Free and Premium Isaca CRISC Dumps Questions Answers

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 helpful factor for an information security management team when allocating resources to mitigate exposures is the risk assessment results. The risk assessment results provide a comprehensive and objective analysis of the risks facing the enterprise, including their likelihood, impact, and root causes. The risk assessment results also help to identify the gaps and weaknesses in the existing controls, and to prioritize the risks based on their severity and urgency. The risk assessment results enable the information security management team to allocate the resources in a cost-effective and risk-based manner, and to implement the most appropriate risk responses to reduce the exposures to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.1, page 1751

A risk event is an occurrence or situation that has a negative impact on the objectives, operations, or resources of an enterprise. A data breach at the company to be acquired is a risk event for the acquiring organization, because it can affect the value, reputation, or performance of the acquisition. A risk event can also trigger other risks or consequences that may require further actions or responses. The other options are not the correct answers, because they do not describe the situation accurately. A threat event is an occurrence or situation that exploits a vulnerability or causes harm to an asset or process. An inherent risk is the risk that exists before applying any controls or treatments. A security incident is an event that violates the security policies or procedures of an enterprise. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that help organizations monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their operations, financial health, or overall performance1. KRIs should have certain characteristics that make them effective for risk monitoring, such as:

Ability to measure the right thing (e.g., supports the decisions that need to be made)

Quantifiable (e.g., damages in dollars of profit loss)

Capability to be measured precisely and accurately

Relevant (measuring the right thing associated with decisions)2

Among the four options given, only option C (sensitivity to changes in risk levels) best enables effective risk monitoring. This is because KRIs should be able to capture the changes in risk levels over time and alert organizations to emerging or escalating risks3. A high sensitivity to changes in risk levels indicates that theKRI is responsive and timely, and can help organizations take preventive or corrective actions before the risks become too severe.

References = Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide, Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions, Key Risk Indicators - Wikipedia

 Implementing controls to bring the risk to a level within appetite and accept the residual risk is the best recommendation to senior management when the results of a risk and control assessment indicate a risk scenario can only be partially mitigated, as it helps to balance the costs and benefits of the risk management and control processes, and to align them with the organizational strategy and objectives. A risk and control assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and controls associated with a specific activity, process, or objective. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could cause harm or loss to the organization or its stakeholders. A risk scenario can only be partially mitigated when the existing or proposed controls are not sufficient or effective to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. A risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. A residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls or risk treatments.

Implementing controls to bring the risk to a level within appetite and accept the residual risk helps to provide the following benefits:

It enables a data-driven and evidence-based approach to risk management and reporting, rather than relying on subjective or qualitative judgments.

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating risk levels and exposure across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the development and implementation of effective and efficient risk response and mitigation strategies and actions that are aligned with the business risk appetite and objectives.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the risk management and control processes, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best recommendations to senior management when the results of a risk and control assessment indicate a risk scenario can only be partially mitigated. Implementing a key performance indicator (KPI) to monitor the existing control performance is a useful method to measure and monitor the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, but it does not address the residual risk or the risk appetite. Accepting the residual risk in its entirety and obtaining executive management approval is a possible option to deal with the risk scenario, but it may expose the organization to excessive or unacceptable risk, and it may not comply with the legal or regulatory obligations or requirements. Separating the risk into multiple components and avoiding the risk components that cannot be mitigated is a possible option to deal with the risk scenario, but it may not be feasible or practical, and it may create new or additional risks or challenges. References = Risk and Control Self-Assessment (RCSA) - Management Study Guide, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Risk Mitigation: What It Is and How to Implement It (Free Templates …

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

Enterprise risk management (ERM) is a holistic and strategic approach to managing the risks that an organization faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. ERM aims to align the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance with its objectives and vision, and to optimize the value and performance of the organization1.

IT risk management is a subset of ERM that focuses on identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks related to the use of information technology (IT) in the organization. IT risk management aims to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of IT resources and information, and to support the IT governance and strategy of the organization2.

The greatest benefit when ERM provides oversight of IT risk management is aligning IT with short-term and long-term goals of the organization, because it can help to:

Integrate IT risk management with the overall business strategy and risk management, and ensure that IT risks are considered and addressed at the enterprise level

Align IT risk appetite and tolerance with the business risk appetite and tolerance, and ensure that IT risks are balanced with the expected benefits and opportunities

Enhance IT risk awareness and communication among the stakeholders, and ensure that IT risks are reported and escalated appropriately

Optimize IT risk response and control, and ensure that IT risks are managed efficiently and effectively

Demonstrate IT risk value and impact, and ensure that IT risks are measured and monitored against the business objectives and performance34

The other options are not the greatest benefit when ERM provides oversight of IT risk management, but rather some of the outcomes or consequences of it. Ensuring the IT budget and resources focus on risk management is a benefit that can help to allocate and prioritize the IT resources and funds according to the IT risk level and the business needs. Ensuring senior management’s primary focus is on the impact of identified risk is a benefit that can help to increase the senior management’s involvement and accountability in IT risk management, and to support the IT risk decision making and reporting. Prioritizing internal departments that provide service to customers is a benefit that can help to improve the quality and efficiency of the IT service delivery and customer satisfaction. References =

Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA

IT Risk Management - ISACA

Aligning IT risks with Enterprise Risk Management (ERM)

Five Benefits of Enterprise Risk Management : Articles : Resources …

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

 According to the CRISC Review Manual, formal approval of the account by the user’s manager is the best evidence that a user account has been properly authorized, because it ensures that the user’s role and access rights are consistent with the business needs and the principle of least privilege. The user’s manager is responsible for verifying the user’s identity, job function, and access requirements, and for approving or rejecting the account request. The other options are not the best evidence of proper authorization, because they do not involve the user’s manager’s approval. An email from the user accepting the account is a confirmation of the account creation, but it does not indicate that the account was authorized by the user’s manager. Notification from human resources that the account is active is an administrative process that does not verify the user’s access rights and role. User privileges matching the request form is a verification of the account configuration, but it does not ensure that the request form was approved by the user’s manager. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.2, page 163.

 IT asset inventory is the process of tracking and managing the financial, physical, licensing, and contractual aspects of IT assets throughout their life cycle1. IT assets include hardware, software, and network components that an organization values and uses to achieve its objectives2. A complete and accurate IT asset inventory can help an organization to optimize its IT budget, reduce security risks, ensure compliance, and improve performance3.

One of the best controls to enable an organization to ensure a complete and accurate IT asset inventory is performing network scanning for unknown devices. Network scanning is the process of identifying and collecting information about the devices connected to a network, such as their IP addresses, operating systems, open ports, services, and vulnerabilities4. Network scanning can help an organization to:

Discover and inventory all the IT assets on the network, including those that are unauthorized, unmanaged, or hidden

Detect and remove any rogue or malicious devices that may pose a threat to the network security or performance

Update and verify the asset inventory data regularly and automatically, and alert on any changes or discrepancies

Support the asset lifecycle management and maintenance activities, such as patching, upgrading, or retiring assets5

References = IT Asset Valuation, Risk Assessment and Control Implementation Model, ITAM: The ultimate guide to IT asset management, Navigating Security Threats with IT Inventory Management, Network Scanning - Wikipedia, 8 Best IT Asset Management Software (2024)

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a control owner is the person who is accountable for ensuring that specific control activities are performed. The control owner is responsible for defining, implementing, monitoring, and improving the control. Therefore, the control owner should authorize changing the control threshold value, as it is part of their role to ensure that the control is effective and efficient. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not directly involved in the control activities. The risk owner is the person who is accountable for the risk and its associated mitigation actions. The IT security manager is the person who is responsible for overseeing the IT security function and ensuring that the IT security policy is enforced. The IT system owner is the person who is responsible for the operation andmaintenance of the IT system and its associated data. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.2, page 108.

Specifying cloud service provider liability for data privacy breaches in the contract is the most effective control to address the risk associated with compromising data privacy within the cloud, because it establishes the roles and responsibilities of the cloud service provider and the customer in case of a data breach, and defines the compensation or remediation measures that the cloud service provider should provide. This control also creates an incentive for the cloud service provider to implement adequate security measures to protect the customer’s data and comply with the relevant laws and regulations. The other options are not the most effective controls, although they may also be helpful in reducing the risk of data privacy breaches. Establishing baseline security configurations with the cloud service provider, requiring the cloud service provider to disclose past data privacy breaches, and ensuring the cloud service provider performs an annual risk assessment are examples of preventive or detective controls that aim to reduce the likelihood or impact of a data breach, but they do not address the accountability or liability of the cloud service provider in case of a data breach. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

An IT risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified IT risks, their likelihood, impact, and mitigation strategies. It is a living document that needs to be updated regularly to reflect the current risk profile of the organization. One of the situations that would require updates to the IT risk register is the discovery of an ineffectively designed key IT control, as this would increase the likelihood or impact of the related IT risk. Management review of key risk indicators (KRIs), changes to the team responsible for maintaining the register, and completion of the latest internal audit are not reasons to update the IT risk register, as they do not affect the identified IT risks or their mitigation strategies. References = [CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version)], page 97; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 198.

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

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics or measures that provide information on the current or potential exposure and performance of an 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, and support and inform the risk decision making and improvement1.

The best way to enable the identification of trends in risk levels is to ensure that the correlation between risk levels and KRIs is positive, because it means that the KRIs are aligned with and reflective of the risk levels, and that they can capture and indicate the variations or movements in the risk levels accurately and reliably. A positive correlation between risk levels and KRIs can be achieved by:

Selecting and defining the KRIs that are relevant and appropriate for the specific risks that the organization faces, and that are consistent and comparable across different domains and contexts

Collecting and analyzing the data and information that are reliable and sufficient for the KRIs, and that are sourced from various methods and sources, such as risk assessments, audits, monitoring, alerts, or incidents

Applying and using the tools and techniques that are suitable and feasible for the KRIs, such as risk matrices, risk registers, risk indicators, or risk models

Reviewing and updating the KRIs periodically or as needed, and ensuring that they reflect the current or accurate risk levels, which may change over time or due to external factors23

The other options are not the best ways to enable the identification of trends in risk levels, but rather some of the factors or aspects of KRIs. Measurements for KRIs are repeatable is a factor that can enhance the reliability and validity of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs can produce the same or similar results under the same or similar conditions. However, repeatability does not necessarily imply accuracy or sensitivity, and it may not capture or reflect the changes or trends in the risk levels. Quantitative measurements are used for KRIs is an aspect that can improve the objectivity and precision of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs are expressed in numerical or measurable values, such as percentages, probabilities, or monetary amounts. However, quantitative measurements may not be suitable or feasible for all types of risks or KRIs, and they may not capture or reflect the complexity or uncertainty of the risk levels. Qualitative definitions for KRIs are used is an aspect that can enhance the understanding and communication of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs are expressed in descriptive or subjective terms, such as high, medium, or low, based on criteria such as likelihood, impact, or severity. However, qualitative definitions may not be consistent or comparable across different risks or KRIs, and they may not capture or reflect the magnitude or variation of the risk levels. References =

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

Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

Key Risk Indicators: Types and Examples

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

A risk treatment plan is a document that outlines the approach and actions to be taken to address the unacceptable risks identified in the risk assessment process1. A risk treatment plan should include the following components2:

The risk identification number and description

The risk treatment option chosen (e.g., avoid, reduce, share, or accept)

The risk treatment owner, who is responsible for implementing and monitoring the risk treatment

The risk treatment actions, which are the specific tasks or steps to be performed to execute the risk treatment

The risk treatment resources, which are the human, financial, or technical resources required to support the risk treatment

The risk treatment target date, which is the deadline for completing the risk treatment

The risk treatment performance indicators, which are the measures to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk treatment

The risk treatment status, which is the current progress or outcome of the risk treatment

Among the four options given, the most important component in a risk treatment plan is the treatment plan ownership. This is because the treatment plan ownership defines the accountability and authority for the risk treatment, and ensures that the risk treatment actions are carried out as planned and reported as required3. The treatment plan ownership also facilitates the communication and coordination among the stakeholders involved in the risk treatment, and enables the escalation and resolution of any issues or challenges that may arise during the risk treatment process4.

References = Risk Treatment (With Examples), ISO 27001 Risk Assessment & Risk Treatment: The Complete Guide, Risk Management Framework - Treat Risks, Risk Management Plan Components

 The primary purpose of a business impact analysis (BIA) is to evaluate the priority of business operations in case of disruption. A BIA is a process that identifies and analyzes the potential effects of various types of disruptions on the enterprise’s critical business functions and processes. A BIA helps to determine the recovery objectives, such as the recovery time objective (RTO) and the recovery point objective (RPO), for each business operation, based on the impact of disruption on the enterprise’s objectives, reputation, compliance, and stakeholders. A BIA also helps to identify the dependencies, resources, and interdependencies of the business operations, and to rank them according to their importance and urgency. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 671

Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure the performance and effectiveness of the controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks. KCIs can help to monitor the status and health of the controls, as well as to identify any issues or gaps that need to be addressed. The primary reason to adopt KCIs in the risk monitoring and reporting process is to provide assessments of mitigation effectiveness, meaning that they can help to evaluate how well the controls are reducing the risk exposure and achieving the desired outcomes. KCIs can also help to support the risk management decision making and improvement actions, as well as to demonstrate the value and benefits of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1.2, p. 115-116

Software as a service (SaaS) is a cloud computing model that provides software applications over the internet, without requiring the customer to install or maintain them on their own devices1. SaaS applicationscan offer many benefits, such as scalability, accessibility, and cost-efficiency, but they also pose security risks, such as data breaches, unauthorized access, and compliance violations2.

One of the best ways to protect an organization against breaches when using a SaaS application is to use data loss prevention (DLP) tools. DLP tools are software solutions that monitor, detect, and prevent the unauthorized transmission or leakage of sensitive data from an organization’s network or devices3. DLP tools can help an organization to:

Identify and classify sensitive data, such as personal information, intellectual property, or financial records, and apply appropriate policies and controls to protect them

Encrypt data in transit and at rest, and use secure protocols and encryption keys to ensure data confidentiality and integrity

Block or alert on suspicious or malicious data transfers, such as unauthorized uploads, downloads, or sharing of data to external sources or devices

Audit and report on data activities and incidents, and provide evidence for compliance with data protection regulations and standards, such as GDPR, HIPAA, or PCI-DSS4

References = What is SaaS?, Top 7 SaaS Security Risks (and How to Fix Them), What is Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?, Data Loss Prevention (DLP) for SaaS Applications

The risk practitioner’s best course of action when the residual risk is now within the organization’s defined appetite and tolerance levels is to verify the adequacy of risk monitoring plans. Risk monitoring is the process of tracking and reviewing the risk status and performance, and ensuring that the risk responses are effective and efficient1. Risk monitoring plans are the documents that specify the objectives, scope, methods, roles, and responsibilities for the risk monitoring activities2. By verifying the adequacy of risk monitoring plans, the risk practitioner can:

Ensure that the risk monitoring plans are aligned with the organization’s risk strategy, objectives, and policies, and that they comply with the relevant standards and regulations3.

Evaluate whether the risk monitoring plans are comprehensive and consistent, and that they cover all the key aspects and indicators of the risks and the risk responses4.

Identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may affect the implementation or outcome of the risk monitoring plans, and recommend and implement appropriate improvement actions5.

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

Identifying new risk entries to include in ERM is not a relevant or necessary course of action, as it is not directly related to the residual risk or the risk responses. ERM is the process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and managing the risks that may affect the organization’s strategic, operational, financial, or reputational objectives6. Identifying new risk entries is a part of the risk identification process, which is the first step in ERM. It should be performed periodically or when there are significant changes in the internal or external environment, not when the residual risk is within the appetite and tolerance levels7.

Removing the risk entries from the ERM register is not a valid or advisable course of action, as it may create a false sense of security or complacency. The ERM register is a tool that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses. Removing the risk entries from the ERM register may imply that the risks no longer exist or matter, which is not true. The risks may still occur or change, and the risk responses may still fail or become obsolete. Therefore, the risk entries should be kept and updated in the ERM register, unless the risks are completely eliminated or transferred.

Re-performing the risk assessment to confirm results is not an efficient or effective course of action, as it may be redundant or unnecessary. Risk assessment is the process of estimating the probability and impact of the risks, and prioritizing the risks based on their significance and urgency. Re-performing the risk assessment may not provide any new or useful information or insights, and may waste time and resources. Instead, the risk practitioner should verify and validate the risk assessment results, and ensure that they are accurate and reliable.

References =

Risk Monitoring - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring Plan - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring and Reporting - ISACA

Risk Monitoring and Control - Project Management Institute

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Enterprise Risk Management - CIO Wiki

Risk Identification - CIO Wiki

[Risk Register - CIO Wiki]

[Risk Register: How to Use It in Project Management - ProjectManager.com]

[Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

[Risk Assessment Process - ISACA]

Showing projected residual risk is the most helpful way to respond to the request of explaining how existing risk treatment plans would affect risk posture at the end of the year. Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses1. Projected residual risk is the estimated level of risk that will remain at a future point in time, based on the assumptions and expectations of the risk responses2. By showing projected residual risk, the risk practitioner can:

Demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk treatment plans, and how they reduce the risk level from the inherent risk (the risk before the risk responses) to the residual risk3.

Compare the projected residual risk with the risk appetite and tolerance, which are the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives4. This can help to determine whether the projected residual risk is acceptable or not, and whether the risk treatment plans are consistent and proportional to the risk level5.

Identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may affect the achievement of the projected residual risk, and recommend and implement appropriate improvement actions or contingency plans6.

The other options are not the most helpful ways to respond to the request, because:

Assessing risk with no controls in place is not the most helpful way, as it does not reflect the current or future risk posture of the organization. Controls are the measures or actions that are implemented to modify the risk, such as prevent, detect, correct, or mitigate the risk7. Assessing risk with no controls in place can help to measure the inherent risk, but it does not show the impact or outcome of the risk treatment plans.

Providing peer benchmarking results is not the most helpful way, as it does not reflect the specific or unique risk profile of the organization. Peer benchmarking is the process of comparing the organization’s risk level and performance with its peers or competitors, based on a common set of criteria or indicators8. Providing peer benchmarking results can help to provide a reference or a standard for the risk posture, but it does not show the effect or result of the risk treatment plans.

Assessing risk with current controls in place is not the most helpful way, as it does not reflect the future or projected risk posture of the organization. Assessing risk with current controls in place can help to measure the current residual risk, but it does not show the expected or estimated residual risk at the end of the year.

