CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Questions and Answers

Prioritizing concerns based on frequency of reports is the most efficient approach to analyze the security-related concerns reported by employees, because it helps to identify and focus on the most common or recurring issues that may pose the highest risk or impact to the organization. A security-related concern is a potential or actual problem or threat that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the organization’s IT systems or data. A service desk is a function that provides a single point of contact for users to report and resolve their IT-related issues or requests. A workflow is a sequence of steps or tasks that are performed to achieve a specific goal or outcome. A workflow for supporting employee reports of security-related concerns may include capturing, categorizing, prioritizing, assigning, and resolving the concerns. Prioritizing concerns based on frequency of reports is the most efficient approach, as it helps to optimize the use of resources and time, and to reduce the likelihood and severity of security incidents or breaches. Mapping concerns to organizational assets, sorting concerns by likelihood, and aligning concerns to key vendors are all possible approaches to analyze the security-related concerns, but they are not the most efficient approach, as they may require more data collection, analysis, or coordination, and may not reflect the urgency or importance of the concerns. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 200

Introducing control procedures early in the IoT solution life cycle ensures proactive identification and mitigation of risks. This approach aligns withSecure System Development PracticesandRisk Mitigation Strategies, reducing exposure as the solution evolves.

A risk register is a document that contains information about potential cybersecurity risks that could threaten a project’s success, or even the business itself2. Therefore, it is important to protect the confidentiality and integrity of the risk register from unauthorized or inappropriate access, modification, or disclosure. One way to do this is to implement role-based access, which is a method of restricting access to the risk register based on the roles or responsibilities of the users1. This way, only authorized users who need to view or edit the risk register for legitimate purposes can do so, and the access rights can be revoked or modified as needed. This would most effectively reduce the potential for inappropriate exposure of vulnerabilities documented in the risk register. The other options are not as effective or feasible as option C, as they do not address the need to balance the security and availability of the risk register. Option A, limiting access to senior management only, would compromise the availability and usefulness of the risk register, as other stakeholders such as project managers, risk owners, or auditors may need to access the risk register for risk identification, analysis, response, or monitoring purposes3. Option B, encrypting the risk register, would enhance the security of the risk register, but it would not prevent authorized users from exposing the vulnerabilities to unauthorized parties, either intentionally or unintentionally. Encryption also adds complexity and cost to the risk register management process, and may affect the performance or usability of the risk register4. Option D, requiring users to sign a confidentiality agreement, would rely on the compliance and ethics of the users, but it would not prevent or detect any breaches of the agreement. A confidentiality agreement also does not specify the access rights or roles of the users, and may not be legally enforceable in some cases5.

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks about the greatest risk associated with inappropriate classification of data.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Inaccurate record management data:This could lead to inefficiencies but doesn't directly pose a major risk.

B. Users having unauthorized access to data:Inappropriate classification can lead to sensitive data being under-protected, making it accessible to unauthorized users, which is a significant security risk.

C. Inaccurate recovery time objectives (RTOs):While this is important for business continuity, it is not the primary risk related to data classification.

D. Lack of accountability for data ownership:This can cause confusion but doesn't directly lead to significant risk as compared to unauthorized data access.

 Detailed Explanation:

Data Classification Importance:Classifying data appropriately ensures that sensitive data receives the necessary protection levels. It determines access controls and other security measures.

Risk of Unauthorized Access:If data is not classified correctly, sensitive information might be treated as less critical data. This can result in weaker access controls, making it easier for unauthorized users to access sensitive information, leading to data breaches and potential legal and financial repercussions.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, emphasizes the importance of appropriate data classification in risk management​​.

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.

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]

 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 BEST way to demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives is through risk scenarios, because they are the descriptions and illustrations of the potential events or situations that may affect the achievement of the business objectives and processes. Risk scenarios can help to demonstrate how the risk profile, which is the summary and representation of the identified and assessed risks, is relatedand relevant to the business objectives and processes, and how the risk responses and controls are designed and implemented to support and enable the business objectives and processes. The other options are not the best way, because:

Option B: Risk tolerance is the level of variation or deviation from the expected or desired outcome that the organization is willing to accept or endure, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of ensuring that the risk profile and the business objectives are consistent and compatible with each other.

Option C: Risk policy is the document that defines the principles, guidelines, and requirements for the risk management process and activities in the organization, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of showing and proving that the risk profile and the business objectives are coherent and integrated with each other.

Option D: Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to take or pursue in order to achieve its objectives and goals, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of establishing and maintaining that the risk profile and the business objectives are aligned and balanced with each other. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 104.

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]

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

 A risk practitioner is preparing a report to communicate changes in the risk and control environment, such as new or emerging risks, changes in risk levels, risk responses, or control effectiveness. The best way to engage stakeholder attention is to include a summary linking information to stakeholder needs, meaning that the report should highlight the key points and findings that are relevant and important for the stakeholder’s role, responsibility, and interest. The summary should also explain how the information affects the stakeholder’s objectives, expectations, and decisions. The summary should be concise, clear, and compelling, and should capture the stakeholder’s attention and interest. The report can also include detailed deviations from industry benchmarks, a roadmap to achieve operational excellence, or an option to publish the report on-demand for stakeholders, but these are not the best ways to engage stakeholder attention, as they may not be directly related to the stakeholder’s needs or may overwhelm the stakeholder with too much information. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, p. 124-125

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 most important objective of establishing an enterprise risk management (ERM) function within an organization is to have a unified approach to risk management across the organization. An ERM function is a centralized and coordinated function that oversees and supports the risk management activities of the organization, such as risk identification, assessment, response, monitoring, and reporting. An ERM function helps to ensure that the risk management process is consistent, comprehensive, and integrated with the organization’s strategy, objectives, and culture. An ERM function also helps to align the risk management activities with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and to provide a holistic view of the organization’s risk profile and exposure. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.1, page 131

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

Risk treatment options are the actions or plans that are implemented to modify or reduce the risk exposure of the organization. Risk treatment options receive adequate funding when the organization allocatessufficient resources and budget to support the risk response actions, and to ensure that the risk controls are effective and efficient. This is the best evidence that risk management is driving business decisions in the organization, as it shows that the organization prioritizes and values the risk management process, and that it aligns its risk strategy and objectives with its business goals and value creation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 245. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 245. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 245.

Data leakage is the unauthorized or accidental disclosure of sensitive or confidential data to unauthorized parties. Data leakage can cause serious damages or losses to the organization, such as data breaches, fines, lawsuits, reputational harm, or loss of customer trust. Data leakage can occur due to various reasons, such as human errors, malicious attacks, or inadequate controls1.

An organization that uses a vendor to destroy hard drives faces a risk of data leakage, as the vendor may not properly or securely destroy the hard drives, or may access or misuse the data stored on them. The best way to reduce this risk is to use an accredited vendor to dispose of the hard drives, because it means that the vendor:

Has been certified or verified by a reputable or recognized authority or organization, such as ISACA, NAID, or R2, to provide hard drive destruction services

Follows the industry standards and best practices for hard drive destruction, such as NIST 800-88 or DoD 5220.22-M, and ensures the compliance with the legal and regulatory requirements, such as HIPAA, PCI DSS, or GDPR

Provides a secure and transparent process for hard drive destruction, such as using a specialized shredder, issuing a certificate of destruction, or allowing the customer to witness the destruction

Maintains a high level of professionalism and integrity, and does not compromise the confidentiality or security of the customer’s data234

The other options are not the best ways to reduce the risk of data leakage, but rather some of the steps or aspects of hard drive destruction. Require the vendor to degauss the hard drives is a step that can help to erase the data on the hard drives by using a strong magnetic field. However, degaussing may not be effective or reliable for some types of hard drives, such as solid state drives (SSDs), and it may not prevent the vendor from accessing or misusing the data before degaussing5. Implement an encryption policy for the hard drives is an aspect that can help to protect the data on the hard drives by using a cryptographic algorithm to make it unreadable without a key. However, encryption may not be sufficient or applicable for some types of data, such as metadata, and it may not prevent the vendor from accessing or misusing the key or the encrypted data6. Require confirmation of destruction from the IT manager is a step that can help to verify that the hard drives have been destroyed by the vendor, and to document the process and the outcome. However, confirmation of destruction may not be accurate or authentic, and it may not prevent the vendor from accessing or misusing the data before destruction7. References =

Data Leakage - ISACA

Hard Drive Shredding Services | Hard Drive Destruction & Disposal

Hard Drive Shredding and Destruction Service | CompuCycle

Electronic Destruction & Recycling | Shred Nations

Degaussing - ISACA

Encryption - ISACA

Certificate of Destruction - ISACA

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

 The greatest risk to change control in business application development over the complete life cycle is the introduction of requirements that have not been approved. Requirements are the specifications or expectations of the business users or stakeholders for the application, such as the features, functions, or performance1. Change control is the process of identifying, evaluating, approving, and implementing changes to the application, such as the design, code, or configuration2. By introducing requirements that have not been approved, the organization can face significant risks, such as:

Scope creep, which is the uncontrolled or unauthorized expansion of the project scope, and can result in increased costs, delays, or errors3.

Quality issues, which can affect the reliability, usability, or security of the application, and can lead to defects, failures, or breaches4.

Stakeholder dissatisfaction, which can arise from the mismatch or inconsistency between the delivered application and the expected application, and can cause complaints, disputes, or litigation5.

The other options are not the greatest risk to change control, because:

Emphasis on multiple application testing cycles is not a risk, but rather a benefit or a best practice for change control, as it can help to ensure that the application meets the requirements and standards, and that the changes are effective and efficient.

Lack of an integrated development environment (IDE) tool is a challenge, but not a risk, for change control, as it can affect the productivity, collaboration, or integration of the developers, and can cause difficulties or inefficiencies in the development process. However, it does not directly affect the requirements or the quality of the application, and it can be overcome by using other tools or methods.

Bypassing quality requirements before go-live is a risk, but not the greatest risk, for change control, as it can compromise the quality or performance of the application, and can expose the organization to errors, failures, or breaches. However, it is less likely or frequent than introducing requirements that have not been approved, and it can be detected or prevented by using quality assurance or quality control techniques.

References =

Requirements - CIO Wiki

Change Control - CIO Wiki

Scope Creep - CIO Wiki

Quality - CIO Wiki

Stakeholder Management - CIO Wiki

[Software Testing - CIO Wiki]

[Integrated Development Environment (IDE) - CIO Wiki]

[Quality Requirements - CIO Wiki]

[Software Development Life Cycle - CIO Wiki]

The primary reason for tracking the status of risk mitigation plans is to ensure that the proposed controls are implemented as scheduled, as this can help to reduce the risk exposure of the organization and to achieve the desired risk objectives. Tracking the status of risk mitigation plans can also help to monitor and evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the risk controls, and to identify and address any issues or gaps that may arise during the implementation. Tracking the status of risk mitigation plans can also provide feedback and information to the risk owners and stakeholders, and enable them to adjust the risk strategy and response actions accordingly. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 251. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 251. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 251. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

The status of identified risk scenarios, because it helps to monitor and track the current level and direction of the IT risks, and to determine whether the risk responses and controls are adequate and effective. An IT riskregister is a document that records and tracks the key IT risks that an organization faces, along with their likelihood, impact, and response strategies. An IT risk scenario is a hypothetical situation or event that describes the source, cause, consequence, and impact of an IT risk. The status of identified risk scenarios is the most important factor, as it reflects the actual and potential outcomes of the IT risks, and the performance and progress of the risk management process. The costs associated with mitigation options, the cost-benefit analysis of each risk response, and the timeframes for risk response actions are all possible factors to review when evaluating the ongoing effectiveness of the IT risk register, but they are not the most important factor, as they do not directly measure and report the status of the IT risk scenarios.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk. They enable ongoing monitoring of emerging risk by alerting the organization when the risk level exceeds thepredefined threshold or tolerance. By using KRIs, the organization can track the changes in the risk environment and take timely and appropriate actions to mitigate or avoid the risk.

Helping an organization identify emerging threats, benchmarking the organization’s risk profile, and identifying trends in the organization’s vulnerabilities are all possible uses of KRIs, but they are not the primary benefit. The primary benefit is to enable ongoing monitoring of emerging risk, which encompasses all these aspects and more. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, page 27-281

The risk associated with an asset after controls are applied can be expressed as a function of the likelihood and impact, as it helps to measure and quantify the residual risk level and exposure. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls or risk treatments. Residual risk can be calculated by multiplying the likelihood and impact of a risk event, where likelihood is the probability or frequency of the risk event occurring, and impact is the consequence or severity of the risk event on the asset or objective. Residual risk can be expressed as:

ResidualRisk=Likelihood×Impact

Expressing the risk associated with an asset after controls are applied as a function of the likelihood and impact helps to provide the following benefits:

It enables a data-driven and evidence-based approach to risk assessment 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 alignment of risk management and control activities with the organizational strategy and objectives, and helps to evaluate the achievement of the desired outcomes.

It helps to identify and prioritize the areas for improvement and enhancement of the risk management and control processes, and guide the development and implementation of corrective or preventive actions.

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 ways to express the risk associated with an asset after controls are applied. A function of the cost and effectiveness of controls is a measure of the inputs or outputs of therisk management and control processes, but it does not indicate the risk level or exposure. The likelihood of a given threat is a component of the risk calculation, but it does not reflect the impact or consequence of the threat. The magnitude of an impact is a component of the risk calculation, but it does not reflect the likelihood or probability of the risk event.References=Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative,IT Risk Resources | ISACA,Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management - Video & Lesson …

The risk likelihood is the element of the risk register that should be updated to reflect the change of implementing encryption on all databases that host customer data. The risk likelihood is the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring, and it is one of the factors that determine the risk level and priority. By implementing encryption, the organization reduces the risk likelihood of unauthorized access, disclosure, or breach of the customer data, as encryption protects the data from being read or modified by anyone who does not have the decryption key. Therefore, the risk likelihood should be updated to reflect the lower probability of the risk event after applying the encryption control. The other options are not the elements that should be updated, as they are either not affected by or not related to the change of implementing encryption. The inherent risk is the level of risk before applying any controls or mitigation measures, and it does not change after implementing encryption. The risk appetite is the amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, and it is not influenced by the change of implementing encryption. The risk tolerance is the acceptable variation between the risk thresholds and thebusiness objectives, and it is not determined by the change of implementing encryption. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Risk Assessment in Project Management | PMI; Risk Assessment Process: Definition, Steps, and Examples; Risk Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

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

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

 The greatest concern for the risk practitioner when an organization wants to launch a campaign to advertise a new product using data analytics is the purpose limitation. Purpose limitation is a principle that states that personal data should be collected for specified, explicit, and legitimate purposes, and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes. By using data analytics to target potential customers, the organization may violate the purpose limitation principle if the data was collected for a different purpose and the customers did not consent to the new use of their data. Data minimization, accountability, and accuracy are other principles that should be followed, but they are not as concerning as the purpose limitation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics used by organizations to monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their objectives and performance. KRIs also provide early warning signals that help organizations identify, analyze, and address risks before they escalate into significant issues1. Effective KRIs are thosethat are relevant, measurable, predictable, comparable, and informational2. The most important factor for developing effective KRIs is including input from risk and business unit management, as they are the persons who have the best understanding of the risk environment, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the risk factors and impacts of the organization. By including input from risk and business unit management, the organization can ensure that the KRIs are aligned with the organization’s strategy, vision, and mission, and that they reflect the current and emerging risks and their potential consequences. Engaging sponsorship by senior management, utilizing data and resources internal to the organization, and developing in collaboration with internal audit are not the most important factors for developing effective KRIs, as they do not provide the same level of insight and relevance as including input from risk and business unit management. Engaging sponsorship by senior management is a factor that involves obtaining the support and approval of the senior leaders who have the authority and accountability for the organization’s performance and governance. Engaging sponsorship by senior management can help to promote the importance and value of KRIs, and to ensure their communication and implementation across the organization, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are appropriate and accurate for the organization’s risk profile. Utilizing data and resources internal to the organization is a factor that involves using the information and assets that are available within the organization to support or enable the development of KRIs. Utilizing data and resources internal to the organization can help to enhance the quality and reliability of KRIs, and to reduce the cost and complexity of obtaining external data and resources, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are comprehensive and consistent with the organization’s risk environment. Developing in collaboration with internal audit is a factor that involves working with the internal audit function that provides independent and objective assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s risk management. Developing in collaboration with internal audit can help to improve the validity and compliance of KRIs, and to provide feedback and recommendations for improvement, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are relevant and realistic for the organization’s risk objectives and strategies. References = 1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture2: KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva3: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Key Risk Indicators, pp. 181-185.]

