CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Questions and Answers

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

An organization’s account provisioning process is the process of creating, modifying, or deleting user accounts and access rights for the organization’s information systems and resources. It involves defining the access requirements, policies, and standards, and implementing and enforcing them across the organization.

The best evidence of the effectiveness of an organization’s account provisioning process is entitlement reviews, which are the periodic or regular reviews and validations of the user accounts and access rights that are granted or assigned to the users or entities that interact with the organization’s information systems and resources. Entitlement reviews can provide assurance and verification that the account provisioning process is accurate, consistent, and compliant, and that it meets the organization’s security and business objectives and requirements.

Entitlement reviews can be performed using various techniques, such as automated tools, reports, audits, surveys, etc. Entitlement reviews can also be integrated with the organization’s governance, risk management, and compliance functions, and aligned with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the best evidence of the effectiveness of an organization’s account provisioning process, because they do not provide the same level of assurance and verification that the account provisioning process is accurate, consistent, and compliant, and that it meets the organization’s security and business objectives and requirements.

User provisioning is the process of creating, modifying, or deleting user accounts and access rights for a specific user or entity, based on their identity, role, or function in the organization. User provisioning is an important part of the account provisioning process, but it is not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because it does not indicate whether the user accounts and access rights are appropriate and authorized, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

Role-based access controls are the controls that grant or restrict user accounts and access rights based on the predefined roles or functions that the users or entities perform or assume in the organization. Role-based access controls are an important part of the account provisioning process, but they are not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because they do not indicate whether the roles or functions are defined and assigned correctly and consistently, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

Security log monitoring is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the security events or activities that are recorded or logged by the organization’s information systems and resources. Security log monitoring is an important part of the account provisioning process, but it is not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because it does not indicate whether the security events or activities are legitimate or authorized, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards. 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 173

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

 AI in Heuristic Security Systems:

Heuristic security systems use artificial intelligence (AI) to identify and respond to potential threats by learning from data patterns and behaviors.

 Risk of Misclassification:

During the baselining process, AI systems establish what is considered normal behavior. If malicious activity is present during this period, it may be incorrectly classified as normal.

This misclassification can lead to undetected security breaches, as the system will not recognize these activities as threats in the future.

 Impact of Misclassification:

Misclassified malicious activities can lead to significant security risks, allowing attackers to operate undetected within the system.

It undermines the effectiveness of the heuristic system, reducing its ability to protect the organization from real threats.

 Comparing Other Risks:

Less Reliance on Human Intervention: This is a general concern but does not directly impact the accuracy of threat detection.

Difficulty in Risk Assessments: While a challenge, it is not the greatest risk compared to misclassification of malicious activity.

Outdated Patterns: While a concern, the primary risk lies in initial misclassification during baselining.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the challenges of AI in security systems, particularly the risk of misclassification during the learning phase (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 4: Information Technology and Security, Section 4.7.4 Artificial Intelligence) .

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 the internal 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

The greatest benefit of using IT risk scenarios is that they facilitate communication of risk, as they provide a clear and realistic description of the risk sources, events, impacts, and responses, and enable the stakeholders to understand and appreciate the risk exposure and appetite of the organization. Supporting compliance with regulations, providing evidence of risk assessment, and enabling the use of key risk indicators (KRIs) are also benefits of using IT risk scenarios, but they are not the greatest benefit, as they are more related to the outcomes or consequences of risk communication, rather than the process or value of risk communication. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

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

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

Conducting periodic reviews of authorizations granted helps to mitigate risks associated with excessive access by authorized users. This practice ensures that users have only the necessary permissions required to perform their roles and that any outdated or unnecessary access rights are removed promptly. Here’s a detailed explanation:

Periodic Reviews of Authorizations Granted:

Regular Audits: Regularly scheduled reviews or audits help identify any discrepancies in user access levels. These audits ensure that users' access rights align with their current roles and responsibilities within the organization.

Detection of Excessive Privileges: During these reviews, any excessive or unnecessary access privileges that have been granted can be identified and revoked. This reduces the risk of unauthorized activities, either intentional or accidental, by users who have more access than required.

Compliance with Policies: Ensuring that user access rights are reviewed periodically aligns with best practices and regulatory requirements, supporting the overall governance framework of the organization.

Comparison with Other Options:

Revoking Access for Users Changing Roles: While revoking access for users changing roles is crucial, it is a reactive measure that only applies when roles change. Periodic reviews are proactive and continuous.

Monitoring User Activity Using Security Logs: Monitoring security logs is essential for detecting and responding to suspicious activities but does not prevent the initial granting of excessive access.

Granting Access Based on Least Privilege: Least privilege is a fundamental principle, but it needs to be continuously enforced and validated through periodic reviews to be effective.

Best Practices:

Automation: Implementing automated tools for access reviews can streamline the process and reduce human errors.

Documentation: Maintaining detailed records of the reviews and any changes made helps in compliance and provides an audit trail.

Segregation of Duties: Ensuring that the review process itself is subject to segregation of duties, preventing conflicts of interest and ensuring objectivity.

CRISC Review Manual: Discusses the importance of periodic reviews in ensuring the effectiveness of access controls and maintaining a secure environment.

ISACA Standards and Guidelines: Emphasize the need for continuous monitoring and review of user access to mitigate risks associated with excessive permissions.

References:

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the first course of action when a risk practitioner discovers several key documents detailing the design of a product currently in development have been posted on the Internet is to invoke the established incident response plan, which is a set of policies, procedures, and resources that enable the organization to respond to and recover from an incident that affects the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of its IT assets and processes. Invoking the incident response plan helps to:

Contain and isolate the incident and prevent further damage or loss

Identify and analyze the source, cause, and impact of the incident

Eradicate and eliminate the incident and restore normal operations

Communicate and coordinate the incident response activities and roles with the relevant stakeholders, such as the business owner, the risk owner, the senior management, and the external parties

Learn and improve from the incident and update the incident response plan and the risk register

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 219-2201

 Check totals are IT controls that verify the accuracy and completeness of data by comparing the sum or count of data records or data fields with a predetermined or expected value. Check totals can help detect and prevent errors, omissions, or alterations in data entry, processing, or transmission. Check totals can also help identify and correct data discrepancies or anomalies. Therefore, check totals are the most useful IT controls in mitigating the risk associated with inaccurate data. The other options are not the best answers because they do not directly address the risk of inaccurate data. Encrypted storage of data is an IT control that protects the confidentiality and integrity of data by preventing unauthorized access or modification. However, encryption does not ensure the accuracy or validity of the data itself. Links to source data are IT controls that provide traceability and transparency of data by allowing users to access or view the original data from which the derived or aggregated data is obtained. However, links to source data do not verify or correct the data quality or consistency. Audit trails for updates and deletions are IT controls that record the history and changes of data by capturing the date, time, user, and action performed on the data. Audit trails can help monitor and review the data activities and transactions, but they do not prevent or detect the data errors or inaccuracies. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 164-1651; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 722

The best way for a risk practitioner to help management prioritize risk response is to assess risk against business objectives. This means comparing the level and nature of the risks with the goals and strategies of the organization, and determining which risks pose the most significant threat or opportunity to the achievement of those objectives. By assessing risk against business objectives, the risk practitioner can help management identify the most critical and relevant risks, and prioritize the risk response actions accordingly. The risk response actions should be aligned with the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to take in order to meet its strategic goals1. The other options are not the best ways for a risk practitioner to help management prioritize risk response, as they are either less effective or less specific than assessing risk against business objectives. Aligning business objectives to the risk profile is a way of ensuring that the organization’s objectives are realistic and achievable, given the current and potential risks that the organization faces. However, this is not the same as prioritizing risk response, as it does not indicate which risks should be addressed first or how they should be managed. Implementing an organization-specific risk taxonomy is a way of creating a common language and classification system for describing and categorizing risks. This can help improve the consistency and clarity of risk communication and reporting across the organization. However, this is not the same as prioritizing risk response, as it does not measure the likelihood and impact of the risks, or their relation to the organization’s objectives. Explaining risk details to management is a way of providing information and insight on the sources, drivers, consequences, and responses of the risks. This can help increase the awareness and understanding of the risks among the decision makers and stakeholders. However, this is not the same as prioritizing risk response, as it does not suggest or recommend the best course of action for managing the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.6, Page 57.

 The best method to identify unnecessary controls is reviewing system functionalities associated with business processes, because this can help to determine whether the controls are relevant, effective, and efficient for the current business needs and objectives. System functionalities are the capabilities and features of IT systems that support the execution and performance of business processes. Business processes are the set of interrelated activities that transform inputs into outputs to deliver value to customers or stakeholders. By reviewing system functionalities associated with business processes, an organization can assess whether the controls are aligned with the process requirements, expectations, and outcomes, and whether they add value or create waste. The review can also identify any gaps, overlaps, redundancies, or conflicts among the controls, and any changes or improvements that are needed to optimize the controls. The other options are less effective methods to identify unnecessary controls. Evaluating the impact of removing existing controls can help to measure the benefits and costs of the controls, but it does not address the root causes or sources of the unnecessary controls. Evaluating existing controls against audit requirements can help to ensure compliance and assurance, but it does not consider the business context or purpose of the controls. Monitoring existing key risk indicators (KRIs) can help to measure the level and impact of risks, but it does not evaluate the suitability or adequacy of the controls. References = Surveying Staff to Identify Unnecessary Internal Controls - Methodology and Results 

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that helps organizations monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their operations, objectives, or performance. A good KRI should have certain characteristics that make it effective for risk management. One of these characteristics is repeatability, which means that the KRI can be measured consistently over time and across different situations. A repeatable KRI ensures that the risk data is reliable, comparable, and meaningful, and that the risk trends and patterns can be identified and analyzed. A repeatable KRI also supports the decision-making process by providing timely and accurate information on the risk level and status. Therefore, repeatability is the most important attribute of a KRI. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 441

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 profile is a summary or representation of the organization’s exposure or level of risk, based on the results of the risk assessment and evaluation. A risk profile can show the distribution and comparison of the risks based on various criteria, such as likelihood, impact, category, source, etc. A risk profile can also indicate the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and the gaps or opportunities for improvement.

The primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register is that it helps to build a risk profile for management review, because it provides the data and information that are necessary and relevant for creating and updating the risk profile, and for communicating and reporting the risk profile to the management. Maintaining an up-to-date risk register can help to build a risk profile for management review by providing the following benefits:

It can ensure that the risk profile reflects the current and accurate state and performance of the organization’s risk management function, and that it covers all the relevant and significant risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations.

It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the identification, analysis, evaluation, and communication of the risks and their responses, and for the alignment and integration of the risks and their responses with the organization’s strategy and culture.

It can support the decision making and planning for the risk management function, and for the allocation and optimization of the resources, time, and budget for the risk management function.

The other options are not the primary benefits of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of building a risk profile for management review, which is to summarize and represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and to communicate and report it to the management.

Implementing uniform controls for common risk scenarios means applying and enforcing the same or similar controls or countermeasures for the risks that have the same or similar characteristics or features, such as source, cause, impact, etc. Implementing uniform controls for common risk scenarios can help to ensure the consistency and efficiency of the risk management function, but it is not the primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because it does not summarize or represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization’s objectives and needs.

Ensuring business unit risk is uniformly distributed means ensuring that the risks that are associated with the different business units or divisions of the organization are balanced or equalized, and that they do not exceed or fall below the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Ensuring business unit risk is uniformly distributed can help to optimize the performance and profitability of the organization, but it is not the primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because it does not summarize or represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and it may not be feasible or realistic for the organization.

Quantifying the organization’s risk appetite means measuring and expressing the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing and able to accept or take, in pursuit of its objectives and goals. Quantifying the organization’s risk appetite can help to establish and communicate the boundaries and expectations for the organization’s risk management function, but it is not the primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because it does not summarize or represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and it may not be consistent or compatible with the organization’s strategy and culture. 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 201

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

The most important requirement for monitoring key risk indicators (KRIs) using log analysis is providing accurate logs in a timely manner, because this ensures that the risk data is reliable, relevant, and up-to-date. Logs are records of events or activities that occur in IT systems, such as network traffic, user actions, system errors, or security incidents. Log analysis is the process of reviewing and interpreting logs to identify and assess risks, such as performance issues, operational failures, compliance violations, or cyberattacks. By providing accurate logs in a timely manner, an organization can monitor the current status and trends of its KRIs, which are metrics that measure the level and impact of risks. Accurate logs mean that the logs are complete, consistent, and free of errors or anomalies that may distort the risk data. Timely logs mean that the logs are available as soon as possible after the events or activities occur, and that they are updated frequently to reflect the latest changes. Providing accurate logs in a timely manner can help an organization to detect and respond to risks promptly, and to support risk-based decision making and reporting. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 22

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 and deliverables, 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

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 to ensure 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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the main reason to continuously monitor IT-related risk is to ensure risk levels are within acceptable limits of the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, while the risk tolerance is the acceptable variation in outcomes related to specific performance measures linked to objectives. Continuous monitoring is a process that tracks the security state of an information system on an ongoing basis and maintains the security authorization for the system over time. Continuous monitoring helps to:

Provide ongoing assurance that the implemented security controls are operating effectively and efficiently

Detect changes in the risk profile of the information system and the environment of operation

Identify new or emerging threats and vulnerabilities that may affect the information system

Support risk-based decisions by providing timely and relevant risk information to stakeholders

Facilitate the implementation of corrective actions and risk mitigation strategies

Promote accountability and transparency in the risk management process

Enhance the security awareness and culture within the organization

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 213-2141

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 affects the 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

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

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

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.

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

The risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk and its associated controls. The risk owner is also responsible for ensuring that the risk is within the acceptable level and that the risk response is effective and efficient. In this case, the risk owner is also the owner of the business service that depends on the managed hosting service. Therefore, the risk owner should be notified of the new information about the flood risk first, as they have the most interest and influence on the risk and its impact on the business objectives. The risk owner can then decide on the appropriate actions to take, such as reviewing the contract terms, requesting additional controls, or changing the service provider. The other options are not the correct answers because they are not the primary stakeholders of the risk and its consequences. The data center manager is an employee of the managed hosting service provider, not the organization that procured the service. The data center manager may not have the authority or the incentive to address the flood risk or inform the organization. The site manager is also an employee of the managed hosting service provider, and their role is to conduct annual risk assessments under the contract. The site manager may not be aware of the new information or have the responsibility to communicate it to the organization. The CIO is the senior executive who oversees the IT strategy and operations of the organization. The CIO may have a general interest in the managed hosting service and its risks, but they are not the direct owner or manager of the specific risk or the business service that relies on the service. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 702

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

 Risk Appetite:

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to take in order to meet its objectives. It reflects the organization’s risk tolerance and guides decision-making at all levels.

 Impact of Market Changes:

A change in the market situation can alter the risk landscape, potentially affecting the organization’s ability to achieve its objectives. This might necessitate a reassessment of what level of risk is acceptable.

Senior management needs to ensure that the risk appetite remains aligned with the new market conditions and organizational goals.

 Reevaluation Process:

Reevaluating the risk appetite involves assessing the organization's capacity to bear risk and determining if the current acceptable risk levels are still appropriate.

This might involve more conservative or aggressive risk-taking strategies based on the new market dynamics.

 Other Considerations:

Risk Classification: This categorizes risks but does not directly address changes in acceptable risk levels.

Risk Policy: While important, the policy outlines the approach to managing risk and is influenced by the risk appetite.

Risk Strategy: This defines how risks are managed but should be aligned with the risk appetite.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of aligning risk appetite with the organization’s strategic objectives and market conditions (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.10 Risk Appetite, Tolerance, and Capacity) .

Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure the performance of a control in reducing the causes, consequences, or likelihood of a risk. They help to evaluate the adequacy and efficiency of the internal control environment, which is the set of policies, procedures, and practices that support the achievement of organizational objectives and the management of risks. By monitoring KCIs, organizations can identify and address any gaps or weaknesses in their internal controls and ensure that they are operating as intended.

References

•ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Domain 3: Risk Response, Section 3.2.2: Control Design and Implementation

•KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva

•What is the difference between key risk indicators and key control indicators?

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.

 A change in the risk profile would be the most important information to communicate to stakeholders after an annual risk assessment is completed, as it indicates how the risk landscape of the organization has changed over time, and how it affects the achievement of the business goals and objectives. A decrease in threats, an increase in reported vulnerabilities, and an increase in identified risk scenarios are also important information, but they are not the most important, as they are specific aspects of the risk profile, and do not provide a holistic view of the risk exposure and appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

Train all staff on relevant information security best practices, because it helps to increase the awareness and understanding of the employees regarding the acceptable use policy and its purpose, and to improve their skills and knowledge on how to protect and handle confidential information. An acceptable use policy is a document that outlines the standards and expectations for the proper usage of the organization’s IT resources, such as systems, applications, networks, or devices, and the consequences of non-compliance. Confidential information is information that is sensitive or proprietary, and may cause harm or damage to the organization or its stakeholders if disclosed or compromised, such as trade secrets, customer data, or financial records. Training all staff on relevant information security best practices is the best way to reinforce the effectiveness of the policy, as it helps to ensure that the employees are aware of and comply with the policy, and that they adopt the appropriate behaviors and techniques to prevent or mitigate the risk of disclosing confidential information.

Communicating sanctions for policy violations to all staff, obtaining signed acceptance of the new policy from employees, and implementing data loss prevention (DLP) within the corporate network are all possible ways to reinforce the effectiveness of the policy, but they are not the best way, as they do not directly address the awareness and understanding of the employees regarding the policy and its purpose, and they may not be sufficient or effective to prevent or mitigate the risk of disclosing confidential information.

 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)​​.

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

IT control self-assessments are techniques that involve identifying and evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of the IT controls that are designed and implemented to mitigate the IT risks, by the managers and staff within the organization12.

An ineffective control is a control that does not achieve its intended objective or purpose, or does not operate as designed or expected34.

A low residual risk scenario is a situation or occurrence that has a low likelihood and impact of affecting the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation, after considering the existing controls and their effectiveness56.

The next course of action when reviewing management’s IT control self-assessments and noting an ineffective control that links to several low residual risk scenarios is to recommend management accept the low-risk scenarios, which is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging and tolerating the level of risk exposure, and not taking any further action to reduce or eliminate it78.

Recommending management accept the low-risk scenarios is the next course of action because it is the most cost-effective and reasonable option, given that the level of risk exposure is low and acceptable, and the cost and effort of implementing or improving the control may outweigh the potential benefits or value78.

Recommending management accept the low-risk scenarios is also the next course of action because it is consistent with 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 stakeholders, and to optimize the balance between risk and reward78.

The other options are not the next course of action, but rather possible alternatives or steps that may be considered or followed in different circumstances or scenarios. For example:

Assessing management’s risk tolerance is a step that involves determining and communicating the acceptable or tolerable level of risk exposure for the organization or its business units, based on the organization’s risk appetite, criteria, and objectives78. However, this step is not the next course of action because it is usually done before or during the risk assessment process, and not after noting an ineffective control that links to several low residual risk scenarios78.

Proposing mitigating controls is a course of action that involves suggesting or recommending additional or alternative controls that can reduce or eliminate the level of risk exposure, and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process78. However, this course of action is not the next course of action because it is not necessary or appropriate for low residual risk scenarios, as the cost and effort of implementing or improving the controls may outweigh the potential benefits or value78.