References =

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Projected Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Risk Treatment Plan - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

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

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Control - CIO Wiki

Benchmarking - CIO Wiki

[Risk Treatment - CIO Wiki]

 A vulnerability is a weakness or flaw that can be exploited by a threat to cause harm or damage to an asset. Employees holding the door open for others, so that trailing employees do not have to stop and swipe their own ID badges, is a behavior that best represents a vulnerability, as it bypasses the security control of the ID badge system, and allows unauthorized or unauthenticated access to the premises. This behavior can increase the risk of physical or logical security breaches, such as theft, vandalism, sabotage, or espionage. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 258. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 258. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

 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 control owner is the person who is accountable for ensuring that a control is designed, implemented, and operated effectively to mitigate risk. The control owner is also responsible for monitoring the performance of the control and reporting any issues or deficiencies. The risk manager is the person who oversees the risk management process and ensures that risks are identified, assessed, and treated appropriately. The control operator is the person who executes the control activities on a day-to-day basis. The risk treatment owner is the person who is accountable for implementing the risk response strategy and ensuring that the residual risk is within the acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, p. 181.

A retention policy is a set of rules and guidelines that define how long and under what conditions the information should be kept or disposed of by the organization, based on its value, sensitivity, and legal or regulatory requirements.

When information is no longer required to support business objectives, the first thing that should be done is to assess the information against the retention policy. This means that the information should be reviewed and evaluated to determine if it should be retained or deleted, and for how long and by whom.

Assessing the information against the retention policy helps to ensure that the information is managed and disposed of in a consistent and compliant manner, that the information is protected from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction, and that the information is available for future reference or audit purposes if needed.

The other options are not the first things that should be done when information is no longer required to support business objectives. They are either secondary or not essential for information management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 28

Information Technology & Security, page 22

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 20

The effectiveness of anti-malware software is the degree to which it can detect, prevent, and remove malicious software (malware) from the system or network. Malware is any software that is designed to harm, exploit, or compromise the functionality, security, or privacy of the system or network1. Some common types of malware are viruses, worms, Trojans, ransomware, spyware, adware, and rootkits2.

One of the best indicators of the effectiveness of anti-malware software is the number of successful attacks by malicious software, which means the number of times that malware has managed to bypass, evade, or disable the anti-malware software and cause damage or disruption to the system or network. The lower the number of successful attacks, the higher the effectiveness of the anti-malware software. This indicator can measure the ability of the anti-malware software to protect the system or network from known and unknown malware threats, and to respond and recover from malware incidents34.

The other options are not the best indicators of the effectiveness of anti-malware software, because:

Number of staff hours lost due to malware attacks is a measure of the impact or consequence of malware attacks on the productivity or performance of the staff. It does not directly reflect the ability of the anti-malware software to detect, prevent, or remove malware, as there may be other factors that affect the staff hours lost, such as the severity of the attack, the availability of backup or recovery systems, or the skills and awareness of the staff5.

Number of downtime hours in business critical servers is a measure of the impact or consequence of malware attacks on the availability or reliability of the servers. It does not directly reflect the ability of the anti-malware software to detect, prevent, or remove malware, as there may be other factors that affect the downtime hours, such as the type of the server, the configuration of the network, or the maintenance of the hardware6.

Number of patches made to anti-malware software is a measure of the maintenance or improvement of the anti-malware software. It does not directly reflect the ability of the anti-malware software to detect, prevent, or remove malware, as there may be other factors that affect the number of patches, such as the frequency of the updates, the quality of the software, or the compatibility of the system7.

References =

What is Malware? - Definition from Techopedia

Common Types of Malware and Their Impact - Techopedia

What is Anti-Malware? Everything You Need to Know (2023) - SoftwareLab

The 10 Best Malware Protection Solutions Compared for 2024 - Techopedia

The Cost of Malware Attacks - Security Boulevard

The Impact of Malware on Business - Kaspersky

What is Patch Management? - Definition from Techopedia

The best indicator of the risk appetite and tolerance level for the risk associated with business interruption caused by IT system failures is the recovery time objective (RTO). The RTO is the maximum acceptable time or duration that a business process or an IT system can be disrupted or interrupted before it causes unacceptable impact or harm to the business. The RTO reflects the risk appetite and tolerance level for thebusiness interruption risk, as it indicates how much disruption or interruption the business can tolerate or accept, and how quickly the business needs to resume or recover the business process or the IT system. The RTO also helps to determine the priorities and requirements for the business continuity and recovery planning, and to select and implement the appropriate continuity and recovery strategies and solutions. Mean time to recover (MTTR), IT system criticality classification, and incident management service level agreement (SLA) are not the best indicators of the risk appetite and tolerance level for the business interruption risk, as they are either the measures or the outcomes of the business continuity and recovery performance, and they do not directly indicate how much disruption or interruption the business can tolerate or accept. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50

A critical threshold value for a key control indicator (KCI) is the value that indicates that the control is no longer performing its intended function of mitigating a risk. If the KCI reaches or exceeds this value, it means that the control effectiveness has failed and corrective actions are needed. The other options are not the best representations of a critical threshold value for a KCI, because they do not reflect the actual performance or outcome of the control. Thresholds benchmarked to peer organizations, a typical operational value, and a value that represents the intended control state are examples of target or acceptable values for a KCI, not critical or unacceptable values. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The most important objective of an enterprise risk management (ERM) program is to create a comprehensive view of critical risk to the organization, as it enables the organization to identify, assess, and prioritize the key risks that may affect its objectives and strategy, and to implement appropriate risk responses and controls. A comprehensive view of critical risk also helps the organization to align its risk appetite and tolerance with its business goals and value creation, and to enhance its risk culture and governance. A comprehensive view of critical risk can be achieved by integrating risk management across all levels and functions of the organization, and by using consistent and reliable risk information and reporting. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 242. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 242. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 242.

 The best person to own the unmitigated risk of the technology is the IT system owner. The IT system owner is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility for the acquisition, development, maintenance, and operation of the IT system. The IT system owner is also responsible for ensuring that the IT system meets the business requirements, security standards, and compliance obligations of the enterprise. The IT system owner should own the unmitigated risk of the technology, as they are in the best position to understand the nature and impact of the risk, and to implement the appropriate risk responses to reduce the risk exposure to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 251234

Classifying IT assets during a risk assessment is a process of assigning values to the IT assets based on their importance, sensitivity, and criticality to the enterprise. The best reason to classify IT assets is todetermine the appropriate level of protection that each IT asset requires, based on its value and the potential impact of its loss or compromise. This helps the enterprise to allocate resources and implement controls that are proportional to the risk exposure of the IT assets, and to optimize the cost and benefit of risk mitigation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 233. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 233. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 233.

A business system is a set of interconnected processes, functions, or activities that support the operations and objectives of a business1. A security gap is a weakness or flaw in a business system that can be exploited by a threat to cause harm or gain unauthorized access2. A control is a measure or mechanism that reduces the likelihood or impact of a security gap or threat3.

The best way to determine whether new controls mitigate security gaps in a business system is to perform a vulnerability assessment. A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the security gaps and threats in a business system, and testing the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls that are implemented to address them. A vulnerability assessment can help to:

Measure and compare the current and desired state of the security posture and performance of the business system

Detect and prioritize the most critical and urgent security gaps and threats that may compromise the business system or its objectives

Validate and validate the adequacy and reliability of the new controls and their ability to prevent, detect, or respond to security incidents or breaches

Provide feedback and recommendations for improving the security of the business system and enhancing the security awareness and culture of the organization

References = What is a Business System?, What is a Security Gap?, What is a Control?, [What is a Vulnerability Assessment?], [Vulnerability Assessment: A Guide for Business Leaders]

A key control indicator (KCI) is a metric that measures the effectiveness of a control in mitigating a risk. A good KCI for a vulnerability management program should reflect how well the program is reducing the exposure to high-risk vulnerabilities. The percentage of high-risk vulnerabilities addressed is a KCI that shows the proportion of identified high-risk vulnerabilities that have been remediated or mitigated within a defined time frame. This KCI can help monitor the progress and performance of the vulnerability management program and identify areas for improvement.

The other options are not the best KCI for a vulnerability management program because they do not measure the effectiveness of the control. The percentage of high-risk vulnerabilities missed is a measure of the completeness of the vulnerability scanning process, not the control. The number of high-risk vulnerabilities outstanding is a measure of the current risk exposure, not the control. The defined thresholds for high-risk vulnerabilities are a measure of the risk appetite, not the control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3: IT Risk Assessment, Section 3.4: Risk Indicators, p. 133-134.

To help identify high-risk situations, an organization should continuously monitor the environment, as it can help to detect and respond to any changes or emerging risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and strategy. Continuous monitoring can also provide timely and relevant feedback and information to the decision-makers and stakeholders, and enable them to adjust the risk strategy and response actions accordingly. Continuous monitoring can also help to ensure that the risk management process is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and supports the achievement of the organization’s goals and value creation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 243. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 243. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 243.

An external audit is the most reliable input to evaluate residual risk in the vendor’s control environment, as it provides an independent and objective assessment of the vendor’s financial systems and processes. An external audit is conducted by a third party, such as a certified public accountant (CPA) or a professional auditing firm, that follows the generally accepted auditing standards (GAAS) and the generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). An external audit can help to verify the accuracy and completeness of the vendor’s financial statements, identify any material misstatements or errors, and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the vendor’s internal controls. An external audit can also provide assurance and confidence to the organization and other stakeholders that the vendor is complying with the relevant laws, regulations, and contractual obligations.

The other options are not the most reliable inputs to evaluate residual risk in the vendor’s control environment. An internal audit is conducted by the vendor itself, which may introduce bias or conflict of interest. An internal audit may also have a different scope, methodology, or quality than an external audit. A vendor performance scorecard is completed by the organization, which may not have the sufficient access, expertise, or authority to assess the vendor’s control environment. A vendor performance scorecard may also focus more on the service level agreement (SLA) compliance, rather than the financial systems and processes. A regulatory examination is conducted by a regulator, such as a government agency or a standard-setting body, which may have a different purpose, criteria, or perspective than the organization. A regulatory examination may also have a limited scope, frequency, or transparency. References = Guide to VendorRisk Assessment | Smartsheet, Understanding Inherent Vs. Residual Risk Assessments - Resolver, Assessing Internal Controls over Compliance - HCCA Official Site

The first step to ensure continuity of operations when performing a risk assessment of a new service to support a new business process is to identify the conditions that may cause disruptions to the service or the process. This is because identifying the potential sources, causes, and scenarios of disruptions helps to determine the impact and likelihood of the risks, and to select the appropriate risk responses and recovery strategies. The other options are not the first steps, although they may also be part of the risk assessment process. Reviewing incident response procedures, evaluating the probability of risk events, and defining metrics for restoring availability are examples of subsequent steps that depend on the identification of the conditions that may cause disruptions. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

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.

 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.

Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying risk responses, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, or acceptance. It represents the level of exposure that the organisation is willing to tolerate or assume. Residual risk should be aligned with the organisation’s risk appetite and risk tolerance, which are determined by senior management. Therefore, the best way to obtain senior management support for investment in a control implementation would be to articulate the reduction in residual risk that the control would achieve. This would demonstrate how the control would help the organisation meet its riskobjectives and reduce the likelihood or impact of adverse events. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 25.

Residual system access is the risk that the customer service representatives who are transferred to the sales department may still have access to the systems or applications that they used in their previous role, which may not be relevant or authorized for their new role.

The access control manager is the person or function who is responsible for defining, implementing, and maintaining the policies and procedures for granting, modifying, reviewing, and revoking access rights to the systems or applications, based on the principle of least privilege and the segregation of duties.

The access control manager is responsible for mitigating the risk associated with residual system access, by ensuring that the access rights of the customer service representatives are updated or removed according to their new role and responsibilities, and that the access changes are documented and approved by the appropriate authorities.

The other options are not responsible for mitigating the risk associated with residual system access. They are either irrelevant or less effective than the access control manager.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 26

Information Technology & Security, page 20

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 18

 A risk portfolio is a collection of risks that an organization faces or may face in the future. Analyzing trends in key control indicators (KCIs) best enables a risk practitioner to proactively identify impacts on an organization’s risk portfolio, as KCIs measure and monitor the performance and effectiveness of the risk controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks. By analyzing the trends in KCIs, a risk practitioner can assess the current and potential risk exposure of the organization, and identify any changes or emerging risks that may affect the risk portfolio. Analyzing trends in KCIs can also help to evaluate the cost and benefit of the risk controls, and to determine the need for enhancing, modifying, or implementing new controls. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 246. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 246. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

The best way to mitigate the risk associated with infrastructure updates is to implement a change control process. A change control process is a set of procedures that ensures that any changes to the infrastructure are planned, approved, tested, implemented, and documented in a consistent and controlled manner. A change control process helps to reduce the risk of errors, conflicts, disruptions, or security breaches that could result from infrastructure updates. A change control process also helps to monitor and evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the changes, and to ensure that they align with the enterprise’s objectives and requirements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 1391

Fraudulent transactions are those that involve deception, manipulation, or misrepresentation of information or data to obtain an unauthorized or improper benefit or advantage1. Fraudulent transactions can pose significant risks and losses for an organization, such as financial damages, legal liabilities, reputational damages, or operational disruptions2.

Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems are integrated software applications that support the core business processes and functions of an organization, such as accounting, finance, human resources, supply chain, inventory, or customer relationship management3. ERP systems can facilitate the efficiency, accuracy, and security of business transactions, but they can also be vulnerable to fraudulent transactions, such as:

Creating fake vendors or customers and processing false invoices or payments

Manipulating or falsifying financial or accounting data or reports

Changing or deleting critical or sensitive information or records

Abusing or misusing access privileges or credentials

Bypassing or compromising the system controls or security measures4

The design of procedures to prevent fraudulent transactions within an ERP system should be based on the control environment. 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 comprises the following elements:

The tone at the top, which reflects the leadership’s commitment and attitude towards internal control and ethical conduct

The organizational structure, which defines the roles and responsibilities, reporting lines, and authority levels for internal control

The human resource policies and practices, which ensure that the staff have the appropriate skills, competencies, and incentives for internal control

The risk assessment process, which identifies and evaluates the potential risks and threats to the organization’s objectives and transactions

The control activities, which are the specific policies, procedures, and mechanisms that prevent, detect, or correct errors or fraud in transactions

The information and communication systems, which provide reliable and timely data and information for internal control and decision-making

The monitoring and evaluation activities, which measure and report the performance and effectiveness of internal control and ensure continuous improvement

By basing the design of procedures to prevent fraudulent transactions within an ERP system on the control environment, the organization can:

Ensure that the procedures are aligned with the organization’s objectives, values, and expectations regarding internal control and fraud prevention

Provide clear and consistent guidance and instructions for the staff and stakeholders involved in the transactions and the ERP system

Implement adequate and appropriate controls and safeguards to mitigate the risks and vulnerabilities of the transactions and the ERP system

Monitor and evaluate the compliance and effectiveness of the procedures and the ERP system, and identify and address any issues or gaps

References = What is Fraud?, Fraud Risk Management - AICPA, What is ERP?, ERP Fraud: How to Prevent It - ERP Focus, [COSO – Control Environment - Deloitte], [How to use COSO to assess IT controls - Journal of Accountancy]

The three lines of defense model is a framework that defines the roles and responsibilities of different functions in an organization for managing risks and ensuring effective internal control1. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense: the operational management and staff who are responsible for implementing and maintaining the internal control system and managing the risks within their areas of activity

The second line of defense: the oversight functions, such as risk management, compliance, and quality assurance, who provide guidance, support, and monitoring to the first line of defense and ensure that the internal control system is designed and operating effectively

The third line of defense: the internal audit function, who provides independent and objective assurance to the board and senior management on the adequacy and effectiveness of the internal control system and the performance of the first and second lines of defense2

The three lines of defense model facilitates a completely independent review of test results for evaluating control effectiveness, because it ensures that the internal audit function, as the third line of defense, has the authority, independence, and competence to conduct objective and unbiased assessments of the internal control system and report its findings and recommendations to the board and senior management3. The internal audit function can also use the test results from the first and second lines of defense as inputs for its own audit planning and testing, and verify their validity and reliability4.

References = The Three Lines of Defense in Effective Risk Management and Control - IIA, The Three Lines Model - IIA, The Role of Internal Audit in the Three Lines of Defense - IIA, Evaluating and Improving Internal Control in Organizations - IFAC

 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.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, monitoring against the configuration standard is the most effective control to maintain the integrity of system configuration files, because it ensures that any unauthorized or unintended changes are detected and corrected. Monitoring against the configuration standard involves comparing the actual configuration of the system with the approved baseline and identifying any deviations or discrepancies. The other options are not the most effective controls, because they do not ensure the integrity of the system configuration files. Recording changes to configuration files is a good practice, but it does not prevent unauthorized or unintended changes from occurring. Implementing automated vulnerability scanning is a preventive control that helps to identify and remediate potential weaknesses in the system, but it does not verify the integrity of the configuration files. Restricting access to configuration documentation is a security measure that limits the exposure of sensitive information, but it does not prevent unauthorized or unintended changes to the configuration files. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.3, page 184.

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.

 Customer behavior data is the information that reflects how customers interact with a brand, product, or service, such as their preferences, needs, motivations, and feedback1. Collecting customer behavior data through social media advertising can help an organization to understand its target market, improve its customer experience, and optimize its marketing strategies2.

