CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Questions and Answers

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

The greatest concern for an IT risk practitioner when an employee transfers to another department is that unnecessary access permissions have not been removed. Unnecessary access permissions are the access rights or privileges that are no longer needed, relevant, or appropriate for the employee’s new role or responsibility. If these access permissions are not removed, they may pose a significant security risk, as the employee may be able to access, modify, or delete sensitive or critical data and systems that are not related to their current function. This may result in data leakage, fraud, sabotage, or compliance violations. The other options are not as concerning as unnecessary access permissions, as they are related to the organizational, operational, or knowledge aspects of the employee transfer, not the security or risk aspects of the employee transfer. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

Providing opinions on control strength after the initial design is the best time for the risk practitioner, because it helps to ensure that the controls are aligned with the requirements and objectives of the new cloud-based service, and that they are effective and efficient in mitigating the risks associated with the service. A cloud-based service is a service that is delivered over the internet, where the service provider owns and manages the IT infrastructure, platforms, or applications, and the customer pays only for the resources or functions they use. An access management capability is a capability that enables the organization to control and monitor the access to its IT systems or networks, such as authentication, authorization, or auditing. Controls are policies, procedures, or mechanisms that help to reduce or eliminate the risks that may affect the security, reliability, performance, or compliance of the cloud-based service. Providing opinions on control strength after the initial design is the best time, as it allows the risk practitioner to review the design specifications and requirements, and to provide feedback and recommendations on the adequacy and suitability of the controls. Providing opinions on control strength before production rollout, after a few weeks in use, or before end-user testing are all possible times for the risk practitioner, but they are not the best time, as they may be too late or too early to influence the design and implementation of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 183

 The global organization has adopted risk acceptance as the risk response with regard to privacy requirements, as it has decided to continue with the implementation of the application that does not address all privacy requirements across multiple jurisdictions, and bear the potential consequences of noncompliance. Risk avoidance, risk transfer, and risk mitigation are not the risk responses adopted by the organization, as they would involve avoiding, sharing, or reducing the risk of noncompliance with privacy requirements, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

 Understanding Reputational Risk:

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

 Mitigating Reputational Risk:

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

 Role of Public Relations:

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

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

 Monitoring and Awareness Training:

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

 Restricting Social Media:

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

 References:

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

A gap analysis is the process of comparing the current state of the organization’s compliance with the new regulation and the desired state of compliance. It helps to identify the gaps or deficiencies that need to be addressed and prioritize the actions to close them. Performing a gap analysis is the first step to understand the impact of the new regulation and plan the appropriate risk response.

References

•ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Domain 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2.3: Gap Analysis

•Regulatory Change: Future of Risk in the Digital Era | Deloitte US

•Gap Analysis: What It Is and How to Perform One | The Blueprint

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.

Updating the risk likelihood in the risk register is appropriate when an improved control, such as an automated interface, is implemented. This change affects the probability of the risk occurring, thus reflecting the enhanced control environment.

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.

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.

References:

 First-hand direct observation of the controls in operation is the best way to confirm the existence and operating effectiveness of information systems controls because it provides the most reliable and persuasive evidence. Direct observation involves inspecting the physical and logical aspects of the controls, such as the hardware, software, network, data, procedures, and personnel involved in the information systems. Direct observation also allows the auditor to verify that the controls are functioning as intended, and to identify any deviations or weaknesses that may affect the reliability of the information systems. Direct observation can be performed by using various techniques, such as walkthroughs, inquiries, inspections, reperformance, and analytical procedures1. References = Auditing Standard No. 13, The Auditor’s Responses to the Risks of Material Misstatement, PCAOB, 2010

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, access controls are the policies, procedures, practices, and technologies that are designed and implemented to prevent unauthorized or inappropriate access to IT resources and data. Access controls are essential for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data, especially personally identifiable information (Pll), which is any information that can be used to identify, locate, or contact an individual. Insufficient access controls are the greatest concern related to data privacy when implementing an Internet of Things (loT) solution that collects Pll, as they can expose the data to various risks and threats, such as data leakage, theft, loss, corruption, manipulation, or misuse. Insufficient access controls can also cause legal, regulatory, ethical, or reputational issues for the organization, if the data privacy rights and expectations of the individuals are violated or compromised. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 240, 253.

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, vendor risk mitigation action items are the specific tasks and activities that are assigned to the vendors or the organization to address the identified risks and implement the risk responses. The percentage of vendor risk mitigation action items completed on time is the best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the effectiveness of a vendor risk management program, as it helps to evaluate the timeliness and quality of the vendor performance, the alignment of the vendor activities with the organization’s risk appetite and objectives, and the achievement of the expected outcomes and benefits of the risk responses. The percentage of vendor risk mitigation action items completed on time also helps to identify and resolve any issues or gaps in the vendor risk management process, and to improve the vendor relationship and communication. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 230.

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

The effectiveness of a control refers to how well it achieves its intended purpose of reducing the risk of material misstatement or error in a process or activity2. One way to measure the effectiveness of a control is to monitor the number of control deviations detected, which are instances where the control fails to operate as designed or is not applied consistently or correctly3. A high number of control deviations indicates a low effectiveness of the control, while a low number of control deviations indicates a high effectiveness of the control. The other options are not good indicators of the effectiveness of a control, as they do not directly relate to the performance or outcome of the control. The scope of the control coverage, the number of exceptions granted, and the number of steps necessary to operate the process are more relevant to the design or efficiency of the control, not its effectiveness

Continuously monitoring a critical security transformation program is crucial for a risk practitioner primarily to ensure that any risk events are identified and mitigated promptly. This ensures that the security transformation remains on track and that potential risks do not escalate to a level that could compromise the program’s success.

Identifying and Mitigating Risks:

Risk Identification: Continuously monitoring the program helps in the early identification of risks. This is essential because unidentified risks can lead to unexpected issues that might derail the program.

Timely Mitigation: Once risks are identified, it is crucial to mitigate them as quickly as possible. Delays in mitigation can allow risks to grow in impact, making them harder and more expensive to address.

Ensuring Program Continuity:

Maintaining Momentum: Security transformation programs often involve significant changes and can be disruptive. By ensuring that risks are mitigated in a timely manner, the risk practitioner helps maintain the program’s momentum and keeps it on schedule.

Preventing Escalation: Timely risk mitigation prevents minor issues from escalating into major problems that could halt the program.

Aligning with Strategic Goals:

Strategic Alignment: Ensuring timely mitigation of risks helps in keeping the program aligned with the strategic goals of the organization. It ensures that the security objectives are met without significant delays or cost overruns.

References:

The importance of timely risk mitigation in program management is emphasized in various risk management frameworks and standards, such as the ISO 31000 and ISACA's Risk IT Framework. These frameworks highlight the need for ongoing risk monitoring and timely response to ensure successful program execution.

Involve the development team in planning is the best recommendation to help reduce IT risk associated with scheduling overruns when starting a new application development project. This is because involving the development team in planning can help ensure that the project scope, requirements, resources, and timeline are realistic, feasible, and agreed upon by all stakeholders. It can also help improve the communication, collaboration, and commitment of the development team, as well as identify and mitigate potential risks and issues early in the project life cycle. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk identification techniques for IT projects is to involve the project team and other relevant parties in the risk assessment process1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, involving the development team in planning is the correct answer to this question2.

Implementing a tool to track the development team’s deliverables, reviewing the software development life cycle, and assigning more developers to the project team are not the best recommendations to help reduce IT risk associated with scheduling overruns. These are possible actions that can be taken during or after the planning phase, but they do not address the root cause of the risk, which is the lack of involvement of the development team in planning. Implementing a tool to track the development team’s deliverables can help monitor the project progress and performance, but it does not guarantee that the deliverables are aligned with the project objectives and expectations. Reviewing the software development life cycle can help ensure that the project follows a structured and standardized process, but it does not account for the specific needs and challenges of the project. Assigning more developers to the project team can help increase the project capacity and productivity, but it can also introduce new risks such as coordination, communication, and quality issues.

Data classification is the process of assigning labels or categories to data based on its sensitivity, value, and criticality to the organization. Data classification is the first consideration when analyzing the risk associated with the web application hosted by a cloud service, as it determines the level of protection and controls required for the data. Data classification can help the organization to comply with legal, regulatory, and contractual obligations, such as GDPR, CCPA, and PCI DSS, and to prevent data breaches, leaks, or losses. Data classification can also help the organization to evaluate the suitability and trustworthiness of the cloud service provider, and to negotiate the terms and conditions of the service level agreement (SLA).

References:

•ISACA, Cloud Computing: Business Benefits With Security, Governance and Assurance Perspectives, 2009, p. 141

•ISACA, Data Classification: What It Is, Why You Should Care and How to Perform It2

Risk mitigation is most effective when the residual risk is optimized, as it means that the risk exposure and impact have been reduced to the level that is aligned with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization, and that the risk response is cost-effective and optimal. The other options are not the factors that determine the effectiveness of risk mitigation, as they are more related to the types or sources of risk, respectively, rather than the level or outcome of risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks what the most important update for keeping the risk register current is.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Modifying organizational structures when lines of business merge: Reflects significant changes in the organization that impact risk profiles.

B. Adding new risk assessment results annually: Important but periodic.

C. Retiring risk scenarios that have been avoided: Necessary but not as impactful as major organizational changes.

D. Changing risk owners due to employee turnover: Important but secondary to major structural changes.

 Detailed Explanation:

Organizational Changes: When lines of business merge, it can significantly alter the risk landscape, introducing new risks and changing the impact and likelihood of existing ones. Updating the risk register to reflect these changes is crucial for accurate risk management.

Impact on Risk Profiles: Mergers and acquisitions can affect every aspect of an organization, from operational processes to regulatory compliance, making it essential to update the risk register accordingly.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, discusses the importance of keeping the risk register updated to reflect organizational changes and ensure effective risk management​​.

The risk practitioner’s primary role during the change is to manage the third-party risk, as this involves identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks associated with outsourcing the business operations for the emerging technology. The risk practitioner should ensure that the third-party provider has the necessary capabilities, security, and compliance to deliver the expected outcomes and meet the contractual obligations. The risk practitioner should also monitor the performance and service levels of the third-party provider and report any issues or incidents. Developing risk scenarios, managing the threat landscape, and updating risk appetite are all important activities for the risk practitioner, but they are not the primary role during the change. Developing risk scenarios is a technique for identifying and analyzing potential risk events and their impacts. Managing the threat landscape is a process of identifying and responding to the external and internal threats that may affect the organization. Updating risk appetite is a decision that reflects the organization’s willingness to accept or avoid risk in pursuit of its objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 48.

The number of emergency change requests is the most important factor to review when confirming whether implemented controls are operating effectively, as it indicates the frequency and severity of incidents or issues that require urgent changes to the controls, and may reflect the control deficiencies or failures. The results of benchmarking studies, the results of risk assessments, and the maturity model are not the most important factors, as they are more related to the comparison, evaluation, or improvement of the controls, respectively, rather than the confirmation of the control effectiveness. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

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

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

Ethics committees are typically responsible for developing, implementing, and overseeing an organization’s ethical guidelines and policies. They play a crucial role in mitigating ethical risk by ensuring that the organization’s operations align with its ethical standards123.