A gap analysis is the best approach to identify information systems control deficiencies, as it helps to compare and evaluate the current and desired states of the information systems and their controls, and to identify and prioritize the gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. A gap analysis is a process of assessing and measuring the difference between the actual and expected performance or outcomes of a system or a process, such as an information system or a control process. A gap analysis can help to identify information systems control deficiencies by providing the following benefits:

It enables a data-driven and evidence-based approach to information systems control assessment and improvement, rather than relying on subjective or qualitative judgments.

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating information systems control performance and quality across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the alignment of information systems and their controls with the organizational strategy and objectives, and helps to evaluate the achievement of the desired outcomes.

It helps to identify and prioritize the root causes and contributing factors of information systems control deficiencies, and to develop and implement appropriate strategies and actions to address them.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the information systems and their controls, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best approaches to identify information systems control deficiencies. Countermeasures analysis is a method of identifying and evaluating the potential countermeasures or solutions to mitigate or eliminate a specific threat or risk, but it does not directly address the information systems control deficiencies. Best practice assessment is a method of comparing and benchmarking the information systems and their controls against the industry standards or best practices, but it does not provide a comprehensive or customized analysis of the information systems control deficiencies. Risk assessment is a method of identifying and analyzing the potential risks and their impacts on the information systems and their objectives, but it does not measure or evaluate the information systems control performance or quality. References = Gap Analysis: A Practical Guide | Smartsheet, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, How to Perform a Gap Analysis: Step-By-Step Guide & Template

Warning banners on login screens serve as deterrent controls. Deterrent controls are designed to discourage individuals from attempting unauthorized actions by warning them of potential consequences.

Purpose of Warning Banners

Warning banners provide clear notice to users, both authorized and unauthorized, that their activities may be monitored and that unauthorized access is prohibited.

They serve as a legal disclaimer, which can be crucial in prosecuting unauthorized access attempts.

Effectiveness as a Deterrent Control

The primary function of a warning banner is to deter potential intruders by making them aware of the surveillance and legal implications of unauthorized access.

For authorized users, it reinforces awareness of the organization's security policies and acceptable use agreements.

Comparison with Other Control Types

A. Corrective: These controls are used to correct or restore systems after an incident.

B. Preventive: These controls are designed to prevent security incidents from occurring.

C. Detective: These controls are used to detect and alert about security incidents.

D. Deterrent: These controls are intended to discourage individuals from performing unauthorized activities.

References

Sybex-CISSP-Official-Study-Guide-9-Edition.pdf, p. 829, detailing the role of warning banners as deterrent controls​​.

The best recommendation to address recent IT risk trends that indicate social engineering attempts are increasing in the organization is to conduct a simulated phishing attack, as it tests the awareness and behavior of the employees in responding to a realistic and targeted email scam, and identifies the areas and individuals that need improvement or training. Updating spam filters, revising the acceptable use policy, and strengthening disciplinary procedures are not the best recommendations, as they may not address the human factor of the risk, or may be too reactive or punitive, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

The most likely justification for risk acceptance of an exception to a security control is when the business benefits exceed the loss exposure. Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging and tolerating the risk, without taking any action to reduce or transfer the risk. An exception to a security control is a deviation or non-compliance from the established security policy or standard, due to a valid business reason or circumstance. Risk acceptance of an exception to a security control may be justified when the business benefits exceed the loss exposure, which means that the value or advantage of the exception outweighs the potential cost or harm of the risk. For example, an exception to a security control may enable faster or easier access to the system or data, which may improve the productivity, efficiency, or satisfaction of the users or customers, and generate more revenue or profit for the business. The business benefits of the exception may exceed the loss exposure of the risk, which may be low or negligible, or may be mitigated by other controls or factors. Therefore, risk acceptance of an exception to a security control may be a reasonable and rational decision, based on the cost-benefit analysis of the exception and the risk. Automation cannot be applied to the control, the end-user license agreement has expired, and the control is difficult to enforce in practice are not the most likely justifications for risk acceptance of an exception to a security control, as they are either irrelevant or insufficient reasons, and they do not consider the business benefits or the loss exposure of the exception and the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

 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)​​.

A risk awareness program is a set of activities and communication methods that aim to increase the understanding and knowledge of risk among the stakeholders of an organization. The primary objective of a risk awareness program is to enhance the organizational risk culture, which is the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes that influence how risk is perceived and managed in the organization. A risk awareness program can help to promote a risk-aware culture by:

•Educating stakeholders on the concepts and benefits of risk management

•Aligning risk management with the organization’s vision, mission, and objectives

•Encouraging stakeholder participation and collaboration in risk management processes

•Fostering a positive attitude towards risk taking and learning from failures

•Reinforcing risk management roles and responsibilities

•Recognizing and rewarding good risk management practices

References: The answer is based on the following sources:

•CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, page 781

•Developing Collective Risk Leadership Through CRISC2

 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 concern is the immediate risk of undetected threats due to missing endpoint protection. Addressing this ensures the organization's ability to detect and respond to security incidents, aligning withIncident Detection and Responseprinciples.

Failure to utilize threat modeling during the design phase results in overlooked vulnerabilities. This highlights the importance ofProactive Threat Identificationin secure software development practices.

MFA significantly increases security by requiring multiple authentication factors, making it harder for attackers to access digital wallets fraudulently. This is a cornerstone ofAccess Control Measuresin risk mitigation.

The integrity of data should be the greatest concern for a risk practitioner upon learning of failures in a data migration activity, because it affects the accuracy, completeness, and consistency of the data that are transferred from one system or format to another. Data integrity is a property of data that ensures that the data are valid, reliable, and trustworthy, and that they have not been altered or corrupted by unauthorized or accidental means. Data migration is a process of moving or copying data from one system or format to another, usually as part of a system upgrade, consolidation, or transformation. Data migration can pose risks to the integrity of data, such as data loss, duplication, inconsistency, or corruption, due to factors such as incompatible formats, human errors, technical glitches, or malicious attacks. Therefore, the integrity of data should be the greatest concern, as it impacts the quality and usability of the data, and the performance and functionality of the system. The availability of test data, the cost overruns, and the system performance are all possible concerns for a risk practitioner, but they are not the greatest concern, as they do not directly affect the integrity of data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

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

 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.

Embedding Risk Management:

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

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

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

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

Best Practices:

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

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

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

References:

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

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

When disposing of storage media, the best way to prevent the loss of highly sensitive data is physical destruction. Here’s why:

Physical Destruction:

Physical destruction involves destroying the storage media so that the data it contains cannot be recovered or reconstructed.

Methods include shredding, crushing, incinerating, or using industrial-grade degaussers that destroy the magnetic fields on the media.

Comparison with Other Methods:

Degaussing:This method erases data by disrupting the magnetic fields of the storage media. While effective for some types of media, it may not work on all (e.g., solid-state drives) and does not provide a visual confirmation that the data is irrecoverable.

Data Anonymization:This process involves altering data to prevent identification of individuals, but it does not destroy the data itself and is not applicable for disposing of storage media.

Data Deletion:Simply deleting data does not remove it permanently. Deleted data can often be recovered using specialized software unless it is overwritten multiple times, which is still less reliable than physical destruction.

Security Best Practices:

Physical destruction is considered the most secure method because it ensures that the media is rendered completely unusable and the data cannot be retrieved by any means.

This method is recommended by various standards and frameworks, including NIST Special Publication 800-88 Guidelines for Media Sanitization.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual highlights the importance of physical destruction for securely disposing of sensitive data (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 4: Information Technology and Security, Section 4.5.2 Data Loss Prevention).

The greatest challenge when implementing a corporate risk framework for a global organization is the management support. A corporate risk framework is a set of principles, policies, standards, and processes that guide and govern the risk management activities across the organization. A corporate risk framework helps to establish a consistent and integrated approach to risk management, and to align the risk management objectives and strategies with the business goals and values. Implementing a corporate risk framework for a global organization requires the management support, which is the commitment, involvement, and endorsement of the senior management and the board. Management support is essential for providing the vision, direction, and resources for the risk management initiatives, and for ensuring the accountability, responsibility, and ownership of the risk management roles and functions. Management support is also critical for creating and sustaining a risk-aware culture, and for promoting the risk management awareness and communication among the stakeholders. Management support can be challenging to obtain and maintain, especially for a global organization, as it may face various barriers, such as different expectations, priorities, preferences, or perspectives of the management, lack of trust or confidence in the risk management value or performance, resistance to change or innovation, or competing interests or agendas. Privacy risk controls, business continuity, and risk taxonomy are not as challenging as management support, as they are the components or outcomes of the corporate risk framework, andthey can be addressed or improved by applying the appropriate methods, techniques, or tools. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 35.

The primary objective of a risk identification process is to determine threats and vulnerabilities, which are the sources and causes of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives. Threats are any events or circumstances that have the potential to harm or exploit the organization’s assets, such as people, information, systems, processes, or infrastructure1. Vulnerabilities are any weaknesses or gaps in the organization’s capabilities, controls, or defenses that may increase the likelihood or impact of the threats2. By determining threats and vulnerabilities, the organization can:

Identify and document all possible risks, regardless of whether they are internal or external, current or emerging, or positive or negative3.

Understand the nature and characteristics of the risks, such as their sources, causes, consequences, and interrelationships4.

Provide the basis for further risk analysis and evaluation, such as assessing the probability and severity of the risks, and prioritizing the risks according to their significance and urgency5.

References =

Threat - CIO Wiki

Vulnerability - CIO Wiki

Risk Identification - CIO Wiki

Risk Identification and Analysis - The National Academies Press

Risk Analysis - CIO Wiki

The best indicator to senior management that IT processes are improving is the changes in the position in the maturity model. A maturity model is a framework that defines the levels of capability and performance of a process, such as IT processes, based on the criteria such as governance, management, control, measurement, and improvement. A maturity model can help to assess the current state and the desired state of the IT processes, and to identify the gaps, strengths, and opportunities for improvement. A maturity model can also help to communicate the progress and the value of the IT processes to the senior management, and to support the strategic alignment and integration of the IT processes with the business objectives. Changes in the position in the maturity model indicate that the IT processes are improving, as they show that the IT processes are moving from a lower level to a higher level of maturity, and that they are achieving higher standards of quality, efficiency, and effectiveness. Changes in the number of intrusions detected, changes in the number of security exceptions, and changes to the structure of the risk register are not as good as changes in the position in the maturity model, as they do not provide a comprehensive and consistent measure of the IT processes improvement, and they may not reflect the actual impact and performance of the IT processes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

Integrating the results of top-down risk scenario analyses is the most helpful in aligning IT risk with business objectives, as it helps to identify and prioritize the IT-related risks that could affect the achievement of the business goals and strategies. A top-down risk scenario analysis is a method of risk assessment that starts from the business perspective and considers the potential impact and likelihood of various risk events on the business outcomes and performance. A top-down risk scenario analysis can help to align IT risk with business objectives by providing the following benefits:

It ensures that the IT risk assessment is driven by the business needs and priorities, rather than by the IT technical details or assumptions.

It enables a holistic and comprehensive view of the IT 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 IT risk exposure and control environment.

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

The other options are not the most helpful in aligning IT risk with business objectives. Introducing an approved IT governance framework is a good practice to establish the principles, policies, and processes for the governance of IT, but it does not directly address the IT risk alignment with the business objectives. Performing a business impact analysis (BIA) is an important step to assess the potential consequences of IT disruptions on the business operations and continuity, but it does not provide information on the likelihood or sources of the IT risk events. Implementing a risk classification system is a useful tool to categorize and organize the IT risks based on their characteristics and attributes, but it does not link the IT risks with the business objectives or outcomes. References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, How to reduce risk by aligning business strategy and IT strategy - QuoStar

Providing assurance on risk management processes is the activity that should only be performed by the third line of defense, because it is the role and responsibility of the independent and objective assurance function, such as internal audit or external audit, to evaluate and report on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management processes and controls. The third line of defense is the last layer of the three lines of defense model, which is a framework that defines the roles and responsibilities of different functions and levels within the organization for risk management and control. The first line of defense is the operational management and staff, who are responsible for identifying, assessing, and managing the risks and controls within their areas of responsibility. The second line of defense is the oversight and support functions, such as risk management, compliance, or legal, who are responsible for establishing and monitoring the risk policies, standards, and frameworks, and providing guidance and advice to the first line of defense. The third line of defense is the assurance function, who are responsible for providing independent and objective assurance on the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk management processes and controls, and reporting to the senior management and the board of directors. Operating controls for risk mitigation, testing the effectiveness and efficiency of internal controls, and recommending risk treatment options are all activities that can be performed by the first or second line of defense, but not by the third line of defense, as they are not part of the assurance function. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.4.1, page 59

Reviewing configuration settings is the best way for an organization to ensure that servers are compliant to security policy, because it helps to check and verify that the servers are configured and maintained according to the established security standards and guidelines, and that any deviations or violations are identified and corrected. A configuration setting is a parameter or option that defines the behavior or functionality of a server, such as a system, an application, or a service. A security policy is a document that outlines the security objectives, principles, and rules that the organization and its employees must follow, and the consequences of non-compliance. Reviewing configuration settings is the best way, as it helps to ensure that the servers are secure and compliant, and that any security risks or issues are detected and resolved. Reviewing change logs, server access logs, and anti-malware compliance are all possible ways to ensure that servers are compliant to security policy, but they are not the best way, as they do not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the configuration settings and their compliance status. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 200

 AI in Heuristic Security Systems:

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

 Risk of Misclassification:

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

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

 Impact of Misclassification:

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

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

 Comparing Other Risks:

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

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

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

 References:

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

The percent of patches implemented within established timeframe is the best metric to demonstrate the effectiveness of an organization’s patch management process, as it measures how well the organization meets its patching objectives and reduces its exposure to vulnerabilities. This metric reflects the timeliness, completeness, and quality of the patching process, and can be compared against the organization’s patch management policy and standards. A high percent of patches implemented within established timeframe indicates that the organization has a mature and efficient patch management process that minimizes the risk of security breaches or operational disruptions due to unpatched systems.

