordinated manner. The effectiveness of a change management process can be measured by how well it reduces the risks and costs associated with changes, and how well it supports the business objectives and customer expectations. One of the best metrics to demonstrate the effectiveness of a change management process is the percent of unauthorized changes. Unauthorized changes are changes that are made without following the established change management process, such as obtaining approval, documenting the change, testing the change, and communicating the change. Unauthorized changes can introduce errors, defects, security breaches, and disruptions to the IT systems and services, and can negatively affect the business performance and customer satisfaction. Therefore, a low percent of unauthorized changes indicates that the change management process is effective in ensuring that changes are properly planned, approved, executed, and monitored. The other options are not the best metrics to demonstrate the effectiveness of a change management process, as they do not directly reflect the quality and control of the changes. An increase in the frequency of changes may indicate that the organization is agile and responsive to the changing business needs and customer demands, but it does not necessarily mean that the changes are well-managed and beneficial. An increase in the number of emergency changes may indicate that the organization is able to handle urgent and critical situations, but it may also suggest that the organization is reactive and lacks proper planning and analysis of the changes. The average time to complete changes may indicate the efficiency and speed of the change management process, but it does not measure the effectiveness and value of the changes. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 156-1571; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 712

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are quantifiable measures of progress toward an intended result, such as a strategic objective or a desired outcome12.

The most important factor when developing KPIs is the alignment to risk responses, which are the actions taken to address the risks that may affect the achievement of the intended result12.

Alignment to risk responses means that the KPIs should reflect the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk responses, and provide feedback and guidance for improving the risk responses12.

Alignment to risk responses also means that the KPIs should be consistent and compatible with the risk responses, and support the risk management process and objectives12.

The other options are not the most important factor, but rather possible aspects or features of KPIs that may vary depending on the context and purpose of the KPIs. For example:

Alignment to management reports is an aspect of KPIs that relates to the communication and presentation of the KPIs to the relevant stakeholders, such as senior management,board members, or external parties12. However, this aspect does not determine the quality or validity of the KPIs, or the alignment to the intended result12.

Alerts when risk thresholds are reached is a feature of KPIs that relates to the monitoring and control of the KPIs, and the triggering of actions or decisions when the KPIs exceed or fall below a certain level or range12. However, this feature does not define the content or scope of the KPIs, or the alignment to the intended result12.

Identification of trends is a feature of KPIs that relates to the analysis and interpretation of the KPIs, and the identification of patterns or changes in the KPIs over time or across different dimensions12. However, this feature does not specify the criteria or methodology of the KPIs, or the alignment to the intended result12. References =

1: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? Guide & Examples - Qlik3

2: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? - KPI.org4

The first step in assessing the current risk level of data loss is to identify where the sensitive data is stored, such as servers, databases, laptops, mobile devices, etc. This will help to determine the scope and boundaries of the risk assessment, as well as the potential exposure and impact of data loss. Identifying staff members who have access to the data, risk scenarios and owners, and existing controls are important steps, but they should be done after identifying the data locations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.1, page 51.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that help organizations monitor and evaluate the level of risk they are exposed to. They provide early warning signals of potential issues that could affect the achievement of organizational goals12.

The most important data source for monitoring KRIs is automated logs collected from different systems, which are records that capture and store the details and history of the transactions or activities that are performed by the organization’s processes, systems, or controls34.

Automated logs collected from different systems are the most important data source because they provide timely and accurate data and information on the performance and status of the organization’s operations, and enable the detection and reporting of any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate a risk event34.

Automated logs collected from different systems are also the most important data source because they support the accountability and auditability of the organization’s operations, and facilitate the investigation and resolution of any risk event34.

The other options are not the most important data sources, but rather possible inputs or factors that may influence or affect the KRIs. For example:

Directives from legal and regulatory authorities are documents that provide the expectations and obligations of the external authorities or bodies that govern or oversee the organization’s activities and operations, such as laws, regulations, standards, or contracts5 . However, these documents are not the most important data source becausethey do not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the criteria or framework for risk compliance5 .

Audit reports from internal information systems audits are documents that provide the findings and recommendations of the independent and objective assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s information systems, processes, and controls . However, these documents are not the most important data source because they do not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the assurance or improvement for risk management .

Trend analysis of external risk factors is a technique that involves analyzing and forecasting the changes and impacts of the external factors that influence the organization’s operations, such as technology, competition, regulation, or customer behavior . However, this technique is not the most important data source because it does not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the insight or prediction for risk identification . References =

1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture1

2: Key risk indicator - Wikipedia2

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia3

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva4

5: Regulatory Compliance - Wikipedia5

Regulatory Compliance Management Software | MetricStream

IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

Trend Analysis - Investopedia

Trend Analysis: A Definition and Examples

A disaster recovery test is a simulation of a disaster scenario that evaluates the effectiveness and readiness of the disaster recovery plan. The main purpose of a disaster recovery test is to ensure that the organization can resume its normal operations as quickly as possible after a disaster, with minimal or no data loss. Therefore, the most important objective of a disaster recovery test from a business perspective is to verify that all critical data can be recovered within the RTOs, which are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the data and systems after a disaster. If the RTOs are not met, the organization may face significant financial, operational, and reputational losses. The other options are not the most important objectives of a disaster recovery test, although they may be beneficial outcomes. Gaining assurance that the organization can recover from a disaster is a subjective and qualitative goal, while recovering data within RTOs is a measurable and quantitative goal. Discovering errors in the disaster recovery process is a valuable result of a disaster recovery test, but it is not the primary objective. The objective is to correct the errors and improve the process, not just to find them. Testing all business critical systems is a necessary step in a disaster recovery test, but it is not the ultimate goal. The goal is to ensure that the systems can be restored and function properly within the RTOs. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 197-1981; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 572

Detailed Explanation:Customizing the risk profile presentation ensures that stakeholders receive information in a format and context relevant to their roles. Tailored communication improves understanding, aligns risk discussions with decision-making needs, and ensures the stakeholders are equipped to act on the information effectively.

An IT risk register is a document that records and tracks the IT-related risks that an organization faces, as well as the information and actions related to those risks, such as the risk description, assessment, response, status, and owner. An IT risk register is a valuable tool for managing and communicating IT risks and their impact on the organization’s objectives and operations. However, an IT risk register may also contain sensitive or confidential information that should not be disclosed or shared with unauthorized or irrelevant parties, as it may compromise the security, privacy, or reputation of the organization or its stakeholders. Therefore, the risk manager’s best approach to the request from the head of a business operations department to review the entire IT risk register is to determine the purpose of the request before sharing the register. This is a technique to understand and evaluate the reason and the need for the request, as well as the scope and the level of access that the requester requires or expects. By determining the purpose of therequest, the risk manager can ensure that the request is legitimate, appropriate, and relevant, and that the requester has a clear and valid interest or stake in the IT risk register. The risk manager can also ensure that the request is aligned with the organization’s policies, procedures, and standards for IT risk management and information sharing. The risk manager can also use the purpose of the request to decide what and how much information to share with the requester, and what conditions or restrictions to apply, such as confidentiality, accuracy, or timeliness. The other options are not the best approaches to the request from the head of a business operations department to review the entire IT risk register, as they may be premature, unnecessary, or ineffective. Escalating to senior management is a technique to involve or inform the higher-level authorities or decision makers about the request, which may be useful or required in some cases, but it may not be the first or the best step to take, as it may delay or complicate the process, or undermine the risk manager’s authority or responsibility. Requiring a nondisclosure agreement is a technique to protect the confidentiality and integrity of the information in the IT risk register by legally binding the requester to not disclose or misuse the information. However, a nondisclosure agreement may not be needed or appropriate in every case, and it may not prevent or address other issues or risks related to the information sharing, such as relevance, accuracy, or timeliness. Sanitizing portions of the register is a technique to remove or redact the sensitive or confidential information from the IT risk register before sharing it with the requester, which may be necessary or prudent in some cases, but it may not be sufficient or satisfactory, as it may affect the completeness, usefulness, or validity of the information, or raise questions or concerns from the requester.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, performing the assessment as it would normally be done is the best approach when a risk practitioner has been asked by a business unit manager for special consideration during a risk assessment of a system, because it ensures that the risk practitioner maintains their objectivity, integrity, and professionalism. The risk practitioner should not compromise the quality or accuracy of the risk assessment, regardless of any external pressure or influence. The risk practitioner should follow the established risk assessment methodology and standards, and report the risk results and recommendations based on the facts and evidence. The other options are not the best approaches, because they may affect the credibility or reliability of the risk assessment. Conducting an abbreviated version of the assessment may result in incomplete or insufficient risk information, which may lead to poor risk decisions or actions. Reporting the business unit manager for a possible ethics violation may escalate the situation or create a conflict of interest, which may hinder the risk assessment process or outcome. Recommending an internal auditor perform the review may transfer the responsibility or accountability of the risk practitioner, which may undermine their role or authority. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 74.

An IT risk profile is a document that summarizes the IT-related risks that an organization faces, as well as the information and actions related to those risks, such as the risk description, assessment, response, status, and owner. An IT risk profile is a valuable tool for managing and communicating IT risks and their impact on the organization’s objectives and operations. The best description of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions is that it helps assess the effects of IT decisions on risk exposure. This means that the IT risk profile can help to evaluate the potential consequences and implications of different IT choices or actions on the level and nature of the IT risks that the organization faces. The IT risk profile can also help to identify and address the gaps or opportunities for improvement in the IT risk management process and performance. The other options are not the best descriptions of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions, although they may be related or beneficial. Comparing performance levels of IT assets to value delivered is a technique to measure and optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of the IT resources and activities that support the organization’s goals and needs. However, this technique does not necessarily involve the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the output and outcome of the IT assets, not the input and impact of the IT risks. Facilitating the alignment of strategic IT objectives to business objectives is a technique toensure that the IT strategy and plans are consistent and compatible with the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, and objectives. However, this technique does not depend on the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the direction and purpose of the IT objectives, not the probability and threat of the IT risks. Providing input to business managers when preparing a business case for new IT projects is a technique to support and justify the initiation and implementation of new IT initiatives that can create value or solve problems for the organization. However, this technique does not require the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the cost and benefit of the IT projects, not the risk and response of the IT risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 962; IT Risk Management Guide for 2022 | CIO Insight3; IT Risk Management Process, Frameworks & Templates4

An organization’s policies are the set of rules and guidelines that define the organization’s objectives, expectations, and responsibilities for its activities and operations. They provide the direction and framework for the organization’s governance, risk management, and compliance functions.

The most important characteristic of an organization’s policies is to reflect the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its goals. The risk appetite is usually expressed as a range or a threshold, and it is aligned with the organization’s strategy and culture.

Reflecting the organization’s risk appetite in its policies ensures that the policies are consistent, appropriate, and proportional to the level and nature of the risks that the organization faces, and that they support the organization’s objectives and values. It also helps to optimize the balance between risk and return, and to create and protect value for the organization and its stakeholders.

The other options are not the most important characteristic of an organization’s policies, because they do not address the fundamental question of whether the policies are suitable and acceptable for the organization.

The risk assessment methodology is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. It involves determining the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their significance and urgency. The risk assessment methodology is important to inform and support the organization’s policies, but it is not the most important characteristic of the policies, because it does not indicate whether the policies are aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The capabilities are the resources and abilities that the organization has or can acquire to achieve its objectives and manage its risks. They include the people, processes, technologies, and assets that the organization uses or relies on. The capabilities are important to enable and implement the organization’s policies, but they are not the most important characteristic of the policies, because they do not indicate whether the policies are aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The asset value is the worth or importance of the assets that the organization owns or controls, and that may be affected by the risks that the organization faces. The assets include the tangible and intangible resources that the organization uses or relies on, such as data, information, systems, infrastructure, reputation, etc. The asset value is important to measure and monitor the organization’s policies, but it is not the most important characteristic of the policies, because it does not indicate whether the policies are aligned with the organization’s risk appetite. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 29-30, 34-35, 38-39, 44-45, 50-51, 54-55

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 148

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The best method to ensure a terminated employee’s access to IT systems is revoked upon departure from the organization is to have the human resources (HR) system automatically revoke system access, which is a process that involves integrating the HR system with the IT system, and triggering the removal of access rights for the employee as soon as the termination is recorded in the HR system12.

This method is the best because it provides the most timely, accurate, and consistent way of revoking access, and reduces the risk of human error, oversight, or delay that may occur in manual or semi-automated processes12.

This method is also the best because it enhances the security and compliance of the organization, and prevents the terminated employee from accessing or compromising the IT systems or data after departure12.

The other options are not the best methods, but rather alternative or supplementary methods that may have some limitations or drawbacks. For example:

Login attempts are reconciled to a list of terminated employees is a method that involves monitoring and verifying the login activities of the IT systems, and comparing them with a list of terminated employees to identify and block any unauthorized access attempts34. However, this method is not the best because it is reactive rather than proactive, and may not prevent the terminated employee from accessing the IT systems before the reconciliation is done34.

A list of terminated employees is generated for reconciliation against current IT access is a method that involves creating and maintaining a list of terminated employees, and checking it against the current IT access rights to identify and remove any access that is no longer needed34. However, this method is not the best because it is manual and labor-intensive, and may introduce errors or inconsistencies in the list or the access rights34.

A process to remove employee access during the exit interview is implemented is a method that involves conducting an exit interview with the terminated employee, and revoking the employee’s access to the IT systems during or immediately after the interview34. However, this method is not the best because it depends on the availability and cooperation of the terminated employee, and may not cover all the IT systems or access rights that the employee had34. References =

1: IT Involvement in Employee Termination, A Checklist3

2: Best Practices to Ensure Departing Employees Retain No Access5

3: User Termination Best Practices - IT Security - Spiceworks2

4: IT Security for Employee Termination - Policies, Checklists, Templates - Endsight1

Residual risk exceeds acceptable limits, because it indicates that the risk level is higher than the organization’s risk appetite or tolerance, and that the risk responses and controls are insufficient or ineffective. Residual risk is the level of risk remaining in a process or procedure following the implementation of risk controls to limit or remove it. Escalation is a process that increases the awareness and involvement of higher-level stakeholders or authorities in a risk issue or situation. Escalation is appropriate when the risk issue or situation is outside the scope or authority of the current risk owner or manager, and requires the attention or action of the senior management or the board of directors. Residual risk exceeding acceptable limits is the best situation to justify escalation, as it implies that the current risk owner or manager cannot manage the risk within the predefined boundaries or expectations, and that the senior management or the board of directors need to intervene or approve the risk acceptance or transfer.