References

1What Is Ethically Informed Risk Management? - Journal of Ethics

2Five Ways to Reduce Ethics and Compliance Risk - Free Ethics Toolkit

35 Ways to Manage Ethical Risks - ClearRisk

Communicating the new risk profile is the best recommendation for a risk practitioner for an organization that recently changed its organizational structure, because it helps to inform and align the stakeholders on the current state of risks and their implications for the organization’s objectives and strategy. A risk profile is a summary of the key risks that an organization faces, along with their likelihood, impact, and response strategies. An organizational structure is the way that an organization arranges its people, roles, and responsibilities to achieve its goals and deliver its value proposition. A change in the organizational structure may affect the risk profile, as it may introduce new sources or types of risk, or alter the existing risk levels or responses. Therefore, communicating the new risk profile is the best recommendation, as it helps to ensure that the stakeholders are aware of and prepared for the changes and challenges that the new organizational structure may bring. Implementing a new risk assessment process, revalidating the corporate risk appetite, and reviewing and adjusting key risk indicators (KRIs) are all important tasks to perform after communicating the new risk profile, but they are not the best recommendation, as they depend on the communication and understanding of the new risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3, page 91

Optimized risk management is achieved when risk is reduced to meet risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the strategic goals and priorities of the organization, as well as its risk culture and tolerance. Reducing risk with strategic initiatives, within resource availability, or below risk appetite are all possible approaches, but they do not necessarily optimize risk management, as they may result in over- or under-investment in risk mitigation, or misalignment with business objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 47

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

Whistleblower Program:

Definition: A whistleblower program allows employees to report unethical or illegal activities within the organization anonymously.

Detection of Ethical Violations: Employees are often in the best position to observe unethical behavior. A well-structured whistleblower program encourages them to report such behavior without fear of retaliation.

Anonymity and Protection: Providing anonymity and protection to whistleblowers increases the likelihood that employees will report violations, thus enabling the organization to detect and address ethical issues more effectively.

Comparison with Other Options:

Transaction Log Monitoring: While useful for detecting anomalies and potential fraud, it is not specifically focused on ethical violations and may not capture all types of unethical behavior.

Access Control Attestation: This ensures that users have the correct access permissions but does not directly detect unethical behavior.

Periodic Job Rotation: This can help prevent fraud by reducing the risk of collusion and providing fresh perspectives on processes, but it does not directly detect ethical violations.

Best Practices:

Clear Reporting Channels: Ensure that the whistleblower program has clear and accessible reporting channels.

Training and Awareness: Regularly train employees on the importance of reporting unethical behavior and the protections offered by the whistleblower program.

Follow-up and Action: Ensure that reports are investigated thoroughly and appropriate actions are taken to address verified violations.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Emphasizes the importance of ethical behavior and the role of whistleblower programs in detecting and addressing ethical violations within organizations.

ISACA Guidelines: Support the implementation of whistleblower programs as a key component of a comprehensive risk management and ethical governance framework.

 Understanding Risk Analysis:

Risk analysis involves identifying potential risks associated with a new application and assessing their likelihood and impact on the organization.

It provides a detailed understanding of the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences, enabling informed decision-making.

 Steps in Conducting a Risk Analysis:

Identify Risks: Determine what risks could arise from the new application, including security vulnerabilities, compliance issues, and operational disruptions.

Assess Risks: Evaluate the likelihood and impact of each identified risk. This includes both qualitative and quantitative assessments.

Prioritize Risks: Rank the risks based on their assessed impact and likelihood to focus on the most significant threats first.

 Importance of Risk Analysis:

Provides senior management with a comprehensive view of the risks involved, enabling them to make informed decisions about proceeding with the application.

Helps in developing mitigation strategies to address the identified risks.

 Comparing Other Options:

Perform an Audit: Audits are useful for evaluating existing controls but are not the first step in assessing risks for a new application.

Develop Risk Scenarios: This is part of the risk analysis process but comes after identifying and assessing risks.

Perform a Cost-Benefit Analysis: Important for decision-making but follows the initial risk analysis to understand potential impacts.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of conducting a risk analysis to understand and manage risks associated with new applications (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2.1 Conducting Risk Analysis)​​.

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

Relationship between Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance:

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

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

Contextual Understanding:

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

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

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

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

Best Practices:

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

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

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

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

References:

Senior management’s role in the RACI model when tasked with reviewing monthly status reports provided by risk owners is accountable, as it means that they have the ultimate authority and responsibility to approve or reject the risk management decisions and actions, and to oversee the risk management performance and outcomes. The other options are not the correct roles, as they imply different levels or types of involvement or participation in the risk management process, such as being informed, responsible, or consulted, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

An independent review is typically sought to provide an objective assessment of the IT risk management program, ensuring that it aligns with the organization’s overall strategy and objectives. The reviewer can identify areas where the program may not be effectively addressing the organization’s strategic goals or where improvements can be made to better manage IT risks.

•External sources of emerging threats are sources that provide information about the latest cyberattacks, hacking techniques, malware, and vulnerabilities that can affect an organization’s IT systems and data. Examples of external sources are security blogs, forums, newsletters, reports, and alerts from reputable organizations such as ISACA, Imperva, Aura, and BitSight123.

•The most useful information an organization can obtain from external sources is the indicators for detecting the presence of threats. Indicators are observable signs or patterns that can help identify, prevent, or mitigate cyberattacks. Examples of indicators are IP addresses, domain names, file hashes, network traffic, system logs, and user behavior4.

•Indicators for detecting the presence of threats are more useful than the other options because they can help an organization to:

oMonitor and analyze its IT environment for any suspicious or malicious activity

oRespond quickly and effectively to any potential or actual incidents

oReduce the impact and damage of cyberattacks

oImprove its security posture and resilience

•Solutions for eradicating emerging threats are not the most useful information because they may not be applicable or effective for every organization, depending on its specific context, needs, and resources. Moreover, solutions may not be available or known for some new or sophisticated threats.

•Cost to mitigate the risk resulting from threats is not the most useful information because it does not help an organization to identify or prevent cyberattacks. Cost is only one factor to consider when deciding how to manage IT risk, and it may not reflect the true value or impact of the threats.

•Source and identity of attackers are not the most useful information because they may not be relevant or accurate for every organization. Source and identity of attackers are often difficult to trace or verify, and they may not affect the organization’s risk level or response strategy.

References =

•Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Risk Identification, pp. 83-84

•Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 12 Month Subscription, ISACA, 2020, Question ID: 100000

A vulnerability assessment is a process that identifies and quantifies vulnerabilities in a system. It is the most effective process to determine the relevance of threats for risk scenarios as it helps in identifying potential security threats and vulnerabilities, quantifying the seriousness of each, and prioritizing techniques to mitigate attack and protect IT resources1.

References

2Identifying and Estimating Cybersecurity Risk for Enterprise Risk Management

3Threat Modeling Process | OWASP Foundation

1Threat modeling explained: A process for anticipating cyber attacks

4Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment: A Guide - SafetyCulture

5How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA

 Risk appetite is the most important factor to consider first when creating a comprehensive IT risk register, as it defines the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, and guides the identification, assessment, response, and monitoring of the IT risks. The other options are not the most important factors, as they are more related to the resources, actions, or methods of the IT risk management, respectively, rather than the strategy or direction of the IT risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

A risk is the possibility of an event that may have a negative impact on the achievement of an organization’s objectives. A risk can be measured by the probability and impact of the event, which indicate the likelihood and consequence of the event. A risk manager is a person who is responsible for performing risk management activities, such as identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and communicating risks. When an organization retains footage from its data center security camera for 30 days when the policy requires 90-day retention, the risk manager’s best response to the business owner who challenges whether the situation is worth remediating is to evaluate the risk as a measure of probable loss, which means to estimate the potential harm or damage that may result from the non-compliance with the policy. By evaluating the risk as a measure of probable loss, the risk manager can provide the business owner with the rationale and justification for the risk remediation, and help the business owner to understand the cost-benefit analysis of the risk response. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 63.

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

A risk action plan is a document that outlines the actions to be taken to mitigate or avoid a risk. A risk action plan should be revised when the risk associated with a new technology is found to be increasing, as this indicates that the current plan is not effective or sufficient. Revising the risk action plan can help identify the root causes of the risk increase, evaluate the effectiveness of current controls, and implement additional or alternative controls as needed. Re-evaluating current controls, escalating the risk to senior management, and implementing additional controls are possible steps in the revision process, but they are not the first course of action. The first course of action should be to update the risk action plan to reflect the current risk situation and the appropriate risk response.

 Importance of a Risk Register:

A risk register is a critical tool for documenting, tracking, and managing risks within an organization. It serves as a central repository for all identified risks, detailing their status, impact, likelihood, and the actions taken to mitigate them.

A regularly updated risk register demonstrates an active and ongoing risk management process, reflecting the organization's commitment to identifying and addressing risks promptly.

 Evidence of Robust Risk Management:

The risk register shows the organization's proactive approach to risk management by continuously monitoring and updating risks.

It provides transparency and accountability, allowing stakeholders to see how risks are being managed and mitigated over time.

Regular updates ensure that new risks are identified and existing risks are reassessed, indicating a dynamic and responsive risk management practice.

 Comparing Other Options:

Management-Approved Risk Dashboard: While useful for summarizing risk information, a dashboard does not provide the detailed, ongoing updates and comprehensive tracking found in a risk register.

Current Control Framework: A control framework outlines the controls in place but does not detail specific risks or their management.

Regularly Updated Risk Management Procedures: Procedures are important but do not provide the same level of detailed risk tracking and management as a risk register.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of a risk register in consolidating and tracking risk data, making it an essential component of robust risk management practices (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.6 Risk Register)​​ .

 Zero Trust Model:

Zero Trust security model assumes that threats can exist both inside and outside the network. Every access request must be authenticated, authorized, and encrypted.

 Preventing Control Gaps:

A robust technical architecture ensures comprehensive and consistent security controls across the entire network.

It integrates various security measures, such as microsegmentation, strong authentication, continuous monitoring, and least privilege access, to create a unified defense strategy.

 Other Options:

Relying on Multiple Solutions: Can lead to fragmentation and inconsistencies in security controls.

Utilizing Rapid Development: May introduce vulnerabilities if security is not properly integrated.

Starting with a Large Initial Scope: Can be overwhelming and difficult to manage effectively, leading to potential gaps.

 References:

The CISSP Study Guide emphasizes the importance of a strong and cohesive technical architecture in implementing Zero Trust effectively (Sybex CISSP Study Guide, Chapter 8: Principles of Security Models, Design, and Capabilities) .