References:

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

•ISACA, Practical Patch Management and Mitigation2

•NIST, Guide to Enterprise Patch Management Planning3

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

When establishing leading indicators for the information security incident response process, it is most important to consider the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the service levelagreement (SLA). A leading indicator is a metric that can predict or influence the future performance or outcome of a process or activity. A leading indicator for the information security incident response process should measure how well the process is achieving its objectives, such as minimizing the impact of incidents, restoring normal operations as quickly as possible, and preventing recurrence of incidents. The percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is a leading indicator that reflects the efficiency and effectiveness of the information security incident response process. It shows how well the process is meeting the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders, such as the business units, customers, and regulators. It also shows how well the process is managing the resources, such as time, budget, and personnel, that are allocated for incident response. A high percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA indicates that the information security incident response process is performing well and delivering value to the organization. A low percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA indicates that the information security incident response process is facing challenges and needs improvement. The percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA can also help identify the root causes of incidents, the gaps in the process, and the areas for improvement. For example, if the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is low, it may indicate that the process has issues with the following aspects: - Incident detection and reporting: The process may not have adequate tools, techniques, or procedures to detect and report incidents in a timely and accurate manner. - Incident prioritization and classification: The process may not have clear and consistent criteria to prioritize and classify incidents based on their severity, impact, and urgency. - Incident analysis and investigation: The process may not have sufficient skills, knowledge, or evidence to analyze and investigate the incidents and determine their root causes, scope, and consequences. - Incident containment and eradication: The process may not have effective methods or measures to contain and eradicate the incidents and prevent them from spreading or escalating. - Incident recovery and restoration: The process may not have reliable backup and recovery plans or systems to restore the normal operations and functionality of the affected systems or services. - Incident communication and escalation: The process may not have proper communication and escalation channels or protocols to inform and involve the relevant stakeholders, such as the management, the users, the vendors, or the authorities. - Incident documentation and closure: The process may not have adequate documentation and closure procedures to record and report the incidents and their resolution. - Incident review and improvement: The process may not have regular review and improvement activities to evaluate and enhance the process and its performance. Therefore, the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is the most important leading indicator for the information security incident response process, as it can provide valuable insights and feedback for the process and its improvement. References = Information Security Incident Response | Process Street1, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Security Operations and Incident Response2, 7 Incident Response Metrics and How to Use Them3

KRIs should be identified during the development of a risk monitoring process to ensure alignment with organizational objectives and effective risk tracking. This reflectsProactive Risk Monitoring.

The risk practitioner should explain to senior management that mitigation plans for threat events should be prepared in the current planning period, as this would demonstrate a proactive and responsible approach to risk management. Mitigation plans are documents that outline the actions and resources needed to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of a specific risk scenario. Mitigation plans should include the following elements:

Risk scenario description and risk ID

Risk owner and other stakeholders

Risk response strategy and objectives

Risk response actions and tasks

Resources, costs, and benefits

Roles and responsibilities

Timeline and milestones

Performance indicators and monitoring mechanisms

Contingency plans and triggers

Mitigation plans help to address the gap between the current and desired risk levels and align the risk response with the organizational risk appetite and objectives. Mitigation plans also facilitate the communication, coordination, and collaboration among the risk owners and other stakeholders involved in the risk response process. Mitigation plans should be prepared in the current planning period, as this would allow the organization to act timely and effectively in the event of a low frequency threat event. Preparing mitigation plans in advance would also help to avoid or minimize the potential harm to the organization and its reputation.

The other options are not the best ways to communicate the associated risk to senior management. Explaining that this risk scenario is equivalent to more frequent but lower impact risk scenarios may not accurately reflect the true nature and severity of the risk. Explaining that the current level of risk is within tolerance may not convey the urgency and importance of addressing the risk. Explaining that an increase in threat events could cause a loss sooner than anticipated may not provide a clear and actionable solution for the risk. References = Four steps for managing risk at the CEO level, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, How to Communicate Risk to Stakeholders | Anitian

The first course of action for an organization that has received notification that it is a potential victim of a cybercrime that may have compromised sensitive customer data is to invoke the incident response plan. An incident response plan is a set of procedures and guidelines that defines the roles and responsibilities of the incident response team, the communication and escalation channels, the incident identification and classification criteria, the incident containment and eradication strategies, the incident recovery and restoration activities, and the incident documentation and reporting requirements. Invoking the incident response plan as soon as possible is crucial to minimize the damage and disruption caused by the cybercrime, to preserve the evidence and facilitate the investigation, and to comply with the legal andregulatory obligations. The other options are not the first course of action, although they may be subsequent or concurrent steps in the incident response process. Determining the business impact is a part of the incident assessment and prioritization phase, which helps to evaluate the severity and scope of the incident and to allocate the appropriate resources and actions. Conducting a forensic investigation is a part of the incident analysis and evidence collection phase, which helps to identify the source and cause of the incident and to support the legal and disciplinary actions. Invoking the business continuity plan (BCP) is a part of the incident recovery and restoration phase, which helps to resume the normal operations and services and to mitigate the adverse effects of the incident. References = The National Cyber Incident Response Plan (NCIRP), Cyber Incident Response Plan | Cyber.gov.au, [Cyber Incident Response: A Framework for Preparation and Success], [Cyber Incident Response Plan: How to Create One for Your Business]

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

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

An incident is an unplanned event that disrupts or degrades the normal operation or performance of an IT service, system, or network1. An incident can cause various negative impacts, such as service outages, data losses, security breaches, or customer dissatisfaction2. An incident can recur if the underlying cause or problem of the incident is not properly identified and resolved3.

The best course of action to help reduce the probability of an incident recurring is to perform root cause analysis. Root cause analysis is a systematic process of finding and eliminating the fundamental cause or problem that led to the incident4. Root cause analysis can help to:

Prevent or minimize the recurrence of the incident by addressing the source of the problem, not just the symptoms or effects

Identify and implement corrective or preventive actions that can effectively resolve or mitigate the problem

Learn from the incident and improve the IT service, system, or network quality and reliability

Enhance the incident management and problem management processes and capabilities5

References = What is an Incident?, Incident Management - Wikipedia, Problem Management - Wikipedia, Root Cause Analysis - Wikipedia, Root Cause Analysis: A Guide for Business Leaders

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

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

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

A good IT risk scenario must be aligned with a business objective. This alignment ensures that the risk scenario is relevant to the organization’s goals and can be effectively integrated into its risk management processes.

Alignment to Business Objective (Answer C):

Importance: Aligning risk scenarios with business objectives ensures that they are relevant and support the organization’s overall strategy.

Impact: This alignment helps in prioritizing risk management efforts and resources toward areas that directly affect the organization’s success.

Outcome: It leads to more effective risk management by focusing on risks that could impact key business outcomes.

Comparison with Other Options:

A. The scenario is aligned to business control processes:

Purpose: Control processes are important but secondary to business objectives.

B. The scenario is aligned to the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance:

Purpose: Important for overall risk management but not the primary characteristic of a good risk scenario.

D. The scenario is aligned to known vulnerabilities in information technology:

Purpose: While addressing vulnerabilities is important, the primary focus should be on how these vulnerabilities affect business objectives.

References:

ISACA CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2, "IT Risk Assessment", which emphasizes the need for risk scenarios to be aligned with business objectives for effective risk management.

 Role of the Board and Executive Management:

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

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

 Defining Risk Tolerance:

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

The board and executive management establish risk tolerance based on the organization's strategic goals, capacity to absorb losses, and regulatory requirements.

 Importance of Senior Leadership:

Senior leadership's involvement ensures that risk tolerance is aligned with the organization's overall strategy and risk appetite.

It provides a top-down approach to risk management, ensuring consistency and alignment across the organization.

 Comparing Other Stakeholders:

IT Compliance and IT Audit:These functions are responsible for monitoring and ensuring adherence to policies but do not set risk tolerance.

Regulators and Shareholders:They influence risk management practices through external pressures but do not define risk tolerance directly.

Enterprise Risk Management (ERM):ERM frameworks support the implementation of risk management but the actual definition of risk tolerance comes from the board and executive management.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses how senior management, including the board, is responsible for defining risk tolerance and ensuring it aligns with the organization's risk appetite (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.10 Risk Appetite, Tolerance, and Capacity) .

Determining Controls:

Acceptable Risk Level: The level of acceptable risk to the organization is the most important consideration because it directly influences the type and extent of controls implemented. Controls must be designed to keep risk within acceptable levels.

Risk Management Strategy: Aligning controls with the organization's risk appetite ensures that resources are used effectively and that critical information systems are adequately protected.

Comparison with Other Options:

Number of Threats: Important for understanding risk exposure but secondary to determining acceptable risk levels.

Available Budget: Budget constraints are important but should not compromise the implementation of necessary controls.

Number of Vulnerabilities: Identifying vulnerabilities is part of the risk assessment process, but controls are prioritized based on the acceptable risk level.

Best Practices:

Risk Assessment: Conduct thorough risk assessments to understand the potential impact of threats and vulnerabilities.

Control Effectiveness: Implement controls that are both cost-effective and capable of reducing risk to acceptable levels.

Continuous Monitoring: Regularly monitor and review controls to ensure they remain effective and aligned with the organization's risk tolerance.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Highlights the importance of aligning controls with the acceptable risk levels determined by the organization ​​.

ISACA Standards: Recommend focusing on acceptable risk levels to guide control implementation and ensure effective risk management .

Implementing an emergency change authorization process is the best control for an organization that allows programmers to change production systems in emergency situations, because it helps to ensure that the changes are justified, approved, documented, and tested before they are implemented, and that they are monitored and reviewed after they are implemented. An emergency change is a change that is required to resolve or prevent a critical issue or incident that may affect the availability, performance, or security of the production systems. A production system is a system that is used to support or enable the operational or business functions or processes of the organization. An emergency change authorization process is a process that defines the roles and responsibilities, criteria and procedures, and tools and techniques for managing and controlling the emergency changes. Implementing an emergency change authorization process is the best control, as it helps to minimize the risks and impacts of the emergency changes, and to maintain the integrity and reliability of the production systems. Periodically reviewing operator logs, limiting the number of super users, and reviewing the programmers’ emergency change reports are all possible controls for an organization that allows programmers to change production systems in emergency situations, but they are not the best control, as they do not provide a comprehensive and consistent approach to the emergency change management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 208

Social engineering attacks are attempts to manipulate or deceive people into revealing confidential or personal information, such as passwords, account numbers, or security codes. Customer service representatives are often targeted by social engineering attacks, as they have access to sensitive customer data and may be pressured to provide quick and satisfactory service. Therefore, it is most important to include in a risk awareness training session for the customer service department how to identify and prevent social engineering attacks, such as phishing, vishing, baiting, or impersonation.

References

•The role of customer service in cybersecurity - Security Intelligence

•How to Improve Risk Awareness in the Workplace [+ Template] - AlertMedia

•Top 4 Risks For Customer Service Teams | Resolver

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]

An IT risk register is a document that records and tracks the significant IT risks that an organization faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. An IT risk register can help to provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the organization’s IT risk profile, and to support the decision making and reporting of the IT risk management function1.

One of the data that must be updated to maintain an IT risk register is the expected frequency and potential impact of each IT risk. The expected frequency is the probability or likelihood of the IT risk occurring, based on historical data, statistical analysis, expert judgment, or other methods. The potential impact is the magnitude or severity of the consequences or outcomes of the IT risk, measured in terms of cost, time, quality, reputation, or other criteria2.

Updating the expected frequency and potential impact of each IT risk is essential for maintaining an IT risk register, because it can help to:

Evaluate and prioritize the IT risks based on their risk level, which is calculated by multiplying the frequency and impact

Monitor and track the changes or trends in the IT risk exposure and performance over time

Identify and implement the appropriate risk response strategies and controls, based on the risk level and the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization

Report and communicate the IT risk status and progress to the stakeholders, using risk indicators, dashboards, or matrices3

The other options are not the data that must be updated to maintain an IT risk register, but rather the data that are used as inputs or outputs of the IT risk management process. Risk tolerance is the acceptable variation in the outcomes related to specific objectives or risks. Risk tolerance is used to measure the IT risk analysis and to guide the IT risk response. Enterprise-wide IT risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the IT risks across the organization. Enterprise-wide IT risk assessment is used topopulate the IT risk register and to inform the IT risk response. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite is used to guide the IT risk analysis and to align the IT risk response. References =

Risk Register - ISACA

Risk Analysis - ISACA

Risk Register 2021-2022 - UNECE

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

[Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance - ISACA]

[Enterprise Risk Assessment - ISACA]

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The primary reason for a risk practitioner to report changes and trends in the IT risk profile to senior management is to ensure that IT risk is managed within acceptable limits, because it helps to inform and advise the senior management on the current state and direction of IT risk, and to support the risk-based decision making and prioritization. An IT risk profile is a summary of the key IT risks that an organization faces, and their implications for the organization’s objectives and strategy. An IT risk profile may change or evolve over time, due to factors such as new technologies, business initiatives, or external events. Reporting changes and trends in the IT risk profile to senior management is the primary reason, as it helps to ensure that the senior management is aware of and prepared for the IT risk challenges and opportunities, and that the IT risk is managed within the acceptable limits defined by the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. To ensure risk owners understand their responsibilities, to ensure the organization complies with legal requirements, and to ensure the IT risk awareness program is effective are all possible reasons for reporting changes and trends in the IT risk profile, but they are not the primary reason, as they are not directly related to the management of IT risk within acceptable limits. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3, page 91

 The best way to assess the effectiveness of an access management process is to reconcile a list of accounts belonging to terminated employees. This will ensure that the access rights of the employees who have left the organization are revoked in a timely and accurate manner, and that there are no orphaned or unauthorized accounts that could pose a security risk. Comparing the actual process with the documented process, reviewing access logs for user activity, and reviewing for compliance with acceptable use policy are also useful methods, but they are not as direct and conclusive as reconciling a list of accounts belonging to terminated employees. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

The primary consideration for determining recovery priorities in a disaster recovery situation is the impact of business disruption on the organization’s mission, objectives, and stakeholders. Business disruption can result in loss of revenue, reputation, customer satisfaction, market share, and competitive advantage. Therefore, the recovery priorities should be based on the criticality of the business processes and functions that support the organization’s value proposition and strategic goals. Data security (A), recovery costs (B), and recovery resource availability (D) are important factors, but they are secondary to the impact of business disruption. Data security should be ensured throughout the recovery process, but it does not determine the recovery order. Recovery costs should be balanced with the benefits of restoring the business operations, but they do not reflect the urgency of the recovery. Recovery resource availability should be assessed and allocated according to the recovery priorities, but it does not define the recovery sequence. (Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 5th Edition, page 982)

The best tool to support the management of identified risk scenarios is maintaining a risk register, as it provides a comprehensive and structured record of the risk information and decisions, such as the risk description, rating, ownership, response, and status, and facilitates the communication and accountability of the risk management process and activities. The other options are not the best tools, as they are more related to the collection, measurement, or definition of the risk scenarios, respectively, rather than the management of the risk scenarios. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

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 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.

The most important factor when determining risk appetite is gaining management consensus, as it involves obtaining the agreement and support of the senior management and the board of directors on the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, and ensuring the alignment and consistency of the risk appetite across the organization. The other options are not the most important factors, as they are more related to the assessment, benchmarking, or identification of the risk, respectively, rather than the determination of the risk appetite. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

 Internal Audit Review:

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

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

 Steps in Audit Review:

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

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

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

 Importance of Audit Review:

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

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

 Comparing Other Validation Methods:

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

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

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

 References:

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

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

References:

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

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

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

The primary reason for logging is to provide evidence of activities, ensuring accountability and traceability. This supports investigations, audits, and compliance requirements, aligning withControl Monitoring and Reportingstandards.

The organization has adopted the risk treatment of transfer, which means that it has shifted some or all of the potential negative consequences of a risk event to another party, such as a vendor, an insurer, or a partner. By including penalties for loss of availability in the contract, the organization has transferred the financial impact of a service disruption to the vendor, who will be liable for compensating the organization for the loss. Transfer does not eliminate the risk, but it reduces the organization’s exposure to the risk.

References:

•ISACA, Risk and Information Systems Control Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2020, p. 2111

•ISACA, A Nuanced View of Risk Response2

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

The criticality of the asset is the most important factor to consider when determining its value during the risk identification process, because it reflects how essential the asset is for the organization’s mission, objectives, and operations. The criticality of the asset can be measured by the potential impact of its loss or compromise on the organization’s performance, reputation, compliance, and continuity. The higher the criticality, the higher the value of the asset.