Re-evaluating the risk scenarios associated with the control is a course of action that involves revising and updating the likelihood and impact of the risk scenarios, and the level of risk exposure or tolerance for the organization, based on the current or changed conditions or factors that influence the risk landscape78. However, this course of action is not the next course of action because it is not required or relevant for low residual risk scenarios, as the level of risk exposure is already low and acceptable, and the ineffective control does not significantly affect the risk assessment78. References =

1: Control Self Assessments - PwC1

2: Control self-assessment - Wikipedia2

3: Ineffective Controls: What They Are and How to Identify Them3

4: Ineffective Controls: What They Are and How to Identify Them4

5: Residual Risk - Definition and Examples5

6: Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management6

7: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

 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

The group that has primary ownership of reputational risk stemming from unethical behavior within the organization is A. Board of directors. According to the CFA Institute, the board of directors is responsible for setting the tone at the top and ensuring that the company adheres to high ethical standards and values. The board of directors also oversees the company’s culture, governance, and risk management practices, and holds the management accountable for any misconduct or breach of trust1 The board of directors may delegate some of its oversight functions to other committees, such as the human resources, risk management, or audit committee, but ultimately, the board of directors bears the ultimate responsibility for the company’s reputation and integrity

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 threat risk assessment will best quantify the risk associated with malicious users in an organization, because it focuses on identifying and evaluating the potential sources of harm or damage to the organization’s assets, such as data, systems, or networks. A malicious user is a person who intentionally and unauthorizedly accesses, modifies, destroys, or steals the organization’s information or resources, for personal gain, revenge, espionage, or sabotage. A threat risk assessment can help the organization to estimate the likelihood and impact of malicious user attacks, based on factors such as the user’s motivation, capability, opportunity, and access level. A threat risk assessment can also help the organization to determine the appropriate risk response strategies, such as prevention, detection, mitigation, or transfer, to reduce the risk exposure and impact of malicious user attacks. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 141

 The most effective way to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan would be to perform a root cause analysis. A root cause analysis is a method of identifying and addressing the underlying factors or causes that led to the occurrence of a problem or incident1. In this case, the problem or incident is the malware infection that affected the organization. By performing a root cause analysis, the organization can determine how and why the malware was able to infect the systems, what vulnerabilities or weaknesses were exploited, what controls or processes failed or were missing, and what actions or decisions contributed to the situation. A root cause analysis can help the organization to prevent or reduce the recurrence of similar incidents, as well as to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process. A root cause analysis can also help the organization to define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, which is a set of actions or measures that are taken to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk2. Based on the findings and recommendations of the root cause analysis, the organization can select and implement the most appropriate risk treatment option for the malware risk, as well as for any other related or emerging risks. The risk treatment plan should also include the roles and responsibilities, resources, timelines, and performance indicators for the risk treatment actions3. The other options are not the most effective ways to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as they are either less thorough or less relevant than a root cause analysis. A gap analysis is a method of comparing the current state and the desired state of a process, system, or organization, and identifying the gaps or differences between them4. A gap analysis can help the organization to identify the areas of improvement or enhancement, as well as the opportunities or challenges for achieving the desired state. However, a gap analysis is not the most effective way to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as it does not address the causes or consequences of the malware infection, or the actions or measures to mitigate the risk. An impact assessment is a method of estimating the potential effects or consequences of a change, decision, or action on a process, system, or organization5. An impact assessment can help the organization to evaluate the benefits and costs, as well as the risks and opportunities, of a proposed or implemented change, decision, or action. However, an impact assessment is not the most effective way to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as it does not investigate the origin or nature of the malware infection, or the solutions or alternatives to manage the risk. A vulnerability assessment is a method of identifying and analyzing the weaknesses or flaws in a process, system, or organization that can be exploited by threats to cause harm or loss6. A vulnerability assessment can help the organization to discover and prioritize the vulnerabilities, as well as to recommend and implement the controls or measures to reduce or eliminate them. However, a vulnerability assessment is not the most effective way to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as it does not consider the root causes or impacts of the malware infection, or the risk treatment options or plans to address the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

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).

Embedding Risk Management:

Integrated Approach: Embedding risk management in business activities ensures that risk considerations are part of everyday decision-making processes and operations.

Cultural Shift: Promotes a risk-aware culture where all employees understand their role in managing risk, leading to more proactive and effective risk management practices.

Comparison with Other Options:

Communicating Risk Awareness Materials: Important for education but less impactful than embedding risk management in daily activities.

Establishing KRIs: Useful for monitoring but does not ensure risk management practices are integrated into all business processes.

Minimizing Inherent Risk: This is an outcome of effective risk management rather than a method to ensure its effectiveness.

Best Practices:

Training and Awareness: Provide ongoing training to employees to embed risk management practices in their roles.

Policy and Procedures: Develop and enforce policies and procedures that integrate risk management into all business activities.

Leadership Support: Ensure strong support from leadership to promote and sustain a risk-aware culture.

CRISC Review Manual: Emphasizes the importance of embedding risk management into business activities to ensure comprehensive and effective risk practices .

ISACA Guidelines: Support the integration of risk management into all levels of the organization to achieve effective risk management outcomes .

References:

The source that provides the most reliable evidence to support conclusions after completing an information systems controls assessment is the information generated by the systems, as it reflects the actual and objective data and results of the system operations and performance, and can be verified and tested against the control objectives and criteria. The other options are not the most reliable sources, as they may be subjective, biased, or incomplete, and may not reflect the actual or current state of the system controls, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

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.

The most useful tool for measuring the existing risk management process against a desired state is the capability maturity model, as it provides a structured and standardized way to assess the current and target levels of maturity, performance, and effectiveness of the risk management process, and to identify the gaps and improvement opportunities. The balanced scorecard, the risk management framework, and the risk scenario analysis are not the most useful tools, as they are more related to the evaluation, design, or identification of the risk management process, respectively, rather than the measurement of the risk management process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

The first step in selecting a risk response after a penetration test reveals several vulnerabilities in a web-facing application is to assess the level of risk associated with the vulnerabilities, as it involves evaluating the likelihood and impact of the vulnerabilities being exploited, and comparing them with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. Correcting the vulnerabilities, developing a risk response action plan, and communicating the vulnerabilities are possible steps in selecting a risk response, but they are not the first step, as they require the prior knowledge of the risk level and the optimal risk response. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 108.

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks what provides the best evidence that robust risk management practices are in place within an organization.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Regularly updated risk management procedures: Important but not as comprehensive as a risk register.

B. A management-approved risk dashboard: Useful for reporting but not as comprehensive as a risk register.

C. A current control framework: Important but does not provide ongoing evidence of risk management practices.

D. A regularly updated risk register: Provides comprehensive and current information on risks, their status, and the effectiveness of risk management efforts.

 Detailed Explanation:

Risk Register: A regularly updated risk register reflects the organization's ongoing risk management activities. It includes details of identified risks, their assessments, mitigation strategies, and current status, providing a comprehensive view of the risk landscape.

Evidence of Practices: Keeping the risk register up-to-date demonstrates that the organization is actively monitoring and managing risks, making it a clear indicator of robust risk management practices.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, highlights the importance of maintaining an updated risk register as part of effective risk management practices​​.

When proposing a risk acceptance framework for an organization, the most important consideration for the risk practitioner is to clearly define the individuals or roles authorized to approve risk acceptance. This ensures that the process is controlled, accountable, and aligned with the organization’s risk management policies.

Risk Acceptance Framework:

Purpose: A risk acceptance framework provides structured criteria and processes for deciding whether to accept a risk. This includes evaluating the risk against the organization's risk appetite and tolerance.

Authorization: Identifying who has the authority to accept risk is critical. This ensures that only those with the appropriate knowledge, experience, and understanding of the organization's risk appetite and strategic objectives can make these decisions.

Importance of Authorized Individuals:

Accountability: Clearly defined roles for risk acceptance ensure accountability. It is essential that those making the decisions are accountable for the outcomes and understand the potential impact of their decisions.

Consistency: By defining specific roles, the organization ensures consistency in risk acceptance decisions, reducing the likelihood of ad-hoc or inconsistent risk management practices.

Alignment with Strategy: Authorized individuals are typically those who understand the strategic objectives of the organization, ensuring that risk acceptance aligns with these goals.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes that risk acceptance must be formally authorized by individuals with the appropriate level of authority and responsibility within the organization​​.

According to ISACA’s guidelines, effective risk management frameworks must include clear definitions of who can accept risks to ensure proper oversight and alignment with organizational goals .

KRI thresholds are the levels or points that trigger an action or a response when a KRI reaches or exceeds them. They reflect the risk appetite of the organization, which is the amount and type of risk that it is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. A new privacy regulation may reduce the risk appetite of the organization, as it may impose stricter requirements and penalties for non-compliance. Therefore, the organization may need to adjust its KRI thresholds to lower levels, to ensure that it can identify and manage privacy risks more effectively and proactively

 Maturity Models:

Maturity models provide a framework for assessing the development and optimization of processes within an organization.

They typically range from ad hoc and immature processes to well-defined and continuously improving processes.

 Assessing IT Process Improvement:

Changes in the organization’s position within a maturity model indicate that processes are becoming more mature, standardized, and optimized.

Improvements in maturity levels reflect enhancements in process efficiency, effectiveness, and consistency.

 Importance of Maturity Models:

Provides a clear and structured approach to evaluate and benchmark process improvements.

Helps senior management understand the progress and development of IT processes over time.

 Comparing Other Indicators:

Number of Security Exceptions: Useful for identifying issues but not a comprehensive measure of process improvement.

Risk Register Changes: Reflects risk management activities but not overall process maturity.

Number of Intrusions Detected: Indicates security effectiveness but not broader process improvements.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the use of maturity models to assess and improve risk management capabilities and IT processes (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.6 Capability Maturity Models)​​.

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, this objective 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 desired state 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

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

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 the identification 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

Brainstorming sessions with key stakeholders are the best way to facilitate the development of relevant risk scenarios, as they can generate diverse and creative ideas, perspectives, and insights about the potential risks and their impact on the organization’s objectives and operations. Brainstorming sessions can also foster collaboration, communication, and engagement among the stakeholders, and help to identify and prioritize the most significant and realistic risk scenarios. Brainstorming sessions can be guided by an industry-recognized risk framework, such as ISACA’s Risk IT, and supported by qualitative or quantitative risk assessment methodologies, but they are not sufficient by themselves to develop relevant risk scenarios.

References:

•ISACA, How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements1

•ISACA, Risk Scenario Development and Analysis2

The most important benefit of key risk indicators (KRIs) is providing an early warning to take proactive actions, because this helps organizations to prevent or mitigate potential risks that may impact their operations, objectives, or performance. KRIs are specific metrics that measure the level and impact of risks, and provide timely signals that something may be going wrong or needs urgent attention. By monitoring and analyzing KRIs, organizations can identify and assess emerging or existing risks, and initiate appropriate risk responses before the risks escalate into significant issues. This can enhance the organization’s resilience, competitiveness, and value creation. The other options are less important benefits of KRIs. Assisting in continually optimizing risk governance is a benefit of KRIs, but it is not the most important one. Risk governance is the framework and process that defines how an organization manages its risks, including the roles, responsibilities, policies, and standards. KRIs can help to evaluate and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of risk governance, but they are not the only factor that influences it. Enabling the documentation and analysis of trends is a benefit of KRIs, but it is not the most important one. Documenting and analyzing trends can help organizations to understand the patterns, causes, and consequences of risks, and to learn from their experiences. However, this benefit is more relevant for historical or retrospective analysis, rather than for proactive action. Ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements is a benefit of KRIs, but it is not the most important one. Compliance is the adherence to the laws, regulations, and standards that apply to an organization’s activities and operations. KRIs can help to monitor and demonstrate compliance, but they are not the only tool or objective for doing so. References = Why Key Risk Indicators Are Important for Risk Management 1

The best way to justify the risk mitigation actions recommended in a risk assessment would be to focus on the business drivers, which are the factors that influence the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

Focusing on the business drivers means aligning the risk mitigation actions with the organization’s strategic goals, priorities, and values, and demonstrating how the actions will support or enhance the organization’s capabilities, opportunities, and competitive advantage12.

Focusing on the business drivers also means communicating the benefits, costs, and trade-offs of the risk mitigation actions to the relevant stakeholders, and showing how the actions will address the organization’s risk appetite, tolerance, and exposure12.

The other options are not the best way to justify the risk mitigation actions, but rather possible sources of information or guidance that may support the justification. For example:

Aligning with audit results is a way to validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk mitigation actions, and to identify any gaps or weaknesses that need improvement34. However, audit results may not reflect the organization’s current or future business drivers, and may not capture the full scope or impact of the risk mitigation actions34.

Benchmarking with competitor’s actions is a way to compare the organization’s risk mitigation actions with the best practices or standards of the industry or market, and to identify any areas of improvement or differentiation56. However, competitor’s actions may not be suitable or applicable for the organization’s specific context, needs, or challenges, and may not align with the organization’s business drivers56.

Referencing best practice is a way to adopt the proven or accepted methods or techniques for risk mitigation, and to ensure the quality and consistency of the risk mitigation actions78. However, best practice may not be the most optimal or innovative solution for the organization’s unique situation, and may not address the organization’s business drivers78. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

4: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

5: Benchmarking IT Risk Management Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 4, 2017

6: Benchmarking: A Tool for Improving IT Risk Management, ISACA Now Blog, March 27, 2017

7: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2018

8: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Now Blog, January 9, 2018

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 decreased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the organization may become less willing or able 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

Control processes are the procedures and activities that aim to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s operations, the reliability of its information, and the compliance with its policies and regulations12.

The ongoing efficiency of control processes is the degree to which the control processes achieve their intended results with minimum resources, costs, or waste34.

The best way to determine the ongoing efficiency of control processes is to analyze key performance indicators (KPIs), which are quantifiable measures of progress toward an intended result, such as a strategic objective or a desired outcome56.

Analyzing KPIs is the best way because it provides a systematic and consistent method of evaluating the performance of the control processes, and identifying the areas of improvement or optimization56.

Analyzing KPIs is also the best way because it enables the organization to monitor and report the efficiency of the control processes to the relevant stakeholders, and to take corrective or preventive actions when necessary56.

The other options are not the best way, but rather possible sources of information or inputs that may support or complement the analysis of KPIs. For example:

Performing annual risk assessments is a way to identify and evaluate the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, and to determine the adequacy and effectiveness of the control processes in mitigating those risks12. However, this way is not the best because it is periodic rather than continuous, and may not capture the changes or trends in the efficiency of the control processes12.

Interviewing process owners is a way to collect and verify the information and feedback from the people who are responsible for designing, implementing, and operating the control processes12. However, this way is not the best because it is subjective and qualitative, and may not provide reliable or comparable data on the efficiency of the control processes12.

Reviewing the risk register is a way to examine and update the documentation and status of the risks and the control processes that are associated with them12. However, this way is not the best because it is descriptive rather than analytical, and may not measure or evaluate the efficiency of the control processes12. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: The Control Process | Principles of Management4

4: Control Management: What it is + Why It’s Essential | Adobe Workfront5

5: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? Guide & Examples - Qlik1

6: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? - KPI.org2

A control deficiency is a weakness or flaw in the design or implementation of a control that reduces its effectiveness or efficiency in achieving its intended objective or mitigating the risk that it is designed to address. A control deficiency may be caused by various factors, such as human error, system failure, process inefficiency, resource limitation, etc.

When determining which control deficiencies are most significant, the most useful information would be the risk analysis results, which are the outcomes or outputs of the risk analysis process that measures and compares the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizes them based on their significance and urgency. The risk analysis results can help to determine which control deficiencies are most significant by providing the following information:

The level and priority of the risks that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization if they materialize.

The gap or difference between the current and desired level of risk, and the extent or degree to which the control deficiencies contribute to or affect the gap or difference.

The cost-benefit or feasibility analysis of the possible actions or plans to address or correct the control deficiencies, and the expected or desired outcomes or benefits that they may provide for the organization.

The other options are not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that the risk analysis results provide, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the organization.

An exception handling policy is a policy that defines and describes the procedures and guidelines for dealing with the situations or circumstances that deviate from the normal or expected operation or functionality of a control, and that may require special or alternative actions or measures to address or resolve them. An exception handling policy can provide useful information on how to handle or manage the control deficiencies, but it is not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the level and priority of the risks that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization.

A vulnerability assessment is an assessment that identifies and evaluates the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A vulnerability assessment can provide useful information on the existence and severity of the control deficiencies, but it is not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the likelihood and impact of the risk scenarios that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization.

A benchmarking assessment is an assessment that compares and contrasts the organization’s performance, practices, or processes with those of other organizations or industry standards, and identifies the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A benchmarking assessment can provide useful information on the best practices or improvement areas for the organization, but it is not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the level and priority of the risks that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for 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 176

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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 cloud provider 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

 The business application owner should have the authority to accept the associated risk, because they are responsible for the performance and outcomes of the critical application, and they understand the business requirements, expectations, and impact of the application. The business application owner can also evaluate the trade-offs between the potential benefits and costs of the application, and the potential risks and consequences of a disruption or failure of the application. The business application owner can also communicate and justify their risk acceptance decision to the senior management and other stakeholders, and ensure that the risk is monitored and reviewed regularly. The other options are less appropriate to have the authority to accept the associated risk. The business continuity director is responsible for overseeing the planning and execution of the business continuity strategy, which includes ensuring the availability and resilience of the critical business processes and applications. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. The disaster recovery manager is responsible for managing the recovery and restoration of the IT systems and applications in the event of a disaster or disruption. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. The data center manager is responsible for managing the operation and maintenance of the data center infrastructure, which includes providing the physical and environmental security, power, cooling, and network connectivity for the IT systems and applications. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 181

Potential theft of personal information should be of greatest concern for an organization that has detected unauthorized logins to its client database servers, as it poses a serious threat to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the client data and the reputation and trust of the organization. Potential theft of personal information is a scenario that involves the unauthorized access, disclosure, or use of the client data by malicious actors, such as hackers, competitors, or insiders. Potential theft of personal information can have significant impacts and consequences for the organization and its clients, such as:

It can compromise the privacy and security of the client data, and expose the clients to identity theft, fraud, or blackmail.

It can violate the legal and regulatory obligations and requirements of the organization, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), or the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), and result in fines, penalties, or lawsuits.

It can damage the reputation and credibility of the organization, and erode the confidence and loyalty of the clients, and lead to loss of business or market share.

The other options are not the greatest concerns for an organization that has detected unauthorized logins to its client database servers. Potential increase in regulatory scrutiny is a possible consequence of the unauthorized logins, as it may trigger audits, investigations, or sanctions by the relevant authorities, but it is not the most critical or immediate concern. Potential system downtime is a possible consequence of the unauthorized logins, as it may disrupt or degrade the performance or availability of the database servers or the applications that depend on them, but it is not the most severe or lasting concern. Potential legal risk is a possible consequence of the unauthorized logins, as it may expose the organization to litigation or liability claims by the affected clients or parties, but it is not the most direct or urgent concern. References = Data Breach Response: A Guide for Business - Federal Trade Commission, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, How to Prevent Unauthorized Access to Your Database - ScaleGrid

 Involving business management in evaluating and managing risk is beneficial, as it enables management to have a comprehensive and holistic view of the risk environment and its impact on the organization’s objectives and strategy. By participating in the risk management process, management can make better-informed business decisions, as they can consider the risk factors and implications of their choices, and align their decisions with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Involving business management in evaluating and managing risk can also enhance the risk culture and governance of the organization, and foster a proactive and collaborative approach to risk management. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 253. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 253. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a root cause analysis is a technique that identifies the underlying causes of an event or a problem. It helps to determine the most effective actions to prevent or mitigate the recurrence of the event or problem. A root cause analysis is the best approach for the risk practitioner to take in this scenario, because it will help to understand why the number of emergency changes has increased substantially and what can be done to address the issue. The other options are not the best approaches, because they do not address the underlying causes of the problem. Temporarily suspending emergency changes may disrupt the business operations and create more risks. Documenting the control deficiency in the risk register is a passive action that does not resolve the problem. Continuing monitoring change management metrics is an ongoing activity that does not provide any insight into the problem. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.4, page 130.

A risk scenario is a hypothetical situation that describes how a risk event could adversely affect an organization’s objectives, assets, or operations. A risk scenario can be used for risk analysis, which is the process of estimating the likelihood and impact of the risk event, and evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response1.

One of the essential components of a risk scenario is the threat type, which is the source or cause of the risk event. The threat type can be classified into various categories, such as natural, human, technical, environmental, or legal. The threat type can help to define the characteristics, motivations, capabilities, and methods of the risk event, and to identify the potential vulnerabilities and exposures of the organization. The threat type can also help to determine the frequency and severity of the risk event, and to select the appropriate risk response strategies and controls23.