However, collecting customer behavior data through social media advertising also poses significant business risks, especially for a global organization that operates in different countries. Among the four options given, the most important business risk to be considered is the regulatory requirements that may differ in each country. This means that the organization should:

Be aware of the different laws and regulations that govern the collection, processing, storage, and transfer of personal data in each country, such as the GDPR in the EU, the CCPA in California, or the PDPA in Singapore3

Ensure that the organization complies with the relevant data protection and privacy rules and standards in each country, such as obtaining consent, providing notice, ensuring security, and respecting rights4

Avoid or mitigate the potential legal, financial, reputational, or operational consequences of violating the data protection and privacy laws and regulations in each country, such as fines, lawsuits, sanctions, or loss of trust5

References = What is Customer Behavior Data?, How to Collect Customer Behavior Data for Marketing, Data Protection Laws Around the World, Data Protection and Privacy: The Age of Intelligent Machines, The Risks of Non-Compliance with Data Protection Laws

A maturity model is a framework that describes the stages or levels of development and improvement of a certain domain, such as a process, a function, or an organization. A maturity model is most useful to an organization when it provides a reference for progress, meaning that it helps the organization to assess its current state, identify its strengths and weaknesses, set its goals and objectives, and measure itsperformance and improvement over time. A maturity model can also help the organization to compare itself with best practices and standards, but benchmarking against other organizations is not its primary purpose. A maturity model can also help the organization to manage its risks, but defining a qualitative measure of risk or providing risk metrics is not its main function. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2.1, p. 118-119

The risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their analysis, and their responses. It is a useful tool for monitoring and controlling the risks throughout the project lifecycle. However, the risk register is not a static document and it should be updated regularly to reflect the changes in the risk environment and the project status. Therefore, when reviewing the risk register, a risk practitioner should not only look at the risk ratings, but also the assumptions and the rationale behind them. Different business units may have different perspectives, contexts, and data sources for the same risk scenario, which can result in significant variances in inherent risk. Inherent risk is the risk level before considering the existing controls or responses. Therefore, the best course of action is to review the assumptions of both risk scenarios to determine whether the variance is reasonable or not. This can help to identify any errors, inconsistencies, or biases in the risk assessment process, and to ensure that the risk register reflects the current and accurate state of the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, p. 106-107

Shadow systems are IT systems, solutions, devices, or technologies used within an organization without the knowledge and approval of the corporate IT department1. They are often the result of employees trying to address specific functionality gaps in the organization’s official systems, such as the ERP system. However, shadow systems can pose significant risks to the organization, such as:

Data security and privacy breaches, as shadow systems may not comply with the organization’s security policies and standards, or may expose sensitive data to unauthorized parties2.

Data quality and integrity issues, as shadow systems may not synchronize or integrate with the organization’s official systems, or may create data inconsistencies or redundancies3.

Compliance and regulatory violations, as shadow systems may not adhere to the organization’s legal or contractual obligations, or may create audit or reporting challenges4.

Cost and resource inefficiencies, as shadow systems may duplicate or conflict with the organization’s official systems, or may consume more IT resources than necessary5.

The best way to reduce the risk associated with shadow systems is to implement an enterprise architecture (EA), which is a comprehensive framework that defines the structure, processes, principles, and standards of the organization’s IT environment6. By implementing an EA, the organization can:

Align the IT systems with the organization’s goals and strategy, and ensure that they support the business needs and requirements6.

Establish a governance structure and process for IT decision making, and ensure that all IT systems are approved, monitored, and controlled by the IT department7.

Enhance the communication and collaboration between the IT department and the business units, and ensure that the IT systems meet the expectations and preferences of the end users5.

Optimize the performance and efficiency of the IT systems, and ensure that they are scalable, flexible, and interoperable6.

References =

Shadow IT: What Are the Risks and How Can You Mitigate Them? - Ekran System

How to Reduce Risks of Shadow IT by Applying Governance to Public Clouds – BMC Software | Blogs

What is shadow IT? - Article | SailPoint

The Risks of Shadow IT and How to Avoid Them | SiteSpect

Start reducing your organization’s Shadow IT risk in 3 steps

What is enterprise architecture (EA)? - Definition from WhatIs.com

Enterprise Architecture Governance - CIO Wiki

 The risk practitioner’s best recommendation is to consider providing additional system resources to this job, as this would help to reduce the likelihood and impact of the risk of delaying financial reporting. Providing additional system resources, such as memory, CPU, disk space, or bandwidth, can improve the performance and efficiency of the application and the scheduled job. This can also help to avoid potential errors, failures, or interruptions that could affect the quality and timeliness of the financial data and reporting.

The other options are not the best recommendations for this situation. Implementing database activity and capacity monitoring is a good practice to identify and analyze the root causes of performance issues, but it does not directly address the risk of delaying financial reporting. Ensuring the business is aware of the risk is an important step to communicate and escalate the risk, but it does not provide a solution or mitigation strategy. Ensuring the enterprise has a process to detect such situations is a preventive measure to avoid or minimize the occurrence of the risk, but it does not eliminate or reduce the risk. References = Practical Recommendations for Better Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA, HR Risk Management: A Practitioner’s Guide - AIHR, Isaca CRISC today updated questions - Verified by Isaca Experts

 The most important consideration for protecting data assets in a business application system is to ensure that the application controls are aligned with the data classification rules. Data classification rules define the level of sensitivity, confidentiality, and criticality of the data, and the corresponding security requirements and controls. Application controls are the policies, procedures, and technical measures that are implemented at the application level to ensure the security, integrity, and availability of the data. Application controls should be designed and configured to match the data classification rules, so that the data is protected according to its value and risk. For example, if the data is classified as highly confidential, the application controls should enforce strong authentication, encryption, access control, logging, and auditing mechanisms. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 214.

The best way to mitigate the risk of reputational damage from inappropriate use of social media sites by employees is to implement training and awareness programs that educate them on the acceptable andunacceptable use of social media, the potential consequences of violating the policy, and the best practices for protecting the organization’s reputation and information. Training and awareness programs can also help to foster a culture of risk awareness and responsibility among employees, and encourage them to report any incidents or issues related to social media use. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.4, page 131.

A security log is a record of security-related events or activities that occur in an IT system, network, or application, such as user authentication, access control, firewall activity, or intrusion detection1. Security logscan help to monitor and audit the security posture and performance of the IT environment, and to detect and investigate any security incidents, breaches, or anomalies2.

The integrity of a security log refers to the accuracy and completeness of the log data, and the assurance that the log data has not been modified, deleted, or tampered with by unauthorized or malicious parties3. The integrity of a security log is essential for ensuring the reliability and validity of the log analysis and reporting, and for providing evidence and accountability for security incidents and compliance4.

Among the four options given, the most important factor to the integrity of a security log is the inability to edit. This means that the security log data should be protected from any unauthorized or accidental changes or alterations, such as adding, deleting, or modifying log entries, or changing the log format or timestamps5. The inability to edit can be achieved by implementing various controls and measures, such as:

Applying digital signatures or hashes to the log data to verify its authenticity and integrity

Encrypting the log data to prevent unauthorized access or disclosure

Implementing least privilege access to the log data to restrict who can view, modify, or delete the log data

Using write-once media or devices to store the log data, such as CD-ROMs or WORM drives

Sending the log data to a secure and centralized log server or repository, and using syslog or other protocols to ensure secure and reliable log transmission

Performing regular backups and archiving of the log data to prevent data loss or corruption

References = Security Log: Best Practices for Logging and Management, Security Audit Logging Guideline, Confidentiality, Integrity, & Availability: Basics of Information Security, Steps for preserving the integrity of log data, Guide to Computer Security Log Management

The best way to ensure that access remains appropriate for an organization that practices the principle of least privilege is to review user access rights on a regular basis by obtaining an access control matrix and approval from the user’s manager. An access control matrix is a table that shows the access rights and permissions of each user or role for each resource or function. An access control matrix helps to verify that the users have the minimum level of access required to perform their duties, and to identify any unauthorized or excessive access rights. Approval from the user’s manager helps to confirm that the user’s access rights are consistent with their current role and responsibilities, and to authorize any changes or exceptions as needed. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 1281

Changes to data sensitivity during the data life cycle present the greatest risk for a global organization when implementing a data classification policy, as they may result in data being under-protected or over-protected, leading to potential data breaches, compliance violations, or inefficiencies. Data sensitivity refers to the level of confidentiality, integrity, and availability that the data requires, and it may changedepending on the data’s creation, storage, processing, transmission, or disposal. A data classification policy should consider the changes to data sensitivity during the data life cycle and ensure that the appropriate controls and procedures are applied at each stage. Data encryption not applied to all sensitive data, many data assets that need to be classified, and changes to information handling procedures not documented are not the greatest risks, as they do not affect the data classification policy itself, but rather the implementation or execution of the policy. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question211; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 211.

A threat and vulnerability assessment is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential sources and impacts of risk events on an organization’s assets, processes, and objectives. It also estimates the probability of occurrence and the severity of consequences for each risk event. A threat and vulnerability assessment is the best way to quantify the likelihood of risk materialization, as it provides a numerical or qualitative measure of the risk exposure and the level of uncertainty associated with the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, p. 68-69

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that measures the achievement of a specific goal or objective. A KPI should be relevant, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound. For measuring the effectiveness of an antivirus program, a possible goal is to ensure that all IT assets are protected from malware infections. A KPI that can measure this goal is the percentage of IT assets with current malware definitions, which indicates how well the antivirus program can detect and prevent the latest malware threats. The higher the percentage, the more effective the antivirus program is. Therefore, this is the best KPI among the given options. References =

Cybersecurity KPIs to Track + Examples — RiskOptics - Reciprocity

Which of the following is the BEST key performance indicator (KPI) to …

Indicators - Program Evaluation - CDC

 Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure how well a specific control is performing in reducing the causes, consequences, or likelihood of a risk1. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure changes in the risk exposure or the potential impact of a risk2. By linking an effective KCI to relevant KRIs, the organization can monitor changes in the risk environment and assess how the control is influencing the risk level3. This can help the organization to:

Identify emerging or escalating risks and take timely and appropriate actions

Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the control and make improvements if needed

Align the control with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization

Communicate the risk and control status to stakeholders and regulators

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 6: Risk Response and Mitigation4

The business process owner is the person or entity that has the accountability and authority to manage a business process and its outcomes. The business process owner would be the most appropriate owner of the risk associated with an IT control gap in a key process, as they are responsible for ensuring that the process meets its objectives and delivers value to the enterprise. The business process owner should also ensure that the process is aligned with the enterprise’s strategy and risk appetite, and that the process risks are identified, assessed, and mitigated effectively. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 247. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 247. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 247. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

A reciprocal agreement is an agreement made by two or more organizations to use each other’s resources during a disaster1. For example, two organizations with similar IT infrastructure may agree to provide backup servers or data centers for each other in case of a major disruption. By doing so, they transfer the risk of losing their IT capabilities to the other party, who agrees to share the responsibility and cost of recovery.

A reciprocal agreement is a form of risk transfer, which is one of the four risk treatment options according to ISO 270012. Risk transfer means that the organization shifts the potential negative consequences of a risk to another party, such as an insurance company, a vendor, or a partner. This reduces the organization’s exposure and liability to the risk, but it does not eliminate the risk completely, as the other party may fail to fulfill their obligations or charge a high price for their services.

References = Reciprocal Agreement - Risky Thinking, ISO 27001 Risk Assessment & Risk Treatment: The Complete Guide - Advisera

Validating the risk scenarios is the most important time to involve business stakeholders, as they can provide feedback on the relevance, completeness, and accuracy of the scenarios. They can also help to ensure that the scenarios are aligned with the business objectives, context, and risk appetite. By involving business stakeholders in the validation process, the risk practitioner can increase the credibility and acceptance of the risk scenarios.

Updating the risk register, documenting the risk scenarios, and identifying risk mitigation controls are all important steps in the risk scenario development process, but they are not the most important time to involve business stakeholders. These steps can be performed by the risk practitioner with input from othersources, such as subject matter experts, historical data, industry standards, etc. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, page 47-481

Data inconsistency is the greatest concern associated with redundant data in an organization’s inventory system, as it can lead to inaccurate, unreliable, and conflicting information that can affect the decision-making and performance of the organization. Redundant data can occur when the same data is stored in multiple locations or formats, or when data is not updated or synchronized properly. Data inconsistency can cause errors, confusion, and inefficiency in the inventory management process, and can also increase the risk of fraud, theft, or loss of inventory. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 238. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 238. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 238.

Residual risk is the remaining risk after the risk response has been implemented. Residual risk can be expressed as a combination of the probability and impact of the risk scenario, or as a single value such as loss expectancy. Residual risk can be compared with the inherent risk, which is the risk level before considering the existing controls or responses, to evaluate the risk reduction and value creation of the risk response. Senior management has asked the risk practitioner for the overall residual risk level for a process that contains numerous risk scenarios. The best way to provide this information is to calculate the average of anticipated residual risk levels for each risk scenario, and to present it as a single value or a range. This can help to provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the residual risk exposure and performance of the process, as well as to align it with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. The sum of residual risk levels for each scenario, the loss expectancy for aggregated risk scenarios, or the highest loss expectancy among the risk scenarios are not the best ways to provide the overall residual risk level, as they may overestimate or underestimate the risk exposure and performance of the process, and may not reflect the actual risk reduction and value creation of the risk response. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, p. 108-109

The best approach to ensure the effectiveness of risk awareness training is to create modules for targeted audiences. This means that the risk awareness training should be customized and tailored to the specific needs, roles, and responsibilities of different groups of staff, such as business owners, process owners, IT staff, or external parties. Creating modules for targeted audiences helps to ensure that the risk awareness training is relevant, engaging, and applicable to the participants, and that it covers the appropriate level of detail and complexity. It also helps to enhance the learning outcomes and retention of the risk awareness training, and to foster a culture of risk awareness and responsibility within the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 2491

 Cross-site scripting (XSS) and SQL injection are two common types of web application attacks that can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data and systems. XSS allows an attacker to inject malicious code into a web page that is viewed by other users, while SQL injection allows an attacker to execute arbitrary commands on a database server by manipulating the input parameters of a web application. Both attacks can result in data theft, unauthorized access, defacement, denial of service, and more.

To mitigate these attacks, the best option is to require the software vendor to remediate the vulnerabilities by applying secure coding practices, such as input validation, output encoding, parameterized queries, and HTML sanitization. These techniques can prevent or limit the impact of XSS and SQL injection by ensuring that user input is not interpreted as code or commands by the web browser or the database server. The software vendor should also provide regular updates and patches to fix any known or newly discovered vulnerabilities.

The other options are not effective or acceptable ways to mitigate these attacks. Monitoring the databases for abnormal activity can help detect and respond to SQL injection attacks, but it does not prevent them from happening or address the root cause of the vulnerability. Approving an exception to allow the software to continue operating can expose the organization to unnecessary risks and liabilities, as well as violate compliance requirements and standards. Accepting the risk and letting the vendor run the software as is can also have serious consequences for the organization, as it implies that the potential impact and likelihood of the attacks are low or acceptable, which may not be the case. References =

IT Risk Resources | ISACA

CRISC Certification | Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control | ISACA

Cross Site Scripting Prevention Cheat Sheet - OWASP

A novel technique to prevent SQL injection and cross-site scripting attacks using Knuth-Morris-Pratt string match algorithm | EURASIP Journal on Information Security | Full Text

Difference Between XSS and SQL Injection - GeeksforGeeks

The greatest concern when assessing the risk profile of an organization is that the risk profile was last reviewed two years ago. A risk profile is a snapshot of the current risk exposure and appetite of the organization, based on the identification, analysis, and evaluation of the risks that could affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives. A risk profile should be reviewed and updated regularly, atleast annually, or whenever there are significant changes in the internal or external environment, such as new projects, strategies, regulations, or incidents. A risk profile that was last reviewed two years ago may not reflect the current risk situation and status of the organization, and may lead to inaccurate or incomplete risk assessment and response. The risk profile not being updated after a recent incident, the risk profile being developed without using industry standards, and the risk profile not containing historical loss data are also concerns, but they are not as critical as the risk profile being outdated. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 48.

A business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that identifies and assesses the effects that accidents, emergencies, disasters, and other unplanned, negative events could have on a business. The BIA (sometimes also called business impact assessment) predicts how a business will be affected by everything from a hurricane to a labor strike1.

One of the data that would be used when performing a BIA is the expected costs for recovering the business. This data can help to estimate the amount of resources and funds that would be needed to restore the normal operations and functions of the business after a disruption. The expected costs for recovering the business can include:

The costs of repairing or replacing damaged or lost assets, such as equipment, inventory, or facilities

The costs of hiring or training additional staff, or outsourcing some tasks or services

The costs of implementing alternative or backup systems or processes, such as cloud computing or manual procedures

The costs of communicating and coordinating with customers, suppliers, partners, regulators, and other stakeholders

The costs of complying with legal or contractual obligations, or paying fines or penalties

The costs of mitigating or preventing further losses or damages, such as insurance premiums or security measures23

The expected costs for recovering the business can help to determine the priority and urgency of the recovery activities, and to allocate the available resources and funds accordingly. The expected costs for recovering the business can also help to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and feasibility of the recovery strategies and options, and to justify the investment in the business continuity planning and management4.

The other options are not the data that would be used when performing a BIA, but rather the data that would be used for other purposes or processes. A cost-benefit analysis of running the current business is a data that would be used to compare the advantages and disadvantages of different business decisions or alternatives, such as launching a new product or service, or expanding to a new market. A cost-benefit analysis can help to assess the profitability and viability of the current business, but it does not measure the impact of a disruption on the business5. A cost of regulatory compliance is a data that would be used toestimate the amount of resources and funds that would be required to meet the rules and standards set by the authorities or agencies that govern the business, such as laws, regulations, or policies. A cost of regulatory compliance can help to ensure the legality and accountability of the business, but it does not measure the impact of a disruption on the business. A projected impact of current business on future business is a data that would be used to forecast the potential outcomes and consequences of the current business activities or strategies on the future business performance and growth, such as sales, revenue, market share, or customer satisfaction. A projected impact of current business on future business can help to plan and optimize the future business, but it does not measure the impact of a disruption on the current business. References =

Business Impact Analysis | Ready.gov

Business Impact Analysis Toolkit | Smartsheet

Business Impact Analysis (BIA): Prepare for Anything [2023] • Asana

How To Conduct Business Impact Analysis in 8 Easy Steps - G2

Cost Benefit Analysis - ISACA

[Regulatory Compliance - ISACA]

[Impact Analysis - ISACA]

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

A key control indicator (KCI) is a metric that provides information on the extent to which a given control is meeting its intended objectives in terms of loss prevention, reduction, etc. A KCI should have an explicit relationship to both the specific control and the specific risk against which the control has been implemented. For risk related to IT infrastructure failure, a possible control is to have a recovery plan that can restore the critical IT services and minimize the impact of the failure. A KCI that can measure the effectiveness of this control is the number of successful recovery plan tests, which indicates how well the recovery plan can be executed in a real scenario. The higher the number of successful tests, the lower the risk of IT infrastructure failure. Therefore, this is the best KCI among the given options. References =

Integrating KRIs and KPIs for Effective Technology Risk Management

Key Control Indicator (KCI) - CIO Wiki

Infrastructure Issues: Understanding and Mitigating Risks

 The risk treatment response that should be reflected in the risk register when an IT department decides to keep the data center in-house instead of outsourcing it to an overseas location is risk avoidance. Risk avoidance is a risk response strategy that involves eliminating the source of the risk, or changing the plan or scope of the activity, to avoid the risk altogether. Risk avoidance can help to reduce the risk exposure and impact to zero, by removing the possibility of the risk occurrence. In this case, the IT department avoids the risk of outsourcing the data center to an overseas location, which could involve various threats, vulnerabilities, and uncertainties, such as data security, legal compliance, service quality, communication, or cultural issues. By keeping the data center in-house, the IT department maintains the control and ownership of the data center, and eliminates the potential risk associated with the outsourcing. Risk mitigation, risk acceptance, and risk transfer are not the correct risk treatment responses, as they do not reflect the actual decision and action taken by the IT department, and they do not eliminate the risk source or occurrence. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 51.