References

•IT Asset Valuation, Risk Assessment and Control Implementation Model - ISACA

•Identifying Assets for IT Risk Analysis — RiskOptics - Reciprocity

•Asset Valuation - Definition, Methods, and Importance

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

Assigning accountability to risk owners is the best way to ensure implementation of corrective action plans, because it clarifies the roles and responsibilities of those who are in charge of managing and mitigating the risks. Contracting to third parties, establishing employee awareness training, and setting target dates tocomplete actions are all helpful measures, but they do not guarantee the implementation of corrective action plans without accountability. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.3, page 105

Reporting to the Risk Committee:

Role of Risk Committee: The risk committee is responsible for overseeing the organization’s risk management practices, including identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks.

Emerging IT Risks: Reporting emerging IT risk scenarios to the committee ensures that new and evolving threats are identified and addressed proactively.

Importance of Emerging IT Risk Scenarios:

Proactive Risk Management: By staying informed about emerging risks, the committee can implement preventive measures and avoid potential impacts.

Strategic Planning: Understanding emerging risks allows for better strategic planning and resource allocation to address these risks.

Comparison with Other Options:

System Risk and Control Matrix: Useful for ongoing monitoring but may not capture new and emerging risks.

Changes to Risk Assessment Methodology: Important for refining risk management processes but not as critical as identifying new risks.

Audit Committee Charter: Relevant for governance but not directly related to proactive risk management.

Best Practices:

Regular Updates: Provide the risk committee with regular updates on emerging IT risk scenarios.

Collaborative Approach: Engage various stakeholders in identifying and reporting emerging risks.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Highlights the importance of monitoring and reporting emerging IT risks to ensure effective risk management .

ISACA Guidelines: Stress the need for continuous risk assessment and reporting to keep the risk committee informed of new threats ​​.

Defining recovery time objectives (RTOs) and acceptable data loss thresholds is critical for effective disaster response, ensuring recovery activities are aligned with business priorities. This supportsBusiness Continuity Planning.

The primary reason to implement a formalized risk taxonomy is to reduce subjectivity in risk management, as it provides a common and consistent language and structure for identifying, classifying, and reporting risks, and facilitates the comparison and aggregation of risks across the organization. The other options are not the primary reasons, as they are more related to the outcomes, benefits, or drivers of risk management, respectively, rather than the reason for risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

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

Integrity is the property of data that ensures its accuracy, completeness, and consistency2. If concurrent update transactions to an account are not processed properly, the integrity of the data may be compromised, as it may lead to concurrency problems such as lost update, unrepeatable read, or phantom read3. These problems can cause the data to be incorrect, incomplete, or inconsistent, which may affect the reliability and validity of the data. Therefore, option D is the correct answer, as it reflects the impact of improper concurrent update transactions on the data integrity. The other options are not correct, as they do not directly relate to the effect of concurrent update transactions on the data. Option A, confidentiality, is the property of data that ensures its protection from unauthorized access or disclosure2. Concurrent update transactions do not necessarily affect the confidentiality of the data, as they do not involve exposing the data to unauthorized parties. Option B, accountability, is the property of data that ensures its traceability and auditability2. Concurrent update transactions do not necessarily affect the accountability of the data, as they do not involve losing the records or logs of the data transactions. Option C, availability, is the property of data that ensures its accessibility and usability2. Concurrent update transactions do not necessarily affect the availability of the data, as they do not involve preventing the access or use of the data.

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

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.

Relationship between Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance:

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

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

Contextual Understanding:

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

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

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

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

Best Practices:

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

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

References:

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

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

The best method for identifying vulnerabilities is periodic network scanning. Network scanning is a process of scanning and probing the network devices, systems, and applications to discover and analyze their security weaknesses, such as configuration errors, outdated software, or open ports. Network scanning can help to identify the vulnerabilities that could be exploited by attackers to gain unauthorized access, compromise data, or disrupt services. Periodic network scanning is the best method, because it can provide a regular and comprehensive view of the network security posture, and it can detect and address the new or emerging vulnerabilities in a timely manner. Periodic network scanning can also help to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements and standards for network security, such as the ISO/IEC 27001, the NIST SP 800-53, or the PCI DSS123. The other options are not the best method, although they may be useful or complementary to periodic network scanning. Batch job failure monitoring is a process of monitoring and reporting the failures or errors that occur during the execution of batch jobs, such as data processing, backup, or synchronization. Batch job failure monitoring can help to identify the operational or technical issues that affect the performance or availability of the network services, but it does not directly identify the security vulnerabilities or the potential threats. Annual penetration testing is a process of simulating a real-world attack on the network devices, systems, and applications to evaluate their security defenses and resilience. Penetration testing can help to identify and exploit the vulnerabilities that could be used by attackers to compromise the network security, and to provide recommendations for improvement. However, annual penetration testing is not the best method, because it is not frequent or consistent enough to keep up with the changing and evolving network security landscape, and it may not cover all thenetwork components or scenarios. Risk assessments are a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks associated with the network devices, systems, and applications. Risk assessments can help to estimate the probability and impact of the vulnerabilities and the threats, and to prioritize and respond to the risks accordingly. However, risk assessments are not the same as or a substitute for vulnerability identification, as they rely on the vulnerability information as an input, rather than an output. References = Vulnerability Testing: Methods, Tools, and 10 Best Practices, ISO/IEC 27001 Information Security Management, NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5

The scenario that is most important to communicate to senior management is the accepted risk scenarios with impact exceeding the risk tolerance, as it indicates a significant risk issue or breach that may affect the achievement of the organizational objectives, and may require a review or escalation action. The other options are not the most important scenarios, as they may not indicate a risk issue or breach, but rather a risk monitoring, sharing, or management activity, respectively, that may not affect the organizational objectives directly or significantly. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

Requesting a formal risk acceptance sign-off is the most likely scenario when the residual risk in excess of the risk appetite cannot be mitigated, because it indicates that the organization is willing to tolerate a higher level of risk than it normally would, and that the risk owner has the authority and accountability to accept the risk and its consequences. Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging the existence ofa risk and deciding not to take any action to reduce it. Risk acceptance is usually chosen when the cost or effort of mitigating the risk outweighs the potential benefits, or when no feasible mitigation options are available. Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying controls or mitigating factors. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Inherent risk, cancellation of an initiative, change of risk appetite, and constant residual risk are all possible scenarios that may affect the risk management process, but they are not the most likely to cause a risk practitioner to request a formal risk acceptance sign-off, as they do not necessarily involve a risk owner accepting a higher level of risk than the organization’s risk appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2, page 103

Reviewing the risk register change log is the best way for management to validate whether risk response activities have been completed, because it helps to track and monitor the changes and updates that have been made to the risk register, and to verify that the risk response activities have been implemented and closed. A risk register is a document that captures, identifies, assesses and tracks risk as part of the risk management process4. A risk register change log is a record that documents the date, description, and reason for each change or update that is made to the risk register. A risk response activity is an action or task that is performed to implement the chosen risk response strategy for a specific risk, such as avoid, transfer, mitigate, or accept. Reviewing the risk register change log is the best way, as it helps to ensure that the risk register is accurate and current, and that the risk response activities have been completed and reported. Reviewing evidence of risk acceptance, control effectiveness test results, and control design documentation are all possible ways to validate whether risk response activities have been completed, but they are not the best way, as they may not cover all the risk response activities, and they may not reflect the changes or updates in the risk register. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 101

Risk likelihood is most likely to be reassessed as a result of implementing a machine learning-based solution to monitor IT usage and analyze user behavior in an effort to detect internal fraud, as it may change the probability of fraud occurrence or detection, and affect the risk assessment and response. Risk culture, risk appetite, and risk capacity are not the most likely to be reassessed, as they are more stable and strategic aspects of risk management, and are not directly influenced by the implementation of a specific solution. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 108.

The risk practitioner is responsible for determining which stakeholders need to be involved in the development of a risk scenario, as they have the knowledge and skills to facilitate the process and ensure that the relevant perspectives and information are considered. The risk owner, the compliance manager, and the control owner are examples of stakeholders who may participate in the risk scenario development, but they are not responsible for determining who should be involved. References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit, page 9; CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the primary benefit of selecting an appropriate set of key risk indicators (KRIs) is that they provide a warning of emerging high-risk conditions. KRIs are metrics that monitor changes in the level of risk exposure and contribute to the early warning signs that enable organizations to report risks, prevent crises, and mitigate them in time. KRIs help risk managers to identify potential threats, assess their impact and likelihood, and take proactive measures to reduce the risk or seize the opportunity12

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

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

References:

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

•ISACA, The Role of Ethics in Risk Management2

The most important factor for management to consider when deciding whether to invest in an IT initiative that exceeds management’s risk appetite is C. Risk tolerance1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that management is willing to allow for any specific risk as the enterprise pursues its objectives. Risk tolerance reflects the degree of uncertainty that an organization is prepared to accept in relation to achieving its goals2

When an IT initiative exceeds management’s risk appetite, it means that the potential benefits of the initiative are outweighed by the potential negative consequences or losses that could result from the initiative. However, management may still decide to invest in the initiative if the level of uncertainty or variation is within the organization’s risk tolerance. For example, management may accept a higher level of risk for a strategic or innovative initiative that could provide a competitive advantage or a significant return on investment3

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

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

The most important data attribute of KRIs is that the data is relevant. This means that the data reflects the current state of the risk, the potential impact of the risk, and the effectiveness of the risk response. Relevant data helps to monitor and measure the risk performance and to make informed decisions about risk management.

The other options are not the most important data attributes of KRIs. They are either secondary or not essential for KRIs.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

The first step in risk assessment is asset identification, which is the process of identifying and documenting the assets that are relevant and valuable to the organization, such as people, information, systems, processes, or infrastructure1. Asset identification can help to:

Establish the scope and boundaries of the risk assessment, and ensure that all the assets within the scope are considered and covered2.

Determine the criticality and priority of the assets, and assign them appropriate values or ratings based on their importance and contribution to the organization’s objectives3.

Identify the potential threats and vulnerabilities that may affect the assets, and assess their likelihood and impact on the assets4.

The other options are not the first step in risk assessment, because:

Review risk governance is not the first step, but rather a prerequisite or a foundation for risk assessment. Risk governance is the system of principles, policies, roles, and responsibilities that guide and oversee the risk management activities and initiatives of the organization5. Reviewing risk governance can help to ensure that the risk assessment is aligned with the organization’s riskstrategy, culture, and appetite, and that the risk assessment process is consistent, effective, and efficient6.

Identify risk factors is not the first step, but rather a subsequent or a parallel step to asset identification. Risk factors are the elements or conditions that influence or contribute to the occurrence or outcome of a risk event7. Identifying risk factors can help to understand the causes and sources of the risks, and to analyze and evaluate the risks based on their probability and severity.

Inherent risk identification is not the first step, but rather a later or a dependent step on asset identification and risk factor identification. Inherent risk is the level of risk that exists before the implementation of risk responses. Identifying inherent risk can help to measure the exposure or uncertainty of the assets, and to determine the need and extent of the risk responses.

References =

Risk Governance - CIO Wiki

Risk Governance Framework - CIO Wiki

Asset Identification - CIO Wiki

Asset Identification and Valuation - ISACA

Asset Criticality - CIO Wiki

Threat and Vulnerability Assessment - CIO Wiki

Risk Factor - CIO Wiki

[Risk Factor Analysis - CIO Wiki]

[Inherent Risk - CIO Wiki]

[Inherent Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

[Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

The best course of action for the risk practitioner is to follow the incident reporting procedures established by the organization. This will ensure that the incident is properly documented, escalated, and resolved in a timely and consistent manner. Reporting the incident to the chief risk officer, advising the employee to forward the email to the phishing team, or advising the employee to permanently delete the email are not the best courses of action, as they may not comply with the organization’s policies and standards, and may not address the root cause and impact of the incident. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2.1, page 193.

The percentage of servers receiving automatic patches is the best key control indicator (KCI) to monitor the effectiveness of patch management, because it measures how well the patch management process is ensuring that the servers are updated with the latest security patches and fixes. A high percentage of servers receiving automatic patches indicates that the patch management process is effective and efficient, and that the servers are protected from known vulnerabilities and threats. The other options are not the best KCIs, because they do not directly measure the effectiveness of patch management. The percentage of legacy servers out of support, the number of unpatched vulnerabilities, and the number of intrusion attempts are examples of risk indicators or consequence indicators that measure the exposure or impact of the lack of patch management, but not the performance or outcome of the patch management process. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers

Formal acceptance of the risk is critical when the risk exposure exceeds the risk appetite, as it ensures accountability and acknowledges the decision at the appropriate level. Documenting acceptance involves communicating the potential impacts and obtaining agreement from senior stakeholders. This process aligns with theRisk Response and Reportingdomain in CRISC, emphasizing clear documentation and communication of risks for decision-making.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Detailed Explanation:A review of business processes is crucial for identifying risk owners, as risk ownership is tied to specific processes within the organization. Risk owners are accountable for managing and mitigating risks within their respective areas. This ensures that risks are effectively addressed where they arise and aligns mitigation efforts with business objectives. Properly identifying risk owners supports better governance, accountability, and alignment with the organization's risk management strategy.

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

Comparing risk rating against appetite is the most helpful criterion when prioritizing action plans for identified risk, as it helps to determine the urgency and importance of addressing the risk. Risk rating is the level of risk after considering the likelihood and impact of a risk event, and risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. By comparing risk rating against appetite, an organization can identify which risks are above, within, or below its tolerance level, and prioritize the action plans accordingly. Risks that are above the appetite level should be treated with the highest priority, as they pose a significant threat to the organization’s objectives and performance. Risks that are within the appetite level should be monitored and controlled regularly, as they are acceptable but still require attention. Risks that are below the appetite level should be reviewed periodically, as they are negligible or insignificant.

References:

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

•ISACA, Tips for Prioritizing Risk in Your Risk Register2

A business continuity plan (BCP) is a system of prevention and recovery from potential threats to a company. The plan ensures that personnel and assets are protected and are able to function quickly in the event of a disaster1. The first task when developing a BCP should be to identify critical business functions and resources, because this will help to determine the scope, objectives, and priorities of the plan. Critical business functions and resources are those that are essential for the continuity of the company’s operations, and that would cause significant disruption or damage if they were interrupted or lost. By identifying critical business functions and resources, the company can focus its efforts and resources on protecting and restoring them, and minimizing the impact of a disaster. The other options are not the first task when developing a BCP, because they depend on the identification of critical business functions and resources, as explained below:

A. Determine data backup and recovery availability at an alternate site is a task that relates to the recovery strategy of the BCP, which aims to restore the data and information systems that support the critical business functions and resources. However, this task cannot be performed without first identifying which data and information systems are critical, and what level of availability and recovery they require.

C. Define roles and responsibilities for implementation is a task that relates to the organization and governance of the BCP, which aims to assign and communicate the duties and expectations of the personnel involved in the plan. However, this task cannot be performed without first identifying which personnel are critical, and what functions and resources they are responsible for.

D. Identify recovery time objectives (RTOs) for critical business applications is a task that relates to the analysis and evaluation of the BCP, which aims to measure the acceptable downtime and recovery speed of the critical business functions and resources. However, this task cannot be performed without first identifying which business applications are critical, and what impact and likelihood they have. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. What Is a Business Continuity Plan (BCP), and How Does It Work?, Business continuity plan (BCP) in 8 steps, with templates | BDC.ca, How Develop a Business Continuity Plan - Invenio IT, Business Continuity Planning | Ready.gov, Develop a Robust Business Continuity Plan | Wrike

An IT policy is a document that defines the rules, standards, and procedures for the use, management, and security of IT resources within an organization. An IT policy should be aligned to the business requirements, which are the needs, expectations, and objectives of the business stakeholders, such as customers, employees, managers, partners, regulators, etc. An IT policy that is aligned to the business requirements can help support the business strategy, improve the business performance, and enhance the business value. 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. The best KPI for determining how well an IT policy is aligned to the business requirements is the number of exceptions to the policy. An exception to the policy is a deviation or violation of the policy rules, standards, or procedures, which may be intentional or unintentional, authorized or unauthorized, justified or unjustified. The number of exceptions to the policy can indicate how well the policy is understood, communicated, implemented, and enforced within the organization. The number of exceptions to the policy can also indicate how well the policy reflects the current and future business needs and expectations, and how flexible and adaptable the policy is to the changing business environment. A low number of exceptions to the policy can suggest that the policy is well aligned to the business requirements, while a high number of exceptions to the policy can suggest that the policy is misaligned or outdated, and may need to be reviewed or revised. References = Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Definition, Types, andExamples, Business KPIs: 5 important characteristics to be effective, What is a KPI? How To Choose the Best KPIs for Your Business - HubSpot Blog.