The other options are not the components of a risk scenario, but rather the outcomes or inputs of risk analysis. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite can help to guide the risk analysis by providing a high-level statement of the desired level of risk taking and tolerance4. Risk tolerance is the acceptable variation in the outcomes related to specific objectives or risks. Risk tolerance can help to measure the risk analysis by providing quantitative or qualitative indicators of the acceptable range of risk exposure and performance4. Residual risk is the remaining risk after the risk response has been implemented. Residual risk can help to monitor the risk analysis by providing feedback on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response and the need for further action. References =

Risk Analysis - ISACA

Threat - ISACA

Threat Modeling - ISACA

Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance - ISACA

[Residual Risk - ISACA]

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The most important factor when developing key risk indicators (KRIs) is to properly set thresholds, which are the predefined values or ranges that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable level of risk1. Thresholds can help to:

Trigger alerts or actions when the risk level exceeds or falls below the threshold, and enable timely and appropriate risk responses2.

Measure and monitor the performance and effectiveness of the risk responses, and ensure that the residual risk is within the risk appetite and tolerance3.

Communicate and report the risk status and performance to the stakeholders, and facilitate the decision-making and accountability for the risk management4.

The other factors are not the most important when developing KRIs, because:

Alignment with regulatory requirements is a necessary but not sufficient factor when developing KRIs, as it ensures that the KRIs comply with the applicable laws, rules, or standards that govern the organization’s activities and operations5. However, alignment with regulatory requirements does not guarantee that the KRIs are relevant and useful for the organization’s specific risk profile and objectives.

Availability of qualitative data is a desirable but not essential factor when developing KRIs, as it provides additional information or insights that may not be captured by quantitative data, such as opinions, perceptions, or feedback. However, availability of qualitative data does not ensure that the KRIs are reliable and consistent, as qualitative data may be subjective and difficult to measure and compare.

Alignment with industry benchmarks is a useful but not critical factor when developing KRIs, as it provides a reference or a standard for comparing the organization’s risk level and performance with its peers or competitors. However, alignment with industry benchmarks does not ensure that the KRIs are suitable and feasible for the organization’s specific context and capabilities.

References =

Threshold - CIO Wiki

Risk Thresholds: How to Set Them and When to Use Them - ProjectManager.com

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Reporting - CIO Wiki

Regulatory Compliance - CIO Wiki

[Regulatory Risk - CIO Wiki]

[Qualitative Data - CIO Wiki

Determining if organizational risk is tolerable requires understanding the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives1. Understanding the organization’s risk appetite can help to:

Define and communicate the risk tolerance, which is the acceptable or unacceptable level of risk for each risk category or scenario2.

Guide and align the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes, and ensure that the risks are consistent and proportional to the risk appetite3.

Measure and monitor the risk performance and outcome, and ensure that the residual risk (the risk that remains after the risk responses) is within the risk appetite, or take corrective actions if needed4.

The other options are not the best ways to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, because:

Mapping residual risk with cost of controls is a useful but not sufficient way to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, as it provides a quantitative analysis of the trade-off between the risk level and the risk response cost5. However, mapping residual risk with cost of controls does not consider the qualitative aspects of the risk, such as the impact on the organization’s strategy, culture, or reputation.

Comparing against regulatory requirements is a necessary but not sufficient way to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, as it ensures that the organization complies with the applicable laws, rules, or standards that govern its activities and operations6. However, comparing against regulatory requirements does not guarantee that the organization meets its own objectives and expectations, which may be higher or lower than the regulatory requirements.

Comparing industry risk appetite with the organization’s risk appetite is a helpful but not sufficient way to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, as it provides a reference or a standard for benchmarking the organization’s risk level and performance with its peers or competitors7. However, comparing industry risk appetite with the organization’s risk appetite does not ensure that the organization addresses its specific or unique risks, which may differ from the industry risks.

References =

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

Risk Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Management Process - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring - CIO Wiki

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Regulatory Compliance - CIO Wiki

Benchmarking - CIO Wiki

Risk and Information Systems Control documents and learning resources by ISACA

The drawback in the use of quantitative risk analysis is that it requires more resources than other methods. Quantitative risk analysis is a method of risk analysis that assigns numeric values to the exposures of assets, the impact and likelihood of risk events, and the cost and benefit of risk responses. Quantitative risk analysis can provide more precise and objective results, and support the risk-based decision making process. However, quantitative risk analysis also requires more resources than other methods, such as data, time, expertise, and tools, to collect, validate, and analyze the quantitative information, and to perform the complex calculations and simulations. Quantitative risk analysis may also be limited by the availability, reliability, and accuracy of the data, and the assumptions and models used. Assigning numeric values to exposures of assets, producing the results in numeric form, and being based on impact analysis of information assets are not drawbacks, but characteristics of quantitative risk analysis. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

Conducting a risk assessment with stakeholders is the best course of action for the risk practitioner to evaluate the adoption of a third-party blockchain integration platform, because it helps to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks and opportunities associated with the platform, and to compare them with the organization’s risk appetite and value proposition. A risk assessment is a process of systematically identifying and assessing the sources and types of risk that an organization faces, and estimating their likelihood and impact. A risk assessment also involves identifying and evaluating the existing or proposed controls or mitigating factors that can reduce or eliminate the risk. A stakeholder is a person or group that has an interest or influence in the organization or its activities, such as customers, employees, shareholders, suppliers, regulators, or partners. A blockchain integration platform is a software solution that enables the organization to connect and interact with blockchain networks or applications, such as cryptocurrencies, smart contracts, or distributed ledgers. A blockchain integration platform can offer benefits such as transparency, security, efficiency, and innovation, but it can also pose risks such as technical complexity, interoperability issues, regulatory uncertainty, or cyberattacks. Therefore, conducting a risk assessment with stakeholders is the best way to evaluate the adoption of a third-party blockchain integration platform, as it helps to understand the benefits and risks of the platform, and to align them with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite. Conducting third-party resilience tests, updating the risk register with the process changes, and reviewing risk related to standards and regulations are all important tasks to perform after conducting a risk assessment, but they are not the best course of action, as they depend on the results of the risk assessment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 87

 The primary accountability for a control owner is to ensure the control operates effectively, as they have the authority and responsibility to design, implement, monitor, and report on the performance and adequacy of the control, and to identify and address any control gaps or deficiencies. Communicating risk to senior management, owning the associated risk the control is mitigating, and identifying and assessing control weaknesses are not the primary accountabilities, as they are more related to the roles and responsibilities of the risk owner, the risk practitioner, or the auditor, respectively, rather than the control owner. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

A data loss prevention (DLP) control is a technology that tries to detect and stop sensitive data breaches, or data leakage incidents, in an organization. A DLP control is used to prevent sensitive data, such as credit card numbers, from being disclosed to an unauthorized person, whether it is deliberate or accidental1. The best way to help ensure the effectiveness of a DLP control that has been implemented to prevent the loss of credit card data is to test the transmission of credit card numbers. This is a technique to verify that the DLP control can successfully identify and block the credit card data when it is sent or received through various channels, such as email, messaging, or file transfers. Testing the transmission of credit card numbers can help to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of the DLP control, as well as to identify and correct any false positives or false negatives. The other options are not the best ways to help ensure the effectiveness of a DLP control that has been implemented to prevent the loss of credit card data, although they may be helpful and complementary. Reviewing logs for unauthorized data transfers is a technique to monitor and analyze the DLP control activities and incidents, such as who, what, when, where, and how the data was transferred. However, reviewing logs is a reactive and passive approach, while testing the transmission is a proactive and active approach. Configuring the DLP control to block credit card numbers is a technique to set up the DLP control rules and policies, such as defining the data patterns, the detection methods, and the response actions. However, configuring the DLP control is a prerequisite and a preparation step, while testing the transmission is a validation and a verification step. Testing the DLP rule change control process is a technique to ensure that the DLP control rules and policies are updated and maintained in a controlled and coordinated manner, such as obtaining approval, documenting the changes, testing the changes, and communicating the changes. However, testing the DLP rule change control process is a quality and governance step, while testing the transmission is a performance and functionality step. References = What is Data Loss Prevention (DLP)? | Digital Guardian1; CRISC Review Manual, pages 164-1652; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 833

 Strong authentication is the most effective measure against external threats to an organization’s confidential information. Confidential information is any data or information that is sensitive, proprietary, or valuable to the organization, and that should not be disclosed to unauthorized parties1. External threats are malicious actors outside the organization who attempt to gain unauthorized access to the organization’s networks, systems, and data, using various methods such as malware, hacking, or social engineering2. Strong authentication is a method of verifying the identity and legitimacy of a user or device before granting access to the organization’s resources or data3. Strong authentication typically involves the use of multiple factors or methods of authentication, such as passwords, tokens, biometrics, or certificates4. Strong authentication can prevent or reduce the risk of external threats to the organization’s confidential information, by making it more difficult and costly for the attackers to compromise the credentials or devices of the authorized users, and by limiting the access to the data or resources that are relevant and necessary for the users’ roles and responsibilities5. The other options are not the most effective measures against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as they are either less secure or less relevant than strong authentication. Single sign-on is a method of allowing a user to access multiple systems or applications with a single set of credentials, without having to log in separately for each system or application6. Single sign-on can improve the user experience and convenience, as well as reduce the administrative burden and cost of managing multiple accounts and passwords. However, single sign-on is not the most effective measure against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it can also increase the risk of credential compromise or misuse, and create a single point of failure or attack for the attackers to access multiple systems or data. Data integrity checking is a method of ensuring that the data or information is accurate, complete, and consistent, and that it has not been altered or corrupted by unauthorized parties or processes. Data integrity checking can involve the use of techniques such as checksums, hashes, digital signatures, or encryption. Data integrity checking can enhance the quality and reliability of the data or information, as well as detect and prevent any unauthorized or malicious changes or tampering. However, data integrity checking is not the most effective measure against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it does not prevent or reduce the risk of data theft or leakage, and it does not verify the identity or legitimacy of the users or devices accessing the data. Intrusion detection system is a system that monitors the network or system activities and events, and detects and alerts any suspicious or malicious behaviors or anomalies that may indicate an attempted or successful breach or attack. Intrusion detection system can help to identify and respond to external threats to the organization’s networks, systems, and data, by providing visibility and awareness of the network or system status and activities, and by enabling timely and appropriate actions or countermeasures. However, intrusion detection system is not the most effective measure against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it is a reactive or passive system that does not prevent or block the attacks, and it may generate false positives or negatives that can affect its accuracy and efficiency. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, Page 189.

The business process owner should be the risk owner for the risk exposure due to weak technical controls in a newly implemented HR system, because they are responsible for the performance and outcomes of the HR business process, and they understand the business requirements, expectations, and impact of the HR system. The business process owner can also evaluate the trade-offs between the potential benefits and costs of the HR system, and the potential risks and consequences of a failure or breach of the system. The business process owner can also communicate and justify their risk acceptance or mitigation decision to the senior management and other stakeholders, and ensure that the risk is monitored and reviewed regularly. The other options are less appropriate to be the risk owner for this risk exposure. The chief risk officer is responsible for overseeing the enterprise-wide risk management framework and process, which includes ensuring the identification, assessment, and reporting of risks. However, they are not the owner of the HR system or the HR business process, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept or mitigate the risk on behalf of the business. The project manager is responsible for managing the implementation of the HR system, which includes ensuring the delivery of the system within the scope, time, and budget constraints. However, they are not the owner of the HR system or the HR business process, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept or mitigate the risk on behalf of the business. The chief information officer is responsible for managing the IT function and resources, which includes providing the technical support and security for the HR system. However, they are not the owner of the HR system or the HR business process, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept or mitigate the risk on behalf of the business. References = Getting risk ownership right 1

 The areas to address first when classifying and prioritizing risk responses are those with high cost effectiveness ratios and high risk levels, as they represent the most optimal and urgent risk responses that can reduce the risk exposure and impact significantly with a reasonable cost. The other options are not the areas to address first, as they may indicate suboptimal or less urgent risk responses that may not align with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

According to ISACA, a risk register is a tool to record and track the identified risks, their ratings, responses, and status. The primary purpose of a risk register is to provide a centralized view of risk for the organization, as it enables the consolidation, communication, and reporting of risk information across different levels, units, and functions. A risk register can also support the risk management process, such as risk identification, assessment, treatment, monitoring, and review.

References:

•ISACA, Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, 2019, p. 761

•ISACA, Capability Maturity Model and Risk Register Integration: The Right Approach to Enterprise Governance2

A KRI is a measure used by an organization to measure the health of a particular risk. In this case, the risk practitioner is developing a metric to measure the risk associated with security threats that were not identified by antivirus software12.

References

1Standardized Scoring for Security and Risk Metrics - ISACA

2Key Performance Indicators for Security Governance, Part 1 - ISACA

 Understanding Reputational Risk:

Reputational risk arises from negative public perception, which can be fueled by disinformation campaigns. These campaigns spread false or misleading information about an organization, potentially damaging its reputation.

 Mitigating Reputational Risk:

The best way to mitigate this risk is to actively counteract false information and restore public trust. This involves debunking false stories and correcting misinformation promptly and effectively.

 Role of Public Relations:

Engaging public relations (PR) personnel is crucial in managing the organization's reputation. PR professionals are skilled in crafting messages, dealing with media, and using communication strategies to address and correct false narratives.

PR personnel can issue press releases, organize press conferences, and leverage social media to reach a wide audience, ensuring the correct information is disseminated.

 Monitoring and Awareness Training:

While monitoring digital platforms and providing awareness training are important, they are more preventive measures. Monitoring helps in early detection, and training aids in internal management of such risks. However, they do not actively counteract the false information once it is in the public domain.

 Restricting Social Media:

Restricting social media usage on corporate networks does not address the core issue of disinformation campaigns. It may reduce internal risks but does not mitigate external reputational damage.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses strategies for managing reputational risk and highlights the importance of proactive communication and public relations efforts (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.3.4 The Value of Risk Communication)​​.

Relationship between Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance:

Risk Appetite: Defined as the amount of risk an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. It is a broad measure that reflects the organization's strategy and goals.

Risk Tolerance: Refers to the acceptable level of variation in performance relative to achieving objectives. It is narrower and can sometimes exceed the risk appetite in specific situations where deviations are permissible.

Contextual Understanding:

Controlled Exceedance: Risk tolerance allows for occasional and controlled exceedance of the risk appetite, typically under specific conditions and for compelling business reasons.

Management Decisions: Decisions to exceed risk appetite should be carefully considered and documented, ensuring they do not threaten the overall risk capacity of the organization.

Comparison with Other Options:

Independent of Each Other: Incorrect, as risk tolerance is related to risk appetite.

Risk Tolerance Determines Risk Appetite: Incorrect, risk appetite is generally broader and set before determining risk tolerance.

Synonymous: Incorrect, they are distinct concepts with risk tolerance providing operational flexibility within the boundaries set by risk appetite.

Best Practices:

Clear Definitions: Clearly define and communicate the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance.

Regular Reviews: Regularly review and adjust risk appetite and tolerance to align with changes in business strategy and external environment.

CRISC Review Manual: Provides detailed definitions and examples illustrating the relationship between risk appetite and risk tolerance .

ISACA Guidelines: Emphasize the importance of understanding and managing the interplay between risk appetite and tolerance for effective risk management .

References:

Automated asset management software is the best method to track asset inventory because it can provide real-time, accurate, and comprehensive data on the location, condition, value, and usage of assets. It can also help to optimize asset utilization, reduce costs, improve compliance, and enhance security.

References

•Free Asset Tracking Templates | Smartsheet

•5 Best Asset Management Software (2023) – Forbes Advisor

•What Is Asset Tracking? Benefits & How It Works - Forbes

•Inventory and Asset Tracking: Keep it Simple (But Powerful)

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 impact is the potential loss or damage that a risk event can cause to an organization. Risk impact can be expressed in qualitative or quantitative terms, such as financial, reputational, operational, or legal. A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the key information about the identified risks, such as their description, likelihood, impact, response, and status. A risk register helps an organization to monitor and manage its risks effectively and efficiently. When there is a change in the external or internal environment that affects the organization’s risks, such as new regulations, the risk register should be updated to reflect this change. The most important element of the risk register to update in this case is the risk impact, because the new regulations have significantly increased the penalties for data breaches, which means that the potential loss or damage that a data breach can cause to the organization has also increased. By updating the risk impact, the organization can reassess the severity and priority of the data breach risk, and adjust its risk response accordingly. The other elements of the risk register are less important to update in this case. The risk trend shows the direction and rate of change of the risk over time, which may or may not be affected by the new regulations. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, which is unlikely to change due to the new regulations. The risk likelihood is the probability of a risk event occurring, which is also independent of the new regulations. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

 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]

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the primary reason to periodically review key performance indicators (KPIs) is to identify trends, because it helps to monitor the changes and patterns in the performance and effectiveness of the risk management processes and controls. KPIs are metrics that measure the achievement of the objectives and targets of the risk management activities. Periodically reviewing KPIs allows the organization to evaluate the progress and results of the risk management strategies and actions, and to identify any gaps, issues, or opportunities for improvement. The other options are not the primary reason to periodically review KPIs, as they are related to other aspects or outcomes of the risk management process. Ensuring compliance is the reason to review key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the occurrence of risk events. Promoting a risk-aware culture is the reason to review key goal indicators (KGIs), which are metrics that measure the alignment of the risk management with the business goals and values. Optimizing resources needed for controls is the reason to review key control indicators (KCIs), which are metrics that measure the efficiency and adequacy of the risk controls. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 143.

The primary reason to have risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register is to ensure that risk is treated appropriately, as risk owners are responsible for implementing the risk response strategies and monitoring the risk status and outcomes. Risk owners are also accountable for the risk and its impact on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. Having risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register helps to clarify the roles and responsibilities, improve the communication and coordination, and enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process. Mitigating actions are prioritized, risk entries are regularly updated, and risk exposure is minimized are not the primary reasons to have risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register, but rather the results or benefits of having risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 206; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 206.

 A vulnerability is a weakness or gap in a system, application, or network that can be exploited by a threat to cause harm or gain unauthorized access1. A vulnerability can be caused by various factors, such as design flaws, coding errors, configuration errors, or outdated software2.

Among the four options given, only option C (a standard procedure for applying software patches two weeks after release) represents a vulnerability. This is because software patches are updates or fixes that address security weaknesses or bugs in software applications or systems3. By applying software patches two weeks after release, the organization is exposing itself to the risk of being attacked or compromised by malicious actors who may exploit the known vulnerabilities in the software before they are patched. This risk is especially high if the software is internet-facing or critical to the organization’s operations4.

References = What is a Vulnerability?, Vulnerability Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster, Vulnerability Patching: A Resource Guide - Rezilion, Why is Software Vulnerability Patching Crucial for Your Software and …

IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the sources, causes, and consequences of IT-related risks, and the potential impacts on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

A corporate risk register 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.

The greatest benefit of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register is that exposure is integrated into the organization’s risk profile, which is a comprehensive and integrated representation of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation56.

Exposure is integrated into the organization’s risk profile means that the organization has a complete and consistent view of the IT risk landscape, and the potential impacts and interdependencies of IT risks on other types of risks, such as financial, operational, strategic, or reputational risks56.

Exposure is integrated into the organization’s risk profile also means that the organization can make informed and balanced decisions on the risk responses and actions, and allocate the appropriate resources and priorities to the IT risk management and control processes56.

The other options are not the greatest benefit, but rather possible outcomes or consequences of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register. For example:

Corporate incident escalation protocols are established is an outcome of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register that indicates the organization has defined and implemented the procedures and mechanisms for reporting and resolving IT-related incidents, and for escalating them to the appropriate authorities or levels when necessary78. However, this outcome does not measure or reflect the exposure or the risk profile of the organization, which may depend on other factors such as the frequency, severity, or complexity of the incidents78.

Risk appetite cascades to business unit management is a consequence of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register that indicates the organization has communicated and aligned the risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue, to the business unit management, who are responsible for executing the risk strategy and objectives at the operational level . However, this consequence does not indicate or imply the exposure or the risk profile of the organization, which may vary depending on the context, environment, or stakeholder expectations .