Residual risk being inadequately recorded, residual risk remaining after controls have been applied, and residual risk equaling current risk are all possible situations that may require escalation, but they are not the best situations, as they do not necessarily indicate that the risk level is higher than the acceptable limits, and that the senior management or the board of directors need to be involved.

Review Assignments of Data Ownership for Key Assets:

Data Ownership: Ensuring that data ownership is clearly assigned helps establish accountability for data protection. Data owners are responsible for the classification, management, and protection of data.

Baseline Understanding: Reviewing data ownership assignments provides a baseline understanding of who is responsible for sensitive data and ensures that the responsibilities are clearly defined and understood.

Compliance and Control: Proper data ownership ensures that controls are in place and that there is compliance with data protection policies and regulations.

Comparison with Other Options:

Identify Staff Who Have Access to Sensitive Data: This is important but should follow the establishment of clear data ownership to ensure that access controls are appropriately applied.

Identify Recent and Historical Incidents Involving Data Loss: Reviewing incidents helps understand past issues but does not address current data ownership and accountability.

Review the Organization's Data Inventory: While important, a data inventory review is part of understanding data ownership and control but should not be the first step.

Best Practices:

Clear Documentation: Ensure that data ownership is clearly documented and communicated across the organization.

Regular Reviews: Conduct regular reviews of data ownership assignments to ensure they remain accurate and up-to-date.

Training and Awareness: Provide training to data owners on their roles and responsibilities regarding data protection and risk management.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Highlights the importance of data ownership in managing and protecting sensitive information within an organization.

ISACA Guidelines: Recommend establishing clear data ownership and accountability as a foundational step in effective data risk management.

Events exceeding risk thresholds are situations or occurrences that result in the actual level of risk exceeding the acceptable or tolerable level of risk, as defined by the organization’s risk appetite, criteria, and objectives12.

The most effective way to enable a business operations manager to identify events exceeding risk thresholds is to implement continuous monitoring, which is a process that involves collecting and analyzing data and information on the performance and status of the business processes, systems, and controls, and detecting and reporting any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate a risk event34.

Continuous monitoring is the most effective way because it provides timely and accurate visibility and insight into the risk landscape, and enables the business operations manager to identify and respond to the events exceeding risk thresholds before they escalate or cause significant harm or damage to the organization34.

Continuous monitoring is also the most effective way because it supports the risk management process and objectives, which are to identify and address the risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s goals and the delivery of value to the stakeholders34.

The other options are not the most effective ways, but rather possible tools or techniques that may complement or enhance the continuous monitoring. For example:

A control self-assessment is a technique that involves engaging and empowering the business process owners and operators to evaluate and report on the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls that are designed and implemented to mitigate the risks56. However, this technique is not the most effective way because it is periodic rather than continuous, and it may not capture or communicate the events exceeding risk thresholds in a timely or consistent manner56.

Transaction logging is a tool that involves recording and storing the details and history of the transactions or activities that are performed by the business processes or systems, and providing an audit trail for verification or investigation purposes78. However, this tool is not the most effective way because it is passive rather than active, and it may not detect or report the events exceeding risk thresholds unless they are analyzed or queried78.

Benchmarking against peers is a technique that involves comparing and contrasting the performance and practices of the business processes or systems with those of the similar or leading organizations in the same or related industry, and identifying the gaps or opportunities for improvement . However, this technique is not the most effective way because it is external rather than internal, and it may not reflect or align with the organization’s specific risk appetite, criteria, and objectives . References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

2: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

3: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA1

4: Continuous Monitoring: A New Approach to Risk Management - ISACA Journal2

5: Risk and control self-assessment - KPMG Global3

6: Control Self Assessments - PwC4

7: Transaction Log - Wikipedia5

8: Transaction Logging - IBM6

Benchmarking - Wikipedia7

Benchmarking: Definition, Types, Process, Advantages & Examples

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control documents, the risk practitioner should conclude that no action is required as there was no impact. The fact that there have been no interruptions to business operations despite the increasing hardware failure incidents indicates that the built-in redundancy and fault-tolerant architecture are effective in ensuring continuity.

Options A and C are not necessary in this scenario. A root cause analysis (Option A) might be considered if there were actual interruptions or impact on business operations. However, since there were no interruptions, a root cause analysis may not be immediately required. Similarly, upgrading hardware (Option C) may not be necessary if the existing controls are effectively preventing business disruptions.

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control documents, implementing record retention tools and techniques is the best solution in this scenario. Record retention involves managing the lifecycle of records, including their creation, usage, storage, and disposal. By implementing record retention policies, organizations can define how long emails and other data should be retained before being deleted. This helps in efficiently managing storage space and reducing unnecessary storage costs.

Establishing e-discovery and data loss prevention (DLP) (Option B) focuses more on legal and compliance aspects and may not directly address the issue of reducing storage costs. Sending notifications when near storage quota (Option C) is a reactive approach and may not prevent the exponential increase in storage costs. Implementing a bring your own device (BYOD) policy (Option D) is unrelated to the issue of email storage costs.

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual

The recovery time objective (RTO) is a metric that defines the maximum acceptable time frame for restoring a system or service after a disruption. The RTO is determined by the business impact and requirements of the system or service, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The calculation of the RTO is necessary to determine the priority of restoration, which means the order and urgency of recovering the systems or services based on their criticality and dependency. The priority of restoration helps to optimize the use of resources and minimize the downtime and losses during a disaster recovery. The other options are not the correct answers, as they are not the main purpose of calculating the RTO. The time required to restore files is a factor that affects the RTO, but it is not the outcome of the RTO calculation. The point of synchronization is the point in time to which the data must be restored to ensure consistency and accuracy. The point of synchronization is related to the recovery point objective (RPO), not the RTO. The annual loss expectancy (ALE) is a measure of the expected loss per year due to a specific risk or threat. The ALE is calculated by multiplying the single loss expectancy (SLE) by the annualized rate of occurrence (ARO). The ALE is not directly related to the RTO, although it may influence the RTO determination. References = Recovery Time Objective (RTO) - What Is It, Examples, Calculation; CRISC Review Manual, pages 197-1981; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 842

An effective risk management program is a systematic and consistent process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and communicating risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives12.

The best indication of an effective risk management program is that the residual risk, which is the risk remaining after risk treatment, is within the organizational risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives12.

This indicates that the organization has successfully implemented appropriate risk responses that align with its risk strategy and criteria, and that the organization is able to balance the potential benefits and costs of taking risks12.

The other options are not the best indication, but rather components or outcomes of an effective risk management program. For example:

Risk action plans are approved by senior management is an outcome of an effective risk management program that demonstrates the commitment and accountability of the leadership for risk management12.

Mitigating controls are designed and implemented is a component of an effective risk management program that involves reducing the likelihood or impact of a risk event12.

Risk is recorded and tracked in the risk register is a component of an effective risk management program that involves documenting and updating the risk information and status12. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

2: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

The risk owner is listed as the department responsible for decision making would pose the greatest concern for a risk practitioner who is reviewing accountability assignments for data risk in the risk register, as it indicates a lack of clarity and specificity on who is accountable for the risk and its response. The risk owner should be an individual, not a department, who has the authority and responsibility to manage the risk and its associated controls. The other options are not the greatest concern, as they do not necessarily imply a lack of accountability, but rather a possible difference in roles and responsibilities between the risk owner and the control owner, the business unit and the IT department, or the staff member and the department manager. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

When moving critical assets to the cloud, the most important KPI to include in the SLA is the percentage of standard supplier uptime, which measures the availability and reliability of the cloud service provider. This KPI indicates how often the cloud service is operational and accessible, and how well it meets the agreed service level objectives. A high percentage of standard supplier uptime means that the cloud service provider can deliver the expected performance and functionality of the critical assets, and minimize the risk of service disruptions, downtime, or data loss. The percentage of standard supplier uptime should be aligned with the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery requirements, and should be monitored and reported regularly by the cloud service provider. The SLA should also specify the compensation or remediation actions in case of any breach of the agreed percentage of standard supplier uptime.

References:

•ISACA, Risk and Information Systems Control Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2020, p. 2501

•ISACA, Cloud Computing: Business Benefits With Security, Governance and Assurance Perspectives, 2009, p. 142

•What is an SLA? Best practices for service-level agreements3

 Understanding KPIs:

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are metrics used to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of a process. They must be accurate and relevant to provide meaningful insights.

 Process Inefficiency Despite No Control Issues:

If a KPI shows inefficiency but no control issues are noted, it suggests that the KPI may not be accurately reflecting the process performance.

Recalibrating the KPI ensures that it correctly measures what it is intended to, providing a true picture of the process efficiency.

 Steps for Recalibration:

Review the current KPI and its alignment with process objectives.

Adjust the KPI parameters or thresholds to better reflect process performance.

Validate the recalibrated KPI with historical data to ensure accuracy.

 Comparing Other Actions:

Implementing New Controls:Premature without understanding the root cause of the KPI discrepancy.

Redesigning the Process:Extensive and unnecessary if the KPI is simply miscalibrated.

Re-Evaluating Existing Control Design:Important but secondary to ensuring KPI accuracy.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of accurate KPIs in monitoring process performance and the need for recalibration when discrepancies are found (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.14 Key Performance Indicators)​​.

The organization’s process owner should own the risk of exposing the payroll data due to a control weakness at the third party, because the process owner is the person who is responsible for the business process that generates, uses, or transfers the payroll data. The process owner should also ensure that the third party complies with the contractual obligations and service level agreements that define the expected performance and security standards of the payroll data processing. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not the primary owners of the risk, although they may also be involved in the risk management process. The third party’s IT operations manager, the third party’s chief risk officer (CRO), and the organization’s risk practitioner are examples of secondary owners or stakeholders of the risk, who may provide support, guidance, or oversight to the risk owner, but they are not accountable for the risk or the risk response strategy. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The risk practitioner’s best recommendation after recovery steps have been completed is B. Perform a root cause analysis. A root cause analysis is a process of identifying and assessing the underlying causes of a problem or an incident. By performing a root cause analysis, the risk practitioner can help the organization to understand how and why the cyber attack happened, what vulnerabilities and gaps were exploited, and what actions and controls can be implemented to prevent or mitigate similar incidents in the future12

A root cause analysis can also help the organization to improve its incident response plan, which is a set of instructions to help IT staff detect, respond to, and recover from network security incidents3 A root cause analysis can provide valuable feedback and lessons learned from the cyber attack, and help the organization to update and test its incident response plan accordingly45

Developing new key risk indicators, recommending the purchase of cyber insurance, and reviewing the incident response plan are all possible actions that the risk practitioner can take after a cyber attack, but they are not the best recommendation. Developing new key risk indicators can help the organization to monitor and measure its risk exposure and performance, but it does not address the root causes of the cyber attack12 Recommending the purchase of cyber insurance can help the organization to hedge against the financial losses caused by cyber incidents, but it does not prevent or solve the underlying issues67 Reviewing the incident response plan can help the organization to evaluate its effectiveness and identify areas for improvement, but it does not explain how and why the cyber attack occurred345

Therefore, the best recommendation is to perform a root cause analysis, as it can help the organization to understand, resolve, and prevent the cyber attack and its consequences12

The second line of defense provides oversight functions, ensuring that risks and controls are effectively managed. This includes policy enforcement, compliance monitoring, and risk program evaluation, aligning with the organizational risk governance structure as described in the CRISC framework.

Sensitivity and reliability are the most important criteria for selecting KRIs, as they indicate how well the KRIs reflect the changes in the risk level and how consistent and accurate the KRIs are in measuring the risk.Sensitivity means that the KRIs should respond quickly and proportionally to the variations in the risk exposure, and provide early warning signals of potential risk events. Reliability means that the KRIs should be based on valid and verifiable data sources, and produce consistent and comparable results over time and across different units or functions. Historical data availability, implementation and reporting effort, and ability to display trends are also useful criteria, but they are not as critical as sensitivity and reliability.

References:

•ISACA, Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, 2019, p. 751

•ISACA, Risk and Information Systems Control Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2020, p. 2122

Greatest Privacy Risk:

Jurisdictional Challenges: Processing personal data in an offshore location often involves dealing with different legal and regulatory requirements, which can complicate compliance with data privacy laws such as GDPR or CPRA.

Data Transfer Risks: Even with a data sharing agreement, the protection and enforcement of privacy rights can be less stringent in the offshore location compared to the home jurisdiction. This can lead to increased risks of data breaches and misuse.

Enforcement Difficulties: If privacy violations occur, enforcing legal actions across borders can be challenging, potentially leading to inadequate redress for affected individuals.

Comparison with Other Options:

Privacy Risk Awareness Training Not Conducted: This is a significant risk but can be mitigated relatively quickly with proper training programs.

Privacy Not Incorporated into Risk Management Framework: While critical, the risk can be managed by integrating privacy into the framework without immediate severe consequences.

Remote Work by Staff with Access to Personal Data: This introduces risks related to secure access and data protection but can be managed with proper security controls.

Best Practices:

Data Sovereignty Considerations: Ensure data is processed in jurisdictions with strong privacy laws that align with the organization's regulatory requirements.

Regular Audits and Assessments: Conduct regular audits of data processing practices in offshore locations to ensure compliance with data privacy agreements.

Legal Safeguards: Establish robust legal safeguards and contracts to enforce data protection standards across jurisdictions.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Discusses the challenges and risks associated with cross-border data processing and the importance of aligning with local privacy regulations .