A virus transmitted on a USB thumb drive is a scenario that represents a threat, as it involves a malicious or harmful event that could compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of an information system. A virus is a type of malware that can infect and damage files, programs, or devices by replicating itself and spreading to other systems or networks. A USB thumb drive is a portable storage device that can be used to transfer data between computers or devices. A virus transmitted on a USB thumb drive can occur when a user inserts an infected USB thumb drive into a computer or device, or when a user downloads or copies an infected file from a USB thumb drive to a computer or device. A virus transmitted on a USB thumb drive can pose a serious risk to the information system, as it can corrupt or delete data, disrupt or degrade performance, steal or leak information, or allow unauthorized access or control.

The other options are not scenarios that represent a threat, but rather vulnerabilities or weaknesses that could increase the likelihood or impact of a threat. Connecting a laptop to a free, open, wireless access point (hotspot) is a vulnerability, as it exposes the laptop to potential eavesdropping, interception, or manipulation by malicious actors on the same network. Visitors not signing in as per policy is a vulnerability, as it creates a gap in the physical security and access control of the premises, and could allow unauthorized or malicious visitors to enter or access sensitive areas or assets. Storing corporate data in unencrypted form on a laptop is a vulnerability, as it reduces the protection and security of the data, and could enable unauthorized or malicious access, disclosure, or modification of the data in case of loss, theft, or compromise of the laptop. References = What is a Computer Virus? | McAfee, What is a USB Flash Drive? | Kingston Technology, Threats, Vulnerabilities, and Exploits – oh my!

 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

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

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics or measures that provide information on the progress and performance of an organization or a team toward an intended result or objective. KPIs can help to monitor and evaluate the achievement of strategic, operational, or tactical goals, and to support the decision making and improvement of the organization or the team1.

Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics or measures that provide information on the status and effectiveness of the controls or safeguards that are implemented to manage the risks or threats that an organization or a team faces. KCIs can help to identify and assess the strengths and weaknesses of the controls or safeguards, and to ensure the compliance and accountability of the organization or the team2.

The statement that best illustrates the relationship between KPIs and KCIs is that KPIs and KCIs both contribute to understanding of control effectiveness, because they can help to:

Measure and compare the actual and expected outcomes and impacts of the controls or safeguards, and to determine the gaps or deviations

Analyze and understand the causes and consequences of the gaps or deviations, and to identify the root problems or issues

Evaluate and report the performance and compliance of the controls or safeguards, and to communicate the results and feedback to the stakeholders

Improve and optimize the design and implementation of the controls or safeguards, and to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the risk management process34

The other statements do not illustrate the relationship between KPIs and KCIs accurately, but rather some of the differences or misconceptions between them. KPIs measure manual controls, while KCIs measure automated controls is a difference between KPIs and KCIs, but not a general one. KPIs and KCIs can measure both manual and automated controls, depending on the type and nature of the controls or safeguards.A robust KCI program will replace the need to measure KPIs is a misconception about KPIs and KCIs, as they are not mutually exclusive or substitutable. KPIs and KCIs complement and support each other, as they provide different but related information on the performance and risk management of the organization or the team. KCIs are applied at the operational level while KPIs are at the strategic level is a difference between KPIs and KCIs, but not a universal one. KPIs and KCIs can be applied at different levels of the organization or the team, depending on the scope and purpose of the measurement and evaluation. References =

Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Definition, Types, and Examples

Key Control Indicators - ISACA

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

Key Performance Indicators vs. Key Control Indicators: What’s the Difference?

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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

The 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

 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) ​​.

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

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

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.

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

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 best indication that risk management is effective is when risk has been reduced to meet the risk appetite of the enterprise. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the enterprise’s risk culture, strategy, and values, and provides a basis for setting risk tolerance levels and risk response strategies. Risk management is effective when it enables the enterprise to align its risk exposure with its risk appetite, and to optimize the risk-return trade-off. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 181

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

A cost-benefit analysis is the best method to assist in justifying an investment in automated controls, as it helps to compare and evaluate the costs and benefits of the investment and to determine its feasibility and profitability. A cost-benefit analysis is a process of identifying, measuring, and comparing the expected costs and benefits of a project or a decision, such as investing in automated controls. A cost-benefit analysis can help to justify an investment in automated controls by providing the following benefits:

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

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of assessing and communicating the value and impact of the investment across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the alignment of the investment with the organizational strategy and objectives, and helps to evaluate the achievement of the desired outcomes.

It helps to identify and prioritize the opportunities and challenges of the investment, and to develop and implement appropriate strategies and actions to address them.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the investment and its outcomes, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best methods to assist in justifying an investment in automated controls. Alignment of investment with risk appetite is an important aspect of risk management, but it does not directly address the costs and benefits of the investment. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Alignment of investment with risk appetite helps to ensure that the investment is consistent with the organizational risk tolerance and preferences,and does not expose the organization to excessive or unacceptable risk. Elimination of compensating controls is a possible benefit of investing in automated controls, but it is not a method to justify the investment. Compensating controls are alternative or additional controls that are implemented to mitigate the risk when the primary or preferred controls are not feasible or effective. Elimination of compensating controls can help to reduce the complexity and costs of the control environment, and to improve the efficiency and reliability of the controls. Reduction in personnel costs is a possible benefit of investing in automated controls, but it is not a method to justify the investment. Personnel costs are the expenses related to the staff and employees involved in the processes or functions that are automated. Reduction in personnel costs can help to increase the profitability and productivity of the organization, and to allocate the resources more effectively and efficiently. References = Cost Benefit Analysis: An Expert Guide | Smartsheet, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Automation - Efficiency, Cost-Savings, Robotics | Britannica

A loss event is an occurrence that results in a negative consequence or damage for an organization, such as a data breach, a cyberattack, or a natural disaster. The impact of a loss event is the extent or magnitude of the harm or loss caused by the event, such as financial losses, reputational damage, operational disruptions, or legal liabilities. A newly enacted information privacy law that significantly increases financial penalties for breaches of personally identifiable information (PII) will most likely increase the impact of a loss event for an organization affected by the new law, because it will increase the potential cost and severity of a data breach involving PII. The other options are not as likely as an increase in loss event impact, because they do not directly result from the new law, but rather depend on other factors, such as the organization’s risk management capabilities, as explained below:

A. Increase in compliance breaches is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will not comply with the new law, which would expose it to more risks and penalties. A rational organization would try to comply with the new law by implementing appropriate controls and measures to protect PII and prevent data breaches.

C. Increase in residual risk is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will not adjust its risk response strategies to account for the new law, which would leave it with more risk exposure than desired. A prudent organization would try to reduce its residual risk by enhancing its risk mitigation controls or transferring its risk to a third party, such as an insurance company.

D. Increase in customer complaints is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will experience more data breaches involving PII, which would affect its customer satisfaction and loyalty. A responsible organization would try to avoid data breaches by improving its security posture and practices, and by communicating transparently and effectively with its customers about the new law and its implications. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 32.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

4: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

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

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

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

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

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

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

According to Wikipedia1, a maturity model is a framework for measuring an organization’s maturity, or that of a business function within an organization, with maturity being defined as a measurement of the ability of an organization for continuous improvement in a particular discipline. A maturity model will best indicate the effectiveness and efficiency of an organization or a business function, as it helps to evaluate how well they achieve their intended objectives with minimum resources, time, and cost. A maturity model also helps to identify and prioritize the areas and opportunities for improvement, and to establish and communicate the standards and best practices for the discipline. References = Wikipedia1

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

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

A change management process is a set of procedures and activities that ensure that any changes to the IT systems or applications are planned, approved, tested, implemented, and documented in a consistent and controlled manner.

A change management process has recently been updated with new testing procedures. This means that the process has been improved or modified to include new or additional steps or methods for verifying and validating the changes before they are deployed to the production environment.

The next course of action after updating the change management process with new testing procedures is to communicate to those who test and promote changes. This means that the change management team or function should inform and educate the people who are involved or affected by the changes, such as the developers, testers, users, customers, etc., about the new testing procedures, their purpose, benefits, requirements, and expectations.

Communicating to those who test and promote changes helps to ensure that the new testing procedures are understood and followed by all the parties, that the changes are tested and promoted in accordance with the process standards and criteria, and that the changes are delivered with the expected quality and performance.

The other options are not the next courses of action after updating the change management process with new testing procedures. They are either secondary or not essential for change management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 27

Information Technology & Security, page 21

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 19

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.

Implementing a data masking process is the best method to mitigate the risk of an unauthorized employee viewing confidential data in a database. Data masking is the process of replacing sensitive data with fictitious but realistic data, such as changing names, addresses, phone numbers, etc. Data masking protects the privacy and confidentiality of the data, while still allowing for testing, analysis, or training purposes. Implementing role-based access control, including sanctions in NDAs, and installing a DLP tool are also useful methods to reduce the risk of data exposure, but they are not as effective as data masking, which prevents the data from being accessed in the first place. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

Appropriate resources contribute most to the effective implementation of risk responses. Resources include people, time, money, equipment, and materials that are needed to execute the risk responses. Without appropriate resources, the risk responses may not be implemented properly, timely, or efficiently, and may not achieve the desired outcomes. The other options are not as important as appropriate resources, as they are related to the understanding, comparison, or documentation of the risk responses, which are less critical than the execution of the risk responses. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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

The board of directors’ response to identified risk factors is the best indicator of the risk appetite of an organization. The board of directors is the highest governing body of the organization, and it is responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization. The board of directors should also oversee the risk management process, and ensure that the risks are aligned with the organization’s goals and values. The board of directors’ response to identified risk factors reflects how much and what type of risk the organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take in order to achieve its objectives. The regulatory environment, the risk management capability, and the importance assigned to IT are not direct indicators of the risk appetite, although they may influence or constrain it. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

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

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

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

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

Reporting risk assessment results to senior management is an essential part of risk communication, which is the process of sharing relevant and timely information about the risk exposure and risk management activities with the stakeholders. The most important benefit of reporting risk assessment results to senior management is to facilitate risk-aware decision making, which is the process of incorporating the risk information and analysis into the strategic and operational decisions of the organization. By reporting the risk assessment results, the risk practitioner can provide senior management with the insight and understanding of the current and potential risks, their likelihood and impact, their interrelationships and dependencies, and their alignment with the risk appetite and tolerance. This can help senior management to prioritize the risks, allocate the resources, select the risk responses, monitor the risk performance, and evaluate the risk outcomes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 105.

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

Effective risk communication best benefits an organization by helping personnel make better-informed decisions. Risk communication is the process of exchanging information and opinions among stakeholders about the nature, magnitude, significance, or control of a risk. By communicating risk information clearly and consistently, the organization can enhance the understanding and awareness of the risk, and enable the personnel to make decisions that are aligned with the risk appetite and objectives of the organization. Assisting the development of a risk register, improving the effectiveness of IT controls, and increasing participation in the risk assessment process are other possible benefits, but they are not as important as helping personnel make better-informed decisions. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The best way to resolve the concern where a control process has been implemented in response to a new regulatory requirement, but has significantly reduced productivity, is to escalate the issue to senior management. Senior management is the highest level of authority and responsibility in the organization, and they are responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization. Senior management should also oversee the risk management process, and ensure that the controls are aligned with the organization’s goals and values. Escalating the issue to senior management can help to find a balance between complying with the regulatory requirement and maintaining the productivity of the organization. The other options are not as effective or desirable as escalating the issue to senior management, because they either ignore the problem, violate the regulation, or compromise the control.

The potential loss to the business due to non-performance of the asset is the most helpful information for asset owners when classifying organizational assets for risk assessment, because it reflects the value and criticality of the asset to the business objectives and processes. The potential loss can be measured in terms of financial, operational, reputational, or legal impacts. The known emerging environmental threats are not relevant for asset classification, because they are external factors that affect the risk level, not the asset value. The known vulnerabilities published by the asset developer are not relevant for asset classification, because they are internal factors that affect the risk level, not the asset value. The cost of replacing the asset with a new asset providing similar services is not relevant for asset classification, because it does not reflect the business impact of losing the asset functionality or availability. References = CRISC Sample Questions 2024

 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

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

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

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.

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

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

Ensuring segregation of duties are implemented within key systems or processes is the best strategy employed by risk management to prevent internal fraud, because it reduces the opportunity for a single person to manipulate or misuse the system or process for fraudulent purposes. Segregation of duties is a control that assigns different roles and responsibilities to different individuals, such that no one person can perform all the steps of a transaction or process. Requiring control owners to conduct an annual control certification, conducting regular internal and external audits on the systems supporting financial reporting, and requiring the information security officer to review unresolved incidents are all useful strategies to detect or deter internal fraud, but they are not the best strategy to prevent it, as they do not directly address the root cause of fraud. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, page 197

 Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that provide information on the extent to which a given control is meeting its intended objectives in terms of loss prevention, reduction, etc. In order to provide such information, the control effectiveness indicator has to have an explicit relationship to both the specific control and to the specific risk against which the control has been implemented1. Therefore, the best source for identifying KCIs is to use controls mapped to organizational risk scenarios, which can help define the control objectives, the expected outcomes, and the relevant indicators for each risk scenario. This approach can also help align the KCIs with the organizational goals and strategy, and enable the monitoring and reporting of the control effectiveness23.

The other options are not the best sources for identifying KCIs, because:

Privileged user activity monitoring controls are specific types of controls that aim to prevent unauthorized access or misuse of sensitive data or systems by privileged users. They are not a sourcefor identifying KCIs, but rather a possible subject of KCIs. For example, a KCI for this type of control could be the number of privileged user accounts that have not been reviewed or revoked within a specified period4.

Recent audit findings of control weaknesses are useful for identifying the gaps or deficiencies in the existing control environment, and for recommending corrective actions or improvements. However, they are not a source for identifying KCIs, but rather an input for evaluating or revising the existing KCIs. For example, if an audit finding reveals that a control is not operating as intended, or that a KCI is not providing reliable or timely information, then the control or the KCI may need to be modified or replaced5.

A list of critical security processes is a high-level overview of the key activities or functions that are essential for maintaining the security of the organization’s assets and information. It is not a source for identifying KCIs, but rather a starting point for defining the control objectives and requirements. For example, a critical security process could be incident response, which requires a set of controls to ensure the timely and effective detection, containment, analysis, and recovery of security incidents. The KCIs for this process could be the number of incidents detected, the average time to resolve incidents, or the percentage of incidents that resulted in data breaches6.

References =

Key Control Indicator (KCI) - CIO Wiki

How to Develop Key Control Indicators to Improve Security Risk Monitoring - Gartner

Indicators - Program Evaluation - CDC

Privileged User Monitoring: What Is It and Why Is It Important? - LogRhythm

Internal Audit Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) - AuditBoard

Hierarchy of Controls - NIOSH - CDC

 Role of the System Owner:

The system owner is responsible for the overall operation and management of an application or system. This includes ensuring that technical controls are implemented and functioning as intended.

They have detailed knowledge of the system's architecture, the controls in place, and how those controls are applied within the system.

 Effectiveness of Technical Controls:

Assessing the effectiveness of a technical control requires understanding its implementation, configuration, and operational context.

The system owner is best positioned to provide this information as they manage and oversee the technical environment of the application.

 Comparing Other Roles:

Internal Auditor:While auditors review and evaluate the effectiveness of controls, they do so from an independent standpoint and might not have detailed, day-to-day operational insights.

Process Owner:The process owner focuses on business processes rather than technical controls specific to an application.

Risk Owner:The risk owner is responsible for managing risk but may not have the technical expertise or detailed operational knowledge of the system.

 Supporting Information:

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the system owner is often involved in the assessment and reporting of control effectiveness, especially regarding technical controls (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.1.3 Assessing Control Effectiveness) .

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual, a list of unencrypted databases which contain sensitive data would be the most important information for assessing the risk impact, because it would help to determine the extent and severity of the potential data breach or loss. The risk impact is the effect or consequence of the risk occurrence on the business objectives and operations. A list of unencrypted databases which contain sensitive data would indicate the scope and magnitude of the risk exposure and the potential damage to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data. The other options are not the most important information for assessing the risk impact, as they are less relevant or less specific than a list of unencrypted databases which contain sensitive data. The number of users who can access sensitive data would indicate the level of access control and the likelihood of unauthorized access, but it would not indicate the type and value of the data. The reason some databases have not been encrypted would indicate the cause and rationale of the risk, but it would not indicate the effect or consequence of the risk. The cost required to enforce encryption would indicate the feasibility and affordability of the risk response, but it would not indicate the potential loss or harm of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 78.

Reviewing historical risk events is most useful for the risk assessment process within the risk management life cycle. Risk assessment is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that may affect the project or the organization1. Reviewing historical risk events can help to:

Identify the sources, causes, and consequences of past risks and learn from the successes and failures of previous projects or organizations

Analyze the likelihood and impact of potential risks based on historical data and trends, and use statistical methods or models to estimate the probability and severity of risk scenarios

Evaluate the level of risk exposure and compare it with the risk appetite and tolerance of the project or the organization, and prioritize the risks that need further attention or action

Use historical risk events as inputs or examples for risk identification and analysis techniques, such as brainstorming, checklists, interviews, surveys, SWOT analysis, root cause analysis, or Monte Carlo simulation2

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

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

Ensuring that database changes are correctly applied is the primary reason for monitoring activities performed in a production database environment, as it helps to maintain the integrity, availability, and performance of the database and the applications that depend on it. Database changes are any modifications made to the database structure, configuration, data, or code, such as adding or deleting tables, columns, indexes, or triggers, updating or inserting data, or altering stored procedures or functions. Database changes can have significant impacts on the database functionality and behavior, and may introduce errors, inconsistencies, or vulnerabilities if not applied correctly. Therefore, monitoring database changes is essential to verify that the changes are implemented as intended, comply with the design specifications and standards, and do not cause any adverse effects or conflicts with the existing database or application components.

The other options are not the primary reasons for monitoring activities performed in a production database environment. Enforcing that changes are authorized is an important aspect of database change management, but it is not the main purpose of database monitoring. Database change management is the process of planning, reviewing, approving, and implementing database changes in a controlled and consistent manner. Database change management helps to ensure that the changes are authorized by the appropriate stakeholders, aligned with the business requirements and objectives, and documented and communicated to the relevant parties. Database monitoring can support database change management by providing information and feedback on the change implementation and performance, but it does not enforce the change authorization. Deterring illicit actions of database administrators is a possible benefit of database monitoring, but it is not the primary reason for it. Database administrators are the users who have the highest level of access and privilege to the database, and they are responsible for managing and maintaining the database operations and security. Database monitoring can help to deter illicit actions of database administrators by tracking and auditing their activities and actions on the database, and alerting or escalating any suspicious or malicious behavior. However, database monitoring is not the only or the most effective way to prevent or detect illicit actions of database administrators. Other measures, such as implementing the principle of least privilege, segregating duties, enforcing password policies, and encrypting data, are also necessary to protect the database from unauthorized or improper access or manipulation by database administrators or other users. Preventing system developers from accessing production data is a possible benefit of database monitoring, but it is not the primary reason for it. System developers are the users who design, develop, and test the applications that interact with the database. System developers should not have access to the production data, as it may contain sensitive or confidential information that could be compromised or misused by the developers. System developers should only use test or dummy data for their development and testing purposes. Database monitoring can help to prevent system developers from accessing production data by controlling and restricting their access and privilege to the database, and logging and reporting any unauthorized or inappropriate access attempts. However, database monitoring is not the only or the most effective way to prevent system developers from accessing production data. Other measures, such as implementing access control policies, masking or anonymizing data, and isolating development and production environments, are also necessary to safeguard the production data from system developers or other users. References = Database Monitoring: Basics & Introduction | Splunk, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Best Practices for Database Performance Monitoring

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

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]

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]

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

A data protection management plan is a document that outlines how an organization will protect its sensitive data from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, or loss. A data protection management plan should include the following components1:

The scope and objectives of the data protection management plan, and how it aligns with the organization’s data protection policy and strategy

The roles and responsibilities of the data protection team and other stakeholders, and how they will communicate and coordinate

The data protection risks and threats that the organization faces, and how they will be assessed and prioritized

The data protection controls and measures that the organization will implement and maintain, and how they will be monitored and evaluated

The data protection incidents and breaches that the organization may encounter, and how they will be reported and resolved

The data protection training and awareness programs that the organization will provide and conduct, and how they will be measured and improved

The first step that should be done when developing a data protection management plan is to identify critical data. This means that the organization should:

Define what constitutes sensitive data in the organization, such as personal data, confidential data, or regulated data

Identify and classify the sensitive data that the organization collects, processes, stores, or transfers, and assign appropriate labels or tags

Determine the value and importance of the sensitive data to the organization and its stakeholders, and the potential impacts or consequences of data loss or compromise

Map the data flows and locations of the sensitive data within the organization and across its partners or vendors, and document the data lifecycle stages and activities

By identifying critical data, the organization can:

Establish a clear and consistent understanding of the data protection scope and objectives, and ensure that they are relevant and realistic

Provide a comprehensive and accurate data inventory that can support the data protection risk assessment and control implementation

Identify and prioritize the data protection needs and requirements of the organization and its stakeholders, and align them with the data protection laws and standards

Communicate and report the data protection status and performance to the stakeholders and regulators, and ensure transparency and accountability

References = Guide to Developing a Data Protection Management Programme

The primary focus of an IT risk awareness program is to cultivate long-term behavioral change. An IT risk awareness program is a program that educates and informs the stakeholders, such as the employees, managers, customers, or partners, about the IT risks and the IT risk management activities. An IT risk awareness program helps to increase the knowledge and understanding of the IT risks and the IT risk management objectives, strategies, and processes, and to promote the participation and collaboration of the stakeholders in the IT risk management activities. The primary focus of an IT risk awareness program is to cultivate long-term behavioral change, which is the change in the attitudes, beliefs, values, and actions of the stakeholders regarding the IT risks and the IT risk management activities. Cultivating long-term behavioral change helps to create and sustain a risk-aware culture, which is a culture that recognizes,respects, and supports the IT risk management activities, and that encourages the stakeholders to take responsibility and ownership of the IT risks and the IT risk management activities. Cultivating long-term behavioral change also helps to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the IT risk management activities, and to align the IT risk management activities with the business goals and values. Ensuring compliance with the organization’s internal policies, communicating IT risk policy to the participants, and demonstrating regulatory compliance are not the primary focus of an IT risk awareness program, as they are either the benefits or the objectives of the IT risk awareness program, and they do not address the primary need of changing the behavior of the stakeholders. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

Administrative controls are the best controls to be strengthened by a clear organizational code of ethics, because they are the policies, procedures, standards, and guidelines that define the expected behavior and conduct of the employees and management. A code of ethics is an example of an administrative control that sets the ethical principles and values of the organization and helps to prevent or deter unethical or illegal actions. The other options are not the best controls to be strengthened by a clear organizational code of ethics, because they are not directly related to the ethical culture or governance of the organization. Detective controls are the controls that monitor and report the occurrence of unwanted events or incidents. Technical controls are the controls that use hardware, software, or network devices to protect the information systems and data. Preventive controls are the controls that prevent or avoid the occurrence of unwanted events or incidents. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers

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.

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk attitude and its willingness to take on risk in specific scenarios. Risk appetite is usually expressed in a qualitative statement approved by the board of directors1.

Risk capacity is the maximum amount of risk that an organization can responsibly take on without jeopardizing its financial stability or other key objectives. Risk capacity is determined by objective factors like income, assets, liabilities, debts, insurance coverage, dependents, and time horizon. Risk capacity is usually expressed in a quantitative measure that sets the limit of how much risk the organization can handle2.

Prudent business practice requires that risk appetite not exceed risk capacity, because this would mean that the organization is taking on more risk than it can afford or sustain. If the risk appetite is higher than the risk capacity, the organization may face serious consequences such as insolvency, bankruptcy, reputational damage, legal liability, or regulatory sanctions. Therefore, the organization should align its risk appetite with its risk capacity, and ensure that its risk exposure is within its risk tolerance3.

The other options are not correct. Inherent risk is the level of risk that exists in the absence of controls or mitigations. It is the natural level of risk inherent in a process or activity. Residual risk is the level of riskthat remains after the controls or mitigations have been applied. It is the remaining risk after the risk response has been implemented. Risk tolerance is the acceptable variation in the outcomes related to specific objectives or risks. It is the range of risk exposure that the organization is prepared to accept4. None of these concepts are directly comparable to risk appetite, and none of them represent the limit of how much risk the organization can take on. References =

Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference? - ISACA

What Is the Difference Between Risk Tolerance and Risk Capacity? - Investopedia

Risk Management: Understanding Risk Capacity, Appetite, and Tolerance - Consulting Edge

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The main purpose of reviewing a control after implementation is to validate that the control operates as intended, as this can help to ensure that the control is effective and efficient in mitigating the risk, and that it meets the control objectives and requirements. Reviewing a control after implementation can also help to identify and address any issues or gaps that may arise during the control operation, and to monitor and evaluate the performance and impact of the control. Reviewing a control after implementation can also provide feedback and information to the control owners and stakeholders, and enable them to adjust the control design and implementation accordingly. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 254. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 254. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

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

 The best control to help reduce the risk of fraudulent internal transactions in several business applications is the segregation of duties. Segregation of duties is the principle of dividing the roles and responsibilities of different individuals or groups involved in a business process or an IT service, so that no one person or group has complete control over the entire process or service. Segregation of duties can help to prevent or detect fraud, errors, conflicts of interest, or misuse of resources, by ensuring that there are checks and balances, and that there is adequate oversight and accountability. Segregation of duties can also help to reduce the risk of collusion, compromise, or coercion among the internal staff, by limiting their access and authority to the business applications and data. Periodic user privileges review, log monitoring, and periodic internal audits are also useful controls, but they are not as effective as segregation of duties, as they are reactive and detective measures, rather than proactive and preventive measures. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

Ongoing availability of data is the most important consideration when selecting key risk indicators (KRIs) to monitor risk trends over time, as it ensures that the KRIs can provide timely and reliable information on the current and future risk status and performance. KRIs are metrics that measure the level of risk exposureand the effectiveness of risk response strategies, and they should be aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and objectives. Ongoing availability of data means that the data sources and collection methods for the KRIs are consistent, accessible, and sustainable, and that the data quality and integrity are maintained and verified. Ability to aggregate data, ability to predict trends, and availability of automated reporting systems are not the most important considerations, as they do not affect the validity and usefulness of the KRIs, but rather the presentation and analysis of the KRI data. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question213; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 213.

The first step to reduce the likelihood of infection from the attack is to identify systems that are vulnerable to being exploited by the attack. This would help the organization to assess the scope and severity of the risk, and to prioritize the systems that need immediate protection. Identifying systems that are vulnerable to being exploited by the attack would also help the organization to apply the appropriate patches, updates, or configurations to prevent or mitigate the attack, and to isolate or disconnect the systems that are already infected or compromised. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, page 60123

 Performing a post-implementation review is the best way to confirm whether appropriate automated controls are in place within a recently implemented system, as it helps to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the system and its controls after they have been deployed and operationalized. A post-implementation review is a process of assessing and validating the system and its controls against the predefined criteria and objectives, such as functionality, performance, security, compliance, and user satisfaction. A post-implementation review can help to confirm whether appropriate automated controls are in place within a recently implemented system by providing the following benefits:

It verifies that the system and its controls meet the design specifications and standards, and comply with the relevant laws, regulations, and contractual obligations.

It identifies and measures the actual or potential benefits and value of the system and its controls, such as improved efficiency, reliability, or quality.

It detects and analyzes any issues, gaps, or weaknesses in the system and its controls, such as errors, inconsistencies, or vulnerabilities.

It provides recommendations and action plans to address the identified issues, gaps, or weaknesses, and to improve or enhance the system and its controls.

It communicates and reports the results and findings of the review to the relevant stakeholders, and solicits their feedback and suggestions.

The other options are not the best ways to confirm whether appropriate automated controls are in place within a recently implemented system. Conducting user acceptance testing is an important step to ensure that the system and its controls meet the user requirements and expectations, but it is usually performed before the system is implemented and operationalized, and it may not cover all aspects of the system and its controls. Reviewing the key performance indicators (KPIs) is a useful method to measure and monitor the performance of the system and its controls, but it may not provide a comprehensive or objective evaluation of the system and its controls. Interviewing process owners is a possible technique to collect and analyze information on the system and its controls, but it may not provide sufficient or reliable evidence to confirm the appropriateness of the system and its controls. References = Post-Implementation Review: The Key to a Successful Project, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Post Implementation Review (PIR) - Project Management Knowledge

Developing a risk response plan is the best action to address the risk scenarios with high impact and low likelihood of occurrence, because it helps to define and implement the appropriate actions to reduce or eliminate the risk, or to prepare for and recover from the potential consequences. A risk response plan is a document that outlines the strategies and tactics for managing the identified risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risk. A risk response plan also assigns the roles and responsibilities for the risk owners and stakeholders, and sets the timelines and budgets for the risk response activities. A risk scenario with high impact and low likelihood of occurrence is a rare but severe event that may cause significant disruption or damage to the organization or its objectives, such as a natural disaster, a cyberattack, or a pandemic. Therefore, developing a risk response plan is the best action to address these scenarios, as it helps to minimize the exposure and impact of the risk, and to enhance the resilience and recovery of the organization. Assembling an incident response team, creating a disaster recovery plan (DRP), and initiating a business impact analysis (BIA) are all important actions to perform as part of the risk response plan, but they are not the best action, as they do not cover the whole spectrum of risk response strategies and activities. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2, page 103

Implement compensating controls until the preferred action can be completed, because it helps to reduce the residual risk to an acceptable level, while allowing the preferred action to be delayed or postponed. A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions and resources required to implement the chosen risk response strategy for a specific risk. A risk response strategy is a course of action that is selected to address a risk, such as avoid, transfer, mitigate, or accept. A compensating control is a control that provides an alternative or additional measure of protection or assurance, when the primary or preferred control is not feasible or effective. Implementing compensating controls is the best approach, as it helps to maintain the risk management process and objectives, and to avoid or minimize the negative consequences of the delay or postponement of the preferred action.

Developing additional key risk indicators (KRIs), replacing the action owner with a more experienced individual, and changing the risk response strategy of the relevant risk to risk avoidance are all possible approaches when a risk treatment plan cannot be completed on time, but they are not the best approach, as they may not address the residual risk level, and they may introduce new risks or issues.

Assigning a data owner ensures accountability and responsibility for classifying and protecting data according to its sensitivity. This role is critical in implementing effectiveData Governance Practices.

When selecting a risk mitigation option, management should consider the cost of control implementation, as well as the benefits and residual risks. The cost of control implementation includes the direct costs of acquiring, installing, and maintaining the control, as well as the indirect costs of potential side effects, suchas reduced performance, increased complexity, or decreased user satisfaction. The cost of control implementation should be balanced with the expected reduction in risk exposure and the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. The maturity of the enterprise architecture, the reliability of key performance indicators (KPIs), and the reliability of key risk indicators (KRIs) are relevant factors for risk identification and assessment, but not for risk response selection. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 149.

Tracking the number of suspected malicious activities reported provides direct evidence of the policy’s effectiveness in detecting insider threats. This KPI aligns withPerformance Metrics for Risk Mitigation.

Local laws and regulations should be the primary consideration when assessing the risk of using IoT devices to collect and process PII, because they define the legal obligations and liabilities of the organization and the individuals involved. Non-compliance with local laws and regulations can result in fines, lawsuits, reputational damage, and loss of trust. Therefore, it is essential to understand and adhere to the applicable laws and regulations in the jurisdictions where the IoT devices operate and where the PII is stored, processed, and transferred.

References

•Considerations for Managing Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity and Privacy Risks

•The Internet of Things (IoT) and Digitally Stored PII: Avoidable or Inevitable?

•Security Issues in IoT: Challenges and Countermeasures

Training employees to recognize and respond to social engineering tactics is the most effective way to mitigate these attacks. It empowers staff to act as the first line of defense, aligning withRisk Awareness and Organizational Trainingpractices.

Recovery time objectives (RTOs) are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the critical functions and processes after a disruption1. RTOs are derived from the business impact analysis (BIA) andreflect the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives2. Risk tolerance is the level of risk a company is willing to tolerate, and it is affected by a number of factors, including how much uncertainty or financial loss can be tolerated and where those losses will impact operations3. Risk tolerance is used to measure if the risk exposure is within the risk appetite and to implement controls to reduce the residual risk to an acceptable level2. If the majority of core IT application RTOs have exceeded the maximum time defined by the business application owners, it means that the organization is not meeting its risk appetite and is exposed to more risk than it can accept. Therefore, the most likely change as a result is to adjust the risk tolerance to reflect the current reality and to take actions to improve the recovery capabilities and reduce the risk exposure4. Risk forecasting is the process of estimating the potential outcomes and impacts of future events that may affect the organization’s objectives5. Risk forecasting may change as a result of the RTOs exceeding the maximum time, but it is not the most likely change, as it does not directly address the gap between the risk appetite and the risk exposure. Risk likelihood is the probability of a risk event occurring5. Risk likelihood may change as a result of the RTOs exceeding the maximum time, but it is not the most likely change, as it does not directly measure the impact of the risk event on the organization’s objectives. Risk appetite is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives2. Risk appetite may change as a result of the RTOs exceeding the maximum time, but it is not the most likely change, as it is a strategic decision that reflects the organization’s vision and mission, and not a tactical response to a specific risk event. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.3: Business Continuity Planning, pp. 227-238.

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

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

 The most important consideration when performing a vendor risk assessment is the inherent risk of the business process supported by the vendor, which is the risk that exists before any controls or mitigating factors are applied. The inherent risk reflects the potential impact and likelihood of the vendor’s failure or disruption on the enterprise’s objectives, operations, and reputation. The higher the inherent risk, the more rigorous and frequent the vendor risk assessment should be. The results of the last risk assessment of the vendor, the risk tolerance of the vendor, and the length of time since the last risk assessment of the vendor are not the most important considerations, as they do not directly measure the level of exposure and dependency that the enterprise has on the vendor. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question204; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 204.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) is the task that should be completed prior to creating a disaster recovery plan (DRP), because it helps to identify the critical business processes and resources, and their dependencies, that need to be recovered in the event of a disaster. The BIA also helps to determine the recovery time objectives (RTOs) and recovery point objectives (RPOs) for each business process and resource, which are the key inputs for the DRP. The other options are not the tasks that should be completed prior to creating a DRP, as they are part of the DRP itself. Identifying the recovery response team is the task of defining the roles and responsibilities of the personnel involved in the recovery process. Procuring a recovery site is the task of selecting and acquiring an alternative location where the business operations can be resumed. Assigning sensitivity levels to data is the task of classifying the data based on its importance and protection requirements. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 237.

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

The risk practitioner’s next course of action should be to review the contract and SLAs with the third-party cloud provider, as they define the roles, responsibilities, expectations, and obligations of both parties regarding the backup and recovery procedures. The contract and SLAs should specify the scope, frequency, quality, security, availability, and performance of the backup and recovery services, as well as the reporting, monitoring, auditing, and remediation mechanisms. The risk practitioner should ensure that the contract and SLAs are aligned with the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery requirements, and that they provide sufficient assurance and accountability for the third-party provider.

References:

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

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

•ISACA, Guidelines on outsourcing to cloud service providers, 2020, p. 63

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.

The percentage of projects with developed controls on scope creep is the best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure how effectively risk management practices are embedded in the project management office (PMO), as it reflects the ability of the PMO to identify, assess, and respond to the risk of project scope changes that may affect the project objectives, budget, and schedule. The other options are not the best KPIs, as they do not directly measure the effectiveness of risk management practices in the PMO, but rather the outcomes or consequences of risk management decisions. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

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 business manager is best suited to assess the impact of potential data loss when outsourcing a key database to an external service provider.

Role of the Business Manager:

Understanding Business Impact:The business manager has a comprehensive understanding of the business processes, the criticality of the data, and the potential impact of data loss on business operations.

Decision Making:They are responsible for making decisions regarding risk tolerance, business continuity, and aligning the risk management practices with business objectives.

Assessment of Data Loss Impact:

Operational Impact:The business manager can evaluate how data loss would affect day-to-day operations and overall business continuity.

Financial and Reputational Impact:They can also assess the financial repercussions and potential damage to the organization’s reputation, providing a holistic view of the impact.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual highlights the importance of involving business managers in assessing the impact of data loss due to their understanding of business operations and strategic objectives .

Risk transfer is a risk response strategy that involves shifting the responsibility or burden of a risk to another party, such as a third party, an insurance company, or a joint venture. Risk transfer does not eliminate the risk, but it reduces the exposure or impact of the risk to the enterprise. An example of risk transfer is engaging a third party to provide an Internet gateway encryption service that protects sensitive data uploaded to a cloud service. By doing so, the organization transfers the risk of data breach or loss to the third party, who is responsible for ensuring the security and availability of the data. The other options are not examples of risk transfer, as they involve different risk response strategies:

Risk mitigation is a risk response strategy that involves reducing the likelihood or impact of a risk to an acceptable level, such as by implementing controls, policies, or procedures.

Risk avoidance is a risk response strategy that involves eliminating the risk by not performing the activity that generates the risk, such as by discontinuing a product or service, or not entering a market.

Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging the risk and taking no action to address it, such as by tolerating the risk, exploiting the risk, or sharing the risk. References =Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1.1, pp. 107-108.

Maturity models are tools that help organizations assess and improve their risk management processes and capabilities. They provide a set of criteria or standards that define different levels of maturity, from ad-hoc to innovative. The primary objective of using maturity models in risk management is to enable strategic alignment, which means ensuring that the risk management activities and objectives are consistent with and support the organization’s mission, vision, values, and goals. By using maturity models, organizations can identify their current level of risk management maturity, compare it with their desired level, and plan and implement actions to close the gap. This way, they can align their risk management practices with their strategic direction and priorities, and enhance their performance and value creation. References = How to Use a Maturity Model in Risk Management — RiskOptics - Reciprocity, Using a Maturity Model to Assess Your Risk Management Program, How to Use a Risk Maturity Model to Level Up · Riskonnect

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]

An organization may rely on third-party vendors to provide some of its IT systems, applications, or services, such as cloud computing, software development, or data processing. The organization should evaluate the control environment of the third-party vendors, which is the set of policies, procedures, and practices that establish the tone and culture of the vendor’s risk management and control activities. The best way to evaluate the control environment of several third-party vendors is to obtain independent control reports from high-risk vendors. Independent control reports are the documents that attest to the design, implementation, and effectiveness of the vendor’s controls, based on the standards or frameworks that are relevant and applicable for the vendor’s services, such as the ISAE 3402 or the SOC 2. Independent control reports are prepared by independent and qualified auditors, who provide an objective and reliable assessment of the vendor’s controls. High-risk vendors are the vendors that pose the highest level of risk to the organization, such as by having access to sensitive or confidential data, or by providing critical or complex services. By obtaining independent control reports from high-risk vendors, the organization can verify that the vendor’s controls are adequate and appropriate for the organization’s needs, and that the vendor complies with thecontractual and regulatory requirements. The other options are not as good as obtaining independent control reports from high-risk vendors, as they may not provide sufficient or consistent information or evidence on the vendor’s control environment:

Review vendors’ internal risk assessments covering key risk and controls means that the organization examines the vendor’s own evaluation of its risks and controls, such as by reviewing the vendor’s risk register, risk matrix, or risk report. This may provide some information or insight on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as reliable or objective as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s internal risk assessments may have biases, conflicts, or gaps in their methodology, scope, or quality.

Review vendors performance metrics on quality and delivery of processes means that the organization measures and monitors the vendor’s performance and outcomes, such as by using key performance indicators (KPIs), service level agreements (SLAs), or customer satisfaction surveys. This may provide some information or feedback on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as comprehensive or relevant as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s performance metrics may not cover all the aspects or components of the vendor’s controls, or may not reflect the latest or updated status or results of the vendor’s controls.

Obtain vendor references from third parties means that the organization collects and verifies the testimonials or recommendations of the vendor’s services from other customers or stakeholders, such as by contacting them directly or by reading their reviews or ratings. This may provide some information or evidence on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as accurate or consistent as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s references from third parties may have biases, conflicts, or variations in their expectations, experiences, or opinions of the vendor’s services. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.2.1, pp. 147-148.

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

Detailed Explanation:SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) is used in the riskidentification phase to comprehensively analyze the organization's internal and external environments. By understanding strengths and weaknesses, internal risks can be identified, while opportunities and threats help to identify external risks. This method provides a foundation for proactive risk management.

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

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

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

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

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

Enhance the security awareness and resilience of the organization

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

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

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

Enhanced the resilience and availability of its critical systems and processes

Minimized the potential losses and damages caused by prolonged downtime

Increased the confidence and satisfaction of its stakeholders and customers

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

When an organization has a policy prohibiting ransom payments in the event of a ransomware attack, the most effective control to support this policy is creating immutable backups. Here’s why:

Immutable Backups:

Definition:Immutable backups are backups that cannot be altered, deleted, or modified in any way once they are created. This ensures that a clean, untampered copy of data is always available.

Protection Against Ransomware:Ransomware attacks typically encrypt data and demand a ransom to decrypt it. With immutable backups, the organization can restore the affected systems using the backup without paying the ransom, thereby adhering to their policy.

Effectiveness:

Restoration Capability:Immutable backups provide a reliable means to restore data to its state before the ransomware attack. This restoration capability negates the need to consider paying the ransom to regain access to encrypted data.

Compliance with Policy:By having a secure and untouchable backup, the organization ensures compliance with its no-ransom policy as it can recover operations without engaging with the attackers.

Comparison with Other Options:

Vulnerability Scanning:While important, this primarily helps in identifying vulnerabilities and does not directly help in data recovery post-ransomware attack.

Patching:Regular patching reduces the risk of ransomware infection but does not aid in recovery if an attack occurs.

Intrusion Detection:Continuous monitoring can detect ransomware activities but does not provide a solution for restoring data after an attack.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of data backups and specifically highlights the advantages of immutable backups in maintaining data integrity and availability in the face of attacks .

Scanning the Internet for unauthorized usage of the enterprise's brand proactively identifies fraudulent activities and enables timely response. This aligns withBrand Protection and Risk Mitigationstrategies.

The effectiveness of a control action plan’s implementation can be measured by the extent to which it achieves the desired risk reduction. A control action plan is a set of actions that are designed to address the root causes of a risk and mitigate its impact or likelihood. The best indicator of the effectiveness of a control action plan’s implementation is the reduced risk level, which means that the risk is either eliminated or brought within the acceptable range. The other options are not the best indicators, because they do not directly reflect the risk reduction. Increased number of controls may not necessarily reduce the risk level, especially if the controls are not aligned with the risk causes, objectives, and priorities. Increased risk appetite may indicate a higher tolerance for risk, but it does not mean that the risk level has been reduced. Stakeholder commitment may facilitate the implementation of the control action plan, but it does not guarantee the effectiveness of the plan. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.2: Control Action Plan, p. 170-171.

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses. An effective risk management program should aim to reduce the residual risk to a level that is acceptable by the enterprise, in alignment with its risk appetite and tolerance. The reduction of residual risk indicates that the risk responses are appropriate and effective, and that the enterprise is achieving its objectives while managing its risks. The other options are not necessarily indicative of an effective risk management program, as they may depend on other factors, such as the reporting culture, the audit scope and methodology, and the nature and source of the inherent risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.3.1, pp. 24-25.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the best way to mitigate the risk associated with data integrity loss in the new payroll system after data migration is to compare the processing output from both systems using the previous month’s data, as this ensures that the new system produces the same results as the old system for the same input data. Comparing the processing output from both systems using the previous month’s data helps to:

Verify the accuracy and completeness of the data migration process and identify any errors or discrepancies in the data transfer

Validate the functionality and performance of the new system and confirm that it meets the business requirements and expectations

Evaluate the consistency and reliability of the data processing and reporting in the new system and detect any anomalies or deviations

Recommend and implement appropriate actions or measures to address any issues or findings in the data migration and the new system

Communicate and coordinate the data migration and the new system testing with the relevant stakeholders, such as the data owners, the users, and the senior management

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, a cable lock is a physical security device that attaches a laptop to a fixed object, such as a desk or a wall, to prevent unauthorized removal or theft. A cable lock is the best option to reduce the probability of laptop theft, as it acts as a deterrent and a barrier for potential thieves. A cable lock also helps to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data stored on the laptop, as well as the laptop itself. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 253.

A maturity model is a tool that assesses the level of development and performance of key processes within an organization. A maturity model typically defines a set of criteria, standards, and best practices for each process, and assigns a rating or score based on the degree of compliance or achievement. A maturity model can help compare the current state of key processes to their desired state, by identifying the strengths, weaknesses, gaps, and opportunities for improvement. A maturity model can also help establish a roadmap for process improvement, by setting realistic and measurable goals and objectives, and monitoring the progress and results. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Scenarios, p. 49-50.

Information security risk factors are the sources of uncertainty that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information assets within an organization. Information security risk factors can include threats, vulnerabilities, or impacts that may compromise the security of information assets. Information security risk factors should be mitigated when developing in-house applications, which are software applications that are designed, developed, and maintained by the organization itself, rather than by external vendors or providers. Mitigating information security risk factors when developing in-house applications canhelp prevent or reduce the occurrence or consequences of security incidents, such as data breaches, cyberattacks, unauthorized access, or data loss. The best way to ensure that information security risk factors are mitigated when developing in-house applications is to identify information security controls in the requirements analysis. The requirements analysis is the stage of the system development life cycle (SDLC) where the business needs and expectations of the application are defined and documented. The requirements analysis should include the functional and non-functional requirements of the application, such as the features, functions, performance, quality, reliability, and security of the application. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can help ensure that the security requirements of the application are clearly specified and agreed upon by the stakeholders, and that they are aligned with the organization’s security policies, standards, and regulations. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can also help ensure that the security requirements are integrated into the design, development, testing, and deployment of the application, and that they are verified and validated throughout the SDLC. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can also help ensure that the security requirements are traceable, measurable, and manageable, and that they can be monitored and reviewed for effectiveness and efficiency. References = THE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE (SDLC), p. 2-3, System Development Life Cycle - GeeksforGeeks, 7.3: Systems Development Life Cycle - Engineering LibreTexts, What Is SDLC? 7 Phases of System Development Life Cycle - Intetics.