The organization-wide control budget is expanded is an outcome of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register that indicates the organization has increased the amount of resources and funds that are allocated to the control processes, which are the procedures and activities that aim to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s operations, the reliability of its information, and the compliance with its policies and regulations . However, this outcome does not affect or determine the exposure or the risk profile of the organization, which is independent of the control budget . References =

1: IT Risk Scenarios - Morland-Austin3

2: Risk Scenarios Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

3: Risk Register Template and Examples | Prioritize and Manage Risk1

4: Risk Register Examples for Cybersecurity Leaders4

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

8: Security Incident Reporting and Response, ISACA, 2019

: Risk Appetite: Linking Strategy, Risk and Performance, ISACA, 2012

: Risk Appetite and Tolerance, ISACA Journal, Volume 4, 2013

: The Control Process | Principles of Management2

: Control Management: What it is + Why It’s Essential | Adobe Workfront5

A cyber intrusion is an unauthorized or malicious access to a computer system or network by an attacker. A cyber intrusion can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the system or network, as well as the data and services that it hosts. A cyber intrusion can also cause damage, disruption, or theft to the organization or its stakeholders. One of the best ways to prevent cyber intrusion is to strengthen vulnerability remediation efforts, which means to identify and fix the weaknesses or flaws in the system or network that can be exploited by the attackers. Vulnerability remediation efforts can include conducting regular vulnerability assessments, applying security patches and updates, configuring security settings and policies, and implementing security controls and measures. By strengthening vulnerability remediation efforts, the organization can reduce the attack surface and the likelihood of cyber intrusion, as well as enhance the resilience and protection of the system or network. The other options are not the best recommendations for preventing cyber intrusion, although they may be helpful and complementary. Establishing a cyber response plan is a technique to prepare for and respond to a cyber incident, such as a cyber intrusion, by defining the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources that are needed to manage and recover from the incident. However, a cyber response plan is a reactive and contingency measure, while strengthening vulnerability remediation efforts is a proactive and preventive measure. Implementing data loss prevention (DLP) tools is a technology that tries to detect and stop sensitive data breaches, or data leakage incidents, in an organization. DLP tools can help to protect the data from being disclosed to an unauthorized person, whether it is deliberate or accidental. However, DLP tools do not prevent cyber intrusion itself, as they only focus on the data, not the system or network. Implementing network segregation is a method to divide a network into smaller segments or subnetworks, each with its own security policies and controls. Network segregation can help to isolate and contain the impact of a cyber intrusion, as well as to limit the access and movement of the attackers within the network. However, network segregation does not prevent cyber intrusion from occurring, as it does not address the vulnerabilities or flaws in the system or network. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 164-1651; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 902; What Are Security Controls? - F53; Assessing Security Controls: Keystone of the Risk Management … - ISACA4

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.

The person or entity who should be primarily responsible for performing user entitlement reviews is the data owner. A user entitlement review is a process that verifies and validates the access rights and privileges of the users to the data and resources in the IT environment. A user entitlement review helps to ensure that the users have the appropriate and necessary access to perform their roles and functions, and to prevent or detect any unauthorized or inappropriate access. A data owner is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility to define, classify, and protect the data and resources in the IT environment. A data owner helps to perform user entitlement reviews, because they help to establish and enforce the access policies and standards for the data and resources, and to approve or revoke the access requests and changes for the users. A data owner also helps to monitor and report on the access performance and compliance for the data and resources, and to identify and address any issues or gaps in the access management activities. The other options are not the primary responsible party for performing user entitlement reviews, although they may be involved in the process. IT security manager, IT personnel, and data custodian are all examples of roles or functions that can help to support or implement the user entitlement reviews, but they do not necessarily have the authority or responsibility to define, classify, or protect the data and resources. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 5-14.

The most relevant source to reference when updating security awareness training materials is the recent security incidents reported by competitors. This can help to illustrate the real-world threats and consequences of poor security practices, and to motivate the employees to follow the security policies and procedures. Risk management framework, risk register, and global security standards are other sources that may be useful, but they are not as relevant as the recent security incidents. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 9; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 214.

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.

 The best way to facilitate the implementation of data classification requirements is to assign a data owner. A data owner is a person who has the authority and responsibility for defining, classifying, and protecting the data. A data owner can help to facilitate the implementation of data classification requirements by providing the criteria, categories, roles, and procedures for classifying the data according to its sensitivity, value, and criticality. A data owner can also ensure that the data is handled and stored appropriately, and that the data classification policy is enforced and monitored. The other options are not as effective as assigning a data owner, as they are related to the prevention, audit, or control of the data, not the classification or protection of the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

The first thing that should be done by IT governance to support the development of a new risk management plan to specifically address legal and regulatory risk scenarios is to establish IT-specific compliance objectives. Compliance objectives are the goals or targets that the organization sets to ensure that its IT activities and processes comply with the relevant laws, regulations, standards, and contracts. Compliance objectives help to define the scope, criteria, and expectations for the IT compliance program, and to align the IT compliance activities with the organization’s strategy, risk appetite, and performance measures. Compliance objectives also help to communicate and demonstrate the organization’s commitment and accountability for IT compliance to the internal and external stakeholders, such as the board, management, regulators, auditors, and customers. The other options are not the first thing that should be done, although they may be useful or necessary steps or components of the IT compliance program. Requesting a regulatory risk reporting methodology, requiring critical success factors (CSFs) for IT risks, and communicating IT key risk indicators (KRIs) and triggers are all activities that can help to implement and monitor the IT compliance program, but they require the prior definition and agreement of the IT compliance objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.4.1, page 2-37.

The risk practitioner should update the risk scenarios in the risk register to reflect the new international regulations and their potential impact on the organization. The risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their likelihood, impact, mitigation strategies, and status. Updating the risk register will help the risk practitioner to prioritize and manage the risks effectively, and communicate them to the relevant stakeholders.

References

•ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Domain 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2.2: Risk Register

•Risk Register - ISACA

•How to Create a Risk Register: A Step-by-Step Guide | The Blueprint

Risk mitigation is a proactive business strategy to identify, assess, and mitigate potential threats or uncertainties that could harm an organization’s objectives, assets, or operations1. It entails specific action plans to reduce the likelihood or impact of these identified risks2.

There are several recognized ways to mitigate risk, such as accepting, avoiding, hedging, transferring, or reducing the risk3. Among the options given, only C is an example of risk reduction, which involves implementing controls or safeguards to minimize the negative effects of the risk3. Change and configuration management processes are methods to ensure that changes to the IT systems or infrastructure are properly authorized, documented, tested, and implemented, and that the configuration of the IT assets is consistent and accurate. These processes can help prevent or detect errors, defects, or vulnerabilities that could compromise the IT performance, security, or availability.

The other options are not examples of risk mitigation, but rather risk avoidance (A), risk transfer (B), or risk acceptance (D). Risk avoidance means eliminating the risk entirely by not engaging in the activity that causes the risk3. Not providing capability for employees to work remotely could avoid the risk of data breaches or network issues, but it could also limit the productivity and flexibility of the workforce. Risk transfer means shifting the responsibility or burden of the risk to another party, such as a vendor or an insurer3. Outsourcing the IT activities and infrastructure could transfer the risk of IT failures or incidents to the service provider, but it could also introduce new risks such as vendor dependency or loss of control. Risk acceptance means acknowledging the risk and its consequences without taking any action to address it3. Taking out insurance coverage for IT-related incidents could provide some financial compensation in case of a loss, but it does not reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk itself. References =

5 Key Risk Mitigation Strategies (With Examples) | Indeed.com

10 Risk Mitigation techniques you need to know - Stakeholdermap.com

Risk Mitigation Strategies: Types & Examples (+ Free Template)

[Change and Configuration Management - ISACA]

 The primary role of a data custodian in the risk management process is to ensure that data is protected according to the classification. A data custodian is a person or entity that has the responsibility for implementing and maintaining the security controls for the data, such as access rights, encryption, backup, or disposal. A data custodian acts as an agent of the data owner, who is the person or entity that has the authority and accountability for the data. A data custodian should ensure that data is protected according to the classification, which is the process of assigning a level of sensitivity and criticality to the data, based on the impact of its loss, disclosure, or modification. Data classification helps to determine the appropriate security controls and risk responses for the data, and to comply with the relevant laws, regulations, or contractual obligations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 1271

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual, the average time to grant access privileges is the best indicator of the efficiency of a process for granting access privileges, because it measures how quickly and effectively the process can respond to the access requests and meet the business needs. The average time to grant access privileges can be calculated by dividing the total time spent on granting access privileges by the number of access requests processed. The other options are not the best indicators of the efficiency of the process, because they measure other aspects of the process, such as the quality, the security, or the maintenance. The number of changes in access granted to users measures the quality of the process, as it indicates how well the process can align the access rights with the user roles and functions. The average number of access privilege exceptions measures the security of the process, as it indicates how often the process deviates from the established policies and standards. The number and type of locked obsolete accounts measures the maintenance of the process, as it indicates how well the process can remove the unnecessary or outdated accounts. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.2, page 163

Using an entry in the risk register to track the aggregate risk associated with server failure provides a comprehensive view of the impact should the servers simultaneously fail, as it considers the combined effect of the server failure on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. The risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their likelihood, impact, and mitigation strategies. By aggregating the risk associated with server failure, the risk register can help to estimate the worst-case scenario and to prioritize the risk response accordingly. It provides a cost-benefit analysis on control options available for implementation, it provides a view on where controls should be applied to maximize the uptime of servers, and it provides historical information about the impact of individual servers malfunctioning are not the primary benefits of using an entry in the risk register to track the aggregate risk associated with server failure, but rather the possible outcomes or actions of using the risk register. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question220; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 220.

 The control owner is the person who has the authority to approve an exception to a control. A control is a policy, procedure, or technical measure that is implemented to prevent or mitigate a risk. A control owner is responsible for the design, implementation, operation, and maintenance of the control, as well as for monitoring and reporting its performance and effectiveness. A control owner is also accountable for the approval of any changes or exceptions to the control, based on the risk assessment and business justification. An information security manager, a risk owner, and a risk manager are not the best choices, as they do not have the same level of authority, responsibility, and knowledge as the control owner in relation to the control. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 35.

 The primary objective for requiring an independent review of an organization’s IT risk management process should be to assess gaps in IT risk management operations and strategic focus, as this helps to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current process, and to provide recommendations for improvement and alignment with the enterprise’s objectives and environment. An independent review is an objective and unbiased evaluation of the IT risk management process by a qualified and competent party that is not involved in the process. An independent review can help to ensure the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of the IT risk management process, as well as to enhance the credibility and confidence of the process. Confirming that IT risk assessment results are expressed as business impact, verifying implemented controls to reduce the likelihood of threat materialization, and ensuring IT risk management is focused on mitigating potential risk are not the primary objectives for requiring an independent review of an organization’s IT risk management process, but rather the expected outcomes or benefits of the independent review. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question219; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 219.

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, expiration date, 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

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

 A control self-assessment (CSA) is a technique that allows managers and work teams directly involved in business units, functions, or processes to participate in assessing the organization’s risk management and control processes. The main purpose of conducting a CSA is to gain a better understanding of the control effectiveness in the organization, which means how well the controls are designed, implemented, and operated to achieve the desired outcomes and mitigate the risks. A CSA can help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the existing controls, as well as the gaps and opportunities for improvement. A CSA can also help to enhance the awareness, ownership, and accountability of the control environment among the managers and staff. The other options are not the main purpose of conducting a CSA, although they may be related or beneficial. Gaining a better understanding of the risk in the organization is a result of conducting a CSA, but it is not the primary goal. The primary goal is to evaluate the controls that address the risks, not the risks themselves. Adjusting the controls prior to an external audit is a possible action that may follow a CSA, but it is not the reason for conducting a CSA. The reason for conducting a CSA is to improve the control effectiveness, not to prepare for an audit. Reducing the dependency on external audits is a potential benefit of conducting a CSA, but it is not the objective of conducting a CSA. The objective of conducting a CSA is to enhance the internal control assurance, not to replace the external audit assurance. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 153-1541; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 802

A baseline assessment is the first step in assessing the maturity of an organization’s internal control environment. A baseline assessment is a comprehensive evaluation of the current state of the internal control structure, processes, and activities across the organization. A baseline assessment helps to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the existing internal controls, as well as the gaps and opportunities for improvement. A baseline assessment also provides a reference point for measuring the progress and effectiveness of the internal control improvement initiatives. The other options are not the first steps in assessing the maturity of an internal control environment, although they may be part of the subsequent steps. Validating control process execution is a technique to verify that the internal control activities are performed as designed and intended. Determining if controls are effective is a process to evaluate the adequacy and efficiency of the internal controls in achieving the desired outcomes and mitigating the risks. Identifying key process owners is a task to assign the roles and responsibilities for the internal control design, implementation, and monitoring to the appropriate individuals or groups within the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 153-1541; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 742

Automation of control monitoring is the application of technology to allow continuous or high-frequency, automated monitoring of controls to validate the effectiveness of controls designed to mitigate risk1.

Automation of control monitoring can provide benefits such as increased test coverage, improved timeliness, reduced risk velocity, greater visibility, improved consistency, and the ability to identify trends23.

However, automation of control monitoring also involves costs such as the acquisition, implementation, maintenance, and updating of the technology, as well as the training and support of the staff who use it45.

Therefore, the primary consideration when assessing the automation of control monitoring is the cost-benefit analysis of automation, which compares the expected benefits and costs of automation and determines whether the benefits outweigh the costs or vice versa45.

The other options are not the primary consideration, but rather secondary or tertiary factors that may influence the decision to automate or not. For example, the impact due to failure of control and the frequency of failure of control are aspects of the risk assessment that may indicate the need for automation, but they do not provide the basis for evaluating the feasibility and desirability of automation45. Similarly, the contingency plan for residual risk is a component of the risk response that may include automation as a risk mitigation strategy, but it does not measure the effectiveness and efficiency of automation45. References =

2: A Practical Approach to Continuous Control Monitoring, ISACA Journal, Volume 2, 2015

3: Continuous Controls Monitoring: The Next Generation Of Controls Testing, Forbes Technology Council, June 2, 2022

1: Making Continuous Controls Monitoring Work for Everyone, ISACA Now Blog, June 13, 2022

4: Controls Automation - Monitoring vs. Operation - Part 3, Turnkey Consulting, July 29, 2021

5: What’s Continuous Control Monitoring and Why Is It Important?, MetricStream Blog, October 15, 2019

 IT risk assessments can best be used by management as input for decision-making, because they provide valuable information about the current and potential risks facing the organization’s IT systems, networks, and data, and their impact on the organization’s objectives and performance. IT risk assessments can help management to identify and prioritize the most critical and relevant risks, and to evaluate and select the most appropriate and effective risk responses. IT risk assessments can also help management to allocate and optimize the resources and budget for IT risk management, and to communicate and report the risk status and performance to the senior management, the board of directors, and other stakeholders. IT risk assessments can support management in making informed and balanced decisions that consider both the opportunities and the threats of IT-related activities and investments. References = Complete Guide to IT Risk Management 1

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

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

IT risk scenarios are the descriptions or representations of the possible or hypothetical situations or events that may cause or result in an IT risk for the organization. IT risk scenarios usually consist of three elements: a threat or source of harm, a vulnerability or weakness, and an impact or consequence.

The best approach to use when creating a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios is to map scenarios to a recognized risk management framework, which is an established or recognized model or standard that provides the principles, guidelines, and best practices for the organization’s IT risk management function. Mapping scenarios to a recognized risk management framework can help the organization to create a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios by providing the following benefits:

It can ensure that the IT risk scenarios are relevant, appropriate, and proportional to the organization’s IT objectives and needs, and that they support the organization’s IT strategy and culture.

It can ensure that the IT risk scenarios are consistent and compatible with the organization’s IT governance, risk management, and control functions, and that they reflect the organization’s IT risk appetite and tolerance.

It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the identification, analysis, evaluation, and communication of the IT risk scenarios, and for the alignment and integration of the IT risk scenarios with the organization’s IT risk policies and standards.

The other options are not the best approaches to use when creating a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that mapping scenarios to a recognized risk management framework provides, and they may not be specific or applicable to the organization’s IT objectives and needs.

Deriving scenarios from IT risk policies and standards means creating or generating the IT risk scenarios based on the rules or guidelines that define and describe the organization’s IT risk management function, and that specify the expectations and requirements for the organization’s IT risk management function. Deriving scenarios from IT risk policies and standards can help the organization to create a consistent and compliant set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not cover all the relevant or significant IT risks that may affect the organization, and it may not support the organization’s IT strategy and culture.

Gathering scenarios from senior management means collecting or obtaining the IT risk scenarios from the senior management or executives that oversee or direct the organization’s IT activities or functions. Gathering scenarios from senior management can help the organization to create a high-level and strategic set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not reflect the operational or technical aspects of the IT risks, and it may not involve the input or feedback from the other stakeholders or parties that are involved or responsible for the IT activities or functions.

Benchmarking scenarios against industry peers means comparing and contrasting the IT risk scenarios with those of other organizations or industry standards, and identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats that may affect the organization’s IT objectives or operations. Benchmarking scenarios against industry peers can help the organization to create a competitive and innovative set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization’s IT objectives and needs, and it may not comply with the organization’s IT policies and standards. 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 199

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Risk mitigation procedures are the actions and plans that an organization implements to reduce the likelihood and impact of identified risks. Risk mitigation procedures should include the deployment of counter measures, which are the specific controls or solutions that address the root causes or sources of the risks, and prevent or minimize the potential losses or damages. For example, a counter measure for the risk of data breach could be encrypting the data or implementing a firewall. The deployment of counter measures should be based on a cost-benefit analysis, a risk assessment, and a risk response strategy. The other options are not necessarily part of risk mitigation procedures. Buying an insurance policy is an example of risk transfer, which is a risk response strategy that shifts the responsibility or burden of the risk to another party, such as an insurer or a vendor. However, risk transfer does not eliminate or reduce the risk itself, and it may involve additional costs or conditions. Acceptance of exposures is an example of risk acceptance, which is a risk response strategy that acknowledges the existence and consequences of the risk, and decides not to take any action to change the risk situation. However, risk acceptance does not mitigate the risk, and it may require contingency plans or reserves to deal with the potential outcomes. Enterprise architecture implementation is an example of a business process or project that may involve or create risks, but it is not a risk mitigation procedure itself. Enterprise architecture is the design and structure of an organization’s IT systems, networks, and resources, and how they align with the organization’s goals and strategies. Enterprise architecture implementation may require risk management activities, such as risk identification, assessment, and response, but it is not a risk mitigation procedure itself. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 151

The audit planning process is the process of defining and describing the scope, objectives, and approach of the internal audit that is performed to assess and evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. The audit planning process involves identifying and prioritizing the audit areas, topics, or issues, and allocating the audit resources, time, and budget.

The most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process is the annual risk assessment results, which are the outcomes or outputs of the risk assessment process that measures and compares the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizes them based on their significance and urgency. The annual risk assessment results can help the internal audit department to plan the audit by providing the following information:

The level and priority of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization if they materialize.

The gap or difference between the current and desired level of risk, and the extent or degree to which the risk responses or controls contribute to or affect the gap or difference.

The cost-benefit or feasibility analysis of the possible actions or plans to address or correct the risks and their responses, and the expected or desired outcomes or benefits that they may provide for the organization.

The other options are not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that the annual risk assessment results provide, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the internal audit department.

Closed management action plans from the previous audit are the actions or plans that have been implemented or completed by the management to address or correct the findings or recommendations from the previous internal audit that was performed. Closed management action plans from the previous audit can provide useful information on the progress and performance of the management in improving and optimizing the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions, but they are not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because they do not indicate the current or accurate state and performance of the organization’s risk profile, and they may not cover all the relevant or emerging risks that may exist or arise.

An updated vulnerability management report is a report that provides the information and status of the vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. An updated vulnerability management report can provide useful information on the existence and severity of the vulnerabilities, and the actions or plans to mitigate or prevent them, but it is not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because it does not indicate the likelihood and impact of the risk scenarios that are associated with the vulnerabilities, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization.

A list of identified generic risk scenarios is a list that contains the descriptions or representations of the possible or hypothetical situations or events that may cause or result in a risk for the organization, without specifying the details or characteristics of the risk source, event, cause, or impact. A list of identified generic risk scenarios can provide useful information on the types or categories of the risks that may affect the organization, but it is not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because it does not indicate the level and priority of the risks, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for 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 188

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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. Risk identification 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.

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 the agencies, 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

The best information to present to business control owners when justifying costs related to controls is the return on IT security-related investments, because this shows the value and benefits of the controls in relation to their costs. Return on IT security-related investments is a metric that measures the effectiveness and efficiency of IT security controls by comparing the amount of money saved or gained from preventing or mitigating IT-related risks with the amount of money spent on implementing and maintaining the controls. By presenting this information, business control owners can see how the controls contribute to the achievement of the business objectives, such as reducing losses, increasing revenues, enhancing customer satisfaction, or improving compliance. This information can also help business control owners to prioritize and allocate resources for the most critical and beneficial controls, and to optimize the balance between risk and return. References = Cost Control: How Businesses Use It to Increase Profits

The primary objective for selecting risk response options is to reduce risk to an acceptable level. Risk response options are the possible actions that can be taken to address the risks that have been identified and analyzed in the risk management process. Risk response options can be classified into four categories: avoid, transfer, mitigate, and accept for negative risks (or threats), and exploit, share, enhance, and accept for positive risks (or opportunities). The selection of the risk response options depends on various factors, such as the risk level, the risk appetite and tolerance, the cost and benefit, and the feasibility and availability of the options. The main goal of selecting the risk response options is to reduce the risk to a level that is acceptable to the organization, which means that the risk exposure is within the boundaries of the risk criteria and the risk appetite. The other options are not the primary objective for selecting risk response options, although they may be related or beneficial. Identifying compensating controls is a technique to implement additional or alternative controls when the existing controls are not effective or sufficient to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Minimizing residual risk is a result of selecting and implementing the risk response options, but it is not the main purpose. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response, and it may or may not be acceptable depending on the risk appetite and tolerance. Reducing risk factors is a method to decrease the likelihood or impact of the risk by addressing the root causes or sources of the risk. However, reducing risk factors does not necessarily mean that the risk is reduced to an acceptable level, as there may be other factors or uncertainties that affect the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 862

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the primary goal of a risk awareness program is to reduce the risk to an acceptable level by increasing the knowledge and understanding of the risk among the stakeholders. A risk awareness program should:

Educate the stakeholders about the sources, types and impacts of IT-related risks

Explain the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders in the risk management process

Promote a risk-aware culture that supports the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the organization

Provide guidance and tools for identifying, assessing, responding and monitoring IT-related risks

Encourage the reporting and escalation of risk issues and incidents

Reinforce the benefits and value of effective risk management

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: IT Risk Reporting, pp. 224-2251

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 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.

An IT risk and control self-assessment (RCSA) is a process that helps organizations identify and evaluate operational risks and assess the effectiveness of their control measures12. It is a structured approach that involves identifying, assessing, mitigating, and monitoring risks across all levels of an organization12.

A report to senior management is a document that summarizes and communicates the results and findings of the RCSA, and provides recommendations and action plans for improving the risk management and control processes34.

The most important aspect of an IT risk and control self-assessment to include in a report to senior management is an increase in residual risk, which is the risk remaining after risk treatment, and represents the exposure or potential impact of the risk on the organization’s objectives56.

An increase in residual risk is the most important aspect because it indicates the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or tolerate, and the gap between the current and desired risk profile56.

An increase in residual risk is also the most important aspect because it requires the attention and decision of the senior management, who are responsible for defining the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, and criteria, and for ensuring that the residual risk is within the acceptable range56.

The other options are not the most important aspects, but rather possible components or outcomes of an IT risk and control self-assessment that may support or complement the report to senior management. For example:

Changes in control design are components of an IT risk and control self-assessment that involve modifying or updating the control measures to address the changes in the risk environment or the organization’s objectives56. However, changes in control design are not the most important aspect because they do not measure or reflect the residual risk, which is the ultimate goal of the risk treatment56.

A decrease in the number of key controls is an outcome of an IT risk and control self-assessment that indicates the improvement or optimization of the control processes, and the reduction of the complexity or redundancy of the control measures56. However, a decrease in the number of key controls is not the most important aspect because it does not indicate or imply the residual risk, which may depend on other factors such as the effectiveness or efficiency of the controls56.

Changes in control ownership are components of an IT risk and control self-assessment that involve assigning or reassigning the responsibility and accountability for the control processes to the appropriate individuals or groups within the organization56. However, changes in control ownership are not the most important aspect because they do not affect or determine the residual risk, which is independent of the control owners56. References =

1: Risk and control self-assessment - KPMG Global1

2: Control Self Assessments - PwC2

3: How-To Guide: Implementing Risk Control Self-Assessment Steps4

4: RISK MANAGEMENT SELF-ASSESSMENT TEMPLATE - Smartsheet5

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

The risk associated with an asset before controls are applied is also known as the inherent risk. It is the level of risk that exists in the absence of any mitigating actions or measures. To express the inherent risk, one needs to consider two factors: the likelihood and the impact of a potential threat. The likelihood is the probability or frequency of a threat occurring, while the impact is the magnitude or severity of the consequences if the threat materializes. The inherent risk can be calculated by multiplying the likelihood and the impact, or by using a risk matrix that assigns a risk rating based on the combination of these two factors. The other options are not correct ways of expressing the inherent risk, as they do not account for both the likelihood and the impact of a threat. The magnitude of an impact is only one component of the risk, and it does not reflect how likely the threat is to happen. The function of the cost and effectiveness of control is related to the residual risk, which is the risk that remains after controls are applied. The likelihood of a given threat is also only one component of the risk, and it does not indicate how severe the impact would be if the threat occurs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, Page 47.

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), 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

 Business process owners would provide the most important input when identifying IT risk scenarios. IT risk scenarios are the situations or events that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance due to the use of information and technology1. Identifying IT risk scenarios means finding, recognizing, and describing the IT risks that the organization faces, as well as their sources, drivers, consequences, and responses2. Business process owners are the persons or entities who are responsible for the design, implementation, and operation of the business processes that support the organization’s goals and values3. Business process owners would provide the most important input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they can:

Provide the context and perspective of the business objectives, strategies, and requirements that are affected or supported by the IT risks and controls;

Identify and prioritize the IT risks that are relevant and significant to their business processes, as well as the IT assets and resources that are involved or impacted by the IT risks;

Evaluate and communicate the likelihood and impact of the IT risks on their business processes, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance of their business units;

Suggest and implement the most suitable and effective IT risk response actions or measures to mitigate the IT risks, as well as monitor and report on the IT risk and control performance;

Align and integrate the IT risk management activities and outcomes with the business risk management framework, policies, and standards. The other options are not the most important roles for providing input when identifying IT risk scenarios, as they are either less relevant or less specific than business process owners. Information security managers are the persons or entities who are responsible for the planning, implementation, and maintenance of the information security measures and controls that protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the organization’s data and systems4. Information security managers can provide input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they can:

Provide the expertise and guidance on the information security risks and controls that are related to the use of information and technology;

Identify and assess the information security vulnerabilities and threats that may affect the organization’s data and systems, as well as the information security assets and resources that are involved or impacted by the information security risks;

Recommend and implement the most appropriate and effective information security risk response actions or measures to reduce or eliminate the information security risks, as well as monitor and report on the information security risk and control performance;

Align and integrate the information security risk management activities and outcomes with the information security framework, policies, and standards. However, information security managers are not the most important roles for providing input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they may not have the full understanding or visibility of the business objectives, strategies, and requirements that are affected or supported by the IT risks and controls, or the risk appetite and tolerance of the business units. Internal auditors are the persons or entities who are responsible for the independent and objective assurance and consulting on the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s governance, risk management, and internal control system5. Internal auditors can provide input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they can:

Provide the assurance and validation on the design and operation of the IT risks and controls that are related to the use of information and technology;

Identify and evaluate the IT risk and control gaps or deficiencies that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance, as well as the IT risk and control objectives and activities that are involved or impacted by the IT risk and control gaps or deficiencies;

Report and recommend improvements or enhancements to the IT risks and controls, as well as follow up and verify the implementation and effectiveness of the IT risk and control improvements or enhancements;

Align and integrate the IT risk and control assurance and consulting activities and outcomes with the internal audit framework, policies, and standards. However, internal auditors are not the most important roles for providing input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they may not have the authority or responsibility to implement or operate the IT risks and controls, or to decide or prioritize the IT risk response actions or measures. Operational risk managers are the persons or entities who are responsible for the identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment of the risks that arise from the failures or inadequacies of the organization’s people, processes, systems, or external events6. Operational risk managers can provide input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they can:

Provide the oversight and coordination of the operational risk management activities and performance across the organization, including the IT risks and controls that are related to the use of information and technology;

Identify and prioritize the operational risks that are relevant and significant to the organization, as well as the operational assets and resources that are involved or impacted by the operational risks;

Evaluate and communicate the likelihood and impact of the operational risks on the organization, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization;

Suggest and implement the most suitable and effective operational risk response actions or measures to mitigate the operational risks, as well as monitor and report on the operational risk and control performance;

Align and integrate the operational risk management activities and outcomes with the operational risk management framework, policies, and standards. However, operational risk managers are not the most important roles for providing input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they may not have the specific knowledge or expertise on the IT risks and controls that are related to the use of information and technology, or the context and perspective of the business processes that are affected or supported by the IT risks and controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 85.

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. A 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.

Performing a root cause analysis is the risk practitioner’s best recommendation when the number of tickets to rework application code has significantly exceeded the established threshold, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:

Why did the application code require rework?

What were the errors or defects in the application code?

How did the errors or defects affect the functionality or usability of the application?

Who was responsible or accountable for the application code development and testing?

When and how were the errors or defects detected and reported?

What were the costs or consequences of the rework for the organization and its stakeholders?

How can the errors or defects be prevented or minimized in the future?

Performing a root cause analysis can help the organization to improve and optimize the application code quality and performance, and to reduce or eliminate the need for rework. It can also help the organization to align the application code development and testing with the organization’s objectives and requirements, and to comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the risk practitioner’s best recommendations when the number of tickets to rework application code has significantly exceeded the established threshold, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of performing a root cause analysis, which is to identify and understand the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in the problem or incident.

Performing a code review is a process of examining and evaluating the application code for its quality, functionality, and security, using the input and feedback from the peers, experts, or tools. Performing a code review can help the organization to identify and resolve the errors or defects in the application code, but it is not the risk practitioner’s best recommendation, because it does not indicate why the application code required rework, and how the errors or defects affected the organization and its stakeholders.

Implementing version control software is a process of using a software tool to manage and track the changes and modifications to the application code, and to ensure the consistency and integrity of the application code. Implementing version control software can help the organization to control and monitor the application code development and testing, but it is not the risk practitioner’s best recommendation, because it does not indicate why the application code required rework, and how the errors or defects affected the organization and its stakeholders.

Implementing training on coding best practices is a process of providing and facilitating the learning and development of the skills and knowledge on the principles, guidelines, and standards for the application code development and testing. Implementing training on coding best practices can help the organization to enhance the competence and performance of the application code developers and testers, but it is not the risk practitioner’s best recommendation, because it does not indicate why the application code required rework, and how the errors or defects affected 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 189

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 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

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

The risk practitioner’s most important responsibility in managing risk acceptance that exceeds risk tolerance is to verify authorization by senior management. Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging and agreeing to bear the risk and its potential consequences. Risk tolerance is the acceptable or allowable level of variation or deviation from the expected or desired outcomes or objectives. When the risk acceptance exceeds the risk tolerance, it means that the organization is taking on more risk than it can handle or afford. Therefore, the risk practitioner should verify that the risk acceptance is authorized by senior management, who have the authority and accountability for making risk management decisions and ensuring that they are aligned with the organizational strategy and objectives. The other options are not as important as verifying authorization by senior management, as they are related to the adjustments, conditions, or documentation of the risk acceptance, not the approval or validation of the risk acceptance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

 The control environment is the set of standards, processes, and structures that provide the basis for carrying out internal control across the organization. The control environment is most effective when the controls perform as intended, meaning that they achieve their objectives, mitigate the risks, and comply with the policies and regulations. The other options are desirable attributes of the controls, but they do not necessarily indicate the effectiveness of the control environment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 69.

 A source code review is the process of examining and analyzing the source code of an application to identify any vulnerabilities, errors, or flaws that may compromise the security, functionality, or performance of the application. A source code review is the most effective way to identify an application backdoor prior to implementation, as it can detect any hidden or unauthorized code that may allow unauthorized access, bypass security controls, or execute malicious commands. A source code review can also help to improve the quality and reliability of the application, and ensure compliance with the coding standards and best practices. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 181.

The best way to mitigate the security risk associated with the inappropriate use of enterprise applications on the BYOD devices is to implement BYOD mobile device management (MDM) controls. MDM controls are software tools or services that allow the organization to remotely manage, monitor, and secure the BYOD devices and the enterprise applications and data on them. MDM controls can help to enforce security policies, restrict unauthorized access, encrypt sensitive data, wipe data in case of loss or theft, and update or patch applications. The other options are not as effective as implementing MDM controls, as they are related to the review, awareness, or recovery of the BYOD devices and applications, not the prevention or protection of the security risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The best method to maintain a common view of IT risk within an organization is to establish and communicate the IT risk profile. An IT risk profile is a document that summarizes the key IT risks that the organization faces or accepts, and their likelihood, impact, and priority. An IT risk profile helps to identify and prioritize the most critical or relevant IT risks, and to align them with the organization’s objectives, strategy, and risk appetite. Establishing and communicating the IT risk profile is the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk, because it helps to create a shared understanding and awareness of the IT risks among the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Establishing and communicating the IT risk profile also helps to facilitate the IT risk decision-making and reporting processes, and to monitor and control the IT risk performance and improvement. The other options are not the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk, although they may be part of or derived from the IT risk profile. Collecting data for IT risk assessment, utilizing a balanced scorecard, and performing and publishing an IT risk analysis are all activities that can help to support or update the IT risk profile, but they are not the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 1-15.

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner when reviewing the findings of a security awareness program assessment is that the program uses non-customized training modules. Non-customized training modules are generic and may not address the specific security needs, issues, and challenges of the organization. They may also fail to engage and motivate the employees to follow the security policies and procedures, and to enhance their security knowledge and skills. The program not decreasing threat counts, not considering business impact, or being significantly revised are other possible findings, but they are not as concerning as the program using non-customized training modules. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

The most helpful source in providing an overview of an organization’s risk management program is the risk management framework. The risk management framework is a set of components that provide the foundations and organizational arrangements for designing, implementing, monitoring, reviewing, and continually improving risk management throughout the organization. The framework includes the risk management principles, policies, processes, procedures, roles, responsibilities, and resources that enable the organization to manage risk effectively. Risk management treatment plan, risk assessment results, and risk register are other sources that may provide some information about the risk management program, but they are not as comprehensive as the risk management framework. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

 Scenario analysis is the best method to identify significant events that could impact an organization. Scenario analysis is the process of creating and evaluating hypothetical situations or scenarios that represent plausible outcomes of various events or actions. Scenario analysis helps to anticipate and prepare for potential risks and opportunities, as well as to test the robustness and resilience of the organization’s strategies and plans. Control analysis, vulnerability analysis, and heat map analysis are not as effective as scenario analysis, because they focus on the existing or current state of the organization, rather than the future or alternative states. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

The most important element to update when an organization’s risk appetite changes is the key risk indicators (KRIs). KRIs are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. They help to monitor the level of risk and to trigger risk responses when the risk exceeds the risk appetite. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk reporting methodology, key performance indicators (KPIs), and risk taxonomy are other elements that may be updated, but they are not as important as the KRIs. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The best way to determine whether system settings are in alignment with control baselines is to perform configuration validation. Configuration validation is the process of verifying that the system settings and parameters are consistent with the predefined standards and requirements, and that they reflect the current and desired state of the system. Configuration validation helps to ensure that the system is configured correctly and securely, and that it complies with the relevant policies, regulations, and best practices. Configuration validation also helps to identify and correct any deviations or errors in the system settings, and to prevent or mitigate any potential risks or issues. The other options are not as effective as configuration validation, although they may provide some input or information for the system alignment. Control attestation, penetration testing, and internal audit review are all activities that can help to assess or evaluate the system alignment, but they do not necessarily determine or validate the system settings. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 3-11.

 The best time to identify the risk associated with a major project to determine a mitigation plan is the project initiation phase. The project initiation phase is the first phase of the project management process, where the project is defined, authorized, and planned. The project initiation phase includes the activities of developing the project charter, identifying the stakeholders, and defining the scope and objectives of the project. The project initiation phase is the best time to identify the risk associated with the project, as it provides the opportunity to understand the project context, requirements, and expectations, and to establish the risk management framework, process, and plan. By identifying the risk early in the project, the mitigation plan can be integrated with the project plan, and the resources, budget, and schedule can be allocated accordingly. The other options are not as optimal as the project initiation phase, as they are related to the execution, closing, or planning of the project, not the definition or authorization of the project. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Process, page 15.

The next thing that the risk practitioner should do from a risk management perspective when the organization is considering the adoption of an aggressive business strategy to achieve desired growth is to identify new threats resulting from the new business strategy. A threat is a potential cause of an unwanted incident that may affect the achievement of the objectives. An aggressive business strategy is a strategy that involves pursuing high-risk, high-reward opportunities or initiatives to gain a competitive advantage or a significant market share. An aggressive business strategy may introduce new threats or increase the likelihood or impact of existing threats, such as market volatility, regulatory changes, customer dissatisfaction, or competitor retaliation. Therefore, the risk practitioner should identify the new threats resulting from the new business strategy, and assess their potential consequences and implications for the organization. The other options are not as immediate as identifying new threats resulting from the new business strategy, as they are related to the update, information, or measurement of the risk management process, not the identification or analysis of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

 The primary purpose of using key risk indicators (KRIs) to illustrate changes in the risk profile is to communicate risk trends to stakeholders. KRIs are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. By using KRIs to illustrate changes in the risk profile, the organization can communicate the risk trends to the stakeholders, such as the board, senior management, business units, and external parties, and enable them to take appropriate actions to manage the risk. Assigning ownership of emerging risk scenarios, highlighting noncompliance with the risk policy, and identifying threats to emerging technologies are other possible purposes, but they are not as important as communicating risk trends to stakeholders. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

Robotic process automation (RPA) is the use of software robots or artificial intelligence (AI) agents to automate repetitive, rule-based tasks that are normally performed by humans. RPA can improve efficiency, accuracy, and scalability of business processes, but it can also introduce new risks or change the existing risk profile. Therefore, the risk practitioner’s best course of action is to reassess whether the mitigating controls that were designed for the human-performed processes are still effective and adequate for the RPA-enabled processes. This may involve reviewing the control objectives, testing the control performance, identifying the control gaps, and recommending the control enhancements or modifications. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 177.

The management action that will most likely change the likelihood rating of a risk scenario related to remote network access is implementing multi-factor authentication. Multi-factor authentication is a technique that requires the user to provide two or more pieces of evidence to verify their identity, such as a password, a token, or a biometric factor. Multi-factor authentication can help to reduce the likelihood of unauthorized or malicious access to the remote network, as it adds an extra layer of security and makes it harder for the attackers to compromise the user credentials. The other options are not as likely to change the likelihood rating of the risk scenario, as they are related to the update, creation, or maintenance of the remote network access, not the verification or protection of the remote network access. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The best way to mitigate the risk to operations caused by severe weather events is to develop a business continuity plan (BCP). A BCP is a document that describes the procedures and resources needed to ensure the continuity of the organization’s critical functions and processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. A BCP helps to identify the recovery objectives, strategies, and priorities, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the recovery team members. A BCP also helps to prepare and test the recovery capabilities and resources, such as alternate locations, backup systems, and communication channels. The other options are not as effective as developing a BCP, although they may be part of the BCP process or outcomes. Preparing a cost-benefit analysis to evaluate relocation, preparing a disaster recovery plan (DRP), and conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) for an alternate location are all activities that can help to develop or implement a BCP, but they are not the best way to mitigate the risk to operations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 5-9.