ISACA Guidelines: Highlight the need for comprehensive risk assessments and robust legal agreements when dealing with offshore data processing .

The percentage of system availability is the most important key performance indicator (KPI) to establish in the service level agreement (SLA) for an outsourced data center. This KPI measures the uptime or reliability of the systems hosted by the data center provider, and reflects the ability of the provider to meet the customer’s expectations and requirements for system performance and accessibility. A high percentage of system availability indicates that the provider is delivering consistent and quality service, while a low percentage of system availability indicates that the provider is experiencing frequent or prolonged system failures or disruptions, which can negatively affect the customer’s business operations and reputation. Therefore, the percentage of system availability is a critical factor for evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of the data center provider, and should be clearly defined and monitored in the SLA. The other options are not the most important KPIs to establish in the SLA for an outsourced data center, as they do not directly measure the quality or reliability of the service provided. The percentage of systems included in recovery processes is a measure of the scope or coverage of the disaster recovery plan (DRP) of the data center provider, but it does not indicate how well the provider can execute the DRP or restore the systems in the event of a disaster. The number of key systems hosted is a measure of the capacity or utilization of the data center provider, but it does not indicate how efficiently or securely the provider can manage the systems. The average response time to resolve system incidents is a measure of the responsiveness or agility of the data center provider, but it does not indicate how effectively or proactively the provider can prevent or mitigate system incidents. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3.4, Page 140.

 The best way to support risk-based decisions by senior management would be to map findings to objectives, because this would help them understand how the identified risks affect the achievement of the organization’s goals and priorities. Mapping findings to objectives would also help senior management evaluate the trade-offs between different risk responses and allocate resources accordingly. By linking risks to objectives, the risk practitioner can communicate the value and impact of risk management in a clear and relevant way. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the most effective approach to mitigate the risk associated with data loss due to users sending sensitive information by email without using encryption is to block unencrypted outgoing emails which contain sensitive data. This is an example of a risk avoidance strategy, which aims to eliminate the risk by removing the source of the risk or the activity that causes the risk. Blocking unencrypted outgoing emails which contain sensitive data can prevent unauthorized access, disclosure, modification or destruction of the sensitive information, and thus protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the data. This approach can also deter users from violating the encryption policy and enforce compliance with the security standards and regulations.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 167-1681

Applying risk appetite is the most important topic to cover in a training session to communicate risk assessment methodologies. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. It is a key element of the risk management framework and influences the risk assessment process. Applying risk appetite helps to ensure a consistent risk view within the organization by providing a common basis for evaluating and prioritizing risks, aligning risk responses with business goals, and communicating risk information to stakeholders. The other options are not the most important topics to cover in a training session to communicate risk assessment methodologies, although they may be relevant and useful. Applying risk factors is a technique to quantify or qualify the likelihood and impact of risks based on predefined criteria or scales. Referencing risk event data is a source of information to identify and analyze risks based on historical or current incidents. Understanding risk culture is a factor that affectsthe risk behavior and attitude of the organization and its people. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 40-411; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 612

Detailed Explanation:The next step is toidentify risk response optionsto address the noncompliance and mitigate its impact. This may include corrective actions, implementing controls, or negotiating terms to reduce exposure.

 The primary consideration when implementing controls for monitoring user activity logs is ensuring that the control is proportional to the risk, because this helps to optimize the balance between the benefits and costs of the control, and to avoid over- or under-controlling the risk. User activity logs are records of the actions or events performed by users on IT systems, networks, or resources, such as accessing, modifying, or transferring data or files. Monitoring user activity logs can help to detect and prevent potential threats, such as unauthorized access, data leakage, or malicious activity, and to support the investigation and remediation of incidents. However, monitoring user activity logs also involves certain costs and challenges, such as collecting, storing, analyzing, and reporting large amounts of log data, ensuring the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of the log data, protecting the privacy and security of the log data, and complying with the relevant laws and regulations. Therefore, when implementing controls for monitoring user activity logs, the organization should consider the level and impact of the risk that the control is intended to address, and the value and effectiveness of the control in reducing the risk exposure and impact. The organization should also consider the costs and feasibility of implementing and maintaining the control, and the potential negative consequences or side effects of the control, such as performance degradation, user dissatisfaction, or legal liability. By ensuring that the control is proportional to the risk, the organization can achieve the optimal level of risk management, and avoid wasting resources or creating new risks. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 151

Cyber risk insurance is a type of insurance policy that provides coverage against losses and damages caused by cyber incidents such as data breaches, hacking, and other cyber attacks. When an organization decides to purchase cyber risk insurance, it transfers the risk of financial loss due to a cyber incident to the insurance company. In the scenario described in the question, the organization allowed its cyber risk insurance to lapse while seeking a new insurance provider. This means that the organization is currently not covered by any cyber risk insurance policy and is therefore exposed to financial losses due to cyber incidents. The risk practitioner should report to management that the risk has been accepted. Accepting risk means that the organization is aware of the potential consequences of the risk and has decided not to take any action to mitigate, transfer, or avoid it. The other options are not correct because they do not reflect the current situation of the organization. The organization has not transferred the risk to another party, as it has no cyber risk insurance policy in place. The organization has not mitigated the risk, as it has not implemented anycontrols or measures to reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk. The organization has not avoided the risk, as it has not eliminated the source or cause of the risk or changed its activities to prevent the risk from occurring. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 752

A decision tree is a technique that can be used during a risk assessment to demonstrate to stakeholders that all known alternatives were evaluated. A decision tree is a graphical tool that shows the possible outcomes and consequences of different choices or actions in a sequential and hierarchical manner. A decision tree can help to compare and contrast the alternatives based on their expected values, costs, benefits, and risks, as well as to identify the optimal or preferred alternative that maximizes the value or minimizes the risk. A decision tree can also help to communicate and explain the rationale and assumptions behind the decision-making process to the stakeholders. The other options are not the best techniques to demonstrate to stakeholders that all known alternatives were evaluated, although they may be useful and complementary. A control chart is a technique that monitors the performance and quality of a process or activity over time by plotting the data points and the control limits. A control chart can help to detect and analyze the variations or deviations from the expected or desired results, as well as to identify and correct the causes or sources of the variations. A sensitivity analysis is a technique that measures the impact ofchanges in one or more variables or parameters on the outcome or result of a model or a system. A sensitivity analysis can help to assess the uncertainty or variability of the outcome or result, as well as to determine the most influential or critical variables or parameters that affect the outcome or result. A trend analysis is a technique that examines the patterns or movements of data or information over time by using statistical or graphical methods. A trend analysis can help to forecast or predict the future behavior or direction of the data or information, as well as to identify and explain the factors or drivers that influence the data or information. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers &Explanations Manual, page 922; Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA3; Risk Assessment: Process, Examples, & Tools | SafetyCulture4

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the next course of action when a risk practitioner finds the IT department’s recovery time objective (RTO) for a key system does not align with the enterprise’s business continuity plan (BCP) is to consult with the IT department to update the RTO. The RTO is the maximum acceptable time that an application, computer, network, or system can be down after an unexpected disaster, failure, or comparable event takes place. The RTO should be aligned with the BCP, which is a set of policies, procedures, and resources that enable the organization to continue or resume its critical business functions in the event of a disruption. Consulting with the IT department to update the RTO helps to:

Ensure that the RTO reflects the current business requirements and expectations for the availability and recovery of the key system

Evaluate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of achieving the RTO with the existing IT resources and capabilities

Identify and implement the necessary changes or improvements in the IT infrastructure, processes, and controls to meet the RTO

Test and validate the RTO and the IT recovery procedures and verify their compatibility and consistency with the BCP

Communicate and coordinate the RTO and the IT recovery plan with the relevant stakeholders, such as the business owner, the risk owner, and the senior management

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 174-1751

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), a vulnerability is a flaw or weakness in an asset’s design, implementation, or operation and management that could be exploited by a threat. A delayed removal of employee access is a vulnerability, as it allows former employees to retain access to the organization’s IT assets and processes, which could lead to unauthorized disclosure, modification, or destruction of data or resources. A delayed removal of employee access could be caused by poor personnel management, lack of security awareness, or inadequate access control policies and procedures.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 32-331

Detailed Explanation:Acost-benefit analysisevaluates the financial implications of acquiring cyber insurance versus the potential loss exposure. This approach enables informed decision-making by comparing the insurance cost with the potential savings from covered risks.

The organization’s risk appetite and tolerance are the most important topics to cover in a risk awareness training for senior management. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk tolerance is the level of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is prepared to accept. Senior management plays a key role in defining and communicating the risk appetite and tolerance, as well as ensuring that they are aligned with the organization’s strategy, culture, and values. By covering these topics in the training session, the risk practitioner can help senior management understand and articulate the risk preferences and boundaries of the organization, as well as monitor and adjust them as needed. The other options are not the most important topics to cover in a risk awareness training for senior management, although they may be relevant and useful. The organization’s strategic risk management projects are specific initiatives or activities that aim to identify, assess, and treat risks that may affect the organization’s objectives. Senior management roles and responsibilities are the duties and expectations that senior management has in relation to risk management, such as providing leadership, oversight, and support. Senior management allocation of risk management resources is the process of assigning and prioritizing the human, financial, and technical resources that are needed to implement and maintain risk management activities. These topics are more operational and tactical than strategic and may vary depending on the context and scope of the risk management function. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 40-411; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 732

A primary benefit of engaging the risk owner during the risk assessment process is prioritization of risk action plans across departments, because this helps to ensure that the most critical and relevant risks are addressed first, and that the resources and efforts are allocated and coordinated efficiently and effectively. A risk owner is the person or group who is responsible for the day-to-day management and mitigation of a specific risk, and who has the authority and accountability to make risk-related decisions. A risk assessment is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value. A risk action plan is the set of actions and tasks that are designed and implemented to reduce the likelihood and impact of a risk, or to exploit the opportunities that a risk may create. By engaging the risk owner during the risk assessment process, the organization can benefit from the following advantages:

The risk owner can provide valuable input and feedback on the risk identification, analysis, and evaluation, based on their knowledge, experience, and perspective of the risk and its context.

The risk owner can help to develop and implement the risk action plan, based on their understanding of the risk objectives, expectations, and outcomes, and their ability to influence and control the risk factors and sources.

The risk owner can help to prioritize the risk action plan, based on their assessment of the risk severity, urgency, and importance, and their consideration of the costs, benefits, and feasibility of the risk actions.

The risk owner can help to coordinate the risk action plan across departments, by communicating and collaborating with other risk owners, stakeholders, and resources, and by aligning and integrating the risk actions with the organization’s strategy, processes, and culture. References = Risk Owners — What Do They Do1

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are the metrics or measures that provide information and insight on the level and trend of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. KRIs can help the organization to monitor and communicate the risks, and to support the decision making and planning for the risk management.

To implement the most effective monitoring of KRIs, one of the essential elements that needs to be in place is threshold definition, which is the process of establishing and specifying the acceptable or tolerable ranges or limits for the KRIs, based on the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Threshold definition can help the organization to monitor KRIs by providing the following benefits:

It can enable the comparison and evaluation of the actual or current values of the KRIs with the expected or desired values of the KRIs, and to identify and quantify the deviations or variations that may indicate the changes or developments in the risk level or performance.

It can trigger the alerts or notifications when the values of the KRIs exceed or fall below the thresholds, and to initiate the appropriate actions or responses to address or correct the risks and their impacts.

It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the alignment and integration of the KRIs with the organization’s risk management function, and for the compliance with the organization’s risk policies and standards.

The other options are not the essential elements that need to be in place to implement the most effective monitoring of KRIs, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of threshold definition, which is to establish and specify the acceptable or tolerable ranges or limits for the KRIs.

Escalation procedures are the processes and guidelines for communicating and sharing the information and status of the risks and their responses among the relevant stakeholders, and for escalating or transferring the risks and their responses to the appropriate levels orparties when necessary or required. Escalation procedures can help the organization to monitor KRIs by ensuring the awareness and involvement of the stakeholders, but they are not the essential elements that need to be in place, because they do not establish and specify the acceptable or tolerable ranges or limits for the KRIs.

Automated data feed is the process of using a software tool or system to collect and transmit the data or information that are related or relevant to the KRIs, and to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and timeliness of the data or information. Automated data feed can help the organization to monitor KRIs by providing the data or information that are necessary and relevant for the KRIs, but they are not the essential elements that need to be in place, because they do not establish and specify the acceptable or tolerable ranges or limits for the KRIs.

Controls monitoring is the process of verifying and validating the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls that are intended to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the information systems and resources that are affected by the risks. Controls monitoring can help the organization to monitor KRIs by providing the assurance and evidence on the performance and compliance of the controls, but they are not the essential elements that need to be in place, because they do not establish and specify the acceptable or tolerable ranges or limits for the KRIs. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 206

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying controls to mitigate the inherent risk. Inherent risk is the risk that exists before considering the controls. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation from the risk appetite. Improvements in the design and implementation of a control will most likely result in an update to the residual risk, because they will reduce the likelihood and impact of the risk event, and therefore lower the risk exposure and value. By improving the design and implementation of a control, the organization can enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the control, and ensure that it is aligned with the risk objectives, expectations, and outcomes. The improvement can also address any gaps, overlaps, redundancies, or conflicts among the controls, and any changes or enhancements that are needed to optimize the controls. The other options are less likely to be updated due to improvements in the design and implementation of a control. The inherent risk will not change, as it is based on the nature and value of the asset and the threats and vulnerabilities that exist. The risk appetite and the risk tolerance will also not change, as they are based on the organization’s culture, strategy, and stakeholder expectations. Therefore, the most likely factor to be updated is the residual risk, as it reflects the actual risk level that the organization faces after applying the controls. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the percentage of systems with long recovery target times has decreased is the information that would have the most impact on the overall recovery profile, as it indicates that the organization has improved its ability to restore its critical systems and processes within the acceptable time frames after a disaster. The recovery target time, also known as the recovery time objective (RTO), is the maximum acceptable time that an application, computer, network, or system can be down after an unexpected disaster, failure, or comparable event takes place. The recovery profile, also known as the recovery point objective (RPO), is the maximum acceptable amount of data loss measured in time. A lower percentage of systems with long recovery target times means that the organization has:

Reduced the gap between the business requirements and the IT capabilities for disaster recovery

Enhanced the resilience and availability of its critical systems and processes

Minimized the potential losses and damages caused by prolonged downtime

Increased the confidence and satisfaction of its stakeholders and customers

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 174-1751

IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations or occurrences that illustrate the potential impact of IT-related threats or opportunities on the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation12.