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

Reassessing the risk profile is the first course of action that a risk practitioner should take after a hospital recently implemented a new technology to allow virtual patient appointments. This is because reassessing the risk profile can help identify, analyze, and evaluate the new or changed risks that the new technology may introduce or affect, such as data privacy, security, quality, reliability, or compliance risks. Reassessing the risk profile can also help determine the appropriate risk response and mitigation strategies, as well as monitor and report the risk performance and outcomes. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, reassessing the risk profile is one of the key steps in the IT risk management process1. According to the web search results, reassessing the risk profile is a common and recommended practice for addressing the risks of virtual patient appointments

The migration to a jurisdiction with heavy fines for data leakage primarily affects the potential impact of a risk event. This change should be reflected in the risk impact factor, as the financial consequences of a risk event would be significantly higher.

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 and regulatory 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 deterrent control is a type of control that has been implemented by displaying a poster that reads “Anyone caught taking photographs in the data center may be subject to disciplinary action.”, as it aims to discourage or prevent unauthorized or malicious activities by warning the potential perpetrators of the consequences or sanctions. The other options are not the correct types of control, as they are more related to the correction, detection, or prevention of unauthorized or malicious activities, respectively, rather than the deterrence of unauthorized or malicious activities. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

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

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

References

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

•KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva

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

The primary consideration when establishing an organization’s risk management methodology is the business context, which includes the internal and external factors that influence the organization’s objectives, strategies, scope, and boundaries. The business context helps to define the risk criteria, the risk appetite, the risk identification, the risk analysis, and the risk treatment. The other options are not the primary consideration, but rather the outcomes or inputs of the risk management methodology. References = ISO 31000 Risk Management – Principles and Guidelines; ISO 31000 Principles of Risk Management; The risk management process: What is the best structure and administration?

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

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures the exposure to a given risk at a particular time. A threshold is a level or point that triggers an action or a warning when a KRI reaches or exceeds it. Therefore, the most likely cause of a KRI exceeding a threshold is the occurrence of specific events that increase the likelihood or impact of the risk. For example, a KRI for cyber risk could be the number of phishing attempts per month, and a threshold could be 10. If more than 10 phishing attempts occur in a month, the KRI would exceed the threshold and indicate a higher level of cyber risk.

References

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva

•Key risk indicators (KRIs) definition - Risk.net

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.

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

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

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

Business impact analysis (BIA) is the most useful analysis for prioritizing risk scenarios associated with loss of IT assets, because it evaluates the potential consequences of disruption to critical business functions and processes. BIA helps to identify the most significant risks and the most urgent recovery needs. SWOT analysis, cost-benefit analysis, and root cause analysis are all useful tools for different purposes, but they do not directly address the impact of risk scenarios on business continuity and resilience. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 143

Using a common risk taxonomy is the most important factor to consider when creating a separate IT risk register for a large organization with regard to the existing corporate risk register, as it ensures consistency, clarity, and alignment of the IT risk identification, classification, and reporting with the corporate risk management framework and strategy. Leveraging business risk professionals, relying on generic IT risk scenarios, and describing IT risk in business terms are not the most important factors, as they are more related to the resources, inputs, or outputs of the IT risk register, respectively, rather than the structure or format of the IT risk register. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

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

The greatest concern with finding unreturned and unencrypted laptops belonging to former employees is the risk of unauthorized access to organizational data. The laptops may contain sensitive or confidential information that could be compromised if they fall into the wrong hands. This could result in data breaches, reputational damage, legal liabilities, or regulatory penalties for the organization. Therefore, it is important to have proper controls in place to ensure that the laptops are returned, wiped, or encrypted when the employees leave the organization.

References: The answer is based on the following sources:

•CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4: Information Technology and Security, pages 224-2251

•CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 12 Month Subscription, Question ID: QID-10032

•What is asset lifecycle management? | IBM1

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

 Understanding KPIs:

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

 Process Inefficiency Despite No Control Issues:

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

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

 Steps for Recalibration:

Review the current KPI and its alignment with process objectives.

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

Validate the recalibrated KPI with historical data to ensure accuracy.

 Comparing Other Actions:

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

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

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

 References:

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

 Risk Appetite:

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

 Impact of Market Changes:

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

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

 Reevaluation Process:

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

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

 Other Considerations:

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

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

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

 References:

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

Updating the risk register to include outcomes from a risk assessment is the greatest benefit because it enables the organization to prioritize and respond to the most significant risks in a timely manner. The risk register is a tool that records and tracks the current status of risks, their likelihood, impact, and response strategies. By updating the risk register with the results of a risk assessment, the organization can ensure that the risk information is accurate, relevant, and actionable. Maintaining evidence of compliance with risk policy, validating the organization’s risk appetite, and helping to mitigate internal and external risk factors are all possible benefits of updating the risk register, but they are not the greatest benefit, as they do not directly support risk-based decision making. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 83

According to the CRISC Review Manual, one of the key objectives of risk identification is to assess the potential impact of risk events on the achievement of business objectives2. In this case, the business objective of the system is to process insurance claim payments for customers, which depends on the accuracy of claim calculation. Therefore, the impact to the accuracy of claim calculation should be the most important consideration for a risk-based review of the user requirements. The other options are less relevant or less critical for the business objective.

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite provides the most important information to facilitate a risk response decision, because it reflects the organization’s risk tolerance, preferences, and expectations, which guide the selection and implementation of the risk response strategies. Risk appetite helps the organization to balance the potential benefits and costs of taking risks, and to align the risk management process with the organizational strategy and culture. The other options are not as important as risk appetite, because they do not indicate the organization’s desired level of risk exposure, but rather provide supplementary or partial information for the risk response decision, as explained below:

A. Audit findings are the results and recommendations of the internal or external audit activities that evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes. Audit findings provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can identify the gaps or weaknesses in the current risk response strategies, and suggest corrective actions or improvements. However, audit findings do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the optimal risk response strategies.

C. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the impact and likelihood of the risks, and provide early warning signs of changes in the risk exposure. KRIs provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can monitor and report the performance and effectiveness of the current risk response strategies, and trigger corrective actions or adjustments. However, KRIs do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the acceptable level of risk exposure and performance.

D. Industry best practices are the standards, norms, and expectations for risk management that are established and followed by the peers or competitors in the same industry or sector. Industry best practices provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can benchmark and compare the organization’s risk response strategies with those of the leading or successful organizations, and identify areas for improvement or innovation. However, industry best practices do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the unique and customized risk response strategies that suit the organization’s needs and goals. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 40. Risk Appetite: What It Is and How to Use It, Risk Appetite: How Hungry Are You?, Risk Appetite: The Strategic Balancing Act

A cost-benefit analysis is the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan. A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions or measures that are taken or planned to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk1. Selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan means choosing the most suitable and effective option for addressing the risk, based on the organization’s objectives, strategies, and risk criteria2. A cost-benefit analysis is a method of comparing the benefits and costs of different alternatives or options, and selecting the one that maximizes the net benefit or value3. A cost-benefit analysis is the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, because it helps to:

Evaluate the feasibility, effectiveness, and efficiency of the risk treatment options, and compare them against the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance;

Balance the benefits and costs of the risk treatment options, and consider both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the risk and the risk response;

Optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities, and ensure that the risk treatment options are aligned and integrated with the organization’s goals and values;

Support the risk decision making and prioritization, and provide a rational and transparent basis for selecting the best risk treatment option. The other options are not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as they are either less comprehensive or less relevant than a cost-benefit analysis. A risk mitigation budget is a document that allocates the financial resources for implementing and maintaining the risk mitigation actions or measures4. A risk mitigation budget can help to ensure the availability and adequacy of the funds for the risk treatment options, as well as to monitor and control the risk treatment expenditures. However, a risk mitigation budget is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the benefits or value of the risk treatment options, or the suitability or effectiveness of the risk treatment options. A business impact analysis is a method of estimating the potential effects or consequences of a risk on the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance5. A business impact analysis can help to assess the severity and priority of the risk, as well as to identify the critical assets and resources that are involved or impacted by the risk. However, a business impact analysis is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the costs or feasibility of the risk treatment options, or the alternatives or options for the risk treatment. A return on investment is a metric that measures the profitability or efficiency of an investment, project, or activity, by comparing the benefits and costs of the investment, project, or activity6. A return on investment can help to evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the risk treatment options, as well as to compare the risk treatment options with other investments, projects, or activities. However, a return on investment is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the qualitative or intangible aspects of the risk and the risk response, or the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: IT Involvement in Employee Termination, A Checklist3

2: Best Practices to Ensure Departing Employees Retain No Access5

3: User Termination Best Practices - IT Security - Spiceworks2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: IT Scenario Analysis in Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA2

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

3: Business Risk - Investopedia3

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

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

7: Executive Risk Council - ISACA5

8: Executive Risk Council: A Guide to Success6

9: IT System Downtime - ISACA7

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

: IT Risk Education - ISACA9

: IT Risk Education: A Guide to Success

 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 and deliverables, as well as to adopt and apply the proven and successful methods or solutions for risk management. However, this technique does not effectively promote a risk-aware culture, as it focuses on the improvement and optimization of risk management, not the communication and collaboration of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 982; The 6 key elements to creating and maintaining a good risk culture3; How to increase risk awareness - Project Management Institute4

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

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

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

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite provides the most important information to facilitate a risk response decision, as it defines the boundaries and expectations for the risk management process. Risk appetite helps to determine the acceptable level of variation around the objectives, and to prioritize and allocate resources for the risk responses. Risk appetite also helps to align the risk management program with the enterprise’s strategy, culture, and values. The other options are not as important as risk appetite, as they provide different types of information for the risk management process:

Audit findings are the results of the independent and objective examination of the risk management program, such as by internal or external auditors. Audit findings provide assurance and feedback on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management program, and may identify gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. Audit findings may influence the risk response decision, but they are not as essential as risk appetite, as they are based on the existing or past performance of the risk management program, and may not reflect the future or potential risks or opportunities.

Key risk indicators are the metrics that measure the changes in the level of risk exposure, such as by monitoring the risk drivers, triggers, or events. Key risk indicators provide information on the current or emerging risks, and may alert the enterprise to take action or adjust the risk response. Key risk indicators may influence the risk response decision, but they are not as essential as risk appetite, as they are based on the observed or estimated data or trends, and may not account for the uncertainties or complexities of the risks.

Industry best practices are the methods or techniques that have been proven to be effective or efficient in managing risks, such as by benchmarking or adopting standards or frameworks. Industry best practices provide guidance and direction on how to implement the risk management program, and may improve the quality or consistency of the risk response. Industry best practices may influence the risk response decision, but they are not as essential as risk appetite, as they are based on the experiences or recommendations of other enterprises, and may not be suitable or applicable for the specific context or objectives of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1.1, pp. 18-19.

The primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan should be that the risk response reduces risk to an acceptable level. A risk response action plan is a document that describes the actions or measures that are taken or planned to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk1. Validating a risk response action plan means verifying whether the plan is feasible, effective, and efficient in addressing the risk2. The main objective of validating a risk response action plan is to ensure that the risk response reduces risk to an acceptable level, which is the level of risk that the organization is willing to tolerate or bear, based on its risk appetite and risk criteria3. Reducing risk to an acceptable level means that the risk response actions can lower the likelihood or impact of the risk to a point where the risk does not pose a significant threat or challenge to the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance. Reducing risk to an acceptable level also means that the risk response actions can balance the benefits and costs of the risk response, and that they can provide a reasonable assurance of the risk management effectiveness and efficiency4. The other options are not the primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as they are either less relevant or less specific than reducing risk to an acceptable level. Quantifying risk impact is a component or element of validating a risk response action plan, not a focus of it. Quantifying risk impact means measuring or estimating the potential effects or consequences of the risk on the organization5. Quantifying risk impact can help to evaluate the severity and priority of the risk, as well as to compare the risk against the risk criteria and the risk appetite. However, quantifying risk impact is not the primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not address the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. Aligning with business strategy is a secondary or incidental benefit of validating a risk response action plan, not a primary or essential focus of it. Aligning with business strategy means ensuring that the risk response actions are consistent and coherent with the organization’s goals and values6. Aligning with business strategy can help to integrate the risk response actions with the organization’s culture and governance, as well as to support and enable the achievement of the organization’s mission and vision. However, aligning with business strategy is not the main focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not indicate the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. Advancing business objectives is a tertiary or indirect outcome of validating a risk response action plan, not a primary or direct focus of it. Advancing business objectives means contributing to the improvement and enhancement of the organization’s performance and results7. Advancing business objectives can help to create value and deliver benefits for the organization and its stakeholders, as well as to optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities. However, advancing business objectives is not the main focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not address the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

A risk factor is a condition or event that may increase the likelihood or impact of a risk, which is the effect of uncertainty on objectives1. An information systems review is a process that involves examining and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of the information systems and their related controls, policies, and procedures2. The purpose of an information systems review is to identify and report the risk factors that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and performance of the information systems and their outputs3. The best way to ensure that the risk factors identified during an information systems review are addressed is to assign action items and deadlines to specific individuals, who are responsible and accountable for implementing the appropriate risk responses. A risk response is an action taken or planned to mitigate or eliminate the risk, such as avoiding, transferring, reducing, or accepting the risk4. By assigning action items and deadlines to specific individuals, the organization can ensure that the risk factors are properly and promptly addressed, and that the progress and results of the risk responses are monitored and reported5. Informing business process owners of the risk, reviewing and updating the risk register, and implementing new control technologies are not the best ways to ensure that the risk factors identified during an information systems review are addressed, as they do not provide the same level of accountability and effectiveness as assigning action items and deadlines to specific individuals. Informing business process owners of the risk is a process that involves communicating and sharing the risk information with the persons who have the authority and accountability for a business process that is supported or enabled by the information systems6. Informing business process owners of the risk can help to raise their awareness and understanding of the risk, but it does not ensure that they will take the necessary actions to address the risk. Reviewing and updating the risk register is a process that involves checking and verifying that the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the risks and their related information, is current, complete, and consistent7. Reviewing and updating the risk register can help to reflect the changes and updates in the risk factors and their status, but it does not ensure that the risk factors are resolved or reduced. Implementing new control technologies is a process that involves introducing or applying new software or hardware that can help to prevent, detect, or correct the risk factors affecting the information systems8. Implementing new control technologies can help to improve the security and performance of the information systems, but it does not ensure that the risk factors are eliminated or mitigated. References = 1: Risk Factors - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics2: Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA) - ISACA3: Information Systems Audit: The Basics4: Risk Response Strategy and Contingency Plans - ProjectManagement.com5: Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Options, pp. 113-115.6: [Business Process Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] 7: Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana8: Technology Control Automation: Improving Efficiency, Reducing … - ISACA : [Business Process Owner - Roles and Responsibilities] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.]

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.

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

Mean time between failures (MTBF) is a key performance indicator (KPI) that measures the average time that a system or component operates without interruption or failure. MTBF is a common metric for reliability and availability of IT services. A higher MTBF indicates a lower frequency of failures and a higher ability to deliver uninterrupted IT services. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, MTBF is one of the KPIs for IT service delivery1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, MTBF is the correct answer to this question2.

Mean time to recover (MTTR), planned downtime, and unplanned downtime are not the best KPIs to measure the ability to deliver uninterrupted IT services. MTTR measures the average time that it takes to restore a system or component to normal operation after a failure. Planned downtime measures the scheduled time that a system or component is not available for use due to maintenance or upgrades. Unplanned downtime measures the unscheduled time that a system or component is not available for use due to failures or incidents. These KPIs are useful for measuring the impact and duration of service interruptions, but they do not directly reflect the ability to prevent or avoid service interruptions.

Local laws and regulations should be the primary consideration when assessing the risk of using Internet of Things (IoT) devices to collect and process personally identifiable information (PII), because they define the legal and ethical obligations and boundaries for the protection and privacy of PII, and the potential consequences of non-compliance or violation. IoT devices are devices that are connected to the internet and can collect, transmit, or process data, such as smart watches, cameras, sensors, or appliances. PII is information that can be used to identify, locate, or contact an individual, such as name, address, phone number, or email address. PII is considered sensitive and confidential, and may be subject to various laws and regulations that govern how it should be collected, processed, stored, shared, or disposed, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the United States. Therefore, local laws and regulations should be the primary consideration, as they provide the legal and ethical framework and guidance for the use of IoT devices to collect and process PII, and the potential risks and impacts of non-compliance or violation. Costs and benefits, security features and support, and business strategies and needs are all possible considerations when assessing the risk of using IoT devices to collect and process PII, but they are not the primary consideration, as they may vary or conflict depending on the situation or context, and may not override the local laws and regulations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

Cross-business representation is most important to the effectiveness of a senior oversight committee for risk monitoring. Here’s a detailed explanation:

Importance of Cross-business Representation:

Comprehensive Risk Perspective: Having representatives from different business units ensures that the committee has a comprehensive view of risks across the entire organization. This diverse representation helps in identifying and assessing risks that may impact various parts of the business differently.

Informed Decision-Making: Members from different business areas can provide unique insights and expertise, leading to more informed and balanced decision-making processes.

Improved Communication: Cross-business representation facilitates better communication and collaboration across the organization, ensuring that risk management practices are understood and implemented consistently.

Comparison with Other Options:

Key Risk Indicators (KRIs): While important for monitoring specific risks, KRIs alone do not ensure the effectiveness of the oversight committee without a diverse representation to interpret and act on these indicators.

Risk Governance Charter: A risk governance charter outlines the roles, responsibilities, and processes for risk management, but its effectiveness depends on the active participation of diverse business representatives.

Organizational Risk Appetite: Understanding the organizational risk appetite is crucial, but without cross-business representation, the risk appetite may not be appropriately reflected or acted upon across all business areas.

Best Practices:

Diverse Membership: Ensure that the oversight committee includes members from all key business units and functions to provide a holistic view of organizational risks.

Regular Meetings: Schedule regular meetings to review and discuss risk management activities, KRIs, and emerging risks with input from all representatives.

Clear Communication: Establish clear communication channels between the oversight committee and business units to ensure that risk management practices are effectively implemented and monitored.

CRISC Review Manual: Emphasizes the importance of cross-functional representation in risk governance to ensure comprehensive risk management.

ISACA Risk Management Framework: Highlights the need for diverse perspectives in risk oversight committees to enhance the effectiveness of risk monitoring and decision-making.

References:Top of Form

Bottom of Form

 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.

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 most important factor for the organization to consider before implementing a new in-house developed artificial intelligence (AI) solution is the expected algorithm outputs, as they define the desired outcomes and objectives of the AI solution, and guide the design, testing, and validation of the AI algorithm. The other options are not the most important factors, as they are more related to the research, input, or monitoring of the AI solution, respectively, rather than the output of the AI solution. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 153.

Key risk indicator (KRI): A metric that measures the level of risk exposure or the likelihood of a risk event1.

KRI threshold: A predefined value or range that triggers an alert or action when the KRI reaches or exceeds it2.

Loss expectancy: The estimated amount of loss that an organization may incur due to a risk event3.

The most helpful thing in developing KRI thresholds is loss expectancy information. Loss expectancy information provides an estimate of the potential or expected impact of a risk event on the organization’s operations, reputation, or objectives. Loss expectancy information can help an organization to:

Quantify and prioritize the risks that pose the greatest threat to the organization

Determine the acceptable level of risk exposure or tolerance for each risk

Set the appropriate value or range for the KRI threshold that reflects the risk appetite and the risk mitigation strategy

Monitor and measure the performance and effectiveness of the risk management process and controls

Loss expectancy information can be derived from various sources, such as historical data, statistical analysis, expert judgment, or simulation models3.

The other options are not as helpful as loss expectancy information in developing KRI thresholds, because they do not directly address the potential or expected impact of a risk event. Control performance predictions, which are the forecasts or estimates of how well the risk management controls will perform in preventing, detecting, or mitigating risks, may help to evaluate the adequacy and efficiency of the risk management process and controls, but they do not provide a clear and quantifiable measure of the risk impact. IT service level agreements (SLAs), which are the contracts or agreements that define the quality and availability of IT services, may help to establish the standards and expectations for IT service delivery and performance, but they do not provide a comprehensive and current view of the risk exposure or likelihood. Remediation activity progress, which is the status or outcome of the actions taken to address and resolve a risk event, may help to monitor and report the effectiveness and compliance of the risk management process and controls, but it is usually done after the risk event has occurred and resolved, not before.

References = Key Risk Indicators: Definition, Examples, and Best Practices, KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva, Loss Expectancy: Definition, Calculation, and Examples

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 the business 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

The most relevant information to include in a risk management strategy is the organizational goals, because they provide the direction and purpose for the risk management activities. A risk management strategy is a document that outlines the objectives, scope, approach, roles, and responsibilities for managing risks in an organization. A risk management strategy should align with the organizational goals, which are the desired outcomes or results that the organization wants to achieve. The organizational goals should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART), and they should reflect the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy. By including the organizational goals in the risk management strategy, the risk practitioner can ensure that the risk management process supports and enables the achievement of the organizational goals. The risk practitioner can also use the organizational goals as a basis for identifying, assessing, prioritizing, and responding to the risks that may affect the organization’s performance and success. The risk practitioner can also monitor and measure the progress and effectiveness of the risk management process by comparing the actual results with the expected results based on the organizational goals. Therefore, the organizational goals are the most relevant information to include in a risk management strategy, as they provide the foundation and framework for the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Strategy, pp. 3-61

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

 The most essential content to include in an IT risk awareness program is how to comply with the organization’s IT risk and information security policies. This will help to ensure that the staff members are aware of their roles and responsibilities, and that they follow the best practices and standards to protect the organization’s information assets and systems. Compliance with the IT risk and information security policies also helps to reduce the likelihood and impact of IT-related incidents and breaches, and to align the IT activities with the organization’s objectives and strategies. Populating risk register entries, prioritizing IT-related actions, and defining the IT risk framework are important aspects of IT risk management, but they are not the most essential content to include in an IT risk awareness program. 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 646.