An internal data access policy is a set of rules and guidelines that define who, how, when, and why the users can access, use, share, or modify the data stored in a business application system, based on the data classification, sensitivity, and ownership.

Enforcing an internal data access policy is the most appropriate way to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system. This means that the organization implements and maintains effective controls to ensure that only the authorized users can access the confidential information, and that the access is logged and monitored for compliance and security purposes.

The other options are not the most appropriate ways to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system. They are either secondary or not essential for data access control.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 28

Information Technology & Security, page 22

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 20

The primary benefit of conducting continuous monitoring of access controls is the ability to identify possible noncompliant activities that lead to data disclosure. Continuous monitoring of access controls is a process that involves collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the performance and effectiveness of the access controls on a regular basis. Continuous monitoring of access controls helps to detect and prevent any unauthorized or inappropriate access to information assets, and to ensure that the access controls arealigned with the enterprise’s security policies and standards. Continuous monitoring of access controls also helps to identify possible noncompliant activities that lead to data disclosure, such as data leakage, data theft, data tampering, or data breach. By identifying these activities, the enterprise can take timely and appropriate actions to mitigate the risk and protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information assets. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 1411

The first course of action for a risk practitioner when discovering a deficiency in a critical system that cannot be patched is to conduct a risk assessment. A risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that could affect the achievement of the objectives of the system or the organization. A risk assessment helps to determine the level and nature of the risk exposure, and to prioritize and respond to the risks. Conducting a risk assessment is the first course of action, as it helps to understand the source, cause, and impact of the deficiency, and to estimate the likelihood and consequences of the risk events that could exploit the deficiency. Conducting a risk assessment also helps to identify and evaluate the existing or potential controls or mitigations that could address the deficiency, and to recommend the appropriate risk treatment options. Reporting the issue to internal audit, submitting a request to change management, and reviewing the business impact assessment are not the first courses of action, as they are either the outputs or the inputs of the risk assessment process, and they do not address the primary need of assessing the risk situation and status. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

A cause-and-effect diagram, also known as a fishbone diagram or an Ishikawa diagram, is a graphical tool that helps to identify and analyze the potential causes and effects of a problem or an event. A cause-and-effect diagram can be used to develop technical risk scenarios related to a recently developed ERP system, because it can help to:

Break down the complex problem or event into manageable and measurable categories and subcategories of causes and effects

Visualize the relationships and interactions among the various factors that contribute to the problem or event

Identify the root causes and the most significant effects of the problem or event

Generate ideas and hypotheses for testing and validating the problem or event

Communicate and present the problem or event clearly and logically to the stakeholders1

A cause-and-effect diagram can be constructed by following these steps:

Define the problem or event and write it in a box on the right side of the diagram

Draw a horizontal line from the box to the left side of the diagram, representing the main spine of the fishbone

Identify the major categories of causes that affect the problem or event, such as people, process, technology, environment, etc., and write them on the branches of the spine

For each category, brainstorm and list the possible subcategories and specific causes that influence the problem or event, and write them on the sub-branches of the spine

For each cause, identify and list the possible effects or consequences that result from the problem or event, and write them on the sub-sub-branches of the spine

Analyze the diagram and prioritize the causes and effects based on their frequency, severity, and controllability

Develop technical risk scenarios based on the most critical causes and effects, and describe how they could affect the ERP system and the organization1

The data owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility to classify, label, and protect the information assets of the organization. The data owner is accountable for the risk of potential loss of confidential information, as they are the ones who determine the level of protection and access required for the data. The risk manager is responsible for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks that may affect the organization, but they are not accountable for the data itself. The end user is the person who uses the information assets for their operational tasks, but they are not accountable for the data protection or classification. The IT department is responsible for providing the technical support and infrastructure for the information assets, but they are not accountable for the data ownership or risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Data Classification, p. 69-70.

User accounts provisioning is the process of creating, managing, and modifying user accounts within a system or an application, based on the user’s roles, responsibilities, and requirements. User accounts provisioning is an essential part of identity and access management (IAM), which aims to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the system or the application, and the information or resources that it handles or supports1.

The best key performance indicator (KPI) for monitoring adherence to an organization’s user accounts provisioning practices is the percentage of accounts without documented approval, because it can help to measure how well the organization follows the policies, standards, and procedures for user accounts provisioning, and how effectively the organization controls and audits the user accounts provisioning activities. The percentage of accounts without documented approval can indicate:

The level of compliance and accountability of the user accounts provisioning process, and the extent to which the user accounts provisioning requests and actions are authorized and verified by the appropriate parties, such as managers, IT staff, or security officers

The level of risk and exposure of the user accounts provisioning process, and the likelihood and impact of unauthorized or inappropriate user accounts provisioning, such as granting excessive or unnecessary access privileges, creating duplicate or fraudulent accounts, or violating legal or regulatory requirements

The level of quality and efficiency of the user accounts provisioning process, and the ability and capacity of the organization to manage and maintain the user accounts provisioning records and documents, such as forms, logs, or reports23

The other options are not the best KPIs for monitoring adherence to an organization’s user accounts provisioning practices, but rather some of the factors or outcomes of it. User accounts with default passwords are user accounts that have not changed their passwords from the initial or default values that are assigned by the system or the application. User accounts with default passwords are a factor that can increase the risk of unauthorized or malicious access to the system or the application, as the default passwords may be easily guessed or compromised by attackers. Active accounts belonging to former personnel are user accounts that have not been deactivated or deleted after the users have left the organization. Active accounts belonging to former personnel are an outcome of ineffective or inefficient user accounts deprovisioning, which is the process of revoking or removing the user accounts and access privileges when they are no longer needed or valid. Accounts with dormant activity are user accounts that have not been used or accessed for a long period of time. Accounts with dormant activity are an outcome of poor or inconsistent user accounts management, which is the process of updating or modifying the user accounts and access privileges according to the changes or needs of the users or the organization4. References =

User Provisioning for SaaS Apps: Top 10 Best Practices | Resmo

Top Identity and Access Management Metrics

KPI-driven approach to Identity & Access Management - Elimity

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

A maturity model is a framework that describes the stages or levels of development and improvement of a certain domain, such as a process, a function, or an organization. A maturity model can help to evaluate the current state, identify the strengths and weaknesses, set the goals and objectives, and measure the performance and improvement over time. The primary benefit of using a maturity model is that it helps to evaluate the evolution of process improvements, meaning that it can help to track the progress andchanges of the processes, as well as to identify the best practices and standards. A maturity model can also help to compare the processes with the industry benchmarks and competitors, as well as to align the processes with the business strategy and vision. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2.1, p. 118-119

Managing cyber risk according to the organization’s risk management framework is the best recommendation to help ensure cyber risk is assessed and reflected in the enterprise-level risk profile, as it helps to integrate and align the cybersecurity risk management (CSRM) and the enterprise risk management (ERM) processes. A risk management framework is a set of principles, policies, and practices that guide and support the risk management activities within an organization. A risk management framework helps to establish a consistent, comprehensive, and coordinated approach to risk management across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

Managing cyber risk according to the organization’s risk management framework helps to ensure cyber risk is assessed and reflected in the enterprise-level risk profile by providing the following benefits:

It enables a holistic and comprehensive view of the cyber risk landscape and its interdependencies with the business processes and functions.

It facilitates the communication and collaboration among the business and IT stakeholders and enhances their understanding and awareness of the cyber risk exposure and control environment.

It supports the development and implementation of effective and efficient cyber risk response and mitigation strategies and actions that are aligned with the business risk appetite and objectives.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the cyber risk management and control processes and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best recommendations to help ensure cyber risk is assessed and reflected in the enterprise-level risk profile. Defining cyber roles and responsibilities across the organization is a good practice to clarify and assign the duties and accountabilities for the cyber risk management and control processes, but it does not directly address the cyber risk assessment and integration with the enterprise-level risk profile. Conducting cyber risk awareness training tailored specifically for senior management is a useful method to educate and engage the senior management in the cyber risk management and control processes, but it does not provide a systematic or consistent way to assess and reflect the cyber risk in the enterprise-level risk profile. Implementing a cyber risk program based on industry best practices is a possible action to improve and enhance the cyber risk management and control processes, but it does not ensure the alignment or integration with the organization’s risk management framework or the enterprise-level risk profile. References = Integrating Cybersecurity and Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) - NIST, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Identifying and Estimating Cybersecurity Risk for Enterprise Risk …

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 ofthe 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]

Identifying potential sources of risk is the first step in the risk identification process, which is essential for developing a thorough understanding of risk scenarios. Sources of risk can be internal or external, and can include factors such as people, processes, technology, environment, regulations, and events. Identifying potential sources of risk can help to generate a comprehensive list of risk scenarios that can affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Identifying potential sources of risk can also help to raise risk awareness among the employees and to foster a risk culture within the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, p. 66-67

The best course of action for a risk practitioner who finds that the approved risk action plan has not been completed but other risk mitigation actions have been implemented is to verify the sufficiency of mitigating controls with the risk owner. This is because the risk owner is the person who is accountable for the risk and the risk response strategy, and therefore should be consulted to ensure that the alternative actions are adequate and effective in reducing the risk to an acceptable level. The other options are not the best course of action, although they may also be performed after verifying the sufficiency of mitigating controls with the risk owner. Reviewing the cost-benefit of mitigating controls, marking the risk status as unresolved within the risk register, and updating the risk register with implemented mitigating actions are secondary actions that depend on the outcome of the verification process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, p. 193.

New regulatory requirements impacting IT are those that impose new obligations, restrictions, or standards on how an organization uses, manages, or secures its IT systems, data, or services1. Examples of such regulations include the GDPR, the CCPA, the HIPAA, or the PCI-DSS2. New regulatory requirements impacting IT can pose significant challenges and risks for an organization, such as:

Compliance costs and efforts, such as updating policies, procedures, and systems, training staff, or hiring experts

Noncompliance penalties and consequences, such as fines, lawsuits, sanctions, or reputational damages

Operational disruptions or inefficiencies, such as system changes, data migrations, or service interruptions

Competitive disadvantages or opportunities, such as losing or gaining customers, partners, or markets3

The first step that should be done when a company is made aware of new regulatory requirements impacting IT is to review the risk tolerance and appetite. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that an organization is willing to accept around its risk appetite. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to take in order to meet its strategic objectives. By reviewing the risk tolerance and appetite, the company can:

Establish a clear and consistent understanding of the organization’s goals, values, and expectations regarding the new regulatory requirements impacting IT

Assess the current and potential impacts of the new regulatory requirements impacting IT on the organization’s performance, operations, or assets

Determine the level of risk exposure and acceptance that the organization is comfortable with, and identify the risk thresholds or limits that should not be exceeded

Align the risk management strategies and actions with the organization’s risk tolerance and appetite, and prioritize the most critical and urgent risks to be addressed

Communicate and report the risk tolerance and appetite to the stakeholders and regulators, and ensure transparency and accountability

References = Regulating emerging technology | Deloitte Insights, Ten Key Regulatory Challenges of 2024 - kpmg.com, The Risks of Non-Compliance with Data Protection Laws, [Risk Tolerance - COSO], [Risk Appetite - COSO], [Risk Appetite and Tolerance - IRM]

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the primary purpose of periodically reviewing an organization’s risk profile is to enable risk-based decision making, because it helps to ensure that the risk information is current, relevant, and accurate. The risk profile is a snapshot of the organization’s risk exposure at a given point in time, based on the risk identification, analysis, and evaluation processes. Periodically reviewing the risk profile allows the organization to monitor the changes in the risk environment, the effectiveness of the risk responses, and the impact of the risk events. This enables the organization to make informed decisions about the risk management strategies and priorities. The other options are not the primary purpose of periodically reviewing the risk profile, as they are related to other aspects of the risk management process. Aligning business objectives with risk appetite is the purpose of establishing the risk context, which defines the scope and boundaries of the risk management activities. Designing and implementing risk response action plans is the purpose of the risk response process, which involves selecting and executing the appropriate risk responses. Updating risk responses in the risk register is the outcome of the risk monitoring and reporting process, which involves tracking the risk performance and communicating the risk information to the stakeholders. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.4, page 86.

The most helpful activity for a risk practitioner when ensuring that mitigated risk remains within acceptable limits is to implement a process for ongoing monitoring of control effectiveness. This would enable the risk practitioner to track the performance of the controls, identify any deviations or gaps, and take corrective actions as needed. Ongoing monitoring of control effectiveness would also provide assurance that the risk responses are working as intended, and that the residual risk is aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 188.

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

 Risk monitoring is the process of tracking and evaluating the performance and effectiveness of the risk management process and controls, and identifying any changes or emerging risks that may affect theenterprise’s objectives and strategy. The primary benefit of risk monitoring is that it facilitates risk-aware decision making, as it provides timely and relevant information and feedback to the decision-makers and stakeholders, and enables them to adjust the risk strategy and response actions accordingly. Risk monitoring also helps to ensure that the risk management process is aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance, and supports the achievement of the enterprise’s goals and value creation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 239. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 239. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 239.

The primary goal of conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) as part of an overall continuity planning process is to identify critical business processes and the degree of reliance on support services. A BIA is a process of assessing the potential impact and consequences of a disruption or interruption of the business activities, operations, or functions. A continuity planning process is a process of developing, implementing, and maintaining a plan to ensure the continuity and recovery of the business activities, operations, or functions in the event of a disruption or interruption. The primary goal of conducting a BIA is to identify critical business processes and the degree of reliance on support services, which are the business processes that are essential for the survival and success of the business, and the support services that are required to enable or facilitate the critical business processes, such as IT systems, human resources, facilities, or suppliers. Identifying critical business processes and the degree of reliance on support services helps to determine the priorities and requirements for the continuity and recovery of the business activities, operations, or functions, and to select and implement the appropriate continuity and recovery strategies and solutions. Obtaining the support of executive management, mapping the business processes to supporting IT and other corporate resources, and documenting the disaster recovery process are not the primary goals of conducting a BIA, as they are either the benefits or the outputs of the BIA process, and they do not address the primary need of assessing the impact and consequences of the business disruption or interruption. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

The best control to prevent the inappropriate disclosure of confidential information when print jobs containing confidential information are sent to a shared network printer located in a secure room is to require a printer access code for each user. A printer access code is a unique and secret code that the user needs to enter on the printer device to release and retrieve the print job. Requiring a printer access code for each user is the best control, as it helps to prevent or limit the unauthorized access, viewing, or copying ofthe confidential information on the print job, especially if the print job is left unattended or forgotten on the printer device. Requiring a printer access code for each user also helps to ensure the accountability and traceability of the user who sent the print job, and to support the audit and monitoring of the printer activity. Using physical controls to access the printer room, using video surveillance in the printer room, and ensuring printer parameters are properly configured are also useful controls, but they are not as effective as requiring a printer access code for each user, as they do not directly prevent or limit the inappropriate disclosure of confidential information on the print job, and they may not deter or detect the unauthorized access or misuse of the print job by the authorized users who have access to the printer room or device. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

The best evidence of an effective risk treatment plan is that the risk tolerance threshold is above the asset residual risk, because this means that the risk treatment plan has reduced the risk to a level that is acceptable to the enterprise. The risk tolerance threshold is the maximum amount of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept for a given asset or process. The asset residual risk is the remaining risk after applying the risk treatment plan. The risk treatment plan is effective if the asset residual risk is lower than or equal to the risk tolerance threshold. The other options are not the best evidence, although they may also be indicators of an effective risk treatment plan. The inherent risk being below the asset residual risk, the remediation cost being below the asset business value, and the remediation being completed within the asset recovery time objective (RTO) are examples of desirable or expected outcomes of the risk treatment plan, but they do not directly measure the effectiveness of the risk treatment plan. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The first step when addressing the situation of moving the payroll system to a SaaS application and complying with the new data privacy regulation is to understand the data flows. This means identifying where the data is collected, stored, processed, and transferred, and who has access to it. Understanding the data flows can help to determine the scope and impact of the regulation, as well as the potential risks and gaps in the current state. It can also help to identify the roles and responsibilities of the organization and the SaaS provider regarding data protection and compliance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1.2, p. 237-238

The most common concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider is unauthorized data usage, which means the misuse, disclosure, or theft of the organization’s data by the service provider or its employees, contractors, or subcontractors1. Unauthorized data usage can pose significant risks to the organization, such as:

Data security and privacy breaches, which can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data, and expose the organization to legal liability, regulatory penalties, reputational damage, or loss of trust and credibility2.

Data quality and accuracy issues, which can affect the reliability and validity of the data, and impair the decision-making, reporting, or performance of the organization3.

Data ownership and control issues, which can limit the access and rights of the organization to its own data, and create dependency or lock-in with the service provider4.

The other options are not the most common concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, because:

Lack of technical expertise is a potential but not prevalent concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, as it may affect the quality and efficiency of the services provided by the service provider, and the compatibility and integration of the services with the organization’s systems and processes5. However, most service providers have sufficient technical expertise in their domain or field, and they can offer specialized skills or resources that the organization may not have internally6.

Combining incompatible duties is a possible but not frequent concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, as it may create conflicts of interest or segregation of duties issues for the service provider or the organization, and increase the risk of errors, fraud, or abuse7. However, most service providers have adequate governance and control mechanisms to prevent or mitigate such issues, and they can adhere to the organization’s policies and standards regarding the separation of duties8.

Denial of service attacks is a rare but not common concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, as it may disrupt the availability or functionality of the services provided by the service provider, and affect the operations or continuity of the organization. However, most service providers have robust security measures and contingency plans to protect and recover from such attacks, and they can ensure the resilience and reliability of the services.

References =

Unauthorized Data Usage - CIO Wiki

What is outsourcing? Definitions, benefits, challenges, processes, advice | CIO

The Pros and Cons of Outsourcing in 2023 - GrowthForce

13 Common Problems of Outsourcing and How to Avoid Them - ENOU Labs

The Top 10 Problems with Outsourcing Implementation - SSON

10 problems with outsourcing (+ Solutions for each) - Time Doctor Blog

Segregation of Duties - CIO Wiki

Outsourcing Governance - CIO Wiki

[Denial-of-Service Attack - CIO Wiki]

[Business Continuity Planning - CIO Wiki]

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics that reflect how well an organization is achieving its goals and objectives. KPIs should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. The most important characteristic of a KPI is its relevance, meaning that it should be aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, and values. A relevant KPI should also be meaningful and useful for the intended audience, such as the management, the staff, or the stakeholders. A relevant KPI should provide insight into the performance and progress of the organization, as well as enable decision making and improvement actions. A KPI that is not relevant may be misleading, inaccurate, or irrelevant, and may not reflect the true state of the organization or its goals. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, p. 116-117

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

 Accepting residual risk is the most important responsibility of a risk owner, as it implies that the risk owner is accountable for the risk and its impact on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls, and it should be aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. The risk owner is responsible for implementing the risk response strategies and monitoring the risk status and outcomes, as well as for reporting and escalating the risk issues and incidents. Testing control design, establishing business information criteria, and establishing the risk register are not the most important responsibilities of a risk owner, but rather the tasks or activities that the risk owner may perform or delegate as part of the risk management process. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question218; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 218.

 Cost-benefit analysis is the most helpful tool to show risk reduction based on when developing risk treatment alternatives for a business case, because it compares the expected costs and benefits of each alternative and helps to select the most optimal and feasible one. Cost-benefit analysis also helps to justify the investment and resources required for the risk treatment plan and to demonstrate the value and return of the risk reduction. The other options are not the most helpful tools, although they may also be considered when developing risk treatment alternatives. Risk appetite, regulatory guidelines, and control efficiency are examples of factors or criteria that influence the selection of risk treatment alternatives, but they do not show the risk reduction based on the alternatives. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The MOST important aspect for the risk practitioner to confirm is:

A. Appropriate approvals for the control changes

Ensuring that the control design changes have the appropriate approvals is crucial. This confirms that the changes are recognized and sanctioned by the necessary authority within the organization, aligning with governance practices and maintaining the integrity of the risk management process.

The observation from a third-party service provider review that would be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner is that the service level agreements (SLAs) have not been met over the last quarter, as it indicates a significant performance issue or breach that may affect the quality, functionality, or security of the outsourced services, and may require a remediation or escalation action. The other options are not the greatest concerns, as they may not indicate a performance issue or breach, but rather a contractual, personnel, or financial issue, respectively, that may not affect the outsourced services directly or significantly. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

The best time to evaluate current control effectiveness when implementing an IT risk management program is during the risk assessment, as it involves measuring and testing the performance and adequacy of the existing controls, and identifying any control gaps or deficiencies that may affect the risk level and response. Before defining a framework, when evaluating risk response, and when updating the risk register are not the best times, as they are more related to the design, selection, or reporting of the controls, respectively, rather than the evaluation of the control effectiveness. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

The primary driver for an organization on a multi-year cloud implementation to publish a cloud security policy is to establish minimum cloud security requirements, as they specify the standards and expectations for the protection of the data and systems in the cloud environment, and ensure the alignment and compliance of the cloud security strategy with the organizational objectives and regulations. The other options are not the primary drivers, as they are more related to the evaluation, enforcement, or education of the cloud securitypolicy, respectively, rather than the establishment of the cloud security policy. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

Ensuring senior management understands the organization’s risk universe in relation to the IT risk management program is primarily to define effective enterprise IT risk appetite and tolerance levels. This understanding is essential for setting the boundaries within which the organization is willing to operate regarding IT risks.

Defining Effective IT Risk Appetite and Tolerance Levels (Answer A):

Purpose: Senior management needs to understand the range and nature of IT risks to set appropriate risk appetite and tolerance levels.

Impact: This enables the organization to make informed decisions about which risks to accept, mitigate, transfer, or avoid.

Alignment: It ensures that the IT risk management strategy is aligned with the overall business objectives and risk posture of the organization.

Comparison with Other Options:

B. To execute the IT risk management strategy in support of business objectives:

Purpose: While important, it follows the definition of risk appetite and tolerance.

Limitation: Without understanding the risk universe, execution may be misaligned.

C. To establish business-aligned IT risk management organizational structures:

Purpose: Structural alignment is crucial but secondary to setting risk appetite and tolerance.

D. To assess the capabilities and maturity of the organization’s IT risk management efforts:

Purpose: This is part of the ongoing process but not the primary purpose of understanding the risk universe.

References:

ISACA CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1, "Governance", which discusses the importance of risk appetite and tolerance in the context of IT risk management.

 Zero Trust Architecture:

Zero Trust is a security concept centered on the belief that organizations should not automatically trust anything inside or outside their perimeters and must verify everything attempting to connect to their systems.

 Basic Tenets of Zero Trust:

The primary principle is "never trust, always verify." This means every access request is authenticated, authorized, and encrypted regardless of where it originates.

Zero Trust requires securing all communication, whether it occurs within the internal network or comes from external sources. This approach prevents lateral movement by potential attackers who have breached the network perimeter.

 Key Components:

Authentication and Authorization:Continuous verification of user identities and access privileges.

Microsegmentation:Dividing the network into small, isolated segments to limit the spread of threats.

Encryption:Ensuring that all data, whether at rest or in transit, is encrypted to protect its confidentiality and integrity.

 Other Options:

Incoming Traffic Inspection:While important, this is just one aspect of Zero Trust.

Security Frameworks and Libraries:These are tools and guidelines to implement security but do not define the core tenets of Zero Trust.

Digital Identities:Implementing digital identities is part of the broader Zero Trust strategy but not a standalone tenet.

 References:

The CISSP Study Guide explains the Zero Trust architecture and its emphasis on securing all communications regardless of network location (Sybex CISSP Study Guide, Chapter 8: Principles of Security Models, Design, and Capabilities)​​.

Risk threshold exceptions are instances when a KRI exceeds or falls below a predefined level or point that triggers an action or a warning. An increase in the number of risk threshold exceptions indicates that the KRIs are not reflecting the current risk exposure or environment accurately or effectively. This may suggest that the KRIs are outdated, irrelevant, or poorly defined. Therefore, the KRIs should be revised to ensure that they are aligned with the organizational objectives, risk appetite, and risk management strategy.

References

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions - SolveXia

•Choosing and Using Key Risk Indicators - Institute of Risk Management

To ensure IT asset protection, having procedures for risk assessments on IT assets is the most important. These procedures enable an organization to systematically identify, evaluate, and mitigate risks associated with its IT assets. This process is crucial for understanding the vulnerabilities and threats that could potentially harm the assets and for implementing the necessary controls to protect them.

Procedures for Risk Assessments on IT Assets (Answer A):

Importance: Regular risk assessments help in identifying vulnerabilities and threats to IT assets, allowing the organization to prioritize and implement appropriate risk mitigation strategies.

Implementation: These procedures should be well-documented and regularly updated to reflect the changing threat landscape and the organization's evolving IT infrastructure.

Outcome: Effective risk assessments ensure that IT assets are protected from potential risks, thereby safeguarding the organization's data, systems, and overall IT environment.

Comparison with Other Options:

B. An IT asset management checklist:

Purpose: This helps in tracking and managing IT assets.

Limitation: It does not address risk assessment and mitigation directly.

C. An IT asset inventory populated by an automated scanning tool:

Purpose: Provides a detailed list of IT assets.

Limitation: While it helps in knowing what assets exist, it does not assess the risks associated with those assets.

D. A plan that includes processes for the recovery of IT assets:

Purpose: Focuses on recovery after an incident.

Limitation: It is reactive rather than proactive in protecting assets.

References:

ISACA CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2, "IT Risk Assessment", which emphasizes the need for systematic risk assessments to manage and protect IT assets effectively.

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks for the best guidance for developing relevant risk scenarios.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Based on industry trends:Important but may not always be directly relevant to the specific organization.

B. Mapped to incident response plans:Useful but secondary to ensuring the scenarios are probable.

C. Related to probable events:Ensures the scenarios are realistic and likely, making them more relevant and actionable.

D. Aligned with risk management capabilities:Important for managing risks but not as critical as ensuring scenarios are probable.

 Detailed Explanation:

Probable Events:Developing risk scenarios that are based on probable events ensures that the organization is prepared for the most likely risks. This makes risk management efforts more practical and focused on real threats.

Relevance:By focusing on probable events, the scenarios will be more relevant to the organization's actual risk environment, making it easier to allocate resources and plan responses effectively.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, emphasizes the importance of identifying and evaluating probable risk events to develop effective risk scenarios​​.

 Understanding Strategic Risk:

Strategic risk refers to the potential losses that can arise from adverse business decisions, improper implementation of decisions, or lack of responsiveness to changes in the business environment.

 Reputational Impact of Cybersecurity Breaches:

A cybersecurity breach can severely damage an organization's reputation, affecting customer trust, investor confidence, and market value.

Such impacts go beyond immediate financial losses and can have long-term strategic implications for the organization's competitive position and strategic objectives.

 Classification of Risk:

Financial Risk:Direct financial losses due to a breach (e.g., fines, legal costs) but does not cover reputational impacts.

Data Risk:Focuses on the loss or compromise of data but not the broader strategic impact.

Operational Risk:Pertains to disruptions in business operations, while reputational damage influences the organization’s strategic direction and goals.

 Strategic Risk and Reputation:

Reputational damage from a cybersecurity breach can lead to a loss of customer base, reduced market share, and difficulties in strategic partnerships, all of which are strategic concerns.

Addressing reputational risk requires strategic planning, proactive communication, and long-term efforts to rebuild trust and credibility.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual highlights that reputational risk is a significant aspect of strategic risk, especially following cybersecurity incidents (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.1.3 Importance and Value of IT Risk Management)​​.

The result of a control working as desired, but having an annual cost of maintenance that exceeds the expected annual loss exposure, is that the control is inefficient, as it implies that the control is not cost-effective or optimal, and may require a review or adjustment. The other options are not the correct results, as they do not reflect the performance or adequacy of the control, but rather the maturity, effectiveness, or optimization of the control, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

The risk practitioner’s best recommendation when one of an organization’s key IT systems cannot be patched because the patches interfere with critical business application functionalities is to identify additional mitigating controls, as they may reduce the likelihood or impact of the vulnerabilities being exploited, and align the residual risk with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. The other options are not the best recommendations, as they may not address the risk adequately, or may introduce unacceptable consequences, such as disrupting the business operations, changing the risk strategy, or accepting excessive risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

The primary concern when IT decides to develop an in-house replacement application for a critical business application is that the business process owner is not an active participant. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for the business process that is supported by the application, and who understands the business requirements, objectives, and expectations of the application. The business process owner should be involved in all stages of the application development lifecycle, from planning, analysis, design, testing, implementation, to maintenance, to ensure that the application meets the business needs and delivers value. Without the active participation of the business process owner, the application development project may face risks such as scope creep, miscommunication, user dissatisfaction, poor quality, or failure.

References:

•ISACA, Auditing IT Risk Associated With Change Management and Application Development1

•ISACA, Auditing Applications, Part 12

Risk appetite determined by senior management reflects the enterprise's willingness to accept certain levels of risk, including noncompliance. This decision underscores the strategic trade-offs made in risk management, a key element inGovernance and Risk Policy Alignment.

Establishing a code of conduct for employee behavior is the most important factor for managing ethical risk, because it defines the standards and expectations for ethical conduct and decision making within the organization, and provides guidance and direction for employees to act in a responsible and ethical manner. Ethical risk is the risk of violating the moral principles or values that govern the behavior and actions of individuals or organizations, such as honesty, integrity, fairness, or respect. A code of conduct is a document that outlines the ethical principles, values, and rules that the organization and its employees must follow, and the consequences of non-compliance. A code of conduct helps to promote a positive and ethical culture within the organization, and to prevent or mitigate the ethical risks that may arise from conflicts of interest, fraud, corruption, discrimination, or other misconduct. Involving senior management in resolving ethical disputes, developing metrics to trend reported ethics violations, and identifying the ethical concerns of each stakeholder are all useful factors for managing ethical risk, but they are not the most important factor, as they do not directly address the ethical conduct and decision making of employees. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.5.1, page 67

The greatest challenge for a risk practitioner during a merger of two organizations is the variances between organizational risk appetites, as they may indicate a significant difference in the risk culture, strategy, and objectives of the two organizations, and may require a complex and lengthy process of alignment and integration. Different taxonomies to categorize risk scenarios, disparate platforms for governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) systems, and dissimilar organizational risk acceptance protocols are not the greatest challenges, as they are more related to the technical, operational, or procedural aspects of risk management, rather than the strategic or cultural aspects of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

The best metric to verify adherence to the policy that requires critical security patches to be deployed in production within three weeks of patch availability is the maximum time gap between patch availability and deployment, as it measures the longest duration that the organization takes to apply the patches, and ensures that it does not exceed the policy limit. The other options are not the best metrics, as they may not reflect the actual or optimal compliance with the policy, or may not be relevant or measurable for the policy, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the information owner is the official with statutory or operational authority for specified information and responsibility for establishing the controls for its generation, collection, processing, dissemination, and disposal. The information owner is also responsible for authorizing access to the information within their domain, based on the principle of least privilege and the need to know. Therefore, the information owner should be accountable for authorizing information system access to internal users12

1: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Study Guide, 4th Edition, page 33 2: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Handbook, 1st Edition, page 25

KRIs provide predictive metrics to monitor changes in risk levels, enabling timely interventions to maintain risks within the organization's appetite. This aligns with theRisk Monitoring and Reportingframework, which emphasizes proactive identification of risk thresholds.

Enforcing segregation of duties between the vendor master file and invoicing is the best process control to mitigate the risk of an employee issuing fraudulent payments to a vendor. This is because segregation of duties is a key internal control that prevents or detects errors, fraud, or abuse by ensuring that no single person can perform incompatible or conflicting tasks. The vendor master file is a database that contains the information and settings for each vendor, such as name, address, bank account, payment terms, etc. Invoicing is the process of generating and sending bills to the vendors for the goods or services they provide. If the same person can access and modify the vendor master file and issue invoices, he or she could create fictitious vendors, alter vendor information, or generate false or duplicate invoices, and then divert the payments to his or her own account. By segregating these duties, the organization can reduce the opportunity and likelihood of such fraudulent activities. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, segregation of duties is one of the key IT control objectives and practices1. According to the web search results, segregation of duties between the vendor master file and invoicing is a common and recommended control to prevent vendor fraud

The greatest benefit of having a mature enterprise architecture (EA) in place is efficient operations, as EA provides a holistic view of the organization’s business processes, information systems, and technology infrastructure, and enables alignment, integration, and optimization of these components. Standards-based policies, audit readiness, and regulatory compliance are also benefits of EA, but they are not the greatest benefit. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 145.

Restricting access to the risk register on a need-to-know basis is important because it contains vulnerabilities and threats that could expose the organization to potential harm or loss if they are disclosed or exploited by unauthorized parties. The risk register is a tool that captures and documents the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes1. The risk register contains sensitive information such as the sources and causes of risk, the potential impacts and consequences of risk, the likelihood and frequency of risk occurrence, and the risk response actions and plans1. If this information is accessed by unauthorized parties, such as competitors, hackers, or malicious insiders, they could use it to launch attacks, sabotage operations, or gain an unfair advantage over the organization. Therefore, access to the risk register should be limited to those who have a legitimate need and authorization to view, modify, or use the information, such as the risk owners, managers, or practitioners

Biased recommendations from AI models can perpetuate or exacerbate organizational risks, especially in decision-making processes, regulatory compliance, and ethical standards. Addressing such concerns is vital under theEmerging Technology Risksdomain in risk management.

Reviewing the impact to the IT environment is the most important task for a risk practitioner to perform after the announcement of a new IT regulatory requirement, because it helps to identify and assess the gaps and risks that the new requirement may introduce or affect. A regulatory requirement is a rule or standard that an organization must comply with to meet the expectations of a regulator, such as a government agency or an industry body. A new regulatory requirement may impose new obligations, restrictions, or expectations on the organization, especially on its IT environment, which supports the business processes and functions. Therefore,reviewing the impact to the IT environment is the first step to understand the implications and implications of the new requirement, and to plan the appropriate actions to achieve compliance. Preparing an IT risk mitigation strategy, escalating to senior management, and performing a cost-benefit analysis are all important tasks to perform after reviewing the impact to the IT environment, but they are not the most important task, as they depend on the results of the impact review. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 153

Conducting interviews with senior management is the best method for determining an enterprise’s current appetite for risk, because it helps to obtain the direct and qualitative input and feedback from the senior management on their expectations and preferences regarding the level and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept or pursue, in relation to its objectives and strategy. Risk appetite is the amount and nature of risk that an enterprise is willing to take in order to achieve its objectives and create value. Risk appetite is influenced by factors such as the enterprise’s culture, values, vision, mission, and strategy, as well as the external environment and stakeholders. Risk appetite may vary depending on the context and situation, and may change over time. Conducting interviews with senior management is the best method, as it helps to understand and capture the current and explicit risk appetite of the enterprise, and to align the risk management process and activities with the senior management’s risk vision and direction. Conducting comparative analysis of peer companies, reviewing brokerage firm assessments, and performing trend analysis using prior annual reports are all possible methods for determining an enterprise’s current appetite for risk, but they are not the best method, as they may provide only indirect, quantitative, or historical information, and may not reflect the current and specific risk appetite of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 45

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

Availability requirements specify the expected level of service and the consequences of non-compliance. They are essential for ensuring that the SaaS provider can meet the business continuity and disaster recovery needs of the customer. Codifying them in the contract creates a clear and enforceable agreement that protects both parties.

References

•ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Domain 3: Risk Response, Section 3.2.3: Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery

•Guideline for Completing Disaster Recovery Plans for SaaS and PaaS Applications (Yale-MSS-3.1 GD.02)

•How to Build a SaaS Disaster Recovery Plan | Acsense

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

An increase in the number of security incidents is the most significant indicator of the need to perform a penetration test, because it suggests that the organization’s IT systems or networks are vulnerable to attacks and may not have adequate security controls in place. A penetration test is a simulated attack on an IT system or network to identify and exploit its weaknesses and evaluate its security posture. A penetration test can help to discover and remediate the vulnerabilities that may have caused or contributed to the security incidents, and to prevent or reduce the likelihood and impact of future incidents. An increase in the number of high-risk audit findings, an increase in the percentage of turnover in IT personnel, and an increase in the number of infrastructure changes are all possible indicators of the need to perform a penetration test, but they are not the most significant indicator, as they do not directly reflect the actual or potential occurrence of security incidents. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 200

Reporting the activity to the supervisor is the first thing that the risk practitioner should do when learning that a risk owner has been accepting gifts from a supplier of IT products. This is because accepting gifts from a supplier of IT products can create a conflict of interest, compromise the integrity and objectivity of the risk owner, and violate the organizational ethics policies. Reporting the activity to the supervisor can help ensure that the issue is escalated to the appropriate authority, investigated, and resolved in a timely and transparent manner. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk response techniques is to report the risk to the relevant stakeholders, such as the supervisor1. According to the web search results, reporting the activity to the supervisor is a common and recommended action when encountering a potential ethical violation in the workplace

 Business Impact Assessment (BIA):

BIA identifies and evaluates the potential effects of interruptions to critical business operations. It helps determine the priority of risk mitigation efforts based on the potential impact on business functions.

BIA provides detailed information on which processes and systems are most critical to the organization's operations and their respective impact levels.

 Prioritizing Risk Mitigation:

The results of a BIA guide decision-makers in prioritizing which risks to address first based on their potential to disrupt critical business operations.

Risks that could cause significant operational, financial, or reputational damage are prioritized higher.

 Comparing Other Factors:

Cost of Risk Mitigation:Important but secondary to understanding the impact on business operations.

Asset Criticality:Relevant but typically part of the BIA process.

Acceptable Risk Level:Defines the threshold but does not prioritize specific risks.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses how BIA facilitates risk prioritization by identifying critical processes and their impacts (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.7 Business Impact Analysis)​​.

Identifying risk events is essential for developing realistic and relevant risk scenarios. This step enables the creation of scenarios that reflect actual vulnerabilities and potential disruptions, adhering to the CRISC's focus onRisk Identification.

According to the FIC Article by FSCA, accountable institutions remain fully accountable, responsible and liable for any compliance failures that may result from or be associated with an outsourcing arrangement and as such, liability and/or culpability for non-compliance with the FIC Act obligations cannot be transferred to a third-party service provider2. Therefore, even if a business process is outsourced to a cloud service provider, the organization still has the ultimate responsibility and accountability for the risk associated with the outsourced process. The other options are not correct, as they imply that the cloud service provider can take over the accountability or responsibility for the risk, or that the organization can mitigate the risk by acquiring insurance, which is not the case.

Monitoring the average time to complete tasks and monthly reporting of the findings during the month-end close process aligns with the definition of a Key Performance Indicator (KPI).

Understanding KPIs:

Performance Measurement:KPIs are used to measure how effectively a company is achieving its key business objectives. Monitoring the average time to complete tasks during the month-end close process provides a performance metric.

Tracking Efficiency:By reporting these findings monthly, management can track the efficiency and performance of the system load capabilities.

Specific Measure:

Task Completion Time:The average time to complete tasks is a specific, measurable indicator of performance. It helps in understanding how well the system handles load and identifies areas for improvement.

Continuous Improvement:Regular monitoring and reporting encourage continuous improvement, which is a core aspect of using KPIs.

References:

According to ISACA's guidelines on performance measurement, KPIs are critical for tracking the efficiency and effectiveness of processes and systems. They provide tangible metrics that help in decision-making and performance improvement.

Payroll system risk mitigation plans are the actions that are taken to reduce or eliminate the risk associated with payroll processing. When a migration from an in-house developed system to an external cloud-based solution is affecting a previously rated key risk scenario related to payroll processing, the first part of the risk register that should be updated is the payroll system risk mitigation plans. This is because the migration may introduce new risks or change the existing risks, and the risk mitigation plans may need to be revised or replaced accordingly. Updating the payroll system risk mitigation plans can help ensure that the risk level is acceptable and the payroll process is secure and reliable. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk treatment techniques is to update the risk action plan, which is a document that outlines the risk mitigation plans1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, updating the risk mitigation plans is the correct answer to this question2.

Payroll system risk factors, payroll process owner, and payroll administrative controls are not the first part of the risk register that should be updated when a migration is affecting a key risk scenario. Payroll system risk factors are the sources or causes of risk, such as threats, vulnerabilities, or uncertainties. Payroll process owner is the person who is responsible for the payroll process and its outcomes. Payroll administrative controls are the policies, procedures, or guidelines that govern the payroll process. These parts of the risk register may also need to be updated, but they are not as urgent or critical as the risk mitigation plans. Updating the risk factors, process owner, and administrative controls can help identify, assess, and monitor the risk, but they do not directly address the risk response. The risk response is the most important part of the risk management process, as it determines how the risk is handled and controlled.

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

The proposed benefit that is most likely to influence senior management approval to reallocate budget for a new security initiative is the reduction in residual risk, as it indicates the expected value and outcome of the initiative in terms of reducing the risk exposure and impact to the level that is aligned with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. The other options are not the most likely benefits, as they may not reflect the actual or optimal risk reduction, or may not be relevant or measurable for the senior management, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

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

According to the three lines of defense model, the responsibility for managing risk and controls resides with the operational management, which forms the first line of defense. The operational management is the function that owns and manages risk as part of their accountability for achieving objectives. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, mitigating, and reporting on risks and controls within their areas ofoperation. They are also responsible for implementing and maintaining effective internal controls and ensuring compliance with policies, standards, and regulations.

References:

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

•Internal audit: three lines of defence model explained2

 The risk owner should be assigned accountability for monitoring risk levels, as they have the authority and responsibility to manage the risk and its associated controls, and to report on the risk status and performance. The risk practitioner, the business manager, and the control owner are not the best choices, as they have different roles and responsibilities related to risk identification, assessment, response, and reporting, but they are not accountable for the risk and its monitoring. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

Well-developed, data-driven risk measurements should be focused on providing a forward-looking view, as they enable the organization to anticipate and prepare for the potential changes and impacts of the risk level and exposure, and to take proactive and appropriate actions to address the risk. The other options are not the characteristics of well-developed, data-driven risk measurements, as they may not reflect the strategic, comprehensive, or timely aspects of the risk measurements, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

Greatest Privacy Risk:

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

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

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

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

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

Best Practices:

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

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

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

References:

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

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

Establishing executive management support is the most important success factor when introducing risk management in an organization. This is because executive management support can help ensure that risk management is aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, as well as provide the necessary resources, authority, and accountability for risk management activities. Executive management support can also help foster a risk-aware culture, promote stakeholder engagement, and facilitate risk communication and reporting. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key elements of IT governance is to obtain executive management support and commitment for risk management1. According to the web search results, executive management support is a critical success factor for risk management in various contexts and industries234.

Assessing risk scenarios is the starting point when performing a risk analysis for an asset. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could cause harm or loss to an asset. Assessing risk scenarios involves identifying the sources and causes of risk, the potential impacts and consequences of risk, and the likelihood and frequency of risk occurrence. Assessing risk scenarios can help establish the risk context, scope, and criteria for the asset, and provide the basis for further risk analysis steps, such as evaluating threats, assessing controls, and updating the risk register. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, assessing risk scenarios is the first step in the IT risk assessment process1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, assessing risk scenarios is the correct answer to this question

Confirming that the risk has been mitigated to the intended level is paramount to ensure that the risk response was effective. This ties toRisk Mitigation and Treatment, ensuring that controls implemented have reduced the risk to within the organization's appetite. Updating registers or recalibrating tolerances comes secondary to verifying the effectiveness of mitigation.

 The most important information to include when reporting the effectiveness of risk management to senior management is the changes in residual risk levels against acceptable levels, as it indicates how well the risk management process and activities have reduced the risk exposure and impact to the level that is aligned with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. The other options are not the most important information, as they are more related to the drivers, factors, or outcomes of risk management, respectively, rather than the effectiveness or value of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

The risk practitioner’s first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls should be A. Determine whether the impact is outside the risk appetite1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk culture, strategy, and values2

When an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, it means that the controls are not providing the expected level of protection or assurance for the information assets or processes. This may result in increased exposure or vulnerability to threats, or reduced ability to achieve objectives. Therefore, the risk practitioner should first determine whether the impact of the ineffective controls is outside the risk appetite, as this would indicate the need for urgent action or escalation3

The other options are not the first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, because:

•B. Requesting a formal acceptance of risk from senior management may be appropriate if the impact of the ineffective controls is within the risk appetite, and the organization decides to accept the risk as it is. However, this should not be the first course of action, as it may not address the root cause of the ineffective controls, or the potential consequences or opportunities for improvement4

•C. Reporting the ineffective control for inclusion in the next audit report may be part of the risk communication and reporting process, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may delay the resolution or mitigation of the issue, or the implementation of corrective actions. Moreover, the next audit report may not be timely or relevant for the decision-makers or stakeholders who need to be informed of the ineffective controls5

•D. Deploying a compensating control to address the identified deficiencies may be a possible risk response option, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may require further analysis, evaluation, and approval. Moreover, deploying a compensating control may not be the most effective or efficient solution, as it may introduce additional complexity, cost, or risk.

1: CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 100003 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 28 3: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 223 4: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 224 5: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 225 : CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 226

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 .

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

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.

The most important consideration when selecting KPIs for control monitoring is that the source information is consistently available, meaning that it can be obtained regularly, reliably, and timely from the same or equivalent data sources. This ensures that the KPIs can measure the performance of the controls over time and across different units or functions, and provide meaningful and comparable results. Source information that is acquired at stable cost, tailored by removing outliers, or readily quantifiable are also desirable, but not as essential as consistency.

References:

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

•ISACA, Performance Measurement Metrics for IT Governance2

Ensuring Timely Recovery of Critical Business Operations:

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

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

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

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

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

Best Practices:

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

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

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

References:

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

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

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the most comprehensive approach to capture the risk scenario of collecting and storing credit card information is event tree analysis (ETA). ETA is a forward, top-down, logical modeling technique that explores the responses and outcomes of a single initiating event, such as a data breach or a cyberattack. ETA can help to identify all possible consequences of the scenario, such as financial losses, reputational damages, legal liabilities, regulatory penalties, and customer dissatisfaction. ETA can also help to assess the probabilities of the outcomes and the effectiveness of the controls and mitigation strategies12

1: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Study Guide, 4th Edition, page 33 2: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Handbook, 1st Edition, page 25

 The most effective way to promote organization-wide awareness of data security in response to an increase in regulatory penalties for data leakage is to require training on the data handling policy, as it educates the employees on the importance, requirements, and procedures of data protection, and enhances their knowledge and skills to prevent, detect, and respond to data leakage incidents. Enforcingsanctions for noncompliance with security procedures, conducting organization-wide phishing simulations, and requiring regular testing of the data breach response plan are not the most effective ways, as they are more related to the enforcement, evaluation, or improvement of the data security, respectively, rather than the promotion of the data security awareness. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

Backups are the best control to mitigate the impact of a failed IT system upgrade project that has resulted in the corruption of an organization’s asset inventory database, as they allow the organization to restore the data from a previous state and resume normal operations. Encryption, authentication, and configuration are not the best controls, as they do not address the data corruption issue, but rather the datasecurity, access, and quality issues, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 153.

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

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

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

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the control owners in the IT department should determine whether risk responses still effectively address risk after a restructuring and outsourcing of certain functions. This is because the restructuring and outsourcing may have changed the risk profile, the control environment, and the control activities of the IT department. The control owners should review the existing risk responses and evaluate if they are still appropriate, adequate, and efficient in mitigating the risks associated with the outsourced functions. The control owners should also monitor the performance and compliance of the service providers and ensure that the contractual obligations and service level agreements are met12

1: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Study Guide, 4th Edition, page 33 2: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Handbook, 1st Edition, page 25

 Segmenting the application within the existing network is the most effective control to manage a legacy application that relies on software that has reached the end of extended support, as it isolates the application from the rest of the network and reduces the attack surface and the potential impact of a compromise. Subscribing to threat intelligence, applying patches for a newer version of the application, and increasing the frequency of regular system and data backups are not the most effective controls, as theymay not address the root cause of the risk, or may introduce additional costs or complexities, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 153.

Notifying the incident response team ensures immediate action to contain and remediate the malware spread, limiting further impact. This aligns withIncident Response and Containmentprotocols under risk management.

The primary focus of an ongoing risk awareness program should be to enable better risk-based decisions, as this can help the organization to achieve its objectives, optimize its performance, and manage its risks effectively. An ongoing risk awareness program is a process of educating, communicating, and engaging the stakeholders about the organization’s risk management framework, methodology, and practices. An ongoing risk awareness program can help the stakeholders to understand the risk context, criteria, appetite, and profile of the organization, and to identify, assess, treat, monitor, and review the risks that may affect their roles and responsibilities. By doing so, an ongoing risk awareness program can empower the stakeholders to make informed and rational decisions that balance the benefits and costs of risk-taking, and that align with the organization’s strategy and goals.

References:

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

•ISACA, Managing Human Risk Requires More Than Just Awareness Training2

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

The recovery time objective (RTO) is the planned recovery time for a process or system which should occur before reaching the business process’s maximum tolerable downtime (MTD) or maximum allowable outage (MAO). The RTO must be aligned with the MAO to ensure that the continuity of the business process is not compromised by a prolonged outage. The RTO is determined by the business impact analysis (BIA) based on the criticality and urgency of the business process and its dependencies. The RTO also helps to select and implement appropriate recovery methods and procedures for the process or system. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 6: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 6.2: IT Risk Reporting, Page 307; What is the difference between RPO, RTO, and MTD? - Tandem Blog.

•A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions and resources needed to implement the chosen risk response strategy for each identified risk1. A risk response strategy is the way an organization decides to address a risk, such as avoiding, accepting, mitigating, or transferring it2.

•Sometimes, a risk treatment plan may not be completed on time due to various reasons, such as delays, resource constraints, technical issues, or changes in the risk environment. In such cases, the best approach is to implement compensating controls until the preferred action can be completed3.

•Compensating controls are alternative or additional controls that provide a similar level of assurance or protection as the original controls, when the latter are not feasible or sufficient3. Compensating controls can help to reduce the residual risk or maintain the risk within the acceptable level until the risk treatment plan is fully executed3.

•For example, if the risk treatment plan involves installing a firewall to protect the network from external threats, but the firewall is not available or compatible with the current system, a compensating control could be to use encryption, authentication, or monitoring tools to secure the network traffic until the firewall is installed3.

•Implementing compensating controls is better than the other options because it allows the organization to continue with the risk treatment plan while maintaining an adequate level of security and compliance. The other options are not advisable for the following reasons:

oReplacing the action owner with a more experienced individual (option A) may not solve the problem if the issue is not related to the action owner’s competence or performance. Moreover, replacing the action owner may cause disruption, confusion, or conflict in the risk management process.

oChanging the risk response strategy of the relevant risk to risk avoidance (option C) may not be possible or desirable if the risk is associated with a critical or beneficial activity or process. Risk avoidance means eliminating the source of the risk or discontinuing the activity that causes the risk2. This may result in losing opportunities, benefits, or value for the organization.

oDeveloping additional key risk indicators (KRIs) until the preferred action can be completed (option D) may not be effective or efficient if the existing KRIs are already sufficient to monitor and measure the risk. KRIs are metrics or data points that provide early warning signals or information about the level or trend of a risk456. Developing additional KRIs may not reduce the risk or improve the risk treatment plan, but may increase the complexity and cost of the risk management process.

References =

•Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions - SolveXia

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•Complete Guide to Key Risk Indicators — RiskOptics

•Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips

•Risk response strategies: mitigation, transfer, avoidance, acceptance - Twproject: project management software,resource management, time tracking, planning, Gantt, kanban

•Risk Response Strategies: A Guide to Navigating Uncertainty - Teamly

•Compensating Controls | Audit and Compliance | Pathlock

The product owner should own the associated risk when contracting with a cloud service provider to support the deployment of a new product. The product owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for defining the product vision, requirements, and priorities. The product owner also has the accountability for the business value and outcomes of the product. Therefore, the product owner should be the one who identifies, assesses, and manages the risks related to the cloud service provider, such as security, compliance, performance, and quality. The product owner should also collaborate with the other stakeholders, such as the head of EA, the IT risk manager, and the information security manager, to ensure that the cloud service provider meets the organization’s standards and expectations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: IT Risk Mitigation, Section 5.3: IT Risk Mitigation Strategies and Approaches, Page 254; Best Practices to Manage Risks in the Cloud - ISACA.

The operational risk associated with attacks on a web application should be owned by the individual in charge of the business function, because they are the primary stakeholder and beneficiary of the web application, and they are responsible for defining and achieving the business objectives and requirements that the web application supports or enables. An operational risk is a risk of loss or damage resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people, or systems, or from external events. An attack on a web application is a type of operational risk that involves a malicious or unauthorized attempt to compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the web application, such as a denial-of-service attack, a SQL injection attack, or a cross-site scripting attack. A web application is an application that runs on a web server and can be accessed or used through a web browser, such as an online shopping site, a social media platform, or a web-based email service. A business function is a set of activities or tasks that support or enable the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, such as marketing, sales, or customer service. A risk owner is a person or role that has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk, and to implement and monitor the risk response and controls. The individual in charge of the business function should be the risk owner, as they have the best understanding and interest of the web application and its business value and impact, and they have the ability and responsibility to manage the operational risk associated with the attacks on the web application. The individual in charge of network operations, the cybersecurity function, or application development are all possible candidates for the risk owner, but they are not the best choice, as they may not have the same level of stake and influence in the web application and its business objectives and requirements, and they may have different or conflicting priorities or perspectives on the operational risk and its management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 101

The most important characteristic of a key risk indicator (KRI) to enable decision-making is illustrating changes in risk trends, as it provides a clear and timely indication of the direction and magnitude of the risk level and exposure, and enables the stakeholders to take proactive and appropriate actions to address the risk. The other options are not the most important characteristics, as they are more related to the monitoring, measurement, or identification of the risk, respectively, rather than the illustration of the risk trends. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

Shutting down operations to prevent exposure to risk exemplifies risk avoidance, which eliminates the activity causing the risk. This aligns withRisk Treatment Strategies.

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)

The most important factor when reporting to senior management on changes in trends related to IT risk is materiality. Materiality is the extent to which the information reported is significant, relevant, and useful for decision-making purposes. Materiality helps to prioritize the most important risks and communicate them effectively to senior management12

1: Integrating KRIs and KPIs for Effective Technology Risk Management - ISACA 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 271

Inherent risk is the most likely to increase as a result of the new initiative, because it is the risk that exists before any controls or mitigating factors are applied. Inherent risk reflects the natural or raw level of exposure that the organization faces from a given risk source or scenario. Accepting credit card payments from customers via the corporate website introduces new sources and types of risk, such as fraud, theft, data breach, or non-compliance, that increase the inherent risk level of the organization. Risk tolerance, risk appetite, and residual risk are all related to the risk management process, but they are not the most likely to increase as a result of the new initiative, as they depend on the organization’s risk strategy, objectives, and controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 51

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

This KPI measures how well the server patch management process meets the agreed-upon standards and expectations for timeliness, quality, and security. It reflects the efficiency and effectiveness of the patch deployment and the compliance with the patch policy. It also helps to identify and address any issues or delays that may affect the patching performance.

References

•Patch Management KPI Metrics - Motadata

•KPI Examples for Patch and Vulnerability Management - Heimdal Security

•Measuring the Effectiveness of Your Patch Management Strategy - Automox

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

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

 Building Key Risk Indicators (KRIs):

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

 Importance of Representative Data Sets:

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

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

 Impact on KRIs:

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

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

 Comparing Other Data Sources:

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

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

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

 References:

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

 Inaccurate risk ratings would most likely cause management to unknowingly accept excessive risk, as they may not reflect the true level of risk exposure and impact, and may lead to inappropriate risk responses or decisions. Satisfactory audit results, risk tolerance being set too low, and lack of preventive controls are not the most likely causes, as they may indicate a different risk management issue, such as over-reliance on audit assurance, misalignment of risk tolerance and appetite, or insufficient risk mitigation, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

Independent Assessment:

Objective Evaluation: An assessment by a qualified independent party ensures that the evaluation of the new controls is unbiased and thorough. It provides a credible verification of the control's effectiveness.

Expertise and Standards: Independent assessors bring specialized expertise and follow established standards and best practices, ensuring a comprehensive review of the control implementation.

Validation and Assurance: This assessment provides assurance to stakeholders that the controls are functioning as intended and meet the required security and operational standards.

Comparison with Other Options:

Post-Implementation Review by Key Personnel: While valuable, this review may lack the objectivity and thoroughness of an independent assessment.

Senior Management Sign-Off: Sign-off from senior management is important but does not provide the detailed validation of control effectiveness that an independent assessment offers.

Daily Operation of Robots without Human Interference: This indicates operational stability but does not verify that all controls are functioning as intended.

Best Practices:

Regular Independent Assessments: Schedule regular independent assessments to continuously validate the effectiveness of controls.

Comprehensive Reporting: Ensure that the independent assessment includes comprehensive reporting on findings and recommendations for improvement.

Follow-Up Actions: Implement any recommended actions from the assessment to address identified gaps or weaknesses in the controls.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Recommends independent assessments as a best practice for validating control effectiveness and ensuring comprehensive risk management.

ISACA Standards: Support the use of independent assessments to provide objective and credible evaluations of control implementations.

Regulatory requirements should be the primary basis for deciding whether to disclose information related to risk events that impact external stakeholders, because they define the rules or standards that the organization must comply with to meet the expectations of the regulators, such as government agencies or industry bodies, and to avoid legal or reputational consequences. A risk event is an occurrence or incident that may cause harm or damage to the organization or its objectives, such as a natural disaster, a cyberattack, or a human error. An external stakeholder is a person or group that has an interest or influence in the organization or its activities, but is not part of the organization, such as customers, suppliers, partners, investors, or regulators. Disclosing information related to risk events that impact external stakeholders is a process of communicating or reporting the relevant facts or details of the risk events to the affected or interested parties. Disclosing information related to risk events may have benefits, such as maintaining trust, transparency, and accountability, but it may also have drawbacks, such as exposing vulnerabilities, losing competitive advantage, or inviting litigation. Therefore, regulatory requirements should be the primary basis for deciding whether to disclose information, as they provide the legal and ethical obligations and boundaries for the disclosure process. Stakeholder preferences, contractual requirements, and management assertions are all possible factors for deciding whether to disclose information related to risk events, but they are not the primary basis, as they may vary or conflict depending on the situation or context, and may not override the regulatory requirements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

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

When an organization restructures its business processes, the first step in revising the BCP is to identify new potentially disruptive scenarios that may affect the continuity of the critical functions and processes. This can be done by conducting a risk assessment or a business impact analysis (BIA) to determine the likelihood and impact of various threats and vulnerabilities on the organization’s objectives and operations. By identifying new potentially disruptive scenarios, the organization can then update its recovery strategies, objectives, and plans accordingly.

References:

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

•ISACA, IT Business Continuity/Disaster Recovery Audit Program, 2021, p. 52

IT assets are the resources that support the organization’s business processes and objectives, such as hardware, software, data, and information. IT assets are the primary targets of IT risk, as they may be exposed to threats, vulnerabilities, and control deficiencies that could compromise their confidentiality, integrity, availability, or value. Therefore, identifying and classifying IT assets is the first step in developing relevant IT risk scenarios, as it helps to determine the scope, boundaries, and dependencies of the IT risk environment.

The other options are not the first things to review for identifying IT risk scenarios. Technology threats (A) are the potential sources of harm or damage to IT assets, such as natural disasters, cyberattacks, human errors, or sabotage. Technology threats are important to consider, but they are not the starting point for IT risk scenarios, as they depend on the context and characteristics of the IT assets. Security vulnerabilities © are the weaknesses or flaws in IT assets or controls that could be exploited by threats, such as outdated software, misconfigured systems, or insufficient encryption. Security vulnerabilities are also important to identify, but they are not the first thing to review, as they are specific to the IT assets and their configurations. IT risk register (D) is a document that records and tracks the identified IT risks, their analysis, evaluation, and response. IT risk register is a result of the IT risk assessment process, not an input to it.

The lack of due diligence for the recommended cloud vendor should be of greatest concern to the risk practitioner, because it exposes the organization to potential risks and issues related to the security, reliability, performance, and compliance of the cloud service provider. Due diligence is a process of conducting a thorough investigation and evaluation of a potential vendor or partner before entering into a contractual relationship. Due diligence helps to verify the vendor’s credentials, capabilities, reputation, and track record, and to identify any red flags or gaps that may affect the quality or suitability of the service. Cloud computing is a model of delivering IT services over the internet, where the service provider owns and manages the IT infrastructure, platforms, or applications, and the customer pays only for the resources or functions they use. Cloud computing can offer cost savings, scalability, and flexibility for the business, but it also introduces new risks and challenges, such as data privacy, security breaches, vendor lock-in, service outages, or regulatory compliance. Therefore, performing due diligence for the recommended cloud vendor is essential to ensure that the organization’s expectations and requirements are met, and that the risks and issues are identified and addressed. The business introducing new SaaS solutions without IT approval, the maintenance of IT infrastructure being outsourced to an IaaS provider, and the architecture responsibilities not being clearly defined are all possible concerns for the risk practitioner, but they are not the greatest concern, as they can be mitigated or resolved with appropriate controls, policies, or agreements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 183

 Business process owners are the most important to include in the assessment of existing IT risk scenarios, as they have the authority and responsibility to manage the business processes and their associated risks and controls, and to provide the business perspective and requirements for the IT risk scenarios. Technology subject matter experts, business users of IT systems, and risk management consultants are not the most important to include, as they may have different roles and responsibilities related to the technical, operational, or advisory aspects of IT risk scenarios, respectively, but they do not own the business processes or the IT risk scenarios. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

The primary objective of risk management is to achieve business objectives, as risk management involves identifying, assessing, responding, and monitoring the risks that may affect the desired outcomes and performance of the organization, and aligning them with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. Identifying and analyzing risk, minimizing business disruptions, and identifying threats and vulnerabilities are not the primary objectives, as they are more related to the process, outcome, or source of risk management, respectively, rather than the purpose or value of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

Perform a Risk Assessment:

Immediate Action: The first step when discovering a non-compliant implementation is to understand the potential risks it poses to the organization. This involves identifying threats, vulnerabilities, and potential impacts of the non-fungible token (NFT) asset program.

Risk Identification and Evaluation: Assess the new program’s impact on the organization’s risk profile. Determine if it introduces significant security, compliance, or operational risks.

Documentation and Reporting: Document the findings and present them to senior management along with recommendations for mitigation or further action.

Comparison with Other Options:

Report the Infraction: Reporting is necessary but should follow the risk assessment to provide a clear understanding of the implications and necessary mitigations.

Conduct Risk Awareness Training: Training is preventive and should be part of a long-term strategy, not the immediate response to a specific incident.

Discontinue the Process: Discontinuing the process may be a necessary step after assessing the risk, but the assessment must come first to justify such an action.

Best Practices:

Comprehensive Risk Assessment: Ensure that the risk assessment covers all aspects, including financial, reputational, and regulatory risks.

Stakeholder Involvement: Involve relevant stakeholders in the assessment process to gather diverse perspectives and ensure a thorough evaluation.

Actionable Recommendations: Provide clear, actionable recommendations based on the risk assessment findings.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Discusses the importance of performing risk assessments when new systems or processes are implemented without following established procedures.

ISACA Standards: Emphasize the need for a systematic approach to identifying and assessing risks introduced by new initiatives or changes within the organization.

The first step is to assess whether the ineffective controls result in residual risk exceeding the risk appetite. This establishes the urgency and priority of remediation efforts and ensures alignment with enterprise risk thresholds, reflecting principles ofRisk Assessment and Prioritization.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 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 best course of action when a risk assessment has identified that an organization may not be in compliance with industry regulations is to conduct a gap analysis against compliance criteria, which is a method of comparing the current state of compliance with the desired or required state of compliance. Conducting a gap analysis against compliance criteria helps to:

Identify and evaluate the differences or discrepancies between the compliance requirements and the actual compliance practices and capabilities

Assess the impact and severity of the compliance gaps on the organization’s objectives and performance

Prioritize the compliance gaps based on their urgency and importance

Develop and implement appropriate actions or measures to close or reduce the compliance gaps

Monitor and measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the actions or measures taken to address the compliance gaps

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 34-351

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Database Security: Attacks and Solutions | SpringerLink2

2: Unauthorised Modification of Data With Intent to Cause Impairment3

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia4

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva5

5: Database Access Control - Wikipedia6

6: Database Access Control: Best Practices for Database Security7

7: Data Reconciliation - Wikipedia8

8: Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection9

9: Edit Check - Wikipedia

Edit Checks: A Data Quality Tool

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the organization’s culture is the most important factor affecting risk management in an organization, as it influences the risk awareness, risk attitude, risk behavior and risk communication of all stakeholders. The organization’s culture is defined as the shared values, beliefs, norms and expectations that guide the actions and interactions of the members of the organization. The organization’s culture affects how risk management is perceived, supported, implemented and integrated within the organization. A strong risk culture is one that:

Aligns with the organization’s vision, mission, strategy and objectives

Promotes a common understanding of risk and its implications for the organization

Encourages the identification, assessment, response and monitoring of risks at all levels

Fosters a proactive, collaborative and transparent approach to risk management

Empowers and rewards the stakeholders for taking ownership and accountability of risks

Enables continuous learning and improvement of risk management capabilities and maturity

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Culture, pp. 23-251

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The 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 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk Assessment for the Production Process1

2: Risk Assessment for Industrial Equipment2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), key risk indicator (KRI) thresholds are the most likely elements of a risk register to change as a result of change in management’s risk appetite, as they reflect the acceptable levels of risk exposure for the organization. KRI thresholds are the values or ranges that trigger an alert or a response when the actual KRI values deviate from the expected or desired values. KRI thresholds help to:

Monitor and measure the current risk levels and performance of the IT assets and processes

Identify and report any risk issues or incidents that may require attention or action

Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response actions and controls

Align the risk management activities and decisions with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

If the management’s risk appetite changes, the KRI thresholds may need to be adjusted accordingly to ensure that the risk register reflects the current risk preferences and expectations of the organization.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 217-2181

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The 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 includesensuring 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

A security incident handling process is a set of procedures and activities that aim to identify, analyze, contain, eradicate, recover from, and learn from security incidents that affect the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information assets12.

The maturity of a security incident handling process is the degree to which the process is defined, managed, measured, controlled, and improved, and the extent to which it meets the organization’s objectives and expectations34.

The best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the maturity of a security incident handling process is the number of recurring security incidents, which is the frequency or rate of security incidents that are repeated or reoccur after being resolved or closed56.

The number of recurring security incidents is the best KPI because it reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the security incident handling process, and the ability of the process to prevent or reduce the recurrence of security incidents through root cause analysis, corrective actions, and continuous improvement56.

The number of recurring security incidents is also the best KPI because it is directly related to the organization’s objectives and expectations, such as minimizing the impact and cost of security incidents, enhancing the security posture and resilience of the organization, and complying with the relevant standards and regulations56.

The other options are not the best KPIs, but rather possible metrics that may support or complement the measurement of the maturity of the security incident handling process. For example:

The number of security incidents escalated to senior management is a metric that indicates the severity or complexity of security incidents, and the involvement or awareness of the senior management in the security incident handling process56. However, this metric doesnot measure the effectiveness or efficiency of the process, or the ability of the process to prevent or reduce security incidents56.

The number of resolved security incidents is a metric that indicates the output or outcome of the security incident handling process, and the performance or productivity of the security incident handling team56. However, this metric does not measure the quality or sustainability of the resolution, or the ability of the process to prevent or reduce security incidents56.

The number of newly identified security incidents is a metric that indicates the input or demand of the security incident handling process, and the capability or capacity of the security incident detection and identification mechanisms56. However, this metric does not measure the effectiveness or efficiency of the process, or the ability of the process to prevent or reduce security incidents56. References =

1: Computer Security Incident Handling Guide, NIST Special Publication 800-61, Revision 2, August 2012

2: ISO/IEC 27035:2016 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security incident management

3: Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) for Services, Version 1.3, November 2010

4: COBIT 2019 Framework: Introduction and Methodology, ISACA, 2018

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), periodically reviewing controls per the risk treatment plan would best help to ensure that identified risk is efficiently managed, as it involves verifying the effectiveness and efficiency of the implemented risk response actions and identifying any gaps or changes in the risk profile. Periodically reviewing controls per the risk treatment plan helps to:

Confirm that the controls are operating as intended and producing the desired outcomes

Detect any deviations, errors, or weaknesses in the controls and their performance

Evaluate the adequacy and appropriateness of the controls in relation to the current risk environment and the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address any issues or deficiencies in the controls

Update the risk register and the risk treatment plan to reflect the current risk status and the residual risk levels

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 215-2161

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), monitoring key access control performance indicators is the best way to provide an early warning that network access of terminated employees is not being revoked in accordance with the service level agreement (SLA), as it measures the effectiveness and efficiency of the access control process and its alignment with the SLA objectives and requirements. The SLA is a contract that defines the expectations and responsibilities of the service provider and the service recipient in terms of the quality, availability, and scope of the service. Monitoring key access control performance indicators helps to:

Evaluate the extent to which the access control process has met the SLA targets and standards

Identify and report any deviations, errors, or breaches in the access control process and its compliance with the SLA

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address the issues or findings in the access control process

Communicate and coordinate the monitoring results and recommendations with the relevant stakeholders, such as the service provider, the service recipient, and the senior management

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 217-2181

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

6: Security Incident Reporting and Response, ISACA, 2019

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

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

System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, University of Toronto, 2017

System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, ISACA, 2019

User Access Management and Control, University of Toronto, 2017

User Access Management and Control, ISACA, 2019

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

Outsourcing IT security operations is a common practice that can provide benefits such as cost savings, access to specialized skills, and improved service quality12. However, outsourcing also introduces risks such as loss of control, dependency, contractual issues, and service failures12.

When an organization outsources its IT security operations to a third party, it does not transfer the accountability for the risk associated with the outsourced operations. Accountability is the obligation to answer for the execution of one’s assigned responsibilities34.

The organization’s management is ultimately accountable for the risk associated with the outsourced operations, as they are responsible for defining the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, and objectives, and for ensuring that the organization’s IT security operations are aligned with them34.

The organization’s management is also accountable for selecting, contracting, and overseeing the third party, and for ensuring that the third party meets the agreed service levels, standards, and compliance requirements34.

The organization’s management is also accountable for monitoring and reporting the risk associated with the outsourced operations, and for taking corrective actions when necessary34.

The other options are not ultimately accountable, but rather have different roles and responsibilities in relation to the outsourced operations. For example:

The third party’s management is responsible for delivering the IT security services according to the contract, and for managing the risk within their own organization34. They are accountable to the organization’s management, but not to the organization’s stakeholders.

The control operators at the third party are responsible for implementing and operating the IT security controls according to the service specifications, and for reporting any issues orincidents to the organization’s management34. They are accountable to the third party’s management, but not to the organization’s management or stakeholders.

The organization’s vendor management office is responsible for facilitating the relationship between the organization and the third party, and for supporting the organization’s management in the outsourcing process34. They are accountable to the organization’s management, but not for the risk associated with the outsourced operations. References =

1: Outsourcing IT Security: A Risk Management Perspective, ISACA Journal, Volume 2, 2019

2: The Cyber Security Risks Of Outsourcing, Cybersecurity Intelligence, January 4, 2022

3: Accountability for Information Security Roles and Responsibilities, Part 1, ISACA Journal, Volume 5, 2019

4: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

Detailed Explanation:TheRecovery Point Objective (RPO)specifies the maximum tolerable period in which data might be lost due to an incident. In this case, the organization is indicating that it cannot afford to lose more than three hours of data, defining its RPO.

The risk practitioner’s primary focus when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk should be the level of residual risk, because this indicates the amount and type of risk that remains after applying the controls, and whether it is acceptable or not. Residual risk is the risk that is left over after the risk responseactions have been taken, such as implementing or improving controls. Controls are the measures or actions that are designed and performed to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of a risk event, or to exploit the opportunities that a risk event may create. The adequacy of controls to mitigate risk depends on how well they address the root causes or sources of the risk, and how effectively and efficiently they reduce the risk exposure and value. The level of residual risk reflects the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it shows the gap between the inherent risk and the actual risk, and whether it is within the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. The risk practitioner should focus on the level of residual risk when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk, as it helps to evaluate and compare the benefits and costs of the controls, and to decide on the best risk response strategy, such as accepting, avoiding, transferring, or further reducing the risk. The other options are less important or relevant to focus on when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk. Sensitivity analysis is a technique that measures how the risk value changes when one or more input variables are changed, such as the probability, impact, or control effectiveness. Sensitivity analysis can help to identify and prioritize the most influential or critical variables that affect the risk value, and to test the robustness or reliability of the risk assessment. However, sensitivity analysis does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the risk acceptance criteria. Cost-benefit analysis is a technique that compares the expected benefits and costs of a control or a risk response action, and determines whether it is worthwhile or not. Cost-benefit analysis can help to justify and optimize the investment or resource allocation for the control or the risk response action, and to ensure that it is aligned with the organization’s objectives and value. However, cost-benefit analysis does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the risk acceptance criteria. 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 define and communicate the organization’s risk preferences and boundaries, and to guide the risk decision-making and behavior. However, risk appetite does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the actual risk performance. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Corporate culture is the set of values, beliefs, and norms that shape the behavior and attitude of an organization and its people. Corporate culture alignment is the degree of consistency and compatibility between the corporate culture and the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, and objectives. Corporate culture misalignment is the situation where the corporate culture is not aligned with the organization’s goals and expectations, and may hinder or undermine the achievement of those goals. The acceptance of control costs that exceed risk exposure is most likely an example of corporate culture misalignment, as it indicates that the organization is not following a rational and optimal approach to risk management. The organization is spending more resources on controlling risks than the potential benefits or losses that the risks entail, which may result in inefficiency, waste, or opportunity cost. The organization may also be overemphasizing the importance of risk avoidance or mitigation, and neglecting the potential value creation or innovation that may arise from taking or accepting some risks. The other options are not the best answers, as they do not explain the situation of accepting control costs that exceed risk exposure. Low risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is not willing to accept. Low risk tolerance may lead to excessive or unnecessary controls, but it does not necessarily mean that the control costs exceed the riskexposure. High risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is willing to accept. High risk tolerance may lead to insufficient or ineffective controls, but it does not imply that the control costs exceed the risk exposure. Corporate culture alignment is the situation where the corporate culture is aligned with the organization’s goals and expectations, and supports and facilitates the achievement of those goals. Corporate culture alignment would not result inaccepting control costs thatexceed risk exposure, as it would imply a balanced and rational approach to risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 812

 The analysis of logs and system events will best help validate whether suspicious network activity is malicious, because they provide detailed and timely information about the source, destination, content, and context of the network traffic. Logs and system events can be collected from various sources, such as firewalls, routers, switches, servers, applications, and endpoints, and can be correlated and analyzed using tools such as security information and event management (SIEM) systems. By analyzing logs and system events, an organization can identify anomalies, patterns, trends, and indicators of compromise (IOCs) that may signal malicious network activity, such as unauthorized access, data exfiltration, malware infection, denial-of-service attack, or lateral movement. Logs and system events can also help determine the scope, impact, and root cause of the malicious network activity, and support the incident response and remediation process. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 221

Detailed Explanation:Multi-factor authentication (MFA)significantly reduces the risk of account compromise by requiring multiple forms of verification, such as a password and a one-time code, enhancing security beyond single-factor authentication methods.

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

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 theyshould 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.

 A rule-based data loss prevention (DLP) tool is a software solution that identifies and helps prevent unsafe or inappropriate sharing, transfer, or use of sensitive data. It can help an organization monitor and protect sensitive information across on-premises systems, cloud-based locations, and endpoint devices. It can also help an organization comply with regulations such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). A rule-based DLP tool works by comparing content to the organization’s DLP policy, which defines how the organization labels, shares, and protects data without exposing it to unauthorized users. The tool can then apply protective actions such as encryption, access restrictions, and alerts. As a result of implementing a rule-based DLP tool, the most likely change is the reduction of risk likelihood, which is the probability of a risk event occurring. By detecting and preventing data breaches, exfiltration, or unwanted destruction of sensitive data, a rule-based DLP tool can lower the chance of such incidents happening and thus decrease the risk likelihood. The other options are less likely to change as a result of implementing a rule-based DLP tool. Risk velocity is the speed at which a risk event impacts an organization, which depends on factors such as the nature of the threat, the response time, and the recovery process. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, which depends on factors such as the organization’s culture, strategy, and stakeholder expectations. Risk impact is the potential loss or damage that a risk event can cause to an organization, which depends on factors such as the severity of the incident, the extent of the exposure, andthe resilience of the organization. While a rule-based DLP tool may have some influence on these factors, it is not the primary driver of change for them. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 13

The primary reason to perform ongoing risk assessments is that the risk environment is subject to change. The risk environment is the external and internal factors that influence the level and nature of the risks that the organization faces1. These factors include economic, political, social, technological, legal,and environmental aspects, as well as the organization’s objectives, strategies, culture, and resources2. The risk environment is dynamic and unpredictable, and may change due to various events, trends, ordevelopments that create new or modify existing risks3. Therefore, it is important to perform ongoing risk assessments to identify, analyze, and evaluate the changes in the risk environment, and to adjust the risk response and management accordingly. Ongoing risk assessments help to ensure that the organization’s risk profile is up to date and reflects the current reality, and that the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance are aligned with the changing risk environment4. The other options are not the primary reason to perform ongoing risk assessments, as they are either less comprehensive or less relevant than the changing risk environment. Emerging risk must be continuously reported to management. This option is a consequence or outcome of performing ongoing risk assessments, not a reason for doing so. Emerging risk is a new or evolving risk that has the potential to affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance5. Ongoing risk assessments can help to identify and monitor emerging risks, and to report them to management for decision making and action. However, this is not the main reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not cover the existing or modified risks that may also change due to the risk environment. New system vulnerabilities emerge at frequent intervals. This option is a specific or narrow example of a changing risk environment, not a general or broad reason for performing ongoing risk assessments. System vulnerabilities are weaknesses or flaws in the design, implementation, or operation of information systems that can be exploited by threats to cause harm or loss6. Ongoing risk assessments can help to discover and assess new system vulnerabilities that may emerge due to technological changes, cyberattacks, or human errors. However, this is not the primary reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not encompass the other types or sources of risks that may also change due to the risk environment. The information security budget must be justified. This option is a secondary or incidental benefit of performing ongoing risk assessments, not a primary or essential reason for doing so. The information security budget is the amount of money that the organization allocates for implementing and maintaining information security measures and controls7. Ongoing risk assessments can help to justify the information security budget by demonstrating the value and effectiveness of the security measures and controls in reducing the risks, and by identifying the gaps or needs for additional or improved security measures and controls. However, this is not the main reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not address the purpose or objective of risk assessment, which is to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks and their impact on the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, Page 47.

The risk associated with the leakage of confidential data is the possibility and impact of unauthorized disclosure, access, or use of sensitive information that may harm the organization or its stakeholders12.

The first step in managing the risk associated with the leakage of confidential data is to define and implement a data classification policy, which is a document that establishes the criteria, categories, roles, and responsibilities for identifying, labeling, and handling different types of data according to their sensitivity, value, and protection needs34.

Defining and implementing a data classification policy is the first step because it provides the foundation and framework for the data protection strategy, and enables the organization to prioritize and allocate the appropriate resources and controls for the most critical and confidential data34.

Defining and implementing a data classification policy is also the first step because it supports the compliance with the relevant laws and regulations, such as GDPR, HIPAA, or PCI-DSS, that require the organization to classify and protect the personal or financial data of its customers or clients34.

The other options are not the first step, but rather possible subsequent steps that may depend on or follow the data classification policy. For example:

Maintaining and reviewing the classified data inventory is a step that involves creating and updating a record of the data assets that have been classified, and verifying their accuracy and completeness over time34. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the data classification policy to provide the guidance and standards for the data inventory process34.

Implementing mandatory encryption on data is a step that involves applying a cryptographic technique that transforms the data into an unreadable format, and requires a key or a password to decrypt and access the data56. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the data classification policy to determine which data needs to be encrypted, and what level of encryption is appropriate56.

Conducting an awareness program for data owners and users is a step that involves educating and training the people who are responsible for or have access to the data, and informing them of their roles, obligations, and best practices for data protection78. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the data classification policy to define the data ownership and user rights, and the data protection policies and procedures78. References =

1: Top Four Damaging Consequences of Data Leakage | ZeroFox1

2: 8 Data Leak Prevention Strategies for 2023 | UpGuard2

3: Data Classification: What It Is, Why You Need It, and How to Do It3

4: Data Classification Policy Template - IT Governance USA4

5: Encryption: What It Is, How It Works, and Why You Need It5

6: Encryption Policy Template - IT Governance USA6

7: What Is Security Awareness Training and Why Is It Important? - Kaspersky7

8: Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US8

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: SWOT Analysis - ISACA1

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

5: Standard Operating Procedure - Wikipedia3

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

7: Benchmarking - Wikipedia5

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

Control Gap Analysis - ISACA7

Control Gap Analysis: A Step-by-Step Guide8

Detailed Explanation:Data biasin machine learning algorithms can lead to inaccurate predictions or decisions, as biases in training data are amplified in the output. Addressing bias is essential for ethical and reliable algorithm performance.

The most appropriate time for changes to be promoted to production is after they are approved by the business owner, who is the individual or group that is accountable and responsible for the business objectives and requirements that are supported or affected by the changes. The approval by the business owner ensures that the changes are aligned and compatible with the business objectives and requirements, and that they provide the expected or desired outcomes or benefits for the business.

The other options are not the most appropriate times for changes to be promoted to production, because they do not ensure that the changes are aligned and compatible with the business objectives and requirements, and that they provide the expected or desired outcomes or benefits for the business.

Communicating the changes to business management means informing or reporting the changes to the senior management or executives that oversee or direct the business activities or functions. Communicating the changes to business management is important for ensuring the awareness and support of the business management, but it is not the most appropriate time for changes to be promoted to production, because it does not indicatewhether the changes are approved or authorized by the business owner, who is accountable and responsible for the business objectives and requirements.

Testing the changes by business owners means verifying and validating the functionality and usability of the changes, using the input and feedback from the business owners. Testing the changes by business owners is important for ensuring the quality and performance of the changes, but it is not the most appropriate time for changes to be promoted to production, because it does not indicate whether the changes are approved or authorized by the business owner, who is accountable and responsible for the business objectives and requirements.

Initiating the changes by business users means requesting or proposing the changes by the end users or customers that interact with the information systems and resources that are affected by the changes. Initiating the changes by business users is important for ensuring the relevance and appropriateness of the changes, but it is not the most appropriate time for changes to be promoted to production, because it does not indicate whether the changes are approved or authorized by the business owner, who is accountable and responsible for the business objectives and requirements. 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 194

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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 andinterdependencies 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

 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

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

 The most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization is clearly defined roles and responsibilities. The three lines of defense model is a framework that outlinesthe roles and responsibilities of different functions or groups within the organization in relation to risk management and internal control1. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense, which consists of the operational management and staff who own and manage the risks associated with their activities and processes. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks, as well as designing, implementing, and operating the controls.

The second line of defense, which consists of the specialized functions or units that provide oversight, guidance, and support to the first line of defense in managing the risks and controls. They are responsible for developing and maintaining the risk management framework, policies, and standards, as well as monitoring and reporting on the risk and control performance.

The third line of defense, which consists of the internal audit function that provides independent and objective assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and internal control system. They are responsible for evaluating and testing the design and operation of the risks and controls, as well as reporting and recommending improvements to the senior management and the board. Clearly defined roles and responsibilities are essential for ensuring that the three lines of defense model works effectively and efficiently. They help to avoid confusion, duplication, or gaps in the risk management and internal control activities, as well as to ensure accountability, coordination, and communication among the different functions or groups. They also help to establish the appropriate level of independence, authority, and competence for each line of defense, as well as to align the risk management and internal control objectives and strategies with the organization’s goals and values2. The other options are not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as they are either less relevant or less specific than clearly defined roles and responsibilities. A robust risk aggregation tool set is a set of methods or techniques that enable the organization to collect, consolidate, and analyze the risk data and information from different sources, levels, or perspectives. A robust risk aggregation tool set can help to enhance the risk identification, assessment, and reporting processes, as well as to support the risk decision making and prioritization. However, a robust risk aggregationtool set is not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as it does not address the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups in relation to risk management and internal control. A well-established risk management committee is a group of senior executives or managers who are responsible for overseeing and directing the risk management activities and performance of the organization. A well-established risk management committee can help to ensure the alignment and integration of the risk management objectives and strategies with the organization’s goals and values, as well as to provide guidance and support to the different functions or groups involved in risk management and internal control. However, a well-established risk management committee is not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as it does not cover the roles and responsibilities of the operational management and staff, the specialized functions or units, or the internal audit function. Well-documented and communicated escalation procedures are the steps or actions that are taken to report and resolve any issues or incidents that may affect the risk management and internal control activities or performance of the organization. Well-documented and communicated escalation procedures can help to ensure the timely and appropriate response and resolution of the issues or incidents, as well as to inform and involve the relevant stakeholders and authorities. However, well-documented and communicated escalation procedures are not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as they do not define the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups in relation to risk management and internal control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 85.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The 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

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

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

Optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities

Enhance the value and performance of the organization

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

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

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

 A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the risks that may affect a project, as well as the actions that are taken or planned to manage them1. A risk register should include information such as the risk description, category, source, impact, likelihood, severity, owner, status, and response2. Among these, the most important information to capture in the risk register is the action plans to address risk scenarios requiring treatment. This is because the action plans are the specific steps that are taken to reduce, avoid, transfer, or accept the risks, depending on the chosen risk treatment option3. The action plans should beclear, realistic, measurable, and aligned with the project objectives and constraints4. The action plans should also be monitored and updated regularly to ensure that they are effective and appropriate for the changing risk environment5. The action plans are essential for managing the risks and ensuring the successful delivery of the project. The other options are not the most important information to capture in the risk register, as they are either less relevant or less actionable than the action plans. The team that performed the risk assessment is the group of people who identified, analyzed, and evaluated the risks, using various tools and techniques6. While this information may be useful for accountability and communication purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not indicate how the risks are treated or resolved. The assigned risk manager to provide oversight is the person who has the responsibility and authority to oversee the risk management process and ensure that the risks are properly identified, assessed, treated, and reported. While this information may be useful for governance and coordination purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not specify what actions are taken or planned to manage the risks. The methodology used to perform the risk assessment is the approach or framework that is used to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks, based on the project context, scope, and objectives. While this information may be useful for consistency and transparency purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not describe how the risks are addressed or mitigated. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.5, Page 55.

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the risks that may affect the organization, as well as the actions that are taken or planned to manage them1. A risk register provides the best evidence that the IT risk profile is up to date, because it reflects the current and potential IT risks that the organization faces, as well as their likelihood, impact, severity, owner, status, and response2. An IT risk profile is a document that describes the types, amounts, and priority of IT risk that the organization finds acceptable and unacceptable3. An IT risk profile is developed collaboratively with various stakeholders within the organization, including business leaders, data and process owners, enterprise risk management, internal and external audit, legal, compliance, privacy, and IT risk management and security4. By maintaining and updating the risk register regularly, the organization can ensure that the IT risk profile is aligned with the changing IT risk environment, and that the IT risk management activities and performance are consistent and effective. The other options are not the best evidence that the IT risk profile is up to date, as they are either less comprehensive or less relevant than the risk register. A risk questionnaire is a tool that collects and analyzes the opinions and perceptions of the stakeholders about the risks that may affect the organization5. A risk questionnaire can help to identify and assess the risks, as well as to communicate and report on the risk status and issues. However, a risk questionnaire is not the best evidence that the IT risk profile is up to date, as it may not capture all the IT risks that the organization faces, or reflect the actual or objective level and nature of the IT risks. A management assertion is a statement or declaration made by the management about the accuracy and completeness of the information or data that they provide or report. A management assertion can help to increase the confidence and trust of the stakeholders and auditors in the information or data, as well as to demonstrate the accountability and responsibility of the management. However, a management assertion is not the best evidence that the IT risk profile is up to date, as it does not provide the details or outcomes of the IT risk management activities or performance, or verify the validity and reliability of the IT risk information or data. A compliance manual is a document that contains the policies, procedures, and standards that the organization must follow to meet the legal, regulatory, or contractual requirements that apply to its activities or operations. A compliance manual can help to ensure the quality and consistency of the organization’s compliance activities or performance, as well as to avoid or reduce the penalties or sanctions for non-compliance. However, a compliance manual is not the best evidence that the IT risk profile is up to date, as it does not address the IT risks that the organization faces, or the IT risk management activities or performance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.5, Page 55.

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 stepis 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

4: ProjectManagement.com - How to Implement Risk Responses2

5: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

6: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

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

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

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

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

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

The primary objective of promoting a risk-aware culture within an organization is enabling risk-based decision making, because this helps the organization to achieve its goals and objectives while managing its risks effectively and efficiently. A risk-aware culture is one where everyone understands the organization’s approach to risk, takes personal responsibility to manage risk in everything they do, and encourages others to follow their example. A risk-aware culture also fosters communication, collaboration, and learning about risk across the organization. By promoting a risk-aware culture, the organization can empower its employees to make informed and balanced decisions that consider both the potential benefits and the potential risks of their actions. This can enhance the organization’s performance, resilience, and competitiveness in a dynamic and uncertain environment. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

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

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

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

Detailed Explanation:An updatedrisk registerensures that decision-makers have accurate, timely information about current risks, enabling informed, risk-based decisions that align with organizational priorities and changes in the environment.

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

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

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the next course of action when an organization has determined a risk scenario is outside the defined risk tolerance level is to identify risk responses, which are the actions or measures taken to address the risk. Identifying risk responses helps to:

Reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk to an acceptable level

Align the risk response with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

Optimize the value and benefits of the risk response

Balance the costs and efforts of the risk response with the potential losses or damages caused by the risk

Coordinate and communicate the risk response with the relevant stakeholders

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: Risk Response Process, pp. 161-1621

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

 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

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

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

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

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

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

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 ofthe 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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 associatedwith 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

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