Business risk scenarios are hypothetical situations or occurrences that illustrate the potential impact of business-related threats or opportunities on the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation34.

The best way for the risk practitioner to address the concerns of the business executives who question why they have been assigned ownership of IT-related risk scenarios is to describe IT risk scenarios in terms of business risk, which is a technique that involves translating and communicating the IT risk scenarios into the language and context of the business risk scenarios, and highlighting the linkages and dependencies between them56.

Describing IT risk scenarios in terms of business risk is the best way because it helps the business executives to understand and appreciate the relevance and importance of IT risk scenarios, andhow they affect the achievement of the organization’s goals and the delivery of value to the stakeholders56.

Describing IT risk scenarios in terms of business risk is also the best way because it helps the business executives to accept and fulfill their roles and responsibilities as the owners of IT risk scenarios, and to collaborate and coordinate with the IT team and other stakeholders in the risk management process56.

The other options are not the best ways, but rather possible alternatives or supplements that may support or enhance the description of IT risk scenarios in terms of business risk. For example:

Recommending the formation of an executive risk council to oversee IT risk is a way that involves establishing and empowering a group of senior leaders from different business units and functions to provide the strategic direction, guidance, and oversight for the IT risk management process78. However, this way is not the best way because it does not directlyaddress the concerns of the business executives who question why they have been assigned ownership of IT risk scenarios, and it may not be feasible or effective without a clear and common understanding of IT risk scenarios among the council members78.

Providing an estimate of IT system downtime if IT risk materializes is a way that involves quantifying and communicating the potential loss or disruption of the IT systems or services that support the organization’s operations, if the IT risk scenarios occur9 . However, this way is not the best way because it does not fully capture or convey the impact of IT risk scenarios on the organization’s objectives, performance, or valuecreation, and it may not be relevant or meaningful for some IT risk scenarios that are not related to IT system downtime9 .

Educating business executives on IT risk concepts is a way that involves providing and delivering the knowledge and skills on the principles, frameworks, and techniques of IT risk management, and the roles and responsibilities of the IT risk owners and stakeholders . However, this way is not the best way because it does not specifically address the concerns of the business executives who question why they have been assigned ownership of IT risk scenarios, and it may not be sufficient or effective without a practical and contextual application of IT risk concepts to the organization’s situation and goals . References =

1: IT Scenario Analysis in Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA2

2: New Toolkit and Course From ISACA Help Practitioners Develop Risk Scenarios - ISACA1

3: Business Risk - Investopedia3

4: Business Risk: Definition, Types, Examples & How to Manage4

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

6: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

7: Executive Risk Council - ISACA5

8: Executive Risk Council: A Guide to Success6

9: IT System Downtime - ISACA7

IT System Downtime: Causes, Costs, and How to Prevent It8

IT Risk Education - ISACA9

IT Risk Education: A Guide to Success

A risk-aware culture is a culture that recognizes, understands, and values the importance of risk management in achieving the organization’s objectives and goals. A risk-aware culture is also a culture that supports and encourages the identification, assessment, response, and monitoring of risks across the organization, as well as the sharing and learning of risk information and best practices. One of the activities that would best contribute to promoting an organization-wide risk-aware culture is communicating components of risk and their acceptable levels. This is a technique to inform and educate the stakeholders and decision makers about the nature and scope of the risks that the organization faces, as well as the criteria and standards that the organization uses to measure and manage the risks. Communicating components of risk and their acceptable levels can help to increase the awareness and understanding of the risks and their impact on the organization’s performance and value, as well as to align the expectations and behaviors of the stakeholders and decision makers with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Communicating components of risk and their acceptable levels can also help to foster a transparent and collaborative environment for risk management, where the stakeholders and decision makers can openly discuss and address the risks and their implications, as well as to provide and receive feedback and support. The other options are not the best activities to promote an organization-wide risk-aware culture, although they may be relevant and useful. Performing a benchmark analysis and evaluating gaps is a technique to compare and improve the organization’s risk management process and performance with the industry standards or best practices, as well as to identify and close the gaps or weaknesses in the organization’s risk management capabilities or maturity. However, this technique does not necessarily promote a risk-aware culture, as it focuses on the process and performance of risk management, not the attitude and behavior of risk management. Conducting risk assessments and implementing controls is a technique to identify and analyze the risks that the organization faces, as well as to select and execute the appropriate actions to address the risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risks. However, this technique does not directly promote a risk-aware culture, as it focuses on the actions and outcomes of risk management, not the values and beliefs of risk management. Participating in peer reviews and implementing best practices is a technique to evaluate and enhance the quality and effectiveness of the organization’s risk management activities anddeliverables, as well as to adopt and apply the proven and successful methods or solutions for risk management. However, this technique does not effectively promote a risk-aware culture, as it focuses on the improvement and optimization of risk management, not the communication and collaboration of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 982; The 6 key elements to creating and maintaining a good risk culture3; How to increase risk awareness - Project Management Institute4

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that provides information on the level of exposure to a given risk or the potential impact of a risk. KRIs are used to monitor changes in risk levels and alert management when a risk exceeds a predefined threshold or tolerance. KRIs can help provide early warning of a high-risk condition and enable timely response and mitigation actions. A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their likelihood, impact, and status. A risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, andevaluates risks. A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that measures the achievement of a specific goal or objective. References = Risk IT Framework, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Manual, pages 44-452

A consolidated view into the organization’s risk profile is a comprehensive and integrated representation of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

The most helpful material to provide a consolidated view into the organization’s risk profile is the IT risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the IT-related risks, their sources, impacts, likelihoods, responses, owners, and statuses within the organization34.

The IT risk register is the most helpful material because it provides a complete and consistent overview of the IT risk landscape, and enables the identification, analysis, evaluation, treatment, monitoring, and communication of IT risks across the organization34.

The IT risk register is also the most helpful material because it supports the project prioritization and resource allocation decisions, by highlighting the most significant and relevant IT risks, and by showing the alignment of the IT risk responses with the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, and objectives34.

The other options are not the most helpful materials, but rather possible inputs or outputs of the IT risk register. For example:

A list of key risk indicators (KRIs) is a set of metrics that measure the occurrence or status of IT risks, and provide timely and relevant information and feedback to the organization56. However, a list of KRIs is not the most helpful material because it does not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a snapshot or a trend of selected IT risks56.

Internal audit reports are documents that present the findings and recommendations of the internal audit function, which evaluates the adequacy and effectiveness of the IT risk management and control processes within the organization78. However, internal audit reports are not the most helpful material because they do not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a periodic and independent assessment of specific IT risk areas78.

A list of approved projects is a document that records and tracks the IT projects that have been authorized and funded by the organization, and their objectives, scope, schedule, budget, and status . However, a list of approved projects is not the most helpful material because it does not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a summary of the IT project portfolio . References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

2: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

3: IT Risk Register Template, ISACA, 2019

4: IT Risk Register Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

5: KPIs for Security Operations & Incident Response, SecurityScorecard Blog, June 7, 2021

6: Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Security Operations and Incident Response, DFLabs White Paper, 2018

7: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

8: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

IT Project Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

IT Project Management Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2018

A web-based service provider is an organization that offers online services or applications to its customers or users, such as e-commerce, social media, cloud computing, etc. A web-based service provider depends on the availability, reliability, and security of its web servers, networks, and systems to deliver its services or applications.

A low risk appetite for system outages means that the organization is not willing to accept a high level or frequency of system outages, which are interruptions or disruptions in the normal operation or functionality of the web servers, networks, or systems. System outages can cause customer dissatisfaction, revenue loss, reputation damage, or legal liability for the web-based service provider.

A current risk profile for online security is the current state or condition of the online security risks that may affect the web-based service provider’s objectives and operations. It includes the identification, analysis, and evaluation of the online security risks, and the prioritization and response to them based on their significance and urgency.

The most relevant observation to escalate to senior management is an increase in attempted distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, which are malicious attacks that aim to overwhelm or overload the web servers, networks, or systems with a large volume or frequency of requests or traffic, and prevent them from responding to legitimate requests or traffic. An increase in attempted DDoS attacks indicates a high likelihood and impact of system outages, and a high level of threat or vulnerability for the web-based service provider’s online security. Escalating this observation to senior management can help them to understand the severity and urgency of the risk, and to decide on the appropriate risk response and allocation of resources.

The other options are not the most relevant observations to escalate to senior management, because they do not indicate a high likelihood or impact of system outages, and they may not be relevant or actionable for senior management.

An increase in attempted website phishing attacks means an increase in malicious attempts to deceive or trick the web-based service provider’s customers or users into providing their personal or financial information, such as usernames, passwords, credit card numbers, etc., by impersonating the web-based service provider’s website or email. An increase in attempted website phishing attacks indicates a high level of threat or vulnerability for the web-based service provider’s online security, but it may not directly cause system outages, unless the phishing attacks are used to compromise the web servers, networks, or systems. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval.

A decrease in achievement of service level agreements (SLAs) means a decrease in the extent or degree to which the web-based service provider meets or exceeds the agreed or expected standards or criteria for the quality, performance, or availability of its services or applications, as specified in the contracts or agreements with its customers or users. A decrease in achievement of SLAs indicates a low level of customer satisfaction, retention, or loyalty, and a low level of competitiveness or profitability for the web-based service provider. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval.

A decrease in remediated web security vulnerabilities means a decrease in the number or percentage of web security vulnerabilities that have been identified and resolved or mitigated by the web-based service provider. Web security vulnerabilities are weaknesses or flaws in the web servers, networks, or systems that can be exploited by malicious attackers to compromise or damage the web-based service provider’s online security. A decrease in remediated web security vulnerabilities indicates a low level of effectiveness or efficiency for the web-based service provider’s web security controls or processes. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 161

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The risk landscape is the set of internal and external factors and conditions that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, and create or influence the risks that the organization faces. The risk landscape is dynamic and complex, and it may change over time due to various drivers or events, such as technological innovations, market trends, regulatory changes, customer preferences, competitor actions, environmental issues, etc.

The best way to identify changes to the risk landscape is threat modeling, which is the process of identifying, analyzing, and prioritizing the potential threats or sources of harm that may exploit the vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems, and cause adverse impacts or consequences for the organization. Threat modeling can help the organization to anticipate and prepare for the changes in the risk landscape, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the threats.

Threat modeling can be performed using various techniques, such as brainstorming, scenario analysis, attack trees, STRIDE, DREAD, etc. Threat modeling can also be integrated with the risk management process, and aligned with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite.

The other options are not the best ways to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they do not provide the same level of proactivity, comprehensiveness, and effectiveness of identifying and addressing the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Internal audit reports are the documents that provide the results and findings of the internal audits that are performed to assess and evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. Internal audit reports can provide useful information and recommendations on the current state and performance of the organization, and identify the issues or gaps that need to be addressed or improved, but they are not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they areusually retrospective and reactive, and they may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Access reviews are the processes of verifying and validating the access rights and privileges that are granted to the users or entities that interact with the organization’s assets, processes, or systems, and ensuring that they are appropriate and authorized. Access reviews can provide useful information and feedback on the security and compliance of the organization’s access management, and identify and revoke any unauthorized or unnecessary access rights or privileges, but they are not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they are usually periodic and specific, and they may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Root cause analysis is the process of identifying and understanding the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in a problem or incident that has occurred or may occur in the organization. Root cause analysis can provide useful insights and solutions on the origin and nature of the problem or incident, and prevent or reduce its recurrence or impact, but it is not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because it is usually retrospective and reactive, and it may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 167

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Risk responses are the actions or strategies that are taken to address the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation12.

The most effective way to increase the likelihood that risk responses will be implemented is to assign ownership, which is the process of identifying and appointing the individuals or groups who are responsible and accountable for the execution and monitoring of the risk responses34.

Assigning ownership is the most effective way because it ensures the clarity and commitment of the roles and responsibilities for the risk responses, and avoids the confusion or ambiguity that may arise from the lack of ownership34.

Assigning ownership is also the most effective way because it enhances the communication and collaboration among the stakeholders involved in the risk responses, and provides the feedback and input that are necessary for the improvement and optimization of the risk responses34.

The other options are not the most effective way, but rather possible steps or tools that may support or complement the assignment of ownership. For example:

Creating an action plan is a step that involves defining and documenting the specific tasks, resources, timelines, and deliverables for the risk responses34. However, this step is not the most effective way because it does not guarantee the implementation of the risk responses, especially if there is no clear or agreed ownership for the action plan34.

Reviewing progress reports is a tool that involves collecting and analyzing the information and data on the status and performance of the risk responses, and identifying the issues or gaps that need to be addressed34. However, this tool is not the most effective way because it does not ensure the implementation of the risk responses, especially if there is no ownership for the progress reports or the corrective actions34.

Performing regular audits is a tool that involves conducting an independent and objective assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk responses, and providing the findings and recommendations for improvement56. However, this tool is not the most effective way because it does not ensure the implementation of the risk responses,especially if there is no ownership for the audit results or the follow-up actions56. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

2: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

3: Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips1

4: ProjectManagement.com - How to Implement Risk Responses2

5: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

6: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

A recovery time objective (RTO) is the maximum acceptable time or duration that a business process or function can be disrupted or unavailable due to a disaster or incident, before it causes unacceptable or intolerable consequences for the organization. It is usually expressed in hours, days, or weeks, and it is aligned with the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements.