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 those that 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 key outcome of risk ownership is that risk responsibilities are addressed, as this means that the risk owner has the authority and accountability to manage the risk, and that the roles and expectations of the other stakeholders are clearly defined and agreed upon. Risk ownership is the process of assigning a person or entity with the responsibility to manage a particular risk. Risk ownership helps to ensure that the risk is properly identified, assessed, and treated, and that the risk status and performance are monitored and reported. The other options are not key outcomes of risk ownership, although they may be related or beneficial aspects of it. Risk-related information is communicated is an outcome of risk reporting, which is a part of risk monitoring and control. Risk-oriented tasks are defined is an outcome of risk response planning, which is a part of risk treatment. Business process risk is analyzed is an outcome of risk assessment, which is a part of risk identification and analysis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 47.

First-hand direct observation of the controls in operation is the best way to confirm the existence and operating effectiveness of information systems controls because it provides the auditor with the most reliable and persuasive evidence. Direct observation involves inspecting the physical and logical aspects of the controls, such as the hardware, software, network, data, procedures, and personnel involved in the information systems. Direct observation also allows the auditor to verify that the controls are functioning as intended, and to identify any deviations or weaknesses that may affect the reliability of the information systems. Direct observation can be performed by using various techniques, such as walkthroughs, inquiries, inspections, reperformance, and analytical procedures1. References = Auditing Standard No. 13, The Auditor’s Responses to the Risks of Material Misstatement, PCAOB, 20101

IT capacity is the ability of an IT system or network to handle the current and future workload and performance demands. IT capacity can be affected by various factors, such as the number and type of users, applications, devices, data, transactions, etc. IT capacity management is the process of planning, monitoring, and optimizing the IT resources to ensure that they meet the business needs and objectives. IT capacity management can help prevent issues such as system slowdowns, outages, errors, or failures, and improve the efficiency, reliability, and security of the IT system or network. One of the IT key risk indicators (KRIs) that provides management with the best feedback on IT capacity is the trends in IT resource usage. IT resource usage is the measure of how much of the IT resources, such as CPU, memory, disk, bandwidth, etc., are being consumed by the IT system or network. Trends in IT resource usage can help monitor and analyze the changes in the IT capacity over time, and identify the patterns, peaks, and bottlenecks in the IT resource consumption. Trends in IT resource usage can also help forecast the future IT capacity requirements, and plan for the appropriate IT resource allocation, optimization, or expansion. Trends in IT resource usage can provide management with valuable information on the current and potential IT capacity risks, and support the decision making and risk response for IT capacity management. References = Integrating KRIs and KPIs for Effective Technology Risk Management, p. 3-4.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

6: Security Incident Reporting and Response, ISACA, 2019

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

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

: System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, University of Toronto, 2017

: System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, ISACA, 2019

: User Access Management and Control, University of Toronto, 2017

: User Access Management and Control, ISACA, 2019

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: The Control Process | Principles of Management4

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

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

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

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

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

The business process owner is the stakeholder who is responsible for the business process that is supported by the IT system, such as the CRM system. The business process owner has the authority and accountability to manage the risk and its response associated with the business process and the IT system. The business process owner should own the risk of customer data leakage caused by insufficient IT security controls for the new system, as it directly affects the performance, functionality, and compliance of the business process. The other options are not the correct answer, as they involve different roles or responsibilities in the risk management process:

The chief information security officer is the senior executive who oversees the enterprise-wide information security program, and provides guidance and direction to the information security managers and practitioners. The chief information security officer may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk.

The chief risk officer is the senior executive who oversees the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provides guidance and direction to the risk managers and practitioners. The chief risk officer may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk.

The IT controls manager is the person who designs, implements, and monitors the IT controls that mitigate the IT risks, such as the IT security controls for the new system. The IT controls manager may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.1, pp. 95-96.

Scheduling periodic audits is the best way to facilitate the maintenance of data classification requirements, because it helps to verify and validate that the data are classified and handled according to the established policies, standards, and guidelines, and that the data classification requirements are updated and aligned with the changes in the data environment or regulations. Data classification is a process of categorizing data according to their sensitivity, confidentiality, and value to the organization, and specifying the appropriate handling and protection measures for each category. Data classification requirements are the rules or criteria that define how data should be classified and treated. Scheduling periodic audits is the best way to ensure that the data classification requirements are followed and maintained, and that any issues or gaps are identified and addressed. Assigning a data custodian, implementing technical controls over the assets, and establishing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution are all useful ways to facilitate the maintenance of data classification requirements, but they are not the best way, as they do not provide a comprehensive and independent review and assessment of the data classification process and outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

A post-implementation RCSA is a process of verifying whether the risk treatment plan has been executed as intended and whether the residual risk is within the acceptable level. It involves testing the effectiveness of the controls that have been implemented to mitigate the risk and identifying any gaps or issues that need to be addressed. A BIA, the original risk response plan, and the training program and user awareness documentation are not sufficient to validate the effectiveness of the risk treatment plan, as they do not measure the actual performance of the controls or the residual risk.

References:

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

•ISACA, Risk and Information Systems Control Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2020, p. 2112

Review Assignments of Data Ownership for Key Assets:

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

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

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

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

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

Best Practices:

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

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

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

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

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

References:

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

Lack of common understanding of the organization’s risk culture is the greatest barrier to achieving the initiative’s objectives, because it hinders the alignment and integration of risk management across the organization. Risk culture is the set of shared values, beliefs, and behaviors that influence how risk is perceived and managed in an organization. A risk universe is a comprehensive and structured representation of all the sources and types of risk that an organization faces. Developing a risk universe requires a common understanding of the organization’s risk culture, as it affects the risk appetite, tolerance, and strategy of the organization. Lack of cross-functional risk assessment workshops, lack of quantitative methods to aggregate the total risk exposure, and lack of an integrated risk management system are all challenges that may affect the development of a risk universe, but they are not the greatest barrier, as they can be overcome with appropriate tools and techniques. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 44

Cybersecurity Awareness Program:

Phishing Simulations: These exercises are designed to test employees’ ability to recognize and respond to phishing attempts. They serve as a deterrent by raising awareness and making employees more vigilant.

Deterrent Controls:

Definition: Deterrent controls are designed to discourage potential attackers or risky behavior by creating awareness of consequences.

Application: Phishing simulations act as deterrent controls by educating employees and reducing the likelihood of successful phishing attacks through increased awareness.

Comparison with Other Options:

Preventive: Preventive controls aim to stop incidents before they occur. Phishing simulations do not prevent but rather educate.

Detective: Detective controls identify and respond to incidents after they occur. Phishing simulations are proactive rather than reactive.

Compensating: Compensating controls provide alternative measures when primary controls are not feasible. Phishing simulations are not compensating but directly address phishing risk.

Best Practices:

Regular Simulations: Conduct regular phishing simulations to maintain high levels of awareness.

Feedback and Training: Provide immediate feedback and additional training to employees who fail simulations.

References:

Sybex CISSP Official Study Guide: Details how phishing simulations serve as deterrent controls by educating and preparing employees against phishing attacks .

CRISC Review Manual: Discusses the role of awareness programs and simulations in enhancing security posture through deterrent measures .

The primary responsibility of senior management in risk management is to prioritize the risk scenarios based on severity. Risk scenarios are hypothetical events or situations that could affect the achievement of the objectives. Risk severity is a measure of the overall level of risk, based on the combination of the probability and impact of the risk scenario. Prioritizing the risk scenarios based on severity is the primary responsibility of senior management, because it helps to allocate the resources and actions to the most critical and urgent risks, and to align the risk management process with the organizational strategy and risk appetite. Senior management also has the authority and accountability to make the final decisions and approve the risk response plans for the prioritized risks. The other options are not the primary responsibility of senior management, although they may be involved or consulted in these activities. Bottom-up identification of emerging risks is a process of identifying and reporting the new or changing risks that may arise from the operational or tactical level of the organization. This is usually the responsibility of the risk owners or the risk practitioners, who have the knowledge and experience of the specific functions and processes. Categorization of risk scenarios against a standard taxonomy is a process of classifying and organizing the risk scenarios into predefined categories or groups, based on their nature, source, or impact. This is usually the responsibility of the risk analysts or the risk coordinators, who have the skills and tools to perform the risk analysis and assessment. Review of external loss data is a process of collecting and analyzing the data and information on the losses or incidents that occurred in other organizations or industries, due to similar or related risks. This is usually the responsibility of the risk researchers or the risk consultants, who have the access and expertise to obtain and interpret the external data and information. References = The Role of Executive Management in ERM - Corporate Compliance Insights, Guidelines on Risk Management Practices – Board and Senior Management, Risk Manager Job Description [+2023 TEMPLATE] - Workable

An anti-virus program is a software that detects and removes malicious software, such as viruses, worms, or ransomware, from the IT assets, such as computers, servers, or networks. The effectiveness of an anti-virus program can be measured by the key performance indicators (KPIs) that reflect the achievement of the program objectives and the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. The best KPI to measure the effectiveness of an anti-virus program is the percentage of IT assets with current malware definitions. Malware definitions are the files or databases that contain the signatures or patterns of the known malicious software, and they are used by the anti-virus program to scan and identify the malware. The percentage of IT assets with current malware definitions indicates how well the anti-virus program is able to protect the IT assets from the latest or emerging threats, and reduce the exposure and impact of the risks associated with the malware. The other options are not as good as the percentage of IT assets with current malware definitions, as they may not reflect the quality or timeliness of the protection, or the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2.1, pp. 171-172.

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

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

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

 Enterprise Risk Management (ERM):

ERM involves a comprehensive approach to identifying, assessing, managing, and monitoring risks across an organization. Effective governance of organizational assets is a key component.

 Importance of a Risk Profile:

Developing a detailed risk profile is the first step in supporting ERM implementation. It provides a clear understanding of the organization's risk landscape, including the types of risks, their potential impact, and likelihood.

A risk profile helps in prioritizing risks, allocating resources, and establishing appropriate risk management strategies.

 Steps to Develop a Risk Profile:

Identify all organizational assets and their importance to business operations.

Assess the vulnerabilities and threats associated with each asset.

Determine the potential impact and likelihood of risk events.

Document the findings to create a comprehensive risk profile.

 Supporting Implementation:

A detailed risk profile informs decision-makers and supports the development of policies, controls, and procedures to mitigate identified risks.

It serves as a foundation for continuous monitoring and improvement of the risk management program.

 Other Options:

Hiring experienced resources, scheduling internal audits, and conducting risk assessments are essential actions but come after establishing a detailed risk profile. The risk profile provides the necessary information to guide these activities effectively.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of developing a detailed risk profile as a foundational step in the ERM process (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.6.5 Asset Valuation)​​.