The conditional approval of the CIO’s proposal indicates the organization’s risk appetite. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. By setting a limit for expenditures before final approval, senior management is expressing their willingness to take a calculated risk with the new technology, but also their desire to control the potential loss or harm. Risk capacity, management capability, and treatment strategy are other possible factors, but they are not as relevant as risk appetite. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97

The most concerning factor for a risk practitioner reviewing risk action plans for documented IT risk scenarios is that many action plans were discontinued after senior management accepted the risk. Risk action plans are documents that define the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for implementing the risk responses and strategies for the IT risk scenarios. Risk action plans help to reduce, transfer, avoid, or accept the IT risks, and to monitor and report on the IT risk performance and improvement. Discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk is a major concern, because it may indicate that the risk acceptance decision was not based on a proper risk analysis or evaluation, or that the risk acceptance decision was not communicated or coordinated with the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk may also create challenges or risks for the organization, such as compliance, legal, reputational, or operational risks, or conflicts or inconsistencies with the organization’s risk appetite, risk objectives, or risk policies. The other options are not as concerning as discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the risk management process. Individuals outside IT managing action plans for the risk scenarios, target dates for completion missing from some action plans, and senior management approving multiple changes to several action plans are all factors that could affect the quality and timeliness of the risk management process, but they do not necessarily indicate a lack of risk management accountability or oversight. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-32.

The asset owner is the best suited to assist a risk practitioner in developing a relevant set of risk scenarios. The asset owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for the IT assets that support the business processes. The asset owner can provide valuable information on the business objectives, requirements, and expectations that the IT assets should meet. The asset owner can also help identify the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts that may affect the IT assets and the business processes. The asset owner can also suggest possible risk responses and mitigation strategies to address the risk scenarios. The other options are not as relevant as the asset owner, as they may not have the same level of knowledge, interest, or involvement in the IT assets and the business processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

The most effective way to mitigate the risk of unintentional data disclosure through the use of social media sites is to conduct user awareness training. User awareness training is a process of educating and informing the users about the security policies, procedures, and practices that are relevant and applicable to their roles and responsibilities. User awareness training can help to increase the knowledge, understanding, and compliance of the users regarding the data protection and privacy requirements, and the potential risks and consequences of data disclosure through social media sites. User awareness training can also help to influence the behavior, attitude, and culture of the users toward data security and privacy. The other options are not as effective as conducting user awareness training, as they are related to the technical, procedural, or contractual measures to mitigate the risk, not the human or behavioral measures to mitigate the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

 The best course of action for a risk practitioner when a bank recently incorporated Blockchain technology with the potential to impact known risk within the organization is to analyze the risk and update the risk register as needed. Blockchain technology is a new and emerging technology that may introduce new risks or change the existing risks for the bank. Therefore, the risk practitioner should perform a risk analysis to identify, assess, and evaluate the risks associated with the Blockchain technology, and update the risk register accordingly. Determining whether risk responses are still adequate, analyzing and updating control assessments, and conducting testing of the controls are possible actions that may follow the risk analysis, but they are not the best initial course of action. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

The primary risk management responsibility of the first line of defense is to implement risk treatment plans. The first line of defense is the operational management and staff who are directly involved in the execution of the business activities and processes. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks that affect their objectives and performance. Implementing risk treatment plans means applying the appropriate risk response strategies and actions to address the identified risks, and monitoring and reporting the results and outcomes of the risk treatment. The other options are not as primary as implementing risk treatment plans, as they are related to the validation, establishment, or review of the risk management process, not the execution of the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Process, page 15.

The main benefit of using key risk indicators (KRIs) for an organization is that they provide an early warning that a risk threshold is about to be reached. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. KRIs also help to trigger timely and appropriate risk responses, before the risk becomes unmanageable or unacceptable. The other options are not the main benefit of using KRIs, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes. KRIs signal that a change in the control environment has occurred, provide a basis to set the risk appetite for an organization, and assist in the preparation of the organization’s risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

The best indicator of executive management’s support for IT risk mitigation efforts is the number of executives attending IT security awareness training. This shows that the executives are committed to enhancing their knowledge and skills on IT security issues, and that they are setting a positive example for the rest of the organization. The number of stakeholders involved in IT risk identification workshops, the percentage of corporate budget allocated to IT risk activities, and the percentage of incidents presented to the board are other possible indicators, but they are not as strong as the number of executives attending IT security awareness training. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

When performing a risk assessment of a new service to support a core business process, the first step is to identify the conditions that may cause disruptions to the service or the process. This involves identifying the sources and causes of potential risk events, such as natural disasters, cyberattacks, human errors, equipment failures, power outages, etc. that may affect the availability, integrity, or confidentiality of the service or the process. By identifying the conditions that may cause disruptions, the risk practitioner can then analyze the probability and impact of the risk events, evaluate the risk exposure, and determine the appropriate risk responses to ensure the continuity of operations. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 66.

Accepting risk is the only risk response strategy that could be applied to both positive and negative risk that has been identified. Accepting risk means taking no action to change the likelihood or impact of the risk, but being prepared to deal with the consequences if the risk occurs. Accepting risk is usually chosen when the risk is low, unavoidable, or outweighed by the benefits. For positive risks, accepting risk means taking advantage of the opportunities if they arise. For negative risks, accepting risk means setting aside contingency reserves or plans to cope with the threats. The other risk response strategies are specific to either positive or negative risks. Transfer, exploit, and mitigate are strategies for negative risks, while share, enhance, and avoid are strategies for positive risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

The best way to mitigate an identified risk scenario is to execute a risk response plan. A risk response plan is a document that describes the actions and resources that are needed to address the risk scenario. A risk response plan can include one or more of the following strategies: avoid, transfer, mitigate, accept, or exploit. By executing a risk response plan, the organization can reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk scenario, or take advantage of the opportunities that the risk scenario may present. The other options are not as effective as executing a risk response plan, as they are related to the awareness, assessment, or monitoring of the risk scenario, not the actual treatment of the risk scenario. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

The best recommendation to reduce the risk associated with potential system compromise when a vendor stops releasing security patches and updates for a business-critical legacy system is to segment the system on its own network. Network segmentation is the process of dividing a network into smaller subnetworks or segments, based on different criteria, such as function, location, or security level. Network segmentation helps to isolate the system from the rest of the network, and limit the exposure and access to the system. Network segmentation also helps to improve the performance and security of the network, by reducing the network traffic and congestion, and enhancing the monitoring and control capabilities. The other options are not as effective as segmenting the system on its own network, although they may provide some additional protection or recovery options. Ensuring regular backups take place, virtualizing the system in the cloud, and installing antivirus software on the system are all measures that can help to reduce the risk of data loss or system damage, but they do not address the root cause of the risk, which is the lack of security patches and updates for the system. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 3-11.

Data privacy protection is the process of safeguarding the personal information of individuals from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction. Personal information is any information that can be used to identify, locate, or contact an individual, such as name, address, phone number, email, social security number, etc. When there are plans for a business initiative to make use of personal information, the primary consideration related to data privacy protection is to do not collect or retain data that is not needed. This means that the organization should only collect the minimum amount of personal information that is necessary for the purpose of the business initiative, and should only retain the data for as long as it is required by law or business needs. By doing so, the organization can reduce the risk of data breaches, comply with the data protection regulations, respect the data subjects’ rights, and enhance the trust and reputation of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 159.

The most helpful information to review when determining a system’s criticality is the associated business impact analysis (BIA). A BIA is a process of identifying and evaluating the potential effects of disruptions to the organization’s critical business functions and processes. A BIA can help to determine the system’s criticality by assessing its impact on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value. Process flow, service level agreement (SLA), and system architecture are other possible information sources, but they are not as helpful as the BIA. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

 The key performance indicator (KPI) that best measures the effectiveness of an organization’s disaster recovery program is the percentage of critical systems recovered within the recovery time objective (RTO). The RTO is the acceptable timeframe within which a business process or system must be restored after a disruption. The percentage of critical systems recovered within the RTO indicates how well the disaster recovery program can meet the business continuity requirements and minimize the impact of the disruption. The other options are not as good as the percentage of critical systems recovered within the RTO, as they are related to the efficiency, quality, or scope of the disaster recovery program, not the effectiveness of the disaster recovery program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the information about the identified risks, such as the risk description, category, owner, probability, impact, response strategy, status, and action plan. The most important consideration for effectively maintaining a risk register is to update it frequently, as the risk environment is dynamic and subject to change. By updating the risk register regularly, an organization can ensure that the risk information is current, accurate, and relevant, and that the risk responses are timely, appropriate, and effective. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

When developing a response plan to address security incidents regarding sensitive data loss, it is most important to review the data classification policy. A data classification policy is a document that defines the categories and levels of data based on their sensitivity, value, and criticality, and specifies the appropriate security measures and handling procedures for each data type. A data classification policy helps to identify and protect the sensitive data that could be exposed or compromised in a security incident, and to comply with the relevant laws, regulations, standards, and contracts. Reviewing the data classification policy is important when developing a response plan, because it helps to determine the scope, impact, and priority of the security incident, and to select the most appropriate and effective response actions and strategies. Reviewing the data classification policy also helps to communicate and coordinate the response plan with the internal and external stakeholders, such as the data owners, users, custodians, and regulators, and to report and disclose the security incident as required. The other options are not as important as reviewing the data classification policy, although they may be part of or derived from the response plan. Revalidating current key risk indicators (KRIs), revising risk management procedures, and revalidating existing risk scenarios are all activities that can help to improve or update the risk management process, but they are not the most important when developing a response plan. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, page 5-25.

The most effective way for a large and diversified organization to minimize risk associated with unauthorized software on company devices is to scan end points for applications not included in the asset inventory. An asset inventory is a document that records and tracks all the hardware and software assets that are owned, used, or managed by the organization, such as laptops, tablets, smartphones, servers, applications, etc. An asset inventory helps to identify and classify the assets based on their type, model, location, owner, status, etc. An asset inventory also helps to monitor and control the assets, such as enforcing security policies, applying patches and updates, detecting and resolving issues, etc. Scanning end points for applications not included in the asset inventory helps to minimize the risk of unauthorized software, because it helps to discover and remove any software that is not approved, authorized, or licensed by the organization, and that may pose security, legal, or operational risks, such as malware, spyware, pirated software, etc. The other options are not as effective as scanning end points for applications not included in the asset inventory, although they may provide some protection or compliance for the software assets. Prohibiting the use of cloud-based virtual desktop software, conducting frequent reviews of software licenses, and performing frequent internal audits of enterprise IT infrastructure are all examples of preventive or detective controls, which may help to prevent or deter the installation or use of unauthorized software, or to verify or validate the software assets, but they do not necessarily discover or remove the unauthorized software. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 3-11.

The most important factor for successful incident response is the timeliness of attack recognition. Incident response is the process of detecting, analyzing, containing, eradicating, recovering, and reporting on security incidents that could affect the organization’s IT systems or data. The timeliness of attack recognition is the speed and accuracy with which the organization can identify and confirm that an attack has occurred or is in progress. The timeliness of attack recognition is crucial for successful incident response, as it affects the ability and effectiveness of the organization to respond to and mitigate the attack, and to minimize the damage and impact of the attack. The other options are not as important as the timeliness of attack recognition, although they may also contribute to or influence the incident response. The quantity of data logged by the attack control tools, the ability to trace the source of the attack, and the blocking of the attack route immediately are all factors that could help or hinder the incident response, but they are not the most important factor for successful incident response. References = CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 5-32.

 The best course of action for the risk practitioner who has identified that the agreed RTO with a SaaS provider is longer than the business expectation is to document the gap in the risk register and report to senior management. The risk register is the document that records the details of all identified risks, including their sources, causes, impacts, likelihood, and responses. The risk register should be updated regularly to reflect any changes in the risk environment or the risk status. Reporting to senior management is also important, because senior management is the highest level of authority and responsibility in the organization, and they are responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization. Senior management should also oversee the risk management process, and ensure that the risks are aligned with the organization’s goals and values. By documenting the gap in the risk register and reporting to senior management, the risk practitioner can communicate the issue clearly and effectively, and seek guidance and support for resolving the problem. Collaborating with the risk owner, including a right to audit clause, or advising the risk owner to accept the risk are not the best courses of action, because they may not be feasible, effective, or desirable in some situations, or they may require senior management approval or involvement. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

Centralizing IT systems is a process of consolidating and integrating the IT systems or resources in the organization into a single or unified platform or location. Centralizing IT systems helps to improve risk reporting, because it helps to simplify and standardize the risk management process and activities, and to enhance the visibility and transparency of the IT risks and controls. Centralizing IT systems also helps to improve risk reporting, because it helps to facilitate and automate the risk data collection, analysis, and evaluation, and to provide consistent and comprehensive risk information and insights to the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. The other options are not the greatest benefit of centralizing IT systems, although they may be related to the risk management process. Risk classification, risk monitoring, and risk identification are all activities that can help to support or improve the risk management process, but they do not necessarily benefit from centralizing IT systems

The primary objective of collecting information and reviewing documentation when performing periodic risk analysis is to identify new or emerging risk issues that may affect the enterprise’s objectives, processes, or resources. This helps to update the risk profile and prioritize the risk responses accordingly. Satisfying audit requirements, surveying and analyzing historical risk data, and understanding internal and external threat agents are secondary objectives that support the primary objective of risk identification. References = Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, page 22; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 64.

A risk profile is a summary of the nature and level of risk that an organization faces. It includes information such as the sources, causes, and consequences of the risks, their likelihood and impact, their interrelationships and dependencies, and their alignment with the risk appetite and tolerance. A risk profile is influenced by various factors, such as the organization’s objectives, strategies, activities, processes, resources, capabilities, culture, etc. When defining a risk profile during the selection process for a new third party application, the stakeholder that is most important to include is the business process owner, who is the person who has the authority and responsibility for the design, execution, and performance of a business process. The business process owner can provide valuable input and insight into the requirements, expectations, and dependencies of the business process that will use the new third party application, and the potential risks and opportunities that may arise from the selection of the application. The business process owner can also help to prioritize and address the risks, and ensure that the risk profile is aligned with the business objectives and strategies. References = 5

The best metric to demonstrate that servers are configured securely is the total number of servers meeting the baseline for hardening. Hardening is the process of applying security configurations and settings to servers to reduce their attack surface and vulnerability. A baseline is a standard or benchmark that defines the minimum level of security required for servers. By measuring the number of servers that meet the baseline, the organization can assess the effectiveness of its hardening efforts and identify any gaps or deviations. The other metrics, such as exceeding availability thresholds, experiencing hardware failures, or exceeding current patching standards, are not directly related to the security configuration of servers, but rather to their performance, reliability, or maintenance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2, page 2-25.

The best indication that key risk indicators (KRIs) should be revised is a decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk. Risk thresholds are the predefined values or ranges that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable level of risk exposure. Critical assets are the assets that are essential or vital for the achievement of the objectives or the continuity of the operations. A decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds means that the KRIs are not capturing or reflecting the current and relevant risk exposure of the organization, and that they may not provide sufficient or accurate information for risk management decisions. Therefore, the KRIs should be revised to ensure that they cover all the critical assets and their risk thresholds. The other options are not as indicative as a decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds, as they are related to the outcomes, impacts, or activities of the KRIs, not the scope or quality of the KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

 Asset management is the process of identifying, tracking, and maintaining the physical and information assets of an organization. Asset management helps to optimize the value, performance, and security of the assets, and support the business objectives and strategies. The factor that would be of greatest concern regarding an organization’s asset management is an incomplete asset inventory, which is a list of all the assets that the organization owns or uses. An incomplete asset inventory may indicate that the organization does not have a clear and accurate understanding of its assets, their location, ownership, value, dependencies, etc. This may lead to various risks, such as asset loss, theft, misuse, damage, underutilization, overutilization, etc. An incomplete asset inventory may also affect the asset classification, protection, recovery, and disposal processes. References = 6

The best tool to help prioritize investment efforts in the organization’s cybersecurity program is to review the outcome of the latest security risk assessment. A security risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks associated with the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the organization’s information assets and systems. By reviewing the outcome of the security risk assessment, senior management can identify the most critical and urgent risks, and allocate the resources and funds accordingly. Analyzing cyber intelligence reports, engaging independent cybersecurity consultants, and increasing the frequency of updates to the risk register are other possible tools, but they are not as effective as reviewing the outcome of the security risk assessment. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The primary reason to perform periodic vendor risk assessments is to monitor the vendor’s control effectiveness. A vendor risk assessment is a process of evaluating the risks associated with outsourcing a service or function to a third-party vendor. The assessment should be performed periodically to ensure that the vendor is complying with the contractual obligations, service level agreements, and security standards, and that the vendor’s controls are operating effectively to mitigate the risks. Providing input to the organization’s risk appetite, verifying the vendor’s ongoing financial viability, and assessing the vendor’s risk mitigation plans are other possible reasons, but they are not as important as monitoring the vendor’s control effectiveness. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

The most important activity when conducting a post-implementation review as part of the system development life cycle (SDLC) is to verify that the project objectives are met. The project objectives are the specific and measurable outcomes that the project aims to achieve. By verifying that the project objectives are met, the post-implementation review can evaluate the success and value of the project, and identify the lessons learned and best practices for future projects. Identifying project cost overruns, leveraging an independent review team, and reviewing the project initiation risk matrix are other possible activities, but they are not as important as verifying that the project objectives are met. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

Recovery time objectives (RTOs) are the acceptable timeframes within which business processes must be restored after a disruption. RTOs should be based on the maximum tolerable downtime (MTD), which is the longest time that a business process can be inoperable without causing irreparable harm to the organization. The other options are not directly related to RTOs, as they refer to the amount of data loss or corruption that can be tolerated, not the time to restore the business processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.3: Key Risk Indicators, page 197.

The HR manager is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility to collect, process, and protect the personal data of the employees in the organization. The HR manager helps to manage the employee personal data, because they help to establish and enforce the data policies and standards for the employees, and to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements, such as the GDPR. The HR manager also helps to monitor and report on the data performance and compliance for the employees, and to identify and address any issues or gaps in the data management activities. The other options are not the best person to manage the employee personal data, although they may be involved in the process. System administrator, data privacy manager, and compliance manager are all examples of roles or functions that can help to support or implement the data management activities, but they do not necessarily have the authority or responsibility to collect, process, or protect the employee personal data

The most useful input to the parent company’s risk practitioner when developing risk scenarios for the post-acquisition phase is the risk registers of both companies. The risk register is a document that records the details of the risks, such as their sources, causes, consequences, likelihood, impact, and responses. By reviewing the risk registers of both companies, the risk practitioner can identify the existing and potential risks that may affect the post-acquisition integration, performance, and value. The risk management framework, the IT balanced scorecard, and the most recent internal audit findings are other possible inputs, but they are not as useful as the risk registers. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

 The control owner should be responsible for evaluating the residual risk after a compensating control has been implemented. A compensating control is a control that provides an alternative or additional measure of protection when the primary or preferred control is not feasible or effective. A residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response or mitigation has been applied. The control owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for designing, implementing, and monitoring the controls that enforce the policy. The control owner can assess the impact and effectiveness of the compensating control on the residual risk, and report the results and recommendations to the risk owner or the risk practitioner. The other options are not as responsible as the control owner, as they are related to the compliance, ownership, or management of the risk, not the evaluation of the control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

The most important input into the assessment of the risk of shadow IT usage is the classification of the data that is being processed, stored, or transmitted by the unauthorized applications or devices. This determines the level of confidentiality, integrity, and availability that is required for the data and the potential impact of a breach or loss. Business benefits of shadow IT, application-related expenses, and volume of data are less important inputs that may affect the risk analysis, but not as much as the data classification. References = Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, page 28; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 98.

The most concerning issue when reviewing the results of an independent control assessment to determine the effectiveness of a vendor’s control environment is that the controls had recurring noncompliance. This indicates that the vendor’s controls are not operating as intended or designed, and that the vendor is not taking corrective actions to address the control deficiencies. This can increase the risk exposure and liability for the organization that outsources the service or function to the vendor. The report being provided directly from the vendor, the risk associated with multiple control gaps being accepted, and the control owners disagreeing with the auditor’s recommendations are other possible issues, but they are not as critical as the recurring noncompliance. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

The result of a significant increase in the motivation of a malicious threat actor would be an increase in risk event likelihood. The likelihood of a risk event is influenced by the factors of threat, vulnerability, and exposure. The motivation of a threat actor is a key component of the threat factor, as it reflects the intent and capability of the actor to exploit a vulnerability. Therefore, a higher motivation would imply a higher probability of an attack. An increase in mitigating control costs, risk event impact, or cybersecurity premium are possible consequences of a risk event, but they are not directly affected by the motivation of the threat actor. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 6; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 67.

Employee activity monitoring is the process of tracking and recording the actions and behaviors of employees on company owned IT systems, such as email, internet, applications, etc. The purpose of employee activity monitoring is to ensure compliance with the company’s policies and regulations, prevent data leakage and misuse, detect and deter inappropriate or malicious activities, and improve productivity and performance. The most likely way to deter an employee from engaging in inappropriate use of company owned IT systems is to communicate the employee activity monitoring policy and practice to the employees, and make them aware of the consequences of violating the policy. By doing so, the company can create a deterrent effect and discourage the employees from misusing the IT systems, as they know that their actions are being monitored and recorded, and that they will be held accountable for any misconduct. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 181.

Optimizing resource utilization is the main reason for prioritizing IT risk responses, as it helps to allocate resources to the most critical and urgent risks. The other options are not the main reasons for prioritizing IT risk responses, although they may be related to the process.

An IT risk register is a document that records the identified IT risks, their analysis, and their responses. It is a useful tool for managing and communicating the IT risks throughout the project or the organization. The most important factor for maintaining the effectiveness of an IT risk register is to perform regular reviews and updates to the register, meaning that the risk practitioner should periodically check and revise the risk register to reflect the changes in the IT risk environment, the project status, or the organization’s objectives. Performing regular reviews and updates to the register can help to ensure that the risk register is accurate, complete, and current, and that it provides relevant and reliable information for the risk management decision making and actions. Performing regular reviews and updates to the register can also help to identify any new or emerging IT risks, as well as to monitor and report on the IT risk performance and improvement. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, p. 106-107

The best way to ensure the continued effectiveness of the IT risk management function within an organization experiencing high employee turnover is to have well documented policies and procedures. Policies and procedures are the formal documents that define the roles, responsibilities, processes, and standards for the IT risk management function. They provide guidance, consistency, and continuity for the IT risk management activities and outcomes. They also facilitate the knowledge transfer, training, and performance evaluation of the IT risk management staff. The other options are not as helpful as well documented policies and procedures, as they are related to the tools, mechanisms, or structures that support the IT risk management function, not the foundation and direction of the IT risk management function. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Process, page 15.

When preparing a risk status report for periodic review by senior management, it is most important to ensure the report includes risk exposure in business terms. Risk exposure is the potential loss or harm that may result from a risk event. Expressing risk exposure in business terms can help senior management to understand the impact and significance of the risk on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value. A detailed view of individual risk exposures, a summary of incidents that have impacted the organization, and recommendations by an independent risk assessor are other possible contents of the report, but they are not as important as risk exposure in business terms. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 10; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 140.

Business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that involves analyzing the potential consequences of an IT risk event on the organization’s critical business functions and processes. BIA can help to understand the severity and duration of the disruption, the financial and operational losses, the recovery time objectives, and the recovery point objectives. BIA can also help to prioritize the recovery activities and resources, as well as to determine the acceptable level of risk and the risk mitigation strategies. BIA is the most helpful tool to understand the consequences of an IT risk event, as it provides a comprehensive and quantitative assessment of the impact and the recovery requirements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.2, p. 206-207

The most important thing for mitigating ethical risk when establishing accountability for control ownership is to ensure that the performance metrics balance business goals with risk appetite. Performance metrics are the measures that evaluate the achievement of the objectives or the performance of the processes or controls. Business goals are the desired or expected outcomes or results of the business activities or processes. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing and able to take. Ethical risk is the risk that arises from the violation or breach of the ethical principles or standards of the organization or the profession. To mitigate ethical risk, the performance metrics should balance business goals with risk appetite, meaning that they should not encourage or reward excessive or inappropriate risk-taking or unethical behavior, but rather promote and support responsible and ethical risk management and decision making. The other options are not as important as ensuring performance metrics balance business goals with risk appetite, as they are related to the documentation, communication, or monitoring of the processes or controls, not the evaluation or alignment of the performance metrics. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

 To determine if a risk is under-controlled, the risk practitioner will need to understand the risk tolerance. Risk tolerance is the acceptable or allowable level of variation or deviation from the expected or desired outcomes or objectives. Risk tolerance reflects the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing and able to take. A risk is under-controlled when the risk exposure exceeds the risk tolerance, meaning that the organization is taking on more risk than it can handle or afford. Therefore, the risk practitioner will need to understand the risk tolerance to compare it with the risk exposure and identify the gap or difference. The other options are not as relevant as understanding the risk tolerance, as they are related to the monitoring, identification, or determination of the risk or the IT performance, not the comparison or evaluation of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

The most important information to review when developing plans for using emerging technologies is the organizational strategic plan. The organizational strategic plan is a document that defines the vision, mission, goals, and objectives of the organization. It also outlines the strategies, actions, and resources that are needed to achieve them. The organizational strategic plan provides the direction, alignment, and guidance for the use of emerging technologies, and ensures that they are aligned with and support the organizational needs and priorities. The other options are not as important as the organizational strategic plan, as they are related to the current state, specific area, or potential issues of the use of emerging technologies, not the overall purpose and value of the use of emerging technologies. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: IT Risk Identification Methods, page 19.

The most important factor for senior management to review during an acquisition is the risk appetite and tolerance of the target organization. The risk appetite and tolerance reflect the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. By reviewing the risk appetite and tolerance of the target organization, senior management can determine if they are compatible with their own, and if the acquisition will create any significant risk exposure or opportunity for the acquiring organization. Risk framework and methodology, key risk indicator (KRI) thresholds, and risk communication plan are other factors that may be reviewed, but they are not as important as the risk appetite and tolerance. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

The best way to enable a risk practitioner to understand management’s approach to organizational risk is to know the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the organization. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take in order to achieve its objectives. Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in relation to specific performance measures, such as availability, reliability, or security. Risk appetite and risk tolerance reflect the management’s attitude, preferences, and expectations towards risk, and guide the risk management process, such as risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring. The other options are not as effective as knowing the risk appetite and risk tolerance, although they may provide some input or context for understanding the management’s approach to organizational risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

Risk appetite should be primarily driven by stakeholder requirements. Stakeholder requirements are the needs and expectations of the internal and external parties that have an interest or influence in the organization’s objectives or operations, such as the board, management, employees, customers, regulators, investors, etc. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite should be driven by stakeholder requirements, because they reflect the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and they provide the basis and direction for the organization’s risk management activities. Risk appetite should also be aligned and communicated with stakeholder requirements, because they affect the organization’s performance and reputation, and they require the organization’s accountability and transparency. The other options are not the primary drivers of risk appetite, although they may be considered or influenced by risk appetite. Enterprise security architecture roadmap, legal and regulatory requirements, and business impact analysis (BIA) are all factors that could affect the organization’s risk profile, risk assessment, or risk response, but they do not necessarily determine or reflect the organization’s risk appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 2-23.

The most important concern when assigning multiple risk owners for an identified risk is that accountability may not be clearly defined. Accountability is the obligation of an individual or group to take responsibility for the risk and its associated actions and outcomes. If multiple risk owners are assigned for the same risk, there may be confusion, conflict, or overlap in their roles and responsibilities, and they may not be held accountable for the risk management performance. Risk ratings being inconsistently applied, different risk taxonomies being used, and mitigation efforts being duplicated are other possible concerns, but they are not as important as accountability not being clearly defined. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The best course of action for a risk practitioner when senior management is deciding whether to share confidential data with the organization’s business partners is to submit a report to senior management containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans. A risk practitioner is a professional who is responsible for identifying, assessing, and managing the risks that could affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A risk practitioner should provide senior management with the information and guidance they need to make informed and effective decisions regarding the sharing of confidential data. A risk practitioner should submit a report that outlines the possible risk scenarios, such as data loss, theft, or compromise, and their likelihood and impact. A risk practitioner should also suggest mitigation plans, such as encryption, access control, monitoring, or contractual agreements, that could reduce or transfer the risk. The other options are not as effective as submitting a report containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans, although they may be part of or derived from the report. Designing controls to encrypt the data to be shared, developing a project plan for classification of the data, and summarizing the data protection and privacy legislation are all activities or outcomes that could be included or referenced in the report, but they are not the best course of action for a risk practitioner. References = CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 2-23

Documenting user IDs and passwords in procedure manuals is a vulnerability that exposes the organization to unauthorized access, data breaches, and other security risks. A vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in a system, process, or control that can be exploited by a threat. A threat is a potential cause of an unwanted incident that may harm the system or organization. A risk is the combination of the likelihood and impact of a threat exploiting a vulnerability. A policy violation is an act of non-compliance with a rule or standard that is established by the organization. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 67.

The three lines of defense model is a framework that describes the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders in the risk management and internal control processes of an organization. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense: the operational management and staff who are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks, as well as implementing and maintaining the controls within their areas of activity.

The second line of defense: the risk management, compliance, and security functions who are responsible for establishing the risk policies and standards, providing guidance and support, monitoring and reporting on the risk performance and compliance, and facilitating the risk management and internal control processes across the organization.

The third line of defense: the internal audit function who is responsible for providing independent and objective assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and internal control processes, as well as recommending improvements and best practices. The stakeholders who are typically included as part of a line of defense within the three lines of defense model are the legal team, who belong to the second line of defense. The legal team is responsible for ensuring that the organization complies with the relevant laws and regulations, as well as for advising and assisting the organization on the legal aspects and implications of the risk management and internal control processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.1, p. 32-33

The most important thing when implementing an organization’s security policy is to obtain management support. Management support means that the senior management and the board of directors endorse, approve, and fund the security policy and its implementation. Management support also means that the management communicates, promotes, and enforces the security policy across the organization. Management support can help to ensure that the security policy is aligned with the organizational strategy and objectives, and that it is effective, consistent, and sustainable. The other options are not as important as obtaining management support, as they are related to the specific aspects or components of the security policy implementation, not the overall success and acceptance of the security policy implementation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

 Understanding vulnerabilities associated with the use of the assets is the primary reason for a risk practitioner to review an organization’s IT asset inventory, as it helps to identify and assess the potential threats and risks to the assets. The other options are not the primary reasons for a risk practitioner to review an organization’s IT asset inventory, although they may be related to the process.

When assessing the potential risk exposure of a loss event involving personal data, the most important factor to determine is the composition and number of records in the information asset. The composition refers to the type and sensitivity of the personal data, such as name, address, phone number, email, social security number, health information, financial information, etc. The number of records refers to the quantity and scope of the personal data that is affected by the loss event. The composition and number of records in the information asset determine the severity and impact of the loss event, as they indicate the extent of the harm and damage that can be caused to the data subjects, the organization, and other stakeholders. The composition and number of records in the information asset also influence the cost of the incident response activities, the level of the regulatory fines, and the duration of the incident containment and recovery. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 159.

The next step to determine the risk exposure after a vulnerability assessment of a web-facing application is to perform a penetration test. A penetration test is a simulated attack on the application to exploit the identified vulnerabilities and measure the potential impact and likelihood of a successful breach. A penetration test can help to quantify and prioritize the risks associated with the web-facing application. Code review, gap assessment, and business impact analysis (BIA) are other possible steps, but they are not as effective as a penetration test. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

 The most concerning issue found during the review of a newly created disaster recovery plan (DRP) is that some critical business applications are not included in the plan. This means that the DRP is incomplete and does not cover all the essential IT systems and services that support the business continuity. This could result in significant losses and damages in the event of a disaster. The other issues are not as critical, as they can be addressed by ensuring proper contracts, standards, and approvals are in place for the outsourced activities, the framework, and the CISO. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The most reliable evidence of the effectiveness of security controls implemented for a web application is penetration testing. Penetration testing is a process that simulates an attack on the web application by exploiting its vulnerabilities, using the same tools and techniques as real attackers. Penetration testing helps to evaluate the effectiveness of security controls, because it helps to verify that the security controls can prevent, detect, or mitigate the attack, and to measure the impact and severity of the attack. Penetration testing also helps to identify and address any weaknesses or gaps in the security controls, and to provide recommendations and solutions for improving the security of the web application. The other options are not as reliable as penetration testing, although they may provide some evidence of the effectiveness of security controls. IT general controls audit, vulnerability assessment, and fault tree analysis are all examples of analytical or evaluative methods, which may help to assess or estimate the effectiveness of security controls, but they do not necessarily test or measure the effectiveness of security controls in a realistic scenario. References = 10

The best way to reduce the risk associated with the theft of a laptop containing sensitive information is to use data encryption. Data encryption is a process that transforms the data into an unreadable or unintelligible format, using a secret key or algorithm, to protect the data from unauthorized access or disclosure. Data encryption helps to reduce the risk of data theft, because even if the laptop is stolen, the data on the laptop cannot be accessed or used by the thief without the proper key or algorithm. Data encryption also helps to comply with the relevant laws, regulations, standards, and contracts that may require the protection of sensitive data. The other options are not as effective as data encryption, although they may provide some protection for the laptop or the data. A cable lock, a periodic backup, and a biometrics access control are all examples of physical or logical controls, which may help to prevent or deter the theft of the laptop, or to recover or restore the data on the laptop, but they do not necessarily protect the data from unauthorized access or disclosure if the laptop is stolen. References = 8

Documented procedures are the best way to enable effective IT control implementation. Documented procedures are the specific actions or steps that are performed to achieve the IT control objectives and mitigate the IT risks. Documented procedures provide clear guidance, consistency, and accountability for the IT control activities. Documented procedures also help to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the IT controls, and to identify and address any gaps or weaknesses. The other options are not as effective as documented procedures, although they may support or complement the IT control implementation. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of IT risks, but they do not specify how to implement the IT controls. Information security policies and standards are high-level statements that define the IT security goals and requirements, but they do not detail how to implement the IT controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 1-15.

Open communication of risk reporting is the most important factor for promoting a risk-aware culture, because it fosters trust, transparency, and accountability among all stakeholders. It also enables timely and informed decision-making, feedback, and learning from risk events. Regular testing of risk controls, communication of audit findings, and procedures for security monitoring are all important aspects of risk management, but they do not necessarily create a risk-aware culture, which requires a shared understanding and commitment to risk management across the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2, page 1-9.

The primary reason an organization should include background checks on roles with elevated access to production as part of its hiring process is to reduce internal threats. Internal threats are the risks that originate from within the organization, such as employees, contractors, or partners. Roles with elevated access to production have the privilege and ability to access, modify, or delete sensitive or critical data and systems. If these roles are assigned to individuals who have malicious intent, criminal records, or conflicts of interest, they may pose a significant threat to the organization’s security, integrity, and availability. By conducting background checks, the organization can verify the identity, credentials, and history of the candidates, and prevent or minimize the possibility of hiring untrustworthy or unsuitable individuals. The other options are not as important as reducing internal threats, as they are related to the outcomes, impacts, or requirements of the roles with elevated access to production, not the reasons for conducting background checks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The best way to ensure data is properly sanitized while in cloud storage is to cryptographically scramble the data. Cryptographic scrambling is the process of transforming data into an unreadable form using a secret key or algorithm. Cryptographic scrambling protects the data from unauthorized access, modification, or deletion, even if the cloud storage provider or a third party gains access to the data. Cryptographic scrambling also ensures that the data can be restored to its original form using the same key or algorithm, if needed. The other options are not as effective as cryptographic scrambling, because they either do not completely remove the data, or they make it impossible to recover the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

 The best way to provide information to management about emergency changes that may not be approved is to use key risk indicators (KRIs). KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. KRIs help to provide information to management about emergency changes, because they help to alert and inform management about the potential risks and consequences of the changes, and to support the risk decision-making and reporting processes. KRIs also help to provide information to management about emergency changes, because they help to track and evaluate the effectiveness and performance of the changes, and to identify and address any issues or gaps that may arise from the changes. The other options are not the best way to provide information to management about emergency changes, although they may be part of or derived from the KRIs. Change logs, change management meeting minutes, and key control indicators (KCIs) are all examples of documentation or communication tools, which may help to record or report the details and status of the changes, but they do not necessarily measure or monitor the risks and outcomes of the changes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.5.1, page 4-38.

A three lines of defense structure is a model that defines the roles and responsibilities of different functions and levels within an organization for risk management and control. The first line of defense is the operational management, which is responsible for owning and managing the risks. The second line of defense is the risk management and compliance functions, which are responsible for overseeing and supporting the risk management processes. The third line of defense is the internal audit function, which is responsible for providing independent assurance on the effectiveness of the risk management and control systems. The greatest benefit of a three lines of defense structure is that it provides clear accountability for risk management processes, as it clarifies who is responsible for what, and how they interact and communicate with each other. This can help to avoid duplication, confusion, or gaps in the risk management activities, and ensure that the risks are properly identified, assessed, treated, monitored, and reported. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 107.

 Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite can be expressed in qualitative or quantitative terms, and can vary depending on the context and the stakeholder. Risk appetite should be defined and communicated by the senior management or the board of directors, and should guide the risk management decisions and actions throughout the organization. When a project team has accepted a risk outside the established risk appetite, the risk practitioner’s best course of action is to escalate the risk decision to the project sponsor for review, meaning that the risk practitioner should report the risk acceptance and its rationale to the project sponsor, who is the person or group that provides the resources and support for the project, and is accountable for its success. The project sponsor should review the risk decision and determine whether it is aligned with the organization’s objectives and strategy, and whether it requires any further approval or action. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, p. 25-26

Assigning a data owner would best facilitate the implementation of data classification requirements. A data owner is responsible for defining the classification of the data, ensuring that the data is properly labeled, and approving access requests. Implementing technical control over the assets, implementing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution, and scheduling periodic audits are important activities, but they are not as effective as assigning a data owner. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

A penetration test is a simulated cyberattack on a web infrastructure to evaluate its security posture and identify any vulnerabilities or weaknesses that could be exploited by an attacker. A penetration test is the best indicator of how well a web infrastructure protects critical information from an attacker, as it mimics the real-world scenarios and techniques that an attacker would use, and measures the effectiveness of the existing security controls and countermeasures. A penetration test can also provide recommendations for improving the security of the web infrastructure and reducing the risk exposure. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 236. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 236. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10.

 IT risk owners are the most appropriate people to review the completed list of potential key risk indicators (KRIs) and select the ones that should be implemented. IT risk owners are the individuals who have the authority and accountability to manage the IT risks within their scope of responsibility. They are also responsible for defining the risk appetite, tolerance, and thresholds for their IT operations, and for ensuring that the KRIs are aligned with the business objectives and risk management strategy. IT security managers, IT control owners, and IT auditors are also involved in the risk management process, but they do not have the same level of authority and accountability as IT risk owners, and they may have different perspectives and priorities on the selection of KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 1-13.

Measurability and consistency are the most essential attributes of an effective key control indicator (KCI), because they ensure that the KCI can be quantified, compared, and reported over time. A KCI should be able to measure the performance or effectiveness of a control in mitigating a risk and provide consistent results across different periods, sources, and methods. The other options are not the most essential attributes, although they may also be desirable for a KCI. Flexibility and adaptability are not the most essential attributes, because they may compromise the reliability and comparability of the KCI. Robustness and resilience are not the most essential attributes, because they are more relevant for the control itself, not the KCI. Optimal cost and benefit are not the most essential attributes, because they are more related to the value and feasibility of the KCI, not the quality and accuracy of the KCI. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers

The most important factor when developing risk scenarios is obtaining input from key stakeholders. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could affect the enterprise’s objectives, processes, or resources. Obtaining input from key stakeholders, such as business owners, process owners, subject matter experts, or external parties, helps to ensure that the risk scenarios are realistic, relevant, and comprehensive. It also helps to identify the sources, drivers, indicators, likelihood, impact, and responses of the risk scenarios, and to align them with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. Obtaining input from key stakeholders also fosters a collaborative and participatory approach to risk management, and enhances the risk awareness and ownership among the stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.3, page 621

Data protection is the process of safeguarding sensitive personal information from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction. Data protection can help to ensure the privacy and security of the data subjects, and to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements that apply to the data processing activities1.

A highly regulated organization that acquired a medical technology startup company that processes sensitive personal information with weak data protection controls faces a high risk of data breaches, fines, lawsuits, reputational damage, or loss of customer trust. The best way for the acquiring company to reduce its risk while still enabling the flexibility needed by the startup company is to classify and protect the data according to the parent company’s internal standards, because it can help to:

Identify and categorize the sensitive personal information based on its value, sensitivity, and criticality, such as confidential, restricted, internal, or public

Apply and enforce the appropriate data protection policies, procedures, and controls for each data category, such as encryption, access control, backup, retention, or disposal

Align and integrate the data protection practices and processes of the startup company with those of the parent company, and ensure the consistency and compliance across the organization

Balance and optimize the trade-off between data protection and data usability, and allow the startup company to leverage the data for innovation and growth, as long as it meets the data protection standards of the parent company23

The other options are not the best ways for the acquiring company to reduce its risk while still enabling the flexibility needed by the startup company, but rather some of the steps or aspects of data protection. Identify previous data breaches using the startup company’s audit reports is a step that can help to assess the current data protection status and gaps of the startup company, and to learn from the past incidents and mistakes, but it does not address the future data protection needs and challenges of the startup company. Have the data privacy officer review the startup company’s data protection policies is an aspect that can help to ensure the legal and regulatory compliance of the data protection activities of the startup company, and to provide guidance and oversight for the data protection issues and risks, but it does not ensure the technical and operational effectiveness and efficiency of the data protection controls of the startup company. Implement a firewall and isolate the environment from the parent company’s network is a control that can help to prevent or limit the external or internal attacks or threats to the data of the startup company, and to reduce the exposure or impact of a data breach, but it does not ensure the availability or accessibility of the data for the legitimate and authorized purposes of the startup company. References =

Data Protection - ISACA

Data Classification - ISACA

Data Protection Best Practices - ISACA

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

According to the ISACA CRISC Review Manual, an enterprise risk management (ERM) process is a holistic approach to identifying, analyzing, responding to, and monitoring all types of risk that affect the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives. The ERM process should consider all types of risk, including strategic, operational, financial, compliance, and reputational risks. Among these, strategic risks are the most important, as they have the potential to affect the enterprise’s mission, vision, and goals. Therefore, risk with strategic impact should be included in the ERM process. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 17.

 A bring your own device (BYOD) initiative allows employees to use their personal devices, such as smartphones, tablets, or laptops, for work purposes. This can provide benefits such as increased productivity, flexibility, and employee satisfaction. However, it also introduces significant risks, such as data loss, data leakage, malware infection, unauthorized access, and compliance violations. Among these risks, data loss is of greatest concern for an organization, as it can have severe consequences, such as reputational damage, legal liability, financial loss, and competitive disadvantage. Data loss can occur due to various reasons, such as device theft, loss, damage, or disposal, accidental deletion, unauthorized transfer, or malicious attack. Therefore, an organization considering the adoption of a BYOD initiative should implement appropriate controls, such as encryption, authentication, remote wipe, backup, and data classification, to protect the data stored or accessed on the personal devices. References = Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) Policy: What You Need to Know, BYOD Risks: What You Need to Know, BYOD Security: 8 Risks and How to Mitigate Them

The primary risk management responsibility of the second line of defense is to monitor the risk responses. The second line of defense is the function that oversees and supports the risk management activities of the first line of defense, which is the function that owns and manages the risks. The second line of defense includes the risk management, compliance, and quality assurance functions, among others. The second line of defense is responsible for monitoring the risk responses, which are the actions taken to address the risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risks. The second line of defense monitors the risk responses to ensure that they are implemented effectively and efficiently, that they achieve the desired outcomes, and that they are aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The second line of defense also provides guidance, advice, and feedback to the first line of defense on the risk responses, and reports the results and issues to the senior management and the board. Applying risk treatments, providing assurance of control effectiveness, and implementing internal controls are not the primary risk management responsibilities of the second line of defense, as they are either the responsibilities of the first line of defense or the third line of defense, which is the function that provides independent assurance of the risk management activities, such as the internal audit function. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

 Anonymizing personal data in non-production environments means replacing the real data with fictitious but realistic data that does not allow identification of the individuals. This is a good way to mitigate the risk of sensitive personal data leakage from a software development environment, as it reduces the exposure of the data to unauthorized access or misuse. Tokenizing personal data only in test environments is not sufficient, as the data may still be exposed in other non-production environments, such as development or staging. Data loss prevention tools (DLP) installed in passive mode may detect and report data leakage incidents, but they do not prevent them from happening. Multi-factor authentication for access to non-production environments may enhance the security of the access, but it does not protect the data from being leaked by authorized users or compromised by other means. References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), page 226; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, question 195.

Periodically reviewing big data strategies is the best option to minimize the risk of inaccurate data, because it allows the organization to assess the quality, validity, and reliability of the data sources and the analytics methods. It also enables the organization to identify and address any gaps, errors, or inconsistencies in the data and the results. By reviewing the big data strategies, the organization can ensure that the data analytics are aligned with the business objectives and the risk appetite.

Establishing an intellectual property agreement is not relevant to the risk of inaccurate data, as it is a legal measure to protect the ownership and use of the data, not its quality or accuracy.

Evaluating each of the data sources for vulnerabilities is a good practice, but it is not sufficient to minimize the risk of inaccurate data, as it only focuses on the security aspect of the data, not the validity or reliability of the data itself.

Benchmarking to industry best practice is a useful way to compare the performance and results of the data analytics, but it does not directly address the risk of inaccurate data, as it assumes that the data and the methods are already valid and reliable. References = Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, ISACA, 2019, page 62-63.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, centralized log management is the best way to assist in reconstructing the sequence of events following a security incident across multiple IT systems in the organization’s network, because it enables the collection, correlation, analysis, and retention of log data from various sources. Centralized log management can provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the activities and transactions that occurred before, during, and after the incident, and can facilitate the identification of the root cause, impact, and scope of the incident. The other options are not the best ways to assist in reconstructing the sequence of events, because they do not provide the same level of detail and accuracy as centralized log management. Network monitoring infrastructure is a tool that helps to monitor the performance and availability of the network, but it does not capture the log data from the IT systems. Centralized vulnerability management is a process that helps to identify and remediate the vulnerabilities in the IT systems, but it does not record the events and transactions that occurred on the systems. Incident management process is a process that helps to respond to and resolve the incidents, but it does not provide the log data from the IT systems. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 263.

Low-probability, high-impact events are those that have a low chance of occurring but would cause significant harm if they do. These events are often difficult to predict and quantify, but they can have a major impact on the organization’s objectives, reputation, or operations. By including these events in a risk assessment, the organization can develop understandable and realistic risk scenarios that reflect the potential consequences of different outcomes1. This can help the organization to prioritize its risk management activities and allocate its resources accordingly.

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Assessment Process

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk. Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure the performance or effectiveness of a control in mitigating a risk. KCIs provide input for KRIs, because they help to assess the residual risk after applying the control. For example, if the KRI is the number of security incidents, and the KCI is the percentage of incidents detected by the intrusion prevention system (IPS), then the KCI provides input for the KRI by showing how well the IPS is reducing the risk of security breaches. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

 Discussing and managing risk as a team is the greatest benefit for an organization with a strong risk awareness culture, as it enables the organization to share and communicate the risk information and knowledge among all the stakeholders, and to collaborate and coordinate the risk management activities and responsibilities. Discussing and managing risk as a team can also help to foster a positive and proactive attitude toward risk, and to align the risk management process with the organization’s strategy and objectives. Discussing and managing risk as a team can also enhance the risk governance and accountability, and support the risk learning and improvement. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 252. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 252. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

The percentage of unpatched IT assets is a KPI that measures the effectiveness of the IT asset management process in ensuring that the IT assets are updated with the latest security patches and are protected from vulnerabilities. This KPI reflects the compliance of the IT assets with the enterprise’s security policy and standards, and the ability of the IT asset management process to identify and remediate any gaps or risks in the IT asset inventory. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 5. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 4. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 4.

 Providing acknowledgments from receiver to sender is a control that helps to ensure that transaction data reaches its destination, as it confirms the successful delivery of the data and allows the sender to resend the data in case of failure. Securing the network from attacks, digitally signing individual messages, and encrypting data-in-transit are controls that help to ensure the integrity and confidentiality of the data, but not the availability or delivery of the data. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 199.

The most appropriate action when a tolerance threshold is exceeded is to communicate the potential impact to the decision makers. A tolerance threshold is the acceptable level of variation or deviation from the expected or planned performance or outcome of a risk response. When a tolerance threshold is exceeded, it means that the risk response is not effective or efficient enough to reduce the risk to an acceptable level, and that the enterprise is exposed to unacceptable levels of risk that could impair its ability to achieve its objectives. Therefore, the potential impact of the risk should be communicated to the decision makers, such as senior management, risk owners, or risk committee, who have the authority and responsibility to decide on the appropriate actions to address the risk situation. Communicating the potential impact can help to raise the awareness and urgency of the risk issue, and to facilitate the risk-based decision making process. Researching the root cause of similar incidents, verifying the response plan is adequate, and increasing human resources to respond in the interim are not as appropriate as communicating the potential impact, as they do not address the primary need of informing and involving the decision makers, and may not be feasible or effective in resolving the risk issue. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 41.

Risk scenarios are descriptions of possible events or situations that could cause or affect a risk. Risk scenarios can help a risk practitioner to enhance understanding of risk among stakeholders, as they can illustrate the causes, consequences, and impacts of the risk in a clear and realistic way. Risk scenarios can also facilitate communication and collaboration among stakeholders, as they can provide a common language and framework for risk identification, analysis, and response. Risk scenarios can also support decision-making and prioritization, as they can show the likelihood and severity of the risk outcomes. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 237.

A risk map is a visual tool that helps to communicate risk to management by showing the likelihood and impact of different risks on a matrix1. A risk map can help to:

Identify the most critical risks that need immediate attention or action

Compare and prioritize risks based on their severity and probability

Align risk management strategies with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

Communicate risk information in a clear and concise way that is easy to understand and interpret2

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Assessment Process3

An independent security audit report is a document that provides an objective and comprehensive assessment of the security posture and practices of a cloud service provider (CSP), based on a set of standards, criteria, or frameworks1. An independent security audit report can help an organization to evaluate the risks and benefits of using a CSP, and to ensure that the CSP meets the organization’s security and compliance requirements2.

If an organization receives an independent security audit report of its CSP that indicates significant control weaknesses, the next step that should be done in response to this report is to analyze the impact of the provider’s control weaknesses to the business. This means that the organization should:

Identify and prioritize the business processes, functions, or objectives that depend on or are affected by the CSP’s services

Assess the potential consequences and likelihood of the control weaknesses leading to security incidents, breaches, or losses

Estimate the financial, operational, reputational, or legal impacts of the security incidents, breaches, or losses

Compare the impacts with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and determine the level of risk exposure and acceptance

Communicate the results of the analysis to the relevant stakeholders and decision-makers3

References = What is a Security Audit?, Cloud Security Audit: A 10-Step Checklist, Independent security audits are essential for cloud service providers. Here’s why

The risk manager’s best course of action when discovering significant vulnerabilities in a commercial off-the-shelf software product is to review the risk of implementing versus postponing with stakeholders. This means that the risk manager should assess the potential impact and likelihood of the vulnerabilities being exploited, as well as the benefits and costs of using the software product. The risk manager should also consult with the relevant stakeholders, such as the business owners, the IT department, the security team, and the vendor, to understand their perspectives, expectations, and requirements. Based on this analysis, the risk manager should decide whether to proceed with the implementation, delay it until the next release, or look for alternative solutions. The risk manager should also document and communicate the decision and the rationale behind it, and monitor the situation for any changes or new developments.

The other options are not the best course of action, because:

Running vulnerability testing tools to independently verify the vulnerabilities is a useful step to confirm the existence and severity of the vulnerabilities, but it is not sufficient to address the risk. The risk manager still needs to evaluate the trade-offs between implementing and postponing the software product, and involve the stakeholders in the decision-making process.

Reviewing the software license to determine the vendor’s responsibility regarding vulnerabilities is an important step to understand the contractual obligations and liabilities of the vendor, but it is not enough to mitigate the risk. The risk manager still needs to consider the impact and likelihood of the vulnerabilities, and the benefits and costs of the software product, and consult with the stakeholders to decide the best course of action.

Requiring the vendor to correct significant vulnerabilities prior to installation is an unrealistic and impractical option, as the vendor has already stated that the vulnerabilities will not be corrected until the next release. The risk manager cannot force the vendor to change their schedule or priorities, and may risk damaging the relationship with the vendor. The risk manager should instead work with the vendor to understand the nature and scope of the vulnerabilities, and the expected timeline and features of the next release, and use this information to inform the risk assessment and decision-making process.

 A role-based user access model is a type of technology control that assigns access rights and permissions to users based on their roles and responsibilities within the organization. A role-based user access model can reduce the likelihood of fraudulent payments committed internally, because it can help to:

Enforce the principle of least privilege, which means that users only have the minimum level of access required to perform their duties

Implement segregation of duties, which means that users cannot perform conflicting or incompatible functions, such as initiating and approving payments

Prevent unauthorized or inappropriate access to sensitive data or systems, such as payment information or applications

Detect and deter fraud attempts by creating audit trails and logs of user activities and transactions

Simplify and streamline the management and maintenance of user access rights and permissions, such as adding, modifying, or deleting users or roles12

The other options are not as important as a role-based user access model for reducing the likelihood of fraudulent payments committed internally. Automated access revocation is a technology control that automatically revokes or suspends user access rights and permissions when certain conditions are met, such as termination of employment, change of role, or expiration of password. Automated access revocation can help to prevent fraud by former or inactive users, but it does not address the risk of fraud by current or active users3. Daily transaction reconciliation is a technology control that compares and verifies the transactions recorded in different systems or sources, such as bank statements and accounting records. Daily transaction reconciliation can help to detect fraud by identifying discrepancies or anomalies in the transactions, but it does not prevent fraud from occurring in the first place4. Rule-based data analytics is a technology control that applies predefined rules or criteria to analyze data and identify patterns, trends, or outliers. Rule-based data analytics can help to monitor fraud by generating alerts or reports of suspicious or unusual transactions, but it does not prevent fraud from happening or being attempted5. References =

Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) - ISACA

Role-Based Access Control: What It Is and How It Works

Automated Access Revocation - ISACA

Reconciliation - ISACA

Rule-Based Data Analytics - ISACA

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

A risk profile is a summary of the key risks that an organization faces, along with the corresponding risk responses, risk owners, and risk indicators1. A risk profile is a useful tool for communicating and reporting the risk status and performance to the management and other stakeholders2. When developing a risk profile for management approval, the most useful information to include is the residual risk and the risk appetite, because:

Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses3. It indicates the degree of exposure or uncertainty that the organization still faces, and the potential impact or consequences of the risk events. Residual risk helps the management to evaluate the effectiveness and adequacy of the risk responses, and to decide whether to accept, reduce, transfer, or avoid the risk4.

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives5. It reflects the organization’s risk culture, strategy, and priorities, and provides a basis for setting risk thresholds and targets. Risk appetite helps the management to align the risk profile with the organizational goals and values, and to ensure that the risk responses are consistent and proportional to the risk level6.

The other options are not the most useful information when developing a risk profile for management approval, because:

Strength of detective and preventative controls is a measure of how well the controls can identify or prevent the occurrence or impact of the risk events7. It is a part of the risk response information, but it does not provide a comprehensive or holistic view of the risk profile. It does not show the residual risk or the risk appetite, which are more relevant and important for the management approval.

Effectiveness and efficiency of controls is a measure of how well the controls achieve their intended objectives and how well they use the available resources8. It is a part of the risk performance information, but it does not provide a complete or balanced view of the risk profile. It does not show the residual risk or the risk appetite, which are more significant and meaningful for the management approval.

Inherent risk and risk tolerance are related but different concepts from residual risk and risk appetite. Inherent risk is the level of risk that exists before the implementation of risk responses3. Risk tolerance is the acceptable variation or deviation from the risk appetite or the risk objectives5. They are useful for the risk assessment and analysis, but they do not provide the current or desired state of the risk profile. They do not show the residual risk or the risk appetite, which are more critical and valuable for the management approval.

References =

Risk Profile - CIO Wiki

Risk Profile: Definition, Example, and How to Create One

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite: What It Is and Why It Matters - Gartner

Preventive and Detective Controls - CIO Wiki

Control Effectiveness and Efficiency - CIO Wiki

Risk management maturity level is the degree to which an organization has developed and implemented a systematic and proactive approach to managing the risks that it faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. Risk management maturity level reflects the organization’s risk culture and capability, and its alignment with its objectives and strategies1.

The best measurement of an organization’s risk management maturity level is the key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics or measures that provide information on the current or potential exposure and performance of the organization in relation to specific risks. KRIs can help to:

Monitor and track the changes or trends in the risk level and the risk response over time

Identify and alert the risk issues or events that require attention or action

Evaluate and report the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management processes and practices

Support and inform the risk decision making and improvement23

KRIs can be classified into different types, such as:

Leading KRIs, which are forward-looking and predictive, and indicate the likelihood or probability of a risk event occurring in the future

Lagging KRIs, which are backward-looking and descriptive, and indicate the impact or consequence of a risk event that has already occurred

Quantitative KRIs, which are numerical or measurable, and indicate the magnitude or severity of a risk event or outcome

Qualitative KRIs, which are descriptive or subjective, and indicate the nature or characteristics of a risk event or outcome4

The other options are not the best measurements of an organization’s risk management maturity level, but rather some of the factors or outcomes of it. Level of residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the risk response has been implemented. Level of residual risk reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response, and the need for further action or monitoring. The results of a gap analysis are the differences between the current and the desired state of the risk management processes and practices. The results of a gap analysis reflect the completeness and coverage of the risk management activities, and the areas for improvement or enhancement. IT alignment to business objectives is the extent to which IT supports and enables the achievement of the organization’s goals and strategies. IT alignment to business objectives reflects the integration and coordination of the IT and business functions, and the optimization of the IT value and performance. References =

Risk Maturity Assessment Explained | Risk Maturity Model

Key Risk Indicators - ISACA

Key Risk Indicators: What They Are and How to Use Them

Key Risk Indicators: Types and Examples

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The most significant risk to an organization when updating the incident response plan is the undefined assignment of responsibility. An incident response plan is a document that defines the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for responding to an incident that could disrupt the normal operations of the organization, or compromise its assets, reputation, or compliance. An incident response plan should clearly assign the responsibility for each task and activity involved in the incident response process, such as detection, containment, analysis, eradication, recovery, and reporting. Undefined assignment of responsibility could lead to confusion, duplication, conflict, or omission among the stakeholders, and impair the effectiveness and efficiency of the incident response process. Undefined assignment of responsibility could also increase the risk of escalation, recurrence, or impact of the incident, and affect the accountability and performance of the organization. Obsolete response documentation, increased stakeholder turnover, and failure to audit third-party providers are also risks, but they are not as significant as undefined assignment of responsibility, as they do not directly affect the execution and outcome of the incident response process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 130.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, ethics management is the process of ensuring that the enterprise’s values and principles are embedded in its culture and practices. Ethics management helps to promote trust, integrity, accountability, and transparency among the stakeholders. One of the key elements of ethics management is to encourage the reporting of IT risk issues and incidents, and to protect the whistleblowers from any retaliation or negative consequences. Therefore, if employees do not report IT risk issues for fear of consequences, it is the strongest indication that the organization has ethics management issues, as it implies that there is a lack of trust, openness, and support in the organization. The other options are not the strongest indications of ethics management issues, as they are related to other aspects of IT governance, such as audit independence, policy compliance, and risk management framework. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 34.

The best course of action in responding to the internal audit inquiry is to provide justification for the lower risk rating. This would demonstrate that the risk record was updated based on a valid and documented rationale, such as changes in the risk environment, risk drivers, risk indicators, or risk responses. Providing justification would also help to maintain the transparency and accountability of the risk management process, and ensure that the internal audit is satisfied with the risk assessment outcome. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.3, page 184.

A risk management program is a systematic and structured approach to identify, analyze, evaluate, treat, monitor, and communicate the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance.

The greatest advantage of implementing a risk management program is enabling risk-aware decisions. This means that the organization incorporates the risk information and analysis into its decision making process, such as strategic planning, resource allocation, project management, etc.

Enabling risk-aware decisions helps to optimize the outcomes and benefits of the decisions, balance the opportunities and threats of the decisions, and align the decisions with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance.

The other options are not the greatest advantages of implementing a risk management program. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 25

Information Technology & Security, page 19

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 17