The observation that would be of GREATEST concern to a risk practitioner reviewing the implementation status of management action plans is that management has not begun the implementation, because it indicates that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored, and that the risks are not being addressed or mitigated. The lack of implementation may also imply that the management action plans are not realistic, feasible, or aligned with the enterprise’s strategy and objectives. The other options are not as concerning as the lack of implementation, because:

Option A: Management has not determined a final implementation date is a concern, but not the greatest one, because it may affect the timely completion and delivery of the management action plans, but it does not necessarily mean that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored.

Option B: Management has not completed an early mitigation milestone is a concern, but not the greatest one, because it may indicate a delay or deviation in the progress and performance of the management action plans, but it does not necessarily mean that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored.

Option C: Management has not secured resources for mitigation activities is a concern, but not the greatest one, because it may affect the quality and effectiveness of the management action plans, but it does not necessarily mean that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 123.

Ineffective control implementation can result in increased risk exposure, reduced compliance, and diminished performance for the organization. Therefore, the most relevant information for stakeholders is the impact of ineffective control implementation on the business objectives, processes, and outcomes. The impact on business can include financial losses, reputational damage, operational inefficiencies, customer dissatisfaction, and legal liabilities. The other options are not as relevant as the impact on business, because they do not directly link the control effectiveness to the business value. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 128.

Outsourcing a web application and storing customer data in the vendor’s public cloud involves transferring some of the organization’s data processing and storage functions to a third-party service provider. This can bring benefits such as cost savings, scalability, and flexibility, but it also introduces risks such as data breaches, unauthorized access, compliance violations, and loss of control12.

To protect customer data, it is most important to ensure that the vendor’s responsibilities are defined in the contract. A contract is a legally binding agreement that specifies the terms and conditions of the outsourcing relationship, such as the scope, duration, quality, and cost of the services, as well as the rights and obligations of both parties. A contract should also address the following aspects of data protection :

Data ownership: The contract should clearly state that the organization retains the ownership and control of its customer data, and that the vendor has no rights to use, disclose, or retain the data for any purpose other than providing the agreed services.

Data security: The contract should define the minimum security standards and controls that the vendor must implement and maintain to protect the customer data from unauthorized or accidental access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction. The contract should also specify the security certifications or audits that the vendor must comply with or undergo to demonstrate its security posture.

Data privacy: The contract should ensure that the vendor complies with the applicable data privacy laws and regulations that govern the collection, processing, and transfer of customer data, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). The contract should also require the vendor to obtain the consent of the customers before collecting or sharing their data, and to respect their rights to access, correct, delete, or restrict their data.

Data breach notification: The contract should establish the procedures and timelines for the vendor to notify the organization and the relevant authorities in the event of a data breach or security incident that affects the customer data. The contract should also define the roles and responsibilities of both parties in responding to and resolving the incident, as well as the remedies and penalties for the vendor’s failure or negligence.

Data backup and recovery: The contract should outline the backup and recovery policies and practices that the vendor must follow to ensure the availability and integrity of the customer data in case of a disaster or system failure. The contract should also specify the frequency and format of the backups, the location and security of the backup storage, and the testing and restoration procedures.

Data retention and disposal: The contract should stipulate the retention period and disposal method for the customer data, in accordance with the organization’s data retention policy and the legal or regulatory requirements. The contract should also require the vendor to return or destroy the customer data at the end of the contract or upon the organization’s request, and to provide proof of the data deletion.

By defining the vendor’s responsibilities in the contract, the organization can ensure that the customer data is protected in a consistent and compliant manner, and that the vendor is accountable and liable for any data protection issues or breaches that may arise from the outsourcing arrangement .

The other options are not as important as defining the vendor’s responsibilities in the contract, because they do not address the core issue of establishing a clear and enforceable data protection framework between the organization and the vendor. Updating the organization’s incident response procedures, which are the plans and actions to be taken in the event of a data breach or security incident, may help to mitigate the impact and consequences of such events, but it does not prevent or reduce the likelihood of them occurring in the first place. Storing the data in the same jurisdiction, which means keeping the data within the same geographic or legal boundaries as the organization, may help to avoid some of the data privacy and sovereignty challenges that arise from cross-border data transfers, but it does not guarantee the security and confidentiality of the data. Restricting the administrative access to the vendor, which means limiting the ability to view, modify, or delete the data to the vendor’s personnel only, may help to reduce the risk of unauthorized or accidental access by the organization’s staff, but it does not ensure that the vendor’s staff are trustworthy and competent, and it may also impair the organization’s oversight and control over the data.

References = Consumer data protection and privacy | McKinsey, 9 Tips for Protecting Consumer Data (& Why It’s Important to Keep It …, [Outsourcing Contracts: Key Issues and Best Practices], [Data Protection in Cloud Services: A Guide for Businesses], [Incident Response Planning: Best Practices for Businesses], [Data Localization: What is it and Why is it Important?], [Administrative Access: Definition, Risks, and Best Practices]

Encrypting the data would MOST effectively reduce the risk associated with inadvertent disclosure of database records from a public cloud service provider (CSP), because it is a control that protects the confidentiality and integrity of the data by transforming it into an unreadable and unmodifiable form, using a secret key or algorithm. Encrypting the data can prevent or minimize the unauthorized or accidental access, modification, or leakage of the data, especially when the data is stored, transmitted, or processed in a public cloud environment, which may have less security and control than a private or on-premise environment. The other options are not as effective as encrypting the data, because:

Option B: Including a nondisclosure clause in the CSP contract is a legal measure that can deter or penalize the CSP from disclosing the data to any third party, but it does not reduce the risk of inadvertent disclosure of the data, which may occur due to human error, system failure, or malicious attack, and it does not protect the data from unauthorized or accidental access, modification, or leakage.

Option C: Assessing the data classification scheme is a process that can help to identify and categorize the data according to its sensitivity, value, and criticality, and to determine the appropriate level of protection and handling for the data, but it does not reduce the risk of inadvertent disclosure of the data, which may affect any type or class of data, and it does not provide the specific or effective control to protect the data from unauthorized or accidental access, modification, or leakage.

Option D: Reviewing CSP access privileges is a procedure that can help to monitor and verify the access rights and permissions of the CSP to the data, and to ensure that they are aligned with the business needs and expectations, but it does not reduce the risk of inadvertent disclosure of the data, which may occur even with the legitimate or authorized access of the CSP, and it does not protect the data from unauthorized or accidental access, modification, or leakage by other parties. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 211.

The most important factor for sustainable development of secure IT services is security training for systems development staff. Security training helps to ensure that the staff members are aware of the security risks, requirements, and best practices that affect the IT services they develop. Security training also helps to improve the security skills and knowledge of the staff members, and to foster a security culture and behavior within the development team. Security training can also help to prevent or reduce security defects, vulnerabilities, or incidents in the IT services, and to enhance the security performance and quality of the IT services. Well-documented business cases, security architecture principles, and secure coding practices are also important factors for sustainable development of secure IT services, but they are not as important as security training for systems development staff. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.1.1.2, page 2291

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 653.

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

When collecting information to identify IT-related risk, a risk practitioner should first focus on IT risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its IT objectives, before action is deemed necessary to reduce the risk1. IT risk appetite reflects the organization’s IT risk attitude and its willingness to accept risk in specific scenarios, with a governance model in place for IT risk oversight. IT risk appetite helps to guide the organization’s approach to IT risk and IT risk management, and to align its IT risk decisions with its business objectives and context. The other options are not the best answers, as they are either derived from or dependent on the IT risk appetite. IT security policies are the rules and guidelines that define the organization’s IT security objectives, requirements, and responsibilities, and they are based on the IT risk appetite. IT process maps are the graphical representations of the IT processes, activities, and tasks that support the organization’s IT objectives, and they are influenced by the IT risk appetite. IT risk tolerance level is the acceptable variation between the IT risk thresholds and the IT objectives, and it is determined by the IT risk appetite. References = IT Risk Resources | ISACA; RiskAppetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference?; IT Risk Management - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics; IT Risk Management Framework - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

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

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

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

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

After identifying new risk events during a project, the project manager’s next step should be to record the scenarios into the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, owners, and status. Recording the scenarios into the risk registerhelps to document and communicate the risks to the project team and stakeholders, and to facilitate the subsequent risk analysis and response processes. The other options are not the next steps, but rather the subsequent steps after recording the scenarios into the risk register. Determining if the scenarios need to be accepted or responded to is part of the risk evaluation and treatment process, which requires a prior risk analysis. Continuing with a qualitative or quantitative risk analysis is part of the risk assessment process, which requires a prior risk identification and documentation. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Risk Identification in Project Management; 6.3. The 5 Steps of the Risk Management Process

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), reviewing the business impact analysis (BIA) will best help an organization select a recovery strategy for critical systems, as it provides an assessment of the potential impact and consequences of a disruption to the organization’s critical business functions and processes. Reviewing the BIA helps to:

Identify and prioritize the critical systems and their dependencies that support the critical business functions and processes

Estimate the maximum tolerable downtime (MTD) and the recovery time objective (RTO) for each critical system

Evaluate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of various recovery strategies and options for each critical system

Select the most appropriate recovery strategy and option for each critical system based on the organization’s objectives and requirements

Develop and implement the recovery plan and procedures for each critical system

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

The best course of action when risk is found to be above the acceptable risk appetite is to execute the risk response plan, which is the set of actions and measures that are designed to reduce, avoid, transfer, or accept the risk. The risk response plan is based on the risk assessment results, the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and the cost-benefit analysis of the risk response options. The risk response plan helps to achieve the optimal balance between the potential benefits and threats of the risk, and to align the risk decisions with the organizational objectives and context. The other options are not the best courses of action, as they are either too passive or too reactive in dealing with the risk. Reviewing risk tolerance levels may help to adjust the acceptable variation between the risk thresholds and the business objectives, but it does not address the actual risk level or impact. Maintaining the current controls may help to prevent the risk from increasing further, but it does not reduce the existing risk exposure or mitigation. Analyzing the effectiveness of controls may help to identify the gaps or weaknesses in the current risk management, but it does not implement the necessary improvements or changes. References = Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips; A Practitioner’s Guide to Ethical Decision Making; How to Manage Project Risk: A 5-Step Guide

According to the Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference? article, risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that an organization is willing to accept around a specific objective. Risk tolerance is usually expressed as a range or a limit, and it helps to guide the decision making and risk taking of the organization. The best way to promote adherence to the risk tolerance level set by management is to define the expectations in the enterprise risk policy, which is a document that establishes the organization’s risk management framework, principles, and objectives. By defining the expectations in the enterprise risk policy, the organization can communicate the risk tolerance level to all the relevant stakeholders, and ensure that they understand and follow the risk management guidelines and standards. This can help to create a consistent and coherent risk culture across the organization, and to avoid any deviations or violations of the risk tolerance level. References = Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference?

The best approach for performing a business impact analysis (BIA) of a supply-chain management application is to interview groups of key stakeholders, as this allows the risk practitioner to obtain direct and detailed information on the business processes, dependencies, resources, and requirements that are supported by the application. The risk practitioner can also clarify any doubts, address any concerns, and validate any assumptions during the interviews. The BIA is a process of identifying and analyzing the potential effects of disruptive events on the critical business functions and objectives. The BIA helps to determine the recovery priorities, strategies, and targets for the business continuity plan. The other options are not the best approaches for performing a BIA, although they may be useful or complementary methods. Reviewing the organization’s policies and procedures can provide some background and context for the BIA, but it may not reflect the current or accurate situation of the business processes and the application. Circulating questionnaires to key internal stakeholders can be a convenient and efficient way to collect some data for the BIA, but it may not capture the complexity and nuances of the business processes and the application. Accepting IT personnel’s view of business issues can be biased and incomplete, as they may not have the full understanding or perspective of the business needs and expectations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 58.

 When reporting risk assessment results to senior management, the most important information to include to enable risk-based decision making is the potential losses compared to treatment cost. This information helps to quantify the impact and likelihood of the risks, and to evaluate the cost and benefit of the risk responses. This information also helps to prioritize and allocate resources for the risk management program, and to align the risk management program with the enterprise’s objectives, strategy, and risk appetite. The other options are not as important as the potential losses compared to treatment cost, as they provide different types of information for the risk management process:

Risk action plans and associated owners are the documents that specify the actions to be taken to address the identified risks, the resources required, the timelines, the owners, and the expected outcomes. This information helps to implement and monitor the risk management program, and to assign the authority and accountability for the risk management activities.

Recent audit and self-assessment results are the outcomes of the independent and objective examination of the risk management program, such as by internal or external auditors, or by the risk owners or practitioners themselves. This information helps to provide assurance and feedback on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management program, and to identify the gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed.

A list of assets exposed to the highest risk are the resources that have the most value for the enterprise, such as hardware, software, data, or services, and that are affected by or contribute to the highest risks. This information helps to identify and protect the critical assets of the enterprise, and to reduce the exposure and impact of the risks to the assets. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1.1, pp. 58-59.

 An IT risk appetite statement is a document that expresses the amount and type of IT risk that an organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. An IT risk appetite statement can help guide the IT risk management process, by setting the boundaries, criteria, and targets for IT risk identification, assessment, response, and reporting. An IT risk appetite statement should be aligned with the organization’s overall risk appetite and strategy, and should be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect the changes in the internal and external environment. One of the factors that would most likely result in updates to an IT risk appetite statement is changes in senior management. Senior management is the group of executives who have the authority and responsibility for the strategic direction and performance of the organization. Changes in senior management can affect the IT risk appetite statement, as they may introduce new perspectives, priorities, expectations, or preferences for IT risk taking or avoidance. Changes in senior management can also affect the IT risk appetite statement, as they may require new or revised IT objectives, goals, or initiatives, which may entail different levels or types of IT risk. Therefore, changes in senior management should trigger a review and update of the IT risk appetite statement, to ensure that it is consistent and compatible with the new leadership and direction of the organization. References = Organisations must define their IT risk appetite and tolerance, Risk Appetite Statements - Institute of Risk Management, Develop Your Technology Risk Appetite - Gartner.

A business case will BEST communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives to senior management, because it provides a clear and concise justification of the objectives, benefits, costs, and risks of the proposed initiatives. A business case helps to align the risk mitigation initiatives with the enterprise’s strategy and goals, and to obtain the necessary approval and support from senior management. The other options are not as effective as a business case, because:

Option B: A balanced scorecard is a tool to measure and monitor the performance of the enterprise across four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth. It does not communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives, but rather the outcomes and impacts of them.

Option C: Industry standards are benchmarks or best practices that define the minimum requirements or expectations for a certain domain or activity. They do not communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives, but rather the compliance or alignment of them with the external environment.

Option D: A heat map is a tool to visualize and prioritize the risks based on their likelihood and impact. It does not communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives, but rather the severity and distribution of the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 118.

The best thing to include when communicating changes in the IT risk profile is the gaps between the current and desired states of the control environment, as this shows the stakeholders the extent and impact of the changes, and the actions and resources needed to address them. The control environment is the set of policies, processes, and systems that provide reasonable assurance that the IT risks are identified, assessed, and treated effectively and efficiently. The current state of the control environment reflects the existing level and performance of the controls, and the residual risk that remains after the controls are applied. The desired state of the control environment reflects the target level and performance of the controls, and the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The gaps between the current and desired states of the control environment indicate the areas of improvement or enhancement for the IT risk management process, and the priorities and strategies for risk response. The other options are not the best things to include when communicating changes in the IT risk profile, although they may be useful or relevant information. A list of recent incidents affecting industry peers can provide some context and comparison for the IT risk profile, but it does not measure or explain the changes in the IT risk level or the control environment. Results of external attacks and related compensating controls can demonstrate the security and resilience of the IT systems and networks, but they do not cover the entire scope or spectrum of the IT risk profile or the control environment. A review of leading IT risk management practices within the industry can provide some insights and benchmarks for the IT risk management process, but it does not reflect the specific situation or needs of the organization or the stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 181.