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

References

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions - SolveXia

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

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.

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

References

1Standardized Scoring for Security and Risk Metrics - ISACA

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

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 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)

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

The information classification policy is the most important document regarding the treatment of sensitive data, because it defines the categories and criteria for classifying data according to their sensitivity, confidentiality, and value to the organization, and specifies the appropriate handling and protection measures for each category. Sensitive data are data that contain personal, proprietary, or confidential information that may cause harm or damage to the organization or its stakeholders if disclosed, modified, or destroyed without authorization. An information classification policy helps to ensure that sensitive data are identified and treated in a consistent and secure manner, and that the organization complies with the applicable laws and regulations regarding data protection and privacy. An encryption policy, an organization risk profile, and a digital rights management policy are all useful documents for the treatment of sensitive data, but they are not the most important document, as they do not directly address the classification and handling of sensitive data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

The percentage of projects introduced into production without high-risk issues is the most important measure of the effectiveness of risk management in project implementation, as it reflects the ability of risk management to ensure that the project deliverables meet the quality, functionality, and security requirements, and do not introduce unacceptable risks to the organization. The percentage of projects having the risk register updated regularly, having key risk indicators (KRIs) established to measure risk, or having an action plan to remediate overdue issues are not the most important measures, as they are more related to the process, performance, or compliance of risk management, rather than the outcome or value of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

 Understanding the Question:

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

 Analyzing the Options:

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

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

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

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

 Detailed Explanation:

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

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

References:

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

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

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

Business Impact Analysis (BIA):

Objective: The primary objective of a BIA is to identify and evaluate the effects of disruptions on business operations. This includes determining the criticality of IT assets that support key business processes.

Risk Mitigation: By identifying critical IT assets, organizations can prioritize risk mitigation efforts to ensure that key business processes remain operational during and after disruptions.

Appropriate IT Risk Mitigation:

Critical Asset Identification: Knowing which IT assets are essential allows for targeted risk mitigation strategies. This ensures resources are allocated efficiently to protect the most important systems.

Impact Assessment: Understanding the impact of potential disruptions on critical IT assets helps in developing effective disaster recovery and continuity plans.

Comparison with Other Options:

Validating Critical IT Risk: While important, this is typically part of a broader BIA process rather than its primary objective.

Assigning Accountability for IT Risk: This is crucial for governance but does not directly enable risk mitigation actions.

Defining IT Risk-aware Culture: Important for overall risk management but does not directly influence specific mitigation actions.

Best Practices:

Detailed Asset Inventory: Maintain an up-to-date inventory of IT assets and their dependencies on business processes.

Regular Updates and Reviews: Continuously update the BIA to reflect changes in the IT environment and business processes.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Emphasizes the role of BIA in identifying critical IT assets and supporting risk mitigation strategies .

ISACA Standards: Outline the importance of aligning IT risk management with business continuity planning through effective BIAs .

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

References

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

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

•Risk Tolerance - ISACA

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

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

References:

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

•Internal audit: three lines of defence model explained2

The 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 most important consideration when identifying stakeholders to review risk scenarios developed by a risk analyst is that the reviewers are accountable for the affected processes. This is because the reviewers need to have a clear understanding of the business processes that are exposed to the risks, and the potential impact and consequences of the risk scenarios. The reviewers also need to have the authority and responsibility to implement the risk responses and monitor the risk performance. By involving the stakeholders who are accountable for the affected processes, the risk analyst can ensure that the risk scenarios are realistic, relevant, and comprehensive, and that the risk management process is aligned with the business objectives and expectations. The other options are not as important as the accountability for the affected processes, because they do not guarantee that the reviewers have the necessary knowledge, experience, and involvement in the risk management process, as explained below:

B. Members of senior management are not the most important consideration, because they may not have the detailed or operational knowledge of the business processes that are exposed to the risks, or the technical or practical aspects of the risk scenarios. Senior management may also have different or conflicting priorities or perspectives on the risk management process, which may affect the quality and validity of the review.

C. Authorized to select risk mitigation options are not the most important consideration, because they may not have the direct or regular involvement in the business processes that are exposed to the risks, or the specific or contextual understanding of the risk scenarios. The authority to select risk mitigation options may also depend on other factors, such as the risk appetite, the budget, or the organizational structure, which may limit or influence the review.

D. Independent from the business operations are not the most important consideration, because they may not have the sufficient or relevant knowledge of the business processes that are exposed to the risks, or the potential or actual impact and consequences of the risk scenarios. The independence from the business operations may also create a gap or disconnect between the risk management process and the business objectives and expectations, which may affect the effectiveness and efficiency of the review. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 45. A Stakeholder Approach to Risk Management, Module 2. Project risk management: stakeholders’ risks and the project manager’s role, What Is Risk Management Scenario Analysis?

A risk assessment indicates the residual risk associated with a new bring your own device (BYOD) program is within organizational risk tolerance. This means that the potential benefits of BYOD outweigh the potential risks, and that the controls in place are adequate to mitigate those risks.

The next step for the risk practitioner is to identify log sources to monitor BYOD usage and risk impact. Log sources are records of events or activities that occur in a system or network, such as file access, network traffic, user behavior, etc. Log sources can provide valuable information about how BYOD devices are used, what data they access, what applications they run, what threats they encounter, etc.

By monitoring log sources, the risk practitioner can track and measure the actual performance and security of BYOD devices, compare them with the expected outcomes and standards, identify any deviations or anomalies that may indicate a breach or a vulnerability, and take appropriate actions to address them.

Therefore, identifying log sources to monitor BYOD usage and risk impact is a recommended action after a successful risk assessment.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 10

Information Technology & Security, page 4

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 2

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 the contractual 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.

The most important objective of embedding risk management practices into the initiation phase of the project management life cycle is to assess inherent risk. Inherent risk is the risk that exists before any controls or mitigations are applied. By assessing inherent risk in the initiation phase, the project team can identify the potential sources, causes, and impacts of risk that may affect the project objectives, scope, and deliverables. Assessing inherent risk in the initiation phase also helps to prioritize the risks, determine the risk appetite and tolerance, and plan the risk responses. Delivering projects on time and on budget, including project risk in the enterprise-wide IT risk profile, and assessing risk throughout the project are important objectives of risk management, but they are not the most important objective of embedding risk management practices into the initiation phase. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.1, page 511

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 658.

Risk treatment is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate risk response strategy and actions to address the identified risks. Risk treatment can involve different strategies, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Risk owner is the person or group who has the authority and accountability to manage the risk and its response. Risk owner is accountable for risk treatment, as they are responsible for deciding, approving, and executing the risk treatment plan, and for monitoring and reporting the results and outcomes of the risk treatment. The other options are not accountable for risk treatment, as they have different roles or responsibilities in the risk management process:

Enterprise risk management team is the group of risk managers and practitioners who support the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provide guidance and direction to the risk owners and stakeholders. Enterprise risk management team may advise or assist the risk owner in risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment.

Risk mitigation manager is the person who designs, implements, and monitors the risk mitigation actions or measures that reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk to an acceptable level, such as controls, policies, or procedures. Risk mitigation manager may advise or assist the risk owner in risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment.

Business process owner is the stakeholder who is responsible for the business process that is supported by the IT system or application, such as the CRM system. Business process owner may be affected by or contribute to the risk, and may be involved in the risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment, unless they are also the risk owner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.1, pp. 95-96.

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.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, controls are the policies, procedures, practices, and organizational structures that are designed and implemented to manage risk. The most important factor when defining controls is to align them with the business objectives, as this helps to ensure that the controls support the achievement of the organization’s strategy, goals, and values. Aligning controls with business objectives also helps to optimize the benefits and costs of controls, and to prioritize and allocate resources for control implementation and maintenance. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 202.

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

 The primary purpose of vulnerability assessments is to detect weaknesses that could lead to system compromise. A vulnerability assessment is a systematic review of security weaknesses in an information system. It evaluates if the system is susceptible to any known vulnerabilities, assigns severity levels to those vulnerabilities, and recommends remediation or mitigation, if and whenever needed1. By identifying and prioritizing the vulnerabilities, a vulnerability assessment helps to prevent or reduce the risk of cyberattacks that could exploit the vulnerabilities and compromise the system. The other options are not the primary purpose, but they may be secondary or tertiary outcomes or benefits of a vulnerability assessment. Providing clear evidence that the system is sufficiently secure is a result of a successful vulnerability assessment and remediation process, but it is not the main objective. Determining the impact of potential threats is a part of the risk assessment process, which complements the vulnerability assessment process, but it is not the same as detecting the vulnerabilities. Testing intrusion detection systems (IDS) and response procedures is a part of the penetration testing process, which simulates a real-world attack on the system to evaluate its security posture, but it is not the same as scanning the system for vulnerabilities. References = What is Vulnerability Assessment | VA Tools and Best Practices - Imperva

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

 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 alert users to any suspicious login attempts and prevent unauthorized transactions. References = 10 Tips for Secure Online Transactions - SmartAsset

Configuration management is a process that establishes and maintains the consistency and integrity of the IT systems and applications throughout their lifecycle. Configuration management involves identifying, documenting, controlling, and auditing the configuration items, such as hardware, software, data, or services, that comprise the IT systems and applications. Configuration management also involves establishing and enforcing the configuration baselines, which are the approved and authorized states of the configuration items. Implementing configuration management will best help ensure that systems comply with an established baseline before deployment, as it will enable the enterprise to verify that the systems meet the specified requirements, standards, and policies, and to detect and correct any deviations or discrepancies. The other options are not as effective as configuration management, as they involve different aspects or outcomes of the IT systems and applications:

Vulnerability scanning is a process that identifies and analyzes the weaknesses or gaps in the IT systems and applications that could be exploited by threats. Vulnerability scanning helps to assess the security and compliance of the systems, but it does not ensure that the systems comply with an established baseline before deployment, as it may not cover all the aspects or components of the systems, or may not reflect the latest changes or updates of the systems.

Continuous monitoring and alerting is a process that tracks and reports the performance and status of the IT systems and applications on an ongoing basis. Continuous monitoring and alerting helps to identify and respond to any issues or incidents that affect the availability, integrity, or confidentiality of the systems, but it does not ensure that the systems comply with an established baseline before deployment, as it may not prevent or detect the unauthorized or unintended changes or modifications of the systems, or may not provide sufficient information or evidence to verify the compliance of the systems.

Access controls and active logging are processes that restrict and record the access and activities of the users or entities on the IT systems and applications. Access controls and active logging help to protect and audit the IT systems and applications, but they do not ensure that the systems comply with an established baseline before deployment, as they may not address the configuration or quality issues of the systems, or may not be consistent or comprehensive across the systems. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.1, pp. 156-157.

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

Engaging key stakeholders in risk management practices is the best way to embed risk management within the organization. This means that the risk practitioner involves and communicates with the people who have an interest or influence in the organization’s objectives, activities, and risks, such as senior management, business unit managers, employees, customers, suppliers, regulators, etc.