The primary factor in determining a RTO is the cost of downtime due to a disaster, which is the estimated loss or damage that the organization may suffer if a business process or function is disrupted or unavailable for a certain period of time. The cost of downtime can be expressed in terms of financial, operational, reputational, or legal consequences, and it can help the organization to assess the impact and urgency of the disaster, and to decide on the appropriate recovery strategy and resources.

The other options are not the primary factors in determining a RTO, because they do not address the fundamental question of how long the organization can tolerate the disruption or unavailability of a business process or function.

The cost of offsite backup premises is the cost of acquiring, maintaining, or using an alternative or secondary location or facility that can be used to resume or continue the business process or function in case of a disaster or incident. The cost of offsite backup premises is important to consider when selecting or implementing a recovery strategy, but it is not the primary factor in determining a RTO, because it does not indicate the impact or urgency of the disaster, and it may not reflect the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements.

The cost of testing the business continuity plan is the cost of conducting, evaluating, or improving the tests or exercises that are performed to verify or validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the business continuity plan, which is the document that describes the actions and procedures that the organization will take to recover or restore the business process or function in case of a disaster or incident. The cost of testing the business continuity plan is important to consider when developing or updating the business continuity plan, but it is not the primary factor in determining a RTO, because it does not indicate the impact or urgency of the disaster, and it may not reflect the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements.

The response time of the emergency action plan is the time or duration that it takes for the organization to initiate or execute the emergency action plan, which is the document that describes the immediate actions and procedures that the organization will take to protect the life, health, and safety of the people, and to minimize the damage or loss of the assets,in case of a disaster or incident. The response time of the emergency action plan is important to consider when preparing or reviewing the emergency action plan, but it is not the primary factor in determining a RTO, because it does not indicate the impact or urgency of the disaster, and it may not reflect the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 62-63, 66-67, 70-71, 74-75, 78-79

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 165

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A risk response is the action or plan that is taken to address a specific risk that has been identified, analyzed, and evaluated. It can be one of the following types: mitigate, transfer, avoid, or accept.

The highest priority when developing a risk response is to ensure that it aligns with the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its goals. The risk appetite is usually expressed as a range or a threshold, and it is aligned with the organization’s strategy and culture.

Aligning the risk response with the organization’s risk appetite ensures that the risk response is consistent, appropriate, and proportional to the level and nature of the risk, and that it supports the organization’s objectives and values. It also helps to optimize the balance between risk and return, and to create and protect value for the organization and its stakeholders.

The other options are not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because they do not address the fundamental question of whether the risk response is suitable and acceptable for the organization.

The risk response addresses the risk with a holistic view means that the risk response considers the interrelationships and dependencies among the risk sources, events, impacts, and responses, and the potential secondary and residual effects of the risk response. This is important to ensure that the risk response is comprehensive and effective, and that it does not create new or unintended risks, but it is not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because it does not indicate whether the risk response is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The risk response is based on a cost-benefit analysis means that the risk response compares the expected costs and benefits of implementing the risk response, and selects the risk response that provides the most favorable net outcome. This is important to ensure that the risk response is efficient and economical, and that it maximizes the return on investment, but it is not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because it does not indicate whether the risk response is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The risk response is accounted for in the budget means that the risk response is included in the financial plan and allocation of resources for the organization or the project. This is important to ensure that the risk response is feasible and realistic, and that it has the necessary funding and support, but it is not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because it does not indicate whether the risk response is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 29-30, 34-35, 38-39, 44-45, 50-51, 54-55

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 147

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the primary reason a risk practitioner would be interested in an internal audit report is to evaluate the maturity of the risk management process, as it provides an independent and objective assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management activities and controls. An internal audit report helps to:

Identify and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the risk management process and its alignment with the organization’s objectives and strategy

Detect and report any gaps, errors, or deficiencies in the risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring processes and controls

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address the issues or findings in the risk management process

Communicate and coordinate the audit results and recommendations with the relevant stakeholders, such as the risk owners, the senior management, and the board

Enhance the accountability and transparency of the risk management process and its outcomes

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: IT Risk Reporting, pp. 223-2241

The most critical factor when designing controls is the involvement of the process owner, who is the person responsible for the performance and outcomes of a business process. The process owner has the best knowledge and understanding of the process objectives, activities, inputs, outputs, resources, and risks. The process owner can provide valuable input and feedback on the design of controls that are relevant, effective, efficient, and aligned with the process goals. The process owner can also ensure that the controls are implemented, monitored, and improved as needed. The involvement of the process owner can also increase the acceptance and ownership of the controls by the process participants and stakeholders. The other options are less critical when designing controls. The involvement of internal audit can provide assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls, but internal audit is not responsible for the design or implementation of the controls. The quantitative impact of the risk can help to prioritize and justify the controls, but it is not sufficient to determine the appropriate type and level of controls. The identification of key risk indicators can help to monitor and measure the risk and the performance of the controls, but it is not the main driver of the control design. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 181

Detailed Explanation:Theimpact to business objectivesis paramount when developing risk scenarios, as the primary purpose of risk management is to protect and support business objectives. Understanding the impact helps tailor scenarios to potential risks that could disrupt key operations or strategic goals.

Social engineering is a technique that involves manipulating or deceiving people into performing actions or divulging information that may compromise the security of an organization or its data12.

Entry into an organization’s secured physical premises is a form of physical access that allows an unauthorized individual to access, steal, or damage the organization’s assets, such as equipment, documents, or systems34.

The best way to prevent future occurrences of social engineering entry into an organization’s secured physical premises is to conduct security awareness training, which is an educational program that aims to equip the organization’s employees with the knowledge and skills they need to protect the organization’s data and sensitive information from cyber threats, such as hacking, phishing, or other breaches56.

Security awareness training is the best way because it helps the employees to recognize and resist the common and emerging social engineering techniques, such as tailgating, impersonation, or pretexting, that may be used by the attackers to gain physical access to the organization’s premises56.

Security awareness training is also the best way because it fosters a culture of security and responsibility among the employees, and encourages them to follow the best practices and policies for physical security, such as locking the doors, verifying the identity of visitors, or reporting any suspicious activities or incidents56.

The other options are not the best way, but rather possible measures or controls that may supplement or enhance the security awareness training. For example:

Employing security guards is a measure that involves hiring or contracting professional personnel who are trained and authorized to monitor, patrol, and protect the organization’s premises from unauthorized access or intrusion78. However, this measure is not the best way because it may not be sufficient or effective to prevent or deter all types of social engineering attacks, especially if the attackers are able to bypass, deceive, or coerce the security guards78.

Installing security cameras is a control that involves using electronic devices that capture and record the visual images of the organization’s premises, and provide evidence or alerts of any unauthorized access or activity . However, this control is not the best way because it is reactive rather than proactive, and may not prevent or stop the social engineering attacks before they cause any harm or damage to the organization .

Requiring security access badges is a control that involves using physical or electronic cards that identify and authenticate the employees or authorized visitors who are allowed to enter the organization’s premises, and restrict or deny the access to anyone else . However, this control is not the best way because it may not be foolproof or reliable to prevent or detect the social engineering attacks, especially if the attackers are able to steal, forge, or clone the security access badges . References =

1: What is Social Engineering? | Types & Examples of Social Engineering Attacks1

2: Social Engineering: What It Is and How to Prevent It | Digital Guardian2

3: What is physical Social Engineering and why is it important? - Integrity3603

4: What Is Tailgating (Piggybacking) In Cyber Security? - Wlan Labs4

5: What Is Security Awareness Training and Why Is It Important? - Kaspersky5

6: Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US6

7: Security Guard - Wikipedia7

8: Security Guard Services - Allied Universal8

Security Camera - Wikipedia

Security Camera Systems - The Home Depot

Access Badge - Wikipedia

Access Control Systems - HID Global

The most important factor to include in the analysis of the policy exception is the risk associated with the inability to implement the multi-factor authentication requirement. A policy exception is a temporary orpermanent deviation from the established policies or standards of the organization, due to various reasons, such as budget constraints, technical limitations, or business needs. A policy exception must be submitted and approved by the appropriate authority, and it must include a clear and comprehensive analysis of the rationale, impact, and mitigation of the exception. The risk associated with the inability to implement the multi-factor authentication requirement is the most important factor to include in the analysis, because it evaluates the probability and severity of potential threats or incidents that could exploit the lack of multi-factor authentication, such as unauthorized access, data breach, or identity theft. The risk analysis also helps to justify the need and urgency of the policy exception, and to propose alternative or compensating controls to reduce or transfer the risk, such as password policies, access restrictions, or encryption. The other options are not the most important factor, although they may be relevant or supportive to the policy exception analysis. Sections of the policy that may justify not implementing the requirement are the clauses or provisions in the policy that allow or enable the policy exception, such as exemptions, waivers, or variances. These sections can help to validate the legitimacy and feasibility of the policy exception, but they do not assess the risk or the impact of the exception. Budget justification to implement the new requirement during the current year is the explanation and evidence of the financial resources and constraints that affect the implementation of the multi-factor authentication requirement. This justification can help to demonstrate the cost-benefit and return on investment of the requirement, but it does not measure the risk or the mitigation of the exception. Industry best practices with respect to implementation of the proposed control are the proven methods and standards that are adopted by the leading organizations in a specific field or sector for implementing the multi-factor authentication requirement. These best practices can help to benchmark and improve the quality and effectiveness of the requirement, but they do not quantify the risk or the impact of the exception. References = Policy Exception Management - ISACA, Multi-Factor Authentication Policy - University of Arkansas, Common Conditional Access policy: Require MFA for all users

 A business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects of a disaster on the critical functions and processes of an organization1. A BIA helps to forecast the operational, financial, legal, and reputational impacts of a disaster, as well as the recovery priorities and resources needed to resume normal operations2. A BIA also helps to determine the recovery time objectives (RTO), which are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the critical functions and processes after a disaster3. Therefore, developing a BIA is the most important step for an organization to forecast the effects of a disaster and plan for its recovery. Defining RTOs is a part of the BIA process, not a separate activity. Analyzing capability maturity model gaps is a method to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s processes and practices, but it does not directly forecast the effects of adisaster4. Simulating a disaster recovery is a way to test and validate the recovery plans and procedures, but it does not forecast the effects of a disaster either5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.3: Business Continuity Planning, pp. 227-238.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics that provide information about the achievement of specific goals or objectives.

Prior to selecting KPIs, it is most important to ensure that measurement objectives are defined. This means that the desired outcomes and targets of the goals or objectives are clearly stated and aligned with the organization’s strategy and vision.

Defining measurement objectives helps to select the most relevant and meaningful KPIs that can accurately reflect the progress and performance of the goals or objectives. It also helps to establish the criteria and standards for evaluating and reporting the results and outcomes of the KPIs.

The other options are not the most important things to ensure prior to selecting KPIs. They are either secondary or not essential for KPIs.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 16

Information Technology & Security, page 10

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 8

Whose risk tolerance matters most when making a risk decision depends on the context and the perspective of the decision-maker. However, in general, the business process owner of the exposed assets is the most important stakeholder to consider, as they are accountable for the risks and the outcomes of the risk decisions. The business process owner has the authority, responsibility, and knowledge to manage the risks that affect their business objectives, performance, and reputation. The business process owner also has the best understanding of the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and how to align the risk decisions with the organizational strategy and context. The other options are not the most important stakeholders to consider, although they may have some influence or interest in the risk decisions. Customers who would be affected by a breach are external stakeholders who may have different risk preferences and expectations than the organization, and who may not be fully aware of the risk exposure or mitigation options. Auditors, regulators, and standards organizations are also external stakeholders who may impose some requirements or constraints on the risk decisions, but who may not have the same level of involvement or impact as the business process owner. The information security manager is an internal stakeholder who may provide some technical expertise or guidance on the risk decisions, but who may not have the same level of authority or accountability as the business process owner. References = Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference?; Principles of risk decision-making; Risk Tolerance - Overview, Factors, and Types of Tolerance; Five Factors to Consider When Establishing Risk Tolerance; Risk Tolerance - Overview, Factors, and Types of Tolerance

A managed security service provider (MSSP) is a third-party entity that offers network security services to an organization, such as firewall operation, administration, monitoring, and maintenance1. A firewall is a device or software that controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules2. A firewall administrator is a person or entity that manages and maintains the firewall configuration, rules, and policies3. When an organization uses an MSSP as a firewall administrator, the greatest concern is the exposure of log data, because log data contains sensitive and valuable information about the organization’s network activity, such as source and destination IP addresses, ports, protocols, timestamps, and user identities4. If the log data is not protected properly by the MSSP, it could be accessed, modified, or stolen by unauthorized parties, such as hackers, competitors, or regulators, which could result in data breaches, compliance violations, reputational damage, or legal liabilities for the organization5. The other options are not as concerning as the exposure of log data, because they do not pose a direct and immediate threat to the organization’s data security and privacy, but rather affect the quality and efficiency of the firewall management, as explained below:

B. Lack of governance is a concern when an organization uses an MSSP as a firewall administrator, because it could lead to misalignment or inconsistency between the organization’s and the MSSP’s objectives, policies, and standards for firewall management. However, this concern can be mitigated by establishing a clear and comprehensive service level agreement (SLA) with the MSSP,which defines the roles, responsibilities, expectations, and performance indicators for the firewall management service6.

C. Increased number of firewall rules is a concern when an organization uses an MSSP as a firewall administrator, because it could create complexity, confusion, or duplication in the firewall configuration, which could affect the firewall performance and security. However, this concern can be mitigated by conducting regular firewall audits and reviews with the MSSP, which can help to rationalize, optimize, and update the firewall rules, and to ensure that they are relevant, effective, and efficient for the organization’s network environment.

D. Lack of agreed-upon standards is a concern when an organization uses an MSSP as a firewall administrator, because it could result in gaps or weaknesses in the firewall design and implementation, which could compromise the firewall functionality and security. However, this concern can be mitigated by adopting and following industry best practices, norms, and expectations for firewall management, such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) guidelines, the Center for Internet Security (CIS) benchmarks, or the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) requirements . References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. What Is A Managed Security Service Provider (MSSP)? - Fortinet, What is a Firewall? - Definition from Techopedia, Firewall Administrator Job Description - Betterteam, What is a Firewall Log? - Definition from Techopedia, Firewall Log Management: Why It’s Important and How to Do It Right, How to Write a Service Level Agreement (SLA) for an MSSP, [Firewall Auditing: Best Practices for Security and Compliance], [Guidelines on Firewalls and Firewall Policy | CSRC], [CIS Firewall Benchmark - CIS], [PCI DSS and Firewalls - PCI Security Standards Council]

 A risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and status. A risk register can help manage and communicate risks throughout the risk management process. A risk register should be updated regularly to reflect the current state of risks and their responses. Due to a change in business processes, an identified risk scenario may no longer require mitigation, as the risk level may have decreased or the risk may have been eliminated. However, the risk should remain in the risk register, as the most important reason is to monitor for potential changes to the risk scenario. This means keeping track of the internal and external factors that may affect the risk scenario, such as new threats, vulnerabilities, opportunities, or controls. Monitoring for potential changes to the risk scenario can help identify and respond to any emerging or reoccurring risks, and ensure that therisk register is accurate and complete. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: Risk Register, p. 41-43.

The primary reason to update a risk register with risk assessment results is to communicate the level and priority of assessed risk to management, as this enables them to make informed decisions about risk response and allocation of resources. The risk register is a tool for documenting and reporting the current status of risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, and responses. Updating the risk register with risk assessment results ensures that the information is accurate, relevant, and timely. The risk register also helps to monitor and track the progress and effectiveness of risk management activities. The other options are not the primary reasons to update the risk register, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of doing so. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Assessment, page 109.

A preventive control is a type of control that aims to avoid or reduce the occurrence of an undesirable event or risk. A preventive control can be implemented through technical, administrative, or physical means. A new policy that forbids copying of data onto removable media is an example of a preventive control, because it prevents unauthorized data exfiltration or leakage through removable devices, such as flash drives or external hard disk drives. A preventive control is different from the other types of controls, as explained below:

A detective control is a type of control that aims to discover or identify the occurrence of an undesirable event or risk. A detective control can be implemented through monitoring, auditing, or reporting activities. An example of a detective control is a log analysis tool that detects any unauthorized access or modification of data on a system.

A directive control is a type of control that aims to guide or instruct the behavior or actions of individuals or groups. A directive control can be implemented through policies, procedures, standards, or rules. An example of a directive control is a training program that teaches employees how to handle sensitive data securely and appropriately.

A deterrent control is a type of control that aims to discourage or dissuade individuals or groups from performing an undesirable event or risk. A deterrent control can be implemented through sanctions, penalties, or consequences. An example of a deterrent control is a warning message that informs users of the legal implications of copying data onto removable media without authorization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 38.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, a third-party audit is an independent and objective examination of an organization’s security controls by an external auditor or organization. A third-party audit provides the most objective assessment of the effectiveness of an organization’s security controls, as it helps to avoid any conflicts of interest, biases, or assumptions that may affect the internal audit, review, or testing. A third-party audit also helps to ensure that the security controls comply with the relevant standards, regulations, and best practices, and that they meet the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders, such as customers, partners, or regulators. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 224.

 According to the Key Performance Indicators for Vulnerability Management article, the number of vulnerabilities remediated is a key performance indicator that measures the effectiveness of a vulnerability remediation program. This KPI indicates how many vulnerabilities have been successfully mitigated or fixed within a given time frame. A higher number can imply that the organization is effectively managing its exposures and reducing its risk level. The number of vulnerabilities remediated can also be compared with the number of new vulnerabilities identified to evaluate the progress and performance of the vulnerability remediation program. References = Key Performance Indicators for Vulnerability Management

A vulnerability management process is a process that identifies, analyzes, prioritizes, and remediates the vulnerabilities in the IT systems and applications. The effectiveness of a vulnerability management process can be measured by the key performance indicators (KPIs) that reflect the achievement of the process objectives and the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. The best KPI to measure the effectiveness of a vulnerability management process is the percentage of vulnerabilities remediated within the agreed service level. This KPI indicates how well the process is able to address the vulnerabilities in a timely and efficient manner, and reduce the exposure and impact of the risks associated with the vulnerabilities. The other options are not as good as the percentage of vulnerabilities remediated within the agreed service level, as they may not reflect the quality or timeliness of the remediation actions, or the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2.1, pp. 171-172.

Data confidentiality risk is the risk that the data may be accessed, disclosed, or modified by unauthorized parties, resulting in breaches of privacy, trust, or compliance1. Platform as a Service (PaaS) is a cloud computing model that provides a platform for developing, testing, and deploying applications, without requiring the users to manage the underlying infrastructure2. An internally developed payroll application is an application that is created and maintained by the organization itself, rather than by a third-party vendor, and that is used to process and manage the payroll data of the organization’s employees3. The owner of the data confidentiality risk is the person or entity that has the authority and accountability for the data and its protection, and that is responsible for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risk. The owner of the data confidentiality risk related to an internally developed payroll application that leverages PaaS infrastructure from the cloud is the human resources head, as they are the person who oversees the human resources function and the payroll data of the organization. The human resources head has the best understanding of the sensitivity, value, and usage of the payroll data, and the potential impacts and implications of a data confidentiality breach. The human resources head also has the ability and responsibility to define and implement the policies, procedures, and controls that are necessary to protect the payroll data, and to monitor and report on the performance and compliance of the data confidentiality risk management. The IT infrastructure head, the supplier management head, and the application development head are not the best choices for owning the data confidentiality risk related to an internally developed payroll application that leverages PaaS infrastructure from the cloud, as they do not have the same level of authority and accountability as the human resources head. The IT infrastructure head is the person who oversees the IT infrastructure function and the PaaS infrastructure of the organization. The IT infrastructure head may be involved in providing input and feedback to the human resources head on the data confidentiality risk management, especially those related to the PaaS infrastructure, but they do not have the final say or the overall responsibility for the payroll data and its protection. The supplier management head is the person who oversees the supplier management function and the relationship with the cloud service provider that provides the PaaS infrastructure. The supplier management head may be involved in negotiating and enforcing the service level agreements and the security requirements with the cloud service provider, but they do not have the authority or the expertise to manage the data confidentiality risk of the payroll data. The application development head is the person who oversees the application development function and the development, testing, and deployment of the payroll application. The application development head may be involved in designing and implementing the security features and controls of the payroll application, but they do not have the perspective or the influence to manage the data confidentiality risk of the payroll data. References = 3: Payroll Software: What Is It & How Does It Work? | QuickBooks2: What is Platform as a Service (PaaS)? | IBM1: Data Confidentiality: Identifyingand Protecting Assets Against Data … : [Risk Ownership - Risk Management] : [Human Resources and Payroll Security Policy - University of …] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Concepts, pp. 17-19.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, inherent risk is the risk that exists before any controls or mitigating factors are considered. Inherent risk is influenced by the nature and complexity of the business activities, the environment, and the technology involved. A new policy that allows staff members to remotely connect to the organization’s IT systems via personal or public computers is likely to increase the inherent risk of the organization, as it introduces new threats and vulnerabilities that may compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the IT systems and data. For example, personal or public computers may not have adequate security measures, such as antivirus software, firewalls, encryption, or authentication, and may expose the organization to malware, hacking, data leakage, or unauthorized access. Therefore, the answer is B. Inherent risk. References = Riskand Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 97. Remote Work: How to Secure Your Data

A payroll manager discovers that fields in certain payroll reports have been modified without authorization. This indicates that there is a risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction of sensitive data, such as employee information, payroll records, tax returns, etc.

A control weakness that could have contributed most to this problem is that the programmer had access to the production programs. This means that the programmer could potentially alter the source code or configuration of the payroll software without proper authorization or approval.

The other options are not control weaknesses that could have contributed most to this problem. They are either irrelevant or less likely to cause unauthorized changes in the payroll software.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 12

Information Technology & Security, page 6

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 4

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, senior management support is the commitment and involvement of the top-level executives and leaders in the risk management process. Senior management support is the most important enabler of effective risk management, as it helps to establish and communicate the risk vision, strategy, and culture of the organization. Senior management support also helps to allocate the necessary resources, authority, and accountability for risk management, and to ensure the alignment of the risk management objectives and activities with the organization’s strategy, goals, and values. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 198.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the risk register is a tool that records the results of risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment. The risk register should be updated whenever there is a change in the risk profile, such as when a risk response is implemented or a new risk is identified. Updating the risk register allows the organization to monitor the current status of risks and the effectiveness of risk responses. Therefore, the next step for the risk practitioner after identifying a risk with high impact and very low likelihood that is covered by insurance is to update the risk register with the new information. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 191.

The risk practitioner’s BEST course of action is to validate the transfer of risk and update the register to reflect the change, because outsourcing the backup and recovery procedures to a third-party cloud provider does not eliminate the risk, but rather transfers it to the service provider. The risk practitioner should verify that the service provider has adequate controls and capabilities to handle the backup and recovery procedures, and that the contractual agreement specifies the roles and responsibilities of both parties. The risk practitioner should also update the risk register to reflect the new risk owner and the residual risk level. The other options are not the best course of action, because:

Option A: Accepting the risk and documenting contingency plans for data disruption is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk practitioner is still responsible for the risk, even though it has been transferred to the service provider. Contingency plans are also reactive measures, rather than proactive ones.

Option B: Removing the associated risk scenario from the risk register due to avoidance is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk has been eliminated, which is not the case. The risk still exists, but it has been transferred to the service provider. The risk register should reflect the current risk status and ownership.

Option C: Mitigating the risk with compensating controls enforced by the third-party cloud provider is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk practitioner is still involved in the risk management process, even though the risk has been transferred to the service provider. The risk practitioner should rely on the service provider’s controls and capabilities, and monitor their performance and compliance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 196.

Avoiding the risk means eliminating the source of the risk or changing the likelihood or impact to zero. In this case, the source of the risk is the collection of customers’ personally identifiable information (Pll), which could be exposed to unauthorized parties and result in severe fines. Therefore, the best action to avoid the risk is to modify the business processes to stop collecting Pll, as this would eliminate the possibility of data leakage and the associated consequences. The other options are not as effective as modifying the business processes, because they do not avoid the risk, but rather mitigate or transfer the risk, as explained below:

A. Reduce retention periods for Pll data is a mitigation action, as it reduces the impact of the risk by minimizing the amount of data that could be leaked and the duration of exposure.

B. Move Pll to a highly-secured outsourced site is a transfer action, as it shifts the responsibility of protecting the data to a third party, but does not eliminate the risk of data leakage.

D. Implement strong encryption for Pll is a mitigation action, as it reduces the likelihood of the risk by making the data unreadable to unauthorized parties, but does not eliminate the risk of data leakage. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 40.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, threat impact analysis is the process of estimating and evaluating the potential effects of a threat event on the organization’s objectives, processes, resources, and risks. Threat impact analysis helps to quantify and qualify the severity and likelihood of the threat, and to identify the possible consequences and implications for the organization. Communicating the results of the threat impact analysis is the most effective way to improve stakeholders’ understanding of the effect of a potential threat, as it helps to inform and educate the stakeholders about the nature and magnitude of the threat, and to solicit their feedback and input for the risk response. Communicating the results of the threatimpact analysis also helps to align the stakeholder expectations and preferences, and to facilitate risk-based decision making and action planning. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 208.

According to the What Is Risk Management & Why Is It Important? article, risk management is the systematic process of identifying, assessing, and mitigating threats or uncertainties that can affect your organization. The primary goal of a risk management program is to help ensure objectives are met, by aligning the risk management process with the organization’s strategy, vision, mission, values, and objectives. By having a risk management program, an organization can identify potential problems before they occur and have a plan for addressing them, as well as monitor and report on the effectiveness of the risk responses. This can help the organization to achieve its desired outcomes and create value for its stakeholders. References = What Is Risk Management & Why Is It Important?

 Changes in methods used to calculate probability present the greatest challenge for an IT risk practitioner who wants to report on trends in historical IT risk levels, as they may introduce inconsistency and incomparability in the risk assessment results over time. Probability is a key factor in determining the level and priority of IT risks, and different methods may produce different values for the same risk scenario. For example, some methods may use historical data, expert judgment, or simulation techniques to estimate the likelihood of a risk event. If the methods used to calculate probability change frequently or vary across different business units or processes, the IT risk practitioner may face difficulty in aggregating, normalizing, and reporting the risk levels and trends. The other options are not the greatest challenges for reporting on trends in historical IT risk levels, although they may pose some difficulties or limitations. Qualitative measures for potential loss events are subjective and imprecise, but they can still provide a relative ranking of risks and their impacts. Changes in owners for identified IT risk scenarios may affect the accountability and responsibility for managing the risks, but they do not necessarily affect the risk levels or trends. Frequent use of risk acceptance as a treatment option may indicate a high risk appetite ortolerance, but it does not prevent the IT risk practitioner from reporting on the risk levels or trends. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 181.

An IT license audit is a process that verifies the compliance of the IT software and hardware assets with the licensing agreements and regulations. An IT license audit can reveal the existence of unlicensed copies of software, which can expose the enterprise to legal, financial, and reputational risks. The best course of action in such a situation is to report the issue to management so that appropriate action can be taken. Management can then decide on the most suitable risk response strategy, such as procuring the necessary licenses, uninstalling the unlicensed software, or negotiating with the software vendor. Reporting the issue to management can also help to prevent further violations, identify the root causes, and implement corrective and preventive measures. The other options are not the best course of action, as they may not address the issue effectively, efficiently, or ethically. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.1, pp. 156-157.

 According to the Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, the main reason for analyzing risk scenarios is to identify additional risk scenarios that may not have been considered in the initial risk identification process. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how, where, and why adverse events can occur. By analyzing risk scenarios, the risk manager can gain a better understanding of the relationships between assets, processes, threats, vulnerabilities, and other factors that may affect the organization’s objectives. Analyzing risk scenarios can also help to evaluate the likelihood and impact of the potential risks, as well as the effectiveness of the existing controls and the need for additional controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, Page 215. How to write good risk scenarios and statements

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner reviewing current key risk indicators (KRIs) is that the KRIs’ source data lacks integrity, as this means that the data is inaccurate, incomplete, inconsistent, or outdated, and therefore cannot provide reliable and valid information on the risk level and performance. The KRIs are metrics that measure and monitor the changes in the risk exposure and the effectiveness of the risk response over time. The KRIs’ source data should be collected and verified from credible and relevant sources, and should be updated and maintained regularly. The KRIs’ source data should also be aligned and integrated with the enterprise’s data governance and quality standards. The other options are not the greatest concerns for a risk practitioner reviewing current key risk indicators (KRIs), although they may pose some challenges or limitations. The KRIs are not automated is a concern for the efficiency and timeliness of the KRI reporting and analysis, but it does not affect the integrity of the KRI source data. The KRIs are not quantitative is a concern for the objectivity and comparability of the KRI measurement and prioritization, but it does not affect the integrity of the KRI source data. The KRIs do not allow for trend analysis is a concern for the usefulness and relevance of the KRI communication and decision making, but it does not affect the integrity of the KRI source data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 183.

A risk heat map is a graphical tool that displays the overall risk of the project to senior management by showing the probability and impact of individual risks in a matrix format. A risk heat map can help to prioritize the risks, communicate the risk exposure, and monitor the risk response. A risk heat map can also show the risk appetite and tolerance levels of the organization, as well as the residual risk after the risk response. The other options are not the most effective ways to represent the overall risk of the project to senior management, although they may be useful or complementary to the risk heat map. Aggregated key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics that measure the performance of the project against the objectives, but they do not show the uncertainty or variability of the project outcomes. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the level of risk or the effectiveness of the risk response, but they do not show the relationship between the probability and impact of the risks. A centralized risk register is a document that records the details of the individual risks, such as the description, category, cause, effect, probability, impact, response, and status, but it does not show the overall risk of the project in a visual or concise way. References = Managing overall project risk, Project Risk Management – Quick Reference Guide, 10 Common Project Risks (Plus the Steps To Solve Them), What Is Project Risk Management: Benefits, Challenges, Best Practices

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, impact analysis is the process of estimating and evaluating the potential effects of a risk event on the organization’s objectives, processes, resources, and risks. Impact analysis helps to quantify and qualify the severity and likelihood of the risk, and to identify the possible consequences and implications for the organization. Impact analysis is the first step that should be done when a risk practitioner learns about a new threat, as it helps to assess the current level of risk exposure and the urgency of the risk response. Impact analysis also helps to communicate and report the risk to the relevant stakeholders, and to facilitate risk-based decision making and action planning. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 208.

Prioritizing risk responses helps to balance the costs and benefits of managing IT risk by ensuring that the most significant risks are addressed first and that the resources allocated to risk management are used efficiently and effectively. Evaluating risk based on frequency and probability is a part of risk analysis, not risk response. Considering risk factors that can be quantified is also a part of risk analysis, and it does not necessarily capture all the relevant aspects of risk. Managing the risk by using controls is a possible risk response, but it does not guarantee that the costs and benefits of risk management are balanced, as some controls may be too expensive or ineffective for the level of risk they mitigate. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 145.

An IT risk register is a document that is used as a risk management tool to identify, analyze, and track the potential risks related to the use of information technology within an organization. An IT risk register helps management to understand the organizational risk profile, which is a comprehensive and structured representation of the risks that the organization faces. The risk profile helps the organization to understand its risk exposure, appetite, and tolerance, and to align its risk management strategy with its business objectives and context. The risk register is an essential input for creating and updating the risk profile, as it provides the data and analysis of the risks that need to be prioritized and addressed12. The other options are not the best answers, as they are either not directly shown or derived from the IT risk register. Aligning IT processes with business objectives is a goal of IT governance, which may be influenced by the IT risk register, but not solely determined by it. Communicating the enterprise risk management policy is a responsibility of the senior management and the board of directors, which may use the IT risk register as a reference, but not as the main source. Staying current with existing control status is a function of IT audit and assurance, which may rely on the IT risk register as a basis, but not as the only evidence. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Complete Guide to IT Risk Management | CompTIA

 The effectiveness of a control monitoring program can be measured by how quickly it can detect and correct any control failures that may compromise the achievement of the organization’s objectives. A shorter time between control failure and failure detection means that the control monitoring program is able to identify and report the issues promptly, and initiate the remediation actions accordingly. This can reduce the impact and likelihood of the risks associated with the control failures, and enhance the performance and reliability of the controls. The other options are not as good indicators of the effectiveness of a control monitoring program, because they do not reflect the timeliness and responsiveness of the program, but rather the scope, effort, or frequency of the program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, page 130.

According to the Section 4: Quiz 40 - Business Continuity Plan Flashcards, the best indication of the effectiveness of a business continuity program is the successful performance of business continuity tests and the resolution of any issues that arise. Business continuity tests are exercises that simulate various scenarios of disruption or disaster and evaluate the organization’s ability to recover and resume its critical functions. Business continuity tests can help to validate the assumptions, objectives, and strategies of the business continuity program, as well as to identify and address any gaps, weaknesses, or errors in the business continuity and disaster recovery plans. By performing business continuity tests regularly and effectively, the organization can ensure that its business continuity program is aligned with its needs andexpectations, and that it can cope with any potential crisis. References = Section 4: Quiz 40 - Business Continuity Plan Flashcards

Senior management interviews would offer the MOST insight with regard to an organization’s risk culture, because they can reveal the attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors of the senior management towards risk management, and how they influence and support the risk management process and activities in the organization. Senior management interviews can also provide information on the risk appetite, tolerance, and objectives of the organization, and how they are communicated and implemented across the organization. The other options are not as insightful as senior management interviews, because:

Option A: Risk management procedures are the steps and methods that define how the risk management process and activities are performed in the organization, but they do not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the human and behavioral aspects of risk management.

Option C: Benchmark analyses are the comparisons of the performance and practices of the organization with those of similar or successful organizations, but they do not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the internal and unique aspects of risk management.

Option D: Risk management framework is the set of rules and standards that guide and support the risk management process and activities in the organization, but it does not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the leadership and commitment aspects of risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 82.

The primary reason for periodically monitoring key risk indicators (KRIs) is to detect changes in the risk profile of the enterprise. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks. By monitoring KRIs, the enterprise can identify any deviations from the expected risk level, and take appropriate actions to adjust the risk response or the risk appetite. Monitoring KRIs also helps to validate the effectiveness of risk mitigation controls and the accuracy of risk assessments. Rectifying errors in results of KRIs, reducing costs of risk mitigation controls, and continually improving risk assessments are possible benefits of monitoring KRIs, but they are not the primary reason. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.1.2, page 175.

When a risk practitioner identifies an increasing trend of employees copying company information unrelated to their job functions to USB drives, the element of the risk register that should be updated is the risk likelihood. Here’s why:

Risk Likelihood:

Risk likelihood refers to the probability that a risk event will occur.

Observing an increasing trend of inappropriate behavior (such as copying sensitive information) indicates a higher probability of occurrence, thus increasing the risk likelihood.

Risk Impact:

While the impact of such actions could be significant, the increasing trend specifically affects the likelihood rather than the immediate impact.

The risk impact remains constant unless there is a change in the potential damage caused by the action.

Key Risk Indicator (KRI):

This observation might serve as a KRI, but the immediate action is to update the likelihood in the risk register, reflecting the increased probability.

Risk Appetite:

Risk appetite defines the level of risk an organization is willing to accept. This observation suggests a deviation but does not directly affect the risk appetite itself.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of regularly updating the risk likelihood based on new observations and trends (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.9.1 Inherent Risk).

The second line of defense provides oversight to ensure risks and controls are effectively managed. This includes compliance, risk management policies, and performance monitoring, aligning withRisk Governanceframeworks and enhancing the organization’s risk resilience.

 Internal Audit Review:

An internal audit review of control design involves a thorough examination of the control’s structure, implementation, and effectiveness.

Auditors use a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk management, control, and governance processes.

 Steps in Audit Review:

Understand Control Objectives:Auditors ensure that the control is designed to meet specific risk management objectives.

Evaluate Implementation:Check whether the control has been implemented as designed.

Test Effectiveness:Perform tests to verify that the control operates effectively and consistently over time.

 Importance of Audit Review:

Provides independent and objective assurance that the control is appropriately designed and functioning as intended.

Identifies any deficiencies or areas for improvement in the control design.

 Comparing Other Validation Methods:

Senior Management Approval:Indicates support but does not validate effectiveness.

Documentation of Control Objectives:Important for understanding intent but not validation.

Control Owner Attestation:Provides insight but lacks the independence of an audit.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual highlights the role of internal audits in validating control design and ensuring effective risk management (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.9 Control Testing and Effectiveness Evaluation)​​.

The risk practitioner’s next step after learning of an incident that has affected a competitor is to develop risk scenarios, as it involves identifying and describing the potential sources, events, impacts, and responses of the risk that may affect the organization in a similar way as the competitor, and assessing the likelihood and magnitude of the risk. Activating the incident response plan, implementing compensating controls, and updating the risk register are not the next steps, as they are more related to the reaction, mitigation, or reporting of the risk, respectively, rather than the identification and assessment of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

The risk scenario associated with data loss at the organization’s cloud provider should be reassigned to the data owner, as they have the authority and responsibility to define the classification, retention, and disposal requirements for the data they own, and to manage the risk and controls related to the data. The risk scenario should not be assigned to the cloud provider, as they are an external party that may not have the same interest or accountability as the organization. Senior management, chief risk officer (CRO), and vendor manager are not the best choices, as they have different roles and responsibilities related to risk governance, strategy, or oversight, respectively, but they do not own the data. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

Segregation of duties is a key control for preventing and detecting fraudulent transactions, especially in a large organization where there are many employees and transactions involved. Segregation of duties means that no single person has the authority or ability to initiate, approve, execute, and record a transaction without the involvement or oversight of another person. This reduces the opportunity and incentive for fraud, as well as the risk of errors or omissions. Segregation of duties also facilitates the detection of fraud by creating an audit trail and increasing the likelihood of whistleblowing.

The other options are not as effective as segregation of duties for mitigating risk related to fraudulent transactions. Monetary approval limits (B) are useful for controlling the amount and frequency of transactions, but they do not prevent unauthorized or fraudulent transactions from occurring. Clear roles and responsibilities © are important for defining the expectations and accountabilities of employees, but they do not ensure that employees comply with them or that their actions are monitored and verified. Password policies (D) are essential for securing access to systems and data, but they do not prevent fraudsters from exploiting weak or compromised passwords or from using legitimate passwords for fraudulent purposes.

The second line of defense is responsible for challenging the risk decision making of the first line of defense, which is the business process owners and managers. The second line of defense also provides oversight, guidance, and support to the first line of defense in implementing and maintaining effective risk management practices. The second line of defense includes functions such as risk management, compliance, quality assurance, and internal audit. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: IT Risk Management Roles and Responsibilities, Page 14.

The principle of least privilege is a key concept in information security that aims to provide users with the minimum level of access—or permissions—necessary to perform their job functions. By ensuring that users only have the access they need, organizations can significantly reduce the risk associated with excessive access by authorized users.

Understanding Least Privilege

The principle of least privilege restricts access rights for users to the bare minimum permissions they need to perform their work. This minimizes the potential damage from accidents or malicious activities.

Least privilege should be applied to all user accounts, including administrative and service accounts.

Implementation

Implementing least privilege involves a detailed analysis of job functions and the necessary access required for each role.

Regularly review and update access permissions to ensure they remain aligned with current job responsibilities and organizational needs.

Mitigating Risk

By limiting access to only what is necessary, organizations can prevent users from having permissions that could be exploited, intentionally or unintentionally, to cause harm.

This also includes revoking unnecessary privileges when users change roles or no longer need access.

Comparison with Other Options

A. Monitoring user activity using security logs: While monitoring can detect inappropriate activity, it does not prevent it.

B. Revoking access for users changing roles: This is a necessary practice but does not address the initial allocation of excessive privileges.

D. Conducting periodic reviews of authorizations granted: Periodic reviews are important but are reactive rather than proactive.

References

Sybex-CISSP-Official-Study-Guide-9-Edition.pdf, p. 641, discussing the principle of least privilege and its implementation​​.

Internet of Things (IoT) is an emerging technology that refers to the network of devices, such as cameras, sensors, appliances, or vehicles, that can communicate and exchange data via the internet. IoT is frequently used for botnet distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, which are cyberattacks that aim to disrupt or disable a target’s online services by overwhelming them with traffic from multiple sources. IoT devices are often unsecured, unpatched, or misconfigured, which makes them vulnerable to being infected by malware and controlled by attackers. Attackers can use IoT devices to create large and powerful botnets that can launch DDoS attacks against various targets, such as websites, servers, or networks. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, IoT is one of the key emerging technologies that pose new IT risks, including DDoS attacks1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, IoT is the correct answer to this question2. According to the web search results, IoT devices are commonly used for botnet DDoS attacks, such as the Mirai botnet, the Emotet botnet, and the BoT-IoT dataset345.

Risk tolerance defines the boundaries for acceptable risk levels and directly impacts decision-making for mitigation strategies. A well-defined tolerance helps prioritize actions and allocate resources effectively, emphasizing its central role in theRisk Responsedomain.

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response has been implemented. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation from the desired outcome or objective. If the residual risk is within the risk tolerance, it means that the risk response has been effective in reducing the risk to an acceptable level.

References

•ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Domain 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1.1: Residual Risk

•Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com

•Risk Tolerance - ISACA

Log modification undermines data integrity, which is critical for accurate risk monitoring. Ensuring log integrity supports reliable KRI assessments, a key focus within theRisk Monitoring and Reportingframework.

Risk capacity is the amount of risk that an organization can financially afford to take, without jeopardizing its ability to meet its objectives or obligations. Risk capacity is determined by factors such as the organization’s income, assets, liabilities, and cash flow. An organization that has built up its cash reserves has increased its risk capacity, as it has more financial resources and flexibility to support additional risk. This may enable the organization to pursue more opportunities or initiatives that involve higher risk and higher reward.

Risk profile is a summary of the key risks that an organization faces, and their implications for the organization’s objectives and strategy. Risk profile may change due to factors such as new technologies, business initiatives, or external events, but not necessarily due to changes in cash reserves.

Risk indicators are metrics or indicators that help to monitor and evaluate the likelihood or impact of a risk, or the effectiveness or efficiency of a control. Risk indicators may vary depending on the risk sources, scenarios, or responses, but not necessarily due to changes in cash reserves.

Risk tolerance is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept, based on its risk appetite and risk capacity. Risk tolerance is influenced by factors such as the organization’s culture, values, and objectives, as well as the risk environment and expectations. Risk tolerance may change due to changes in cash reserves, but it is not the most likely impact, as it also depends on the organization’s risk appetite and other factors.

A risk awareness program is a set of activities that aim to educate and inform employees about the organization’s risk culture, policies, and procedures. A risk awareness program can help improve an organization’s risk culture by enhancing the employees’ understanding of risk, their roles and responsibilities in risk management, and the benefits of risk mitigation. A risk awareness program can also foster a culture of openness, trust, and collaboration among employees, managers, and stakeholders, which can improve the organization’s risk performance and resilience.

Maintaining a documented risk register, rewarding employees for reporting security incidents, and allocating resources for risk remediation are also important aspects of risk management, but they do not directly address the organization’s risk culture, which is the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes that influence how risk is perceived and handled within the organization.

The policy has not been approved by the organization’s board should be of most concern, as it indicates a lack of governance and oversight for the organization’s cybersecurity posture. The board is ultimately responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization, and for ensuring that the cybersecurity policy aligns with them. Without the board’s approval, the policy may not reflect the organization’s vision, mission, values, and culture, and may not be communicated, implemented, or enforced effectively. The board’s approval also demonstrates the commitment and support of the senior management for the cybersecurity program, and enhances the accountability and responsibility of the stakeholders involved.

References:

•ISACA, Essential Functions of a Cybersecurity Program1

•ISACA, Cybersecurity: Based on the NIST Cybersecurity Framework2

According to the CRISC exam content outline2, one of the tasks of a risk practitioner is to “report on risk, in line with organizational reporting requirements, to enable decision making and escalation”. Therefore, the first thing that the risk practitioner should do after discovering a policy violation is to report the incident to the appropriate authority, such as the IT security manager or the risk management committee. This will ensurethat the incident is properly documented, investigated, and resolved, and that any potential impact or consequences are minimized.

The other options are not the first actions that the risk practitioner should take. Planning a security awareness session (B) may be a preventive measure to avoid future incidents, but it does not address the current one. Assessing the new risk © may be part of the risk response process, but it should be done after reporting the incident and gathering more information. Updating the risk register (D) may be a result of the risk assessment and response, but it should not be done before reporting the incident and following the organizational procedures.

The second line of defense is tasked with overseeing risk responses to ensure they align with the organization’s risk strategy and appetite. This responsibility supports effective governance under theThree Lines of Defense Model.

 Role of the Board and Executive Management:

The board of directors and executive management are responsible for setting the overall strategic direction of the organization, including its risk tolerance.

They have the authority and oversight necessary to define the levels of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives.

 Defining Risk Tolerance:

Risk tolerance refers to the acceptable level of variation in performance relative to the achievement of objectives. It is essentially the degree of risk the organization is willing to endure.

The board and executive management establish risk tolerance based on the organization's strategic goals, capacity to absorb losses, and regulatory requirements.

 Importance of Senior Leadership:

Senior leadership's involvement ensures that risk tolerance is aligned with the organization's overall strategy and risk appetite.

It provides a top-down approach to risk management, ensuring consistency and alignment across the organization.

 Comparing Other Stakeholders:

IT Compliance and IT Audit:These functions are responsible for monitoring and ensuring adherence to policies but do not set risk tolerance.

Regulators and Shareholders:They influence risk management practices through external pressures but do not define risk tolerance directly.

Enterprise Risk Management (ERM):ERM frameworks support the implementation of risk management but the actual definition of risk tolerance comes from the board and executive management.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses how senior management, including the board, is responsible for defining risk tolerance and ensuring it aligns with the organization's risk appetite (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.10 Risk Appetite, Tolerance, and Capacity) .

According to the three lines of defense model, the responsibility for managing risk and controls resides with the operational management, which forms the first line of defense. The operational management is the function that owns and manages risk as part of their accountability for achieving objectives. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, mitigating, and reporting on risks and controls within their areas ofoperation. They are also responsible for implementing and maintaining effective internal controls and ensuring compliance with policies, standards, and regulations.

References:

•ISACA, Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, 2019, p. 741

•Internal audit: three lines of defence model explained2

Ethics committees are typically responsible for developing, implementing, and overseeing an organization’s ethical guidelines and policies. They play a crucial role in mitigating ethical risk by ensuring that the organization’s operations align with its ethical standards123.

References

1What Is Ethically Informed Risk Management? - Journal of Ethics

2Five Ways to Reduce Ethics and Compliance Risk - Free Ethics Toolkit

35 Ways to Manage Ethical Risks - ClearRisk

An increase in the number of security incidents is the most significant indicator of the need to perform a penetration test, because it suggests that the organization’s IT systems or networks are vulnerable to attacks and may not have adequate security controls in place. A penetration test is a simulated attack on an IT system or network to identify and exploit its weaknesses and evaluate its security posture. A penetration test can help to discover and remediate the vulnerabilities that may have caused or contributed to the security incidents, and to prevent or reduce the likelihood and impact of future incidents. An increase in the number of high-risk audit findings, an increase in the percentage of turnover in IT personnel, and an increase in the number of infrastructure changes are all possible indicators of the need to perform a penetration test, but they are not the most significant indicator, as they do not directly reflect the actual or potential occurrence of security incidents. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 200

The most important factor when determining risk appetite is gaining management consensus, as it involves obtaining the agreement and support of the senior management and the board of directors on the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, and ensuring the alignment and consistency of the risk appetite across the organization. The other options are not the most important factors, as they are more related to the assessment, benchmarking, or identification of the risk, respectively, rather than the determination of the risk appetite. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

 The best way to validate whether controls to reduce user device vulnerabilities have been implemented according to management’s action plan is to rescan the user environment, as it provides an objective and reliable way to measure and verify the effectiveness and adequacy of the controls, and to detect any remaining or new vulnerabilities. Surveying device owners, requiring annual end user policy acceptance, and reviewing awareness training assessment results are not the best ways, as they may not provide sufficient assurance, evidence, or timeliness of the control validation, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the most important reason to communicate control effectiveness to senior management is to ensure management understands the current risk status. Control effectiveness is a measure of how well a control reduces the likelihood or impact of a risk event. By communicating control effectiveness, risk managers can provide management with relevant and timely information about the residual risk level, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the potential gaps or weaknesses in the control environment. This can help management make informed decisions about risk response strategies, resource allocation, and risk oversight12

1: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Study Guide, 4th Edition, page 33 2: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Handbook, 1st Edition, page 25

 Data Protection Controls:

Evaluating existing data protection controls involves reviewing and assessing the measures in place to protect sensitive data from breaches.

This includes technical, administrative, and physical controls designed to prevent unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, or destruction of data.

 Steps in Evaluation:

Review Current Controls:Assess the effectiveness of encryption, access controls, data masking, and other security measures.

Identify Gaps:Determine if there are any weaknesses or vulnerabilities in the current controls.

Recommend Improvements:Suggest enhancements or additional controls to address identified gaps.

 Importance of Evaluation:

Provides the board with a clear understanding of the organization’s current security posture and exposure to data breaches.

Helps in identifying areas where additional controls or improvements are needed to mitigate risks effectively.

 Comparing Other Actions:

Reassess Risk Appetite and Tolerance Levels:Important but secondary to understanding current controls.

Evaluate Data Sensitivity:Useful but should be part of a broader assessment of existing controls.

Review Data Retention Policy:Relevant for compliance but not directly addressing the immediate concern of data breaches.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the importance of evaluating data protection controls to understand and mitigate risks (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 4: Information Technology and Security, Section 4.4 Data Protection and Privacy)​​.

 Understanding Risk Analysis:

Risk analysis involves identifying potential risks associated with a new application and assessing their likelihood and impact on the organization.

It provides a detailed understanding of the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences, enabling informed decision-making.

 Steps in Conducting a Risk Analysis:

Identify Risks:Determine what risks could arise from the new application, including security vulnerabilities, compliance issues, and operational disruptions.

Assess Risks:Evaluate the likelihood and impact of each identified risk. This includes both qualitative and quantitative assessments.

Prioritize Risks:Rank the risks based on their assessed impact and likelihood to focus on the most significant threats first.

 Importance of Risk Analysis:

Provides senior management with a comprehensive view of the risks involved, enabling them to make informed decisions about proceeding with the application.

Helps in developing mitigation strategies to address the identified risks.

 Comparing Other Options:

Perform an Audit:Audits are useful for evaluating existing controls but are not the first step in assessing risks for a new application.

Develop Risk Scenarios:This is part of the risk analysis process but comes after identifying and assessing risks.

Perform a Cost-Benefit Analysis:Important for decision-making but follows the initial risk analysis to understand potential impacts.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of conducting a risk analysis to understand and manage risks associated with new applications (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2.1 Conducting Risk Analysis)​​.

Senior management’s role in the RACI model when tasked with reviewing monthly status reports provided by risk owners is accountable, as it means that they have the ultimate authority and responsibility to approve or reject the risk management decisions and actions, and to oversee the risk management performance and outcomes. The other options are not the correct roles, as they imply different levels or types of involvement or participation in the risk management process, such as being informed, responsible, or consulted, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

Developing a risk response plan is the best action to address the risk scenarios with high impact and low likelihood of occurrence, because it helps to define and implement the appropriate actions to reduce or eliminate the risk, or to prepare for and recover from the potential consequences. A risk response plan is a document that outlines the strategies and tactics for managing the identified risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risk. A risk response plan also assigns the roles and responsibilities for the risk owners and stakeholders, and sets the timelines and budgets for the risk response activities. A risk scenario with high impact and low likelihood of occurrence is a rare but severe event that may cause significant disruption or damage to the organization or its objectives, such as a natural disaster, a cyberattack, or a pandemic. Therefore, developing a risk response plan is the best action to address these scenarios, as it helps to minimize the exposure and impact of the risk, and to enhance the resilience and recovery of the organization. Assembling an incident response team, creating a disaster recovery plan (DRP), and initiating a business impact analysis (BIA) are all important actions to perform as part of the risk response plan, but they are not the best action, as they do not cover the whole spectrum of risk response strategies and activities. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2, page 103

Completing a gap analysis identifies discrepancies between current controls and the requirements of the IT control framework, ensuring a focused approach to compliance. This supportsRisk Assessment for Compliance Requirements.

Establishing executive management support is the most important success factor when introducing risk management in an organization. This is because executive management support can help ensure that risk management is aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, as well as provide the necessary resources, authority, and accountability for risk management activities. Executive management support can also help foster a risk-aware culture, promote stakeholder engagement, and facilitate risk communication and reporting. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key elements of IT governance is to obtain executive management support and commitment for risk management1. According to the web search results, executive management support is a critical success factor for risk management in various contexts and industries234.

Scanning the Internet for unauthorized usage of the enterprise's brand proactively identifies fraudulent activities and enables timely response. This aligns withBrand Protection and Risk Mitigationstrategies.

The MOST important aspect for the risk practitioner to confirm is:

A. Appropriate approvals for the control changes

Ensuring that the control design changes have the appropriate approvals is crucial. This confirms that the changes are recognized and sanctioned by the necessary authority within the organization, aligning with governance practices and maintaining the integrity of the risk management process.

A risk profile is a summary of the risks that an organization faces and their likelihood and impact. Consistently recording risk assessment results in the risk register can help improve the accuracy of risk profiles by providing a reliable and up-to-date source of information on the current risk situation, the risk response actions, and the residual risk levels. A risk register is a tool that captures and documents the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes2. A risk register can also facilitate risk communication, monitoring, and reporting2.

Assessment of organizational risk appetite, compliance with best practice, and accountability for loss events are not the primary benefits of consistently recording risk assessment results in the risk register. These are possible outcomes or objectives of risk management, but they do not directly depend on the risk register.

The risk practitioner’s best recommendation when one of an organization’s key IT systems cannot be patched because the patches interfere with critical business application functionalities is to identify additional mitigating controls, as they may reduce the likelihood or impact of the vulnerabilities being exploited, and align the residual risk with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. The other options are not the best recommendations, as they may not address the risk adequately, or may introduce unacceptable consequences, such as disrupting the business operations, changing the risk strategy, or accepting excessive risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

Assigning accountability to risk owners is the best way to ensure implementation of corrective action plans, because it clarifies the roles and responsibilities of those who are in charge of managing and mitigating the risks. Contracting to third parties, establishing employee awareness training, and setting target dates tocomplete actions are all helpful measures, but they do not guarantee the implementation of corrective action plans without accountability. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.3, page 105

 The situation where the cost of maintaining a control has grown to exceed the potential loss is best described as an over-controlled environment, as it indicates that the control is not cost-effective and may be unnecessary or excessive. Insufficient risk tolerance, optimized control management, and effective risk management are not the best descriptions, as they do not reflect the imbalance between the control cost and the potential loss. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 149.