Isaca CISM Actual Questions

= The best way to enable the integration of information security governance into corporate governance is to establish an information security steering committee with business representation. An information security steering committee is a group of senior executives and managers from different business units and functions who are responsible for overseeing, directing, and supporting the information security program and strategy of the organization. An information security steering committee with business representation can enable the integration of information security governance into corporate governance by providing the following benefits12:

Align the information security objectives and priorities with the business objectives and priorities, and ensure that the information security program and strategy support and enable the achievement of the organizational goals and performance.

Communicate and promote the value and importance of information security to the board of directors, senior management, and other stakeholders, and ensure that information security is considered and incorporated in the decision making and planning processes of the organization.

Provide guidance and direction to the information security manager and the information security team, and ensure that they have the necessary authority, resources, and support to implement and maintain the information security program and strategy effectively and efficiently.

Monitor and evaluate the performance and outcomes of the information security program and strategy, and ensure that they are aligned with the expectations and requirements of the organization and its stakeholders, as well as the relevant laws, regulations, standards, and best practices.

Identify and address the issues, challenges, and opportunities related to information security, and ensure that the information security program and strategy are continuously improved and updated to reflect the changes and developments in the internal and external environment.

The other options are not the best way to enable the integration of information security governance into corporate governance, as they are less comprehensive, effective, or influential than establishing an information security steering committee with business representation. Well-documented information security policies and standards are important components of the information security program and strategy, but they are not sufficient to enable the integration of information security governance into corporate governance, as they may not reflect or align with the business needs, priorities, or expectations, and they may not be communicated, implemented, or enforced properly or consistently across the organization. Clear lines of authority across the organization are important factors for the information security governance structure, but they are not sufficient to enable the integration of information security governance into corporate governance, as they may not ensure the involvement, participation, or support of the senior executives, managers, and other stakeholders who are responsible for or affected by information security. Senior management approval of the information security strategy is an important outcome of the information security governance process, but it is not sufficient to enable the integration of information security governance into corporate governance, as it may not ensure the alignment, communication, or monitoring of the information security strategy with the business strategy, and it may not ensure the accountability, responsibility, or authority of the information security manager and the information security team12. References = CISM Domain 1: Information Security Governance (ISG) [2022 update], Information Security Governance for CISM® | Pluralsight, Aligning Information Security with Business Strategy - ISACA, Aligning Information Security with Business Objectives - ISACA

= Information classification is the process of assigning appropriate labels to information assets based on their sensitivity and value to the organization. Information classification should be aligned with the business objectives and risk appetite of the organization, and should be reviewed periodically to ensure its accuracy and relevance. The information security manager is responsible for establishing and maintaining the information classification policy and procedures, as well as providing guidance and oversight to the data owners and custodians. Data owners are the individuals who have the authority and accountability for the information assets within their business unit or function. Data owners are responsible for determining the appropriate classification level and security controls for their information assets, as well as ensuring compliance with the information classification policy and procedures. Data custodians are the individuals who have the operational responsibility for implementing and maintaining the security controls for the information assets assigned to them by the data owners.

If the information security manager believes that information has been classified inappropriately, increasing the risk of a breach, the best action is to complete a risk assessment and refer the results to the data owners. A risk assessment is a systematic process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks associated with the information assets, and recommending appropriate risk treatment options. By conducting a risk assessment, the information security manager can provide objective and evidence-based information to the data owners, highlighting the potential impact and likelihood of a breach, as well as the cost and benefit of implementing additional security controls. This will enable the data owners to make informed decisions about the appropriate classification level and security controls for their information assets, and to justify and document any deviations from the information classification policy and procedures.

The other options are not the best actions for the information security manager. Refering the issue to internal audit for a recommendation is not the best action, because internal audit is an independent and objective assurance function that provides assurance on the effectiveness of governance, risk management, and control processes. Internal audit is not responsible for providing recommendations on information classification, which is a management responsibility. Re-classifying the data and increasing the security level to meet business risk is not the best action, because the information security manager does not have the authority or accountability for the information assets, and may not have the full understanding of the business context and objectives of the data owners. Instructing the relevant system owners to reclassify the data is not the best action, because system owners are not the same as data owners, and may not have the authority or accountability for the information assets either. System owners are the individuals who have the authority and accountability for the information systems that process, store, or transmit the information assets. System owners are responsible for ensuring that the information systems comply with the security requirements and controls defined by the data owners and the information security manager. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2020, pp. 49-51, 63-64, 69-701; CISM Online Review Course, Domain 3: Information Security Program Development and Management, Module 2: Information Security Program Framework, ISACA2

A balanced scorecard most effectively enables information security govern-ance. Information security governance is the process of establishing and maintaining a framework to provide assurance that information security strategies are aligned with and support business objectives, are consistent with applicable laws and regulations, and are managed effectively and efficiently1. A balanced scorecard is a tool for meas-uring and communicating the performance and progress of an organization toward its strategic goals. It typically includes four perspectives: financial, customer, internal pro-cess, and learning and growth2. A balanced scorecard can help information security managers to:

•Align information security objectives with business objectives and communicate them to senior management and other stakeholders

•Monitor and report on the effectiveness and efficiency of information security processes and controls

•Identify and prioritize improvement opportunities and corrective actions

•Demonstrate the value and benefits of information security investments

•Foster a culture of security awareness and continuous learning

Several sources have proposed models or frameworks for applying the balanced scorecard approach to information security governance34 . The other options are not the most effective applications of a balanced scorecard for information security. Pro-ject management is the process of planning, executing, monitoring, and closing pro-jects to achieve specific objectives within constraints such as time, budget, scope, and quality. A balanced scorecard can be used to measure the performance of individual projects or project portfolios, but it is not specific to information security projects. Per-formance is the degree to which an organization or a process achieves its objectives or meets its standards. A balanced scorecard can be used to measure the performance of information security processes or functions, but it is not limited to performance measurement. Risk management is the process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and communicating risks that affect an organization’s objec-tives. A balanced scorecard can be used to measure the risk exposure and risk appetite of an organization, but it is not a tool for risk assessment or treatment. References: 1: Information Security Governance - ISACA 2: Balanced scorecard - Wikipedia 3: Key Per-formance Indicators for Security Governance Part 1 - ISACA 4: A Strategy Map for Se-curity Leaders: Applying the Balanced Scorecard Framework to Information Security - Security Intelligence : How to Measure Security From a Governance Perspective - ISA-CA : Project management - Wikipedia : Performance measurement - Wikipedia : Risk management - Wikipedia

 The information security manager’s first course of action should be to validate the relevance of the information received from the threat intelligence service. This means verifying the source, credibility, accuracy, and timeliness of the information, as well as assessing the potential impact and likelihood of the threat for the organization. This will help the information security manager to determine the appropriate response and prioritize the actions to mitigate the threat. Conducting an information security audit, performing a gap analysis, and informing senior management are possible subsequent actions, but they are not the first course of action. An information security audit is a systematic and independent assessment of the effectiveness of the information security controls and processes. A gap analysis is a comparison of the current state of the information security program with the desired state or best practices. Informing senior management is a communication activity that should be done after validating the information and assessing the risk. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, pages 44-451; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, page 632

The first step the information security manager should take upon learning of the potential threat is to validate the relevance of the information. This should involve researching the threat to evaluate its potential impact on the organization and to determine the accuracy of the threat intelligence. Once the information is validated, the information security manager can then take action, such as informing senior management, conducting an information security audit, or performing a gap analysis.