Engaging key stakeholders in risk management practices helps to create a risk-aware culture, align risk management with the organization’s strategy and vision, ensure the ownership and accountability of risks and controls, obtain the support and commitment for risk management initiatives, and improve the risk management performance and outcomes.

The other options are not the best ways to embed risk management within the organization. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 17

Information Technology & Security, page 11

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 9

 A risk practitioner’s best course of action when a business manager wants to leverage an existing approved vendor solution from another area within the organization is to assess the risk associated with the new use case. This is because the new use case may introduce different or additional risks that were not considered or addressed in the original approval. For example, the new use case may involve different data types, volumes, or sensitivities; different business processes, functions, or objectives; different regulatory or contractual requirements; or different technical or operational dependencies. Therefore, the risk practitioner should perform a vendor risk assessment (VRA) to identify, evaluate, and mitigate the potential risks of the new use case and ensure that the vendor solution meets the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance12. Recommending allowing the new usage based on prior approval is not the best course of action, as it may overlook or underestimate the risks of the new use case and expose the organization to unacceptable levels of risk. Requesting a new third-party review is not the best course of action, as it may be unnecessary or redundant if the vendor solution has already been reviewed and approved for another use case within the organization. Requesting revalidation of the original use case is not the best course of action, as it may not address the specific risks of the new use case and may also delay or disrupt the existing use case. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

 The performance of a client-facing application is the measure of how well the application meets the expectations and requirements of the clients who use it. The performance of a client-facing application can be affected by various factors, such as functionality, usability, reliability, availability, security, and scalability. Continuously monitoring the performance of a client-facing application is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the performance data and metrics of the application over time. Continuously monitoring the performance of a client-facing application can help identify and resolve issues, improve quality, optimize resources, and enhance client satisfaction. The most important thing to ensure when continuously monitoring the performance of a client-facing application is that the objectives are confirmed with the business owner. The business owner is the person or entity who has the authority and responsibility for the business value and outcomes of the application. The business owner defines the objectives, goals, and requirements of the application, and sets the performance criteria and targets. Confirming the objectives with the business owner can help ensure that the performance monitoring is aligned with the business needs and expectations, and that the performance data and metrics are relevant, accurate, and meaningful. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.3: Continuous Monitoring, p. 203-205.

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

 The main benefit of involving stakeholders in the selection of key risk indicators (KRIs) is improving risk awareness, as it helps to communicate the risk exposure, appetite, and tolerance of the organization to the relevant parties. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given operational risk1. By involving stakeholders in the selection of KRIs, the risk practitioner can ensure that the KRIs are aligned with the stakeholder expectations, needs, and objectives, and that they reflect the most significant risks that affect the organization. This also helps to foster a risk culture and a shared understanding of risk among the stakeholders, which can enhance the risk management process and performance. The other options are not the main benefit of involving stakeholders in the selection of KRIs, although they may be some of the outcomes or advantages of doing so. Obtaining buy-in from risk owners, leveraging existing metrics, and optimizing risk treatment decisions are all important aspects of risk management, but they are not the primary reason for involving stakeholders in the selection of KRIs. References = Key Risk Indicators; Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide; The 10 Types of Stakeholders That You Meet in Business; What are Stakeholders? Stakeholder Definition | ASQ

The MOST important thing to review when determining whether a potential IT service provider’s control environment is effective is an independent audit report, because it provides an objective and reliable assessment of the service provider’s controls and compliance with standards and regulations. The other options are not as important as an independent audit report, because:

Option B: Control self-assessment is a subjective and voluntary process that may not reflect the actual effectiveness of the service provider’s controls.

Option C: This option is incomplete and irrelevant to the question.

Option D: Service level agreements (SLAs) are contractual agreements that specify the expected performance and availability of the service provider, but they do not necessarily indicate the effectiveness of the service provider’s controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 195.

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

 The best recommendation to the control owner when an existing control has deteriorated over time is to discuss risk mitigation options with the risk owner. This is because the risk owner is the person or entity who has the authority and accountability to make decisions and take actions regarding the risk, including the selection and implementation of the risk response strategies. The control owner is the person or entity who is responsible for the design, operation, and maintenance of the control, but not for the overall risk management. By discussing risk mitigation options with the risk owner, the control owner can communicate the current status and performance of the control, and collaborate on finding the most appropriate and effective solution to address the risk and the control deterioration. The other options are not the best recommendation to the control owner, because they do not involve the risk owner, who is the key stakeholder in the risk management process, as explained below:

A. Implement compensating controls to reduce residual risk is not the best recommendation, because it may not be feasible, efficient, or sufficient to address the risk and the control deterioration. Compensating controls are additional or alternative controls that are implemented to mitigate the risk when the primary control is not available, adequate, or effective. However, implementing compensating controls without discussing with the risk owner may result in wasting resources, duplicating efforts, or conflicting objectives, and may not align with the risk appetite or strategy of the organization.

B. Escalate the issue to senior management is not the best recommendation, because it may not be necessary, timely, or appropriate to involve senior management in the risk and control deterioration issue. Senior management is the highest level of authority and oversight in the organization, and may not have the detailed or operational knowledge or involvement in the risk and control management. Escalating the issue to senior management without discussing with the risk owner may create confusion, delay, or misunderstanding, and may not result in the optimal risk mitigation solution.

D. Certify the control after documenting the concern is not the best recommendation, because it may not be accurate, honest, or compliant to certify the control when it has deteriorated over time. Certifying the control is the process of attesting that the control is designed and operating effectively and efficiently, and meets the established criteria and standards. Certifying the control after documenting the concern may not reflect the true status and performance of the control, and may not comply with the internal or external audit or regulatory requirements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. Roles and Responsibilities in Risk Management, Risk Owner vs. Control Owner: What’s the Difference?, Control Deterioration: How to Avoid It and What to Do About It

A risk heat map is a graphical tool that displays the level of risk for each risk area based on the impact and likelihood of occurrence. It also provides a summary of the risk assessment results, such as the number and severity of risks, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the risk response strategies. A risk heat map can help senior management to understand the risk profile of the organization, prioritize the risks that need attention, and allocate resources accordingly. A risk heat map is more effective than the other options because it can communicate complex information in a simple and visual way, and it can highlight the key risk areas and trends. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2, page 97.

A risk practitioner notices a trend of noncompliance with an IT-related control. This indicates that there is a risk of ineffective or inefficient implementation or operation of the control, which may expose the organization to potential threats or losses.

The best way to assist in making a recommendation to management is to assess the degree to which the control hinders business objectives. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the impact of the control on the performance, productivity, quality, or customer satisfaction of the business processes or functions that are affected by the control.

Assessing the degree to which the control hinders business objectives helps to identify the root causes of noncompliance, the costs and benefits of compliance, and the potential alternatives or improvements for the control. It also helps to communicate the value and importance of the control to the management and the stakeholders, and to obtain their support and commitment for the control compliance.

The other options are not the best ways to assist in making a recommendation to management. They are either secondary or not essential for control compliance.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 19

Information Technology & Security, page 13

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 11

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

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

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

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

The most effective key risk indicator (KRI) for monitoring risk related to a bring your own device (BYOD) program is the number of incidents originating from BYOD devices, as it directly measures the impact and frequency of the potential threats and vulnerabilities associated with the use of personal devices for accessing company data and systems. A BYOD program can pose various risks to an organization, such as data loss or breach, malware infection, unauthorized access, compliance violation, or device theft or loss12. The number of incidents originating from BYOD devices can help to identify and quantify these risks, and to trigger appropriate risk response actions when the incidents exceed the acceptable thresholds. The other options are not the most effective KRIs, as they do not directly measure the risk level or impact of the BYOD program. The number of users who have signed a BYOD acceptable use policy may indicate the awareness and compliance of the users, but not the actual risk exposure or mitigation. The budget allocated to the BYOD program security controls may indicate the investment and efficiency of the risk management, but not the effectiveness or necessity. The number of devices enrolled in the BYOD program may indicate the scope and scale of the risk, but not the severity or likelihood. References = Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide; KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management

 Residual risk is the risk that remains after security controls have been implemented on a system. Residual risk can be accepted, transferred, avoided, or further mitigated. The most important consideration when deciding whether to accept residual risk is the cost versus benefit of additional mitigating controls. This means comparing the potential impact of the residual risk with the cost and effectiveness of implementing more controls to reduce it. If the cost of additional controls outweighs the benefit of reducing the residual risk, then it may be acceptable to accept the residual risk. However, if the benefit of additional controls exceeds the cost, then it may be advisable to implement more controls to lower the residual risk to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.4: Risk Response Selection, p. 156-157.

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

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

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

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

The most important consideration when selecting either a qualitative or quantitative risk analysis is the time available for risk analysis, as this affects the level of detail and accuracy that can be achieved in the risk assessment process. Qualitative risk analysis is a method that uses subjective judgments and ratings to measure and prioritize the risks based on their likelihood and impact, as well as other factors such as urgency, velocity, and persistence. Qualitative risk analysis is usually faster and simpler than quantitative risk analysis, but it may also be less precise and consistent. Quantitative risk analysis is a method that uses numerical data and mathematical models to measure and prioritize the risks based on their probability and magnitude, as well as other factors such as frequency, duration, and correlation. Quantitative risk analysis is usually more complex and time-consuming than qualitative risk analysis, but it may also provide more objective and reliable results. The other options are not the most important considerations when selecting either a qualitative or quantitative risk analysis, although they may have some influence or relevance. Expertise in both methodologies is desirable, but it does not determine the choice of the risk analysis method, as it depends on the availability and suitability of the experts for the specific risk context and objectives. Maturity of the risk management program is important, but it does not dictate the choice of the risk analysis method, as it depends on the level of integration and alignment of the risk management activities with the enterprise’s strategy and goals. Resources available for data analysis are relevant, but they do not decide the choice of the risk analysis method, as they depend on the quality and availability of the data sources and tools for the risk assessment process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Assessment, page 81.ST

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

 According to the 6 Best Practices to Ensure Software License Compliance article, the best way to determine software license compliance is to conduct regular internal compliance audits. These self-assessments can be done with the help of software license management companies. The goal is to see where compliance issues lie and to take corrective actions before they become serious problems. Periodic compliance reviews can help to avoid fines, penalties, lawsuits, and reputational damage that may result from software license violations. They can also help to optimize software spending and utilization, and to identify any gaps or opportunities for improvement in the software license management process. References = 6 Best Practices to Ensure Software License Compliance

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

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

Brainstorming sessions would best contribute to identifying obscure risk scenarios, as they allow participants to generate and share ideas without being constrained by conventional thinking or assumptions. Brainstorming sessions can help to identify risks that are not obvious, not well understood, or not covered by existing controls. Control self-assessments, vulnerability analysis, and Monte Carlo analysis are useful methods for evaluating and quantifying risks, but they are not designed to identify obscure risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 59.

 The production environment is the environment where the application is deployed and used by the end users. The production environment should be protected from unauthorized or unintended changes that could compromise the availability, integrity, or confidentiality of the application and its data. Developers have access to the production environment presents the greatest risk to an application, as it could allow them to bypass the change management process, introduce errors or vulnerabilities, or manipulate the application or its data for malicious purposes. The other options are not as risky as developers having access to the production environment, as they involve different aspects of the application lifecycle:

Application controls are manual means that the application relies on human intervention to perform some functions or validations, such as data entry, reconciliation, or authorization. This could increase the risk of human error, fraud, or inefficiency, but it does not directly affect the production environment.

Application development is outsourced means that the application is developed by a third party, such as a vendor or a contractor. This could increase the risk of quality issues, contractual disputes, or intellectual property rights, but it does not directly affect the production environment.

Source code is escrowed means that the source code of the application is deposited with a trusted third party, such as a lawyer or a bank. This could provide assurance and continuity in case the original developer is unable or unwilling to maintain or support the application, but it does not directly affect the production environment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.1.1, pp. 144-145.

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.

Read rights: The permission to view or access the content of a file or a folder1.

Application files: The files that contain the code, data, or resources of an application or a program2.

Controlled server environment: A server environment that is managed and secured by a set of policies, procedures, and tools3.

Business process owner: The person who is responsible for the design, execution, and performance of a business process.

Read rights to application files in a controlled server environment should be approved by the business process owner. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the business process that uses or depends on the application files. The business process owner should approve the read rights to application files in a controlled server environment to:

Ensure that the read rights are aligned with the business needs and objectives

Prevent unauthorized or unnecessary access to the application files

Protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the application files

Comply with the relevant laws and regulations that govern the access to the application files

The other options are not the best choices for approving the read rights to application files in a controlled server environment, because they do not have the same level of authority, responsibility, or knowledge as the business process owner. The database administrator, who is the person who manages and maintains the database systems and data, may have the technical skills and access to grant the read rights to application files, but they may not have the business insight or approval to do so. The chief information officer, who is the person who oversees the IT strategy and operations of the organization, may have the executive power and oversight to approve the read rights to application files, but they may not have the specific or detailed knowledge of the business process or the application files. The systems administrator, who is the person who configures and maintains the server systems and networks, may have the administrative privileges and tools to grant the read rights to application files, but they may not have the business understanding or authorization to do so.

References = Read Permission - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics, What is an Application File? - Definition from Techopedia, What is a Server Environment? - Definition from Techopedia, [Business Process Owner: Definition, Roles, and Responsibilities]

 Masking data before being transferred to the test environment is the best recommendation to address the situation where sensitive data from the production environment is required for testing purposes in non-production environments. Data masking is a technique that replaces sensitive data elements with realistic but fictitious data, preserving the format, structure, and meaning of the original data. Data masking ensures that the test data is sufficiently anonymized and de-identified, while still maintaining its functionality and validity for testing purposes. Data masking also reduces the risk of data leakage, exposure, or breach in the test environment, which may have lower security controls than the production environment. The other options are not the best recommendations, as they do not adequately protect the sensitive data or meet the testing requirements. Enabling data encryption in the test environment may protect the data from unauthorized access, but it does not prevent the data from being decrypted by authorized users who may misuse or mishandle it. Implementing equivalent security in the test environment may be costly, complex, or impractical, and it may not be feasible to replicate the same level of security controls as in the production environment. Preventing the use of production data for test purposes may not be possible or desirable, as production data may be required to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and quality of the testing results. References = P = NP: Cloud data protection in vulnerable non-production environments …; Data masking secures sensitive data in non-production environments …; CRISC EXAM TOPIC 2 LONG Flashcards | Quizlet

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

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

The risk appetite of an organization is the amount and type of risk that it is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives1. Technology risk is the risk related to the use of information and technology in the organization2. If an organization has raised its risk appetite for technology risk, it means that it is willing to accept more risk in exchange for more potential benefits from technology initiatives. This would likely result in lower risk management cost, as the organization would spend less on implementing and maintaining controls to mitigate technology risk. The other options are not the most likely results of raising the risk appetite for technology risk. Increased inherent risk is the risk before considering the effect of controls3, and it is not directly affected by the risk appetite. Higher risk management cost would be the opposite of the expected outcome, as the organization would reduce its risk management efforts. Decreased residual risk is the risk after considering the effect of controls3, and it would also be the opposite of the expected outcome, as the organization would accept more risk exposure. References = Organisations must define their IT risk appetite and tolerance; IT Risk Resources; CRISC | What Accurate CRISC Free Download Is

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

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

 The PRIMARY purpose of using control metrics is to evaluate the variance against objectives, because control metrics are measures that indicate the performance and effectiveness of the controls in achieving the desired outcomes and goals. Control metrics can help to identify and quantify the gaps or deviations between the actual and expected results of the controls, and to provide feedback and improvement for the control design and implementation. The other options are not the primary purpose, because:

Option A: Amount of risk reduced by compensating controls is a result of using control metrics, but not the primary purpose. Compensating controls are controls that provide an alternative or additional level of protection or assurance when the primary or preferred controls are not feasible or effective. Control metrics can help to measure and monitor the amount of risk reduced by compensating controls, but they are not the only or the most important measure of the control performance and effectiveness.

Option B: Amount of risk present in the organization is an input to using control metrics, but not the primary purpose. The amount of risk present in the organization is the level of exposure and uncertainty that the organization faces in pursuing its objectives and goals. Control metrics can help to assess and report the amount of risk present in the organization, but they are not the only or the most important measure of the risk profile and exposure.

Option D: Number of incidents is a source of using control metrics, but not the primary purpose. Incidents are events or occurrences that disrupt or threaten the normal operations or security of the organization. Control metrics can help to analyze and respond to the number of incidents, but they are not the only or the most important measure of the incident management and resolution. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 120.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that management is willing to allow for any particular risk as it pursues its objectives. Risk tolerance provides a helpful reference point when communicating the results of a risk assessment to stakeholders, as it helps to compare the current level of risk exposure with the desired level of risk exposure, and to prioritize and allocate resources for risk response. Risk tolerance also helps to align the risk assessment results with the stakeholder expectations and preferences, and to facilitate risk-based decision making. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 192.

The best way to ensure that information system controls are effective is to test them periodically. Testing controls periodically helps to verify that the controls are operating as intended, and that they are aligned with the enterprise’s objectives, policies, and standards. Testing controls periodically also helps to identify any gaps, weaknesses, or deficiencies in the controls, and to implement corrective actions or improvements. Responding promptly to control exceptions, implementing compensating controls, and automating manual controls are good practices, but they are not the best way to ensure control effectiveness. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.2, page 1071

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 641.

A purchase order approval process is a set of procedures that companies use to authorize the purchase of goods or services from suppliers1. This process typically involves multiple levels of approvals, ensuring that purchases are compliant with company regulations and policies, and within budget limitations1. Sometimes, a department may be granted an exception to bypass the existing approval process for purchase orders, for example, due to urgency, emergency, or special circumstances2. However, such exceptions should not compromise the effectiveness and integrity of the purchase order approval process, and should be properly documented and justified2. Therefore, the risk practitioner should verify that the exception has been approved by senior management, as they are ultimately responsible for setting and overseeing the purchase order approval process, and for ensuring that the exceptions are reasonable and aligned with the company’s objectives and risk appetite3. Internal audit is not the correct answer, as they are not involved in approving the purchase order approval process or its exceptions. Internal audit’s role is to provide independent assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the purchase order approval process and its controls, and to report any issues or recommendations for improvement4. Control owner is not the correct answer, as they are not involved in approving the purchase order approval process or its exceptions. Control owner’s role is to design, implement, and operate the controls that support the purchase order approval process, and to monitor and report on the performance and compliance of the controls5. Risk manager is not the correct answer, as they are not involved in approving the purchase order approval process or its exceptions. Risk manager’s role is to identify, assess, and mitigate the risks associated with the purchase order approval process, and to communicate and report on the risk status and issues6. References = 1: A Step-by-Step Guide to a Purchase Order Approval Process2: Purchase Order Exceptions | Fordham3: Purchase Order (PO) Approval Process and Approval Workflow - ProcureDesk4: IT Risk Resources | ISACA5: CRISC Resources [updated 2021] | Infosec6: Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

The primary objective of a risk awareness training program is to enable risk-based decision making, which means making decisions that take into account the potential risks and opportunities associated with each option. A risk awareness training program should aim to develop a common understanding of risk across multiple functions and business units, achieve a better understanding of risk for competitive advantage, and build safeguards against earnings-related surprises1. A risk awareness training program should also cover the basics of risk management, such as the risk management process, the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders, the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and the tools and techniques for identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating risks234. A risk awareness training program should also include practical examples and case studies to illustrate how risk management can be applied in different scenarios and contexts5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.11: Risk Awareness, pp. 34-354

According to the LDR514: Security Strategic Planning, Policy, and Leadership Course, after mapping generic risk scenarios to organizational security policies, the next course of action should be to validate the risk scenarios for business applicability. This is because generic risk scenarios are not specific to the organization’s context, objectives, and environment, and they may not capture the unique threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts that the organization faces. Therefore, validating the risk scenarios for business applicability will help to ensure that the risk scenarios are relevant, realistic, and consistent with the organization’s security policies. Validating the risk scenarios will also help to identify any gaps, overlaps, or conflicts between the risk scenarios and the security policies, and to resolve them accordingly. References = LDR514: Security Strategic Planning, Policy, and Leadership Course, Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative

A security policy exception is a deviation from the established security policy that is granted to an individual or a group for a specific purpose or period of time. A security policy exception may be necessary when the security policy is too restrictive, outdated, or incompatible with the business requirements or objectives. However, a security policy exception also introduces a risk to the organization, as it may weaken the security posture, expose the organization to threats or vulnerabilities, or violate the compliance or regulatory obligations. Therefore, an upward trend in the number of security policy exceptions approved should be of most concern, as it indicates that the security policy is not effective or aligned with the organization’s needs and goals, and that the organization is accepting more risk than desired. The other options are not as concerning as the number of security policy exceptions approved, because they do not imply a direct or immediate risk to the organization, but rather reflect the normal or expected activities of the security management process, as explained below:

A. Number of business change management requests is a metric that measures the volume and frequency of the requests to modify the business processes, systems, or functions. An upward trend in this metric may indicate that the organization is undergoing a transformation, innovation, or improvement, which may have positive or negative impacts on the organization’s performance and security. However, this metric does not necessarily imply a risk to the organization, as the change management requests may be properly assessed, approved, and implemented, following the established change management procedures and controls.

B. Number of revisions to security policy is a metric that measures the amount and extent of the changes made to the security policy over time. An upward trend in this metric may indicate that the security policy is being updated, refined, or enhanced, which may improve or maintain the security posture and compliance of the organization. However, this metric does not necessarily imply a risk to the organization, as the revisions to the security policy may be based on the best practices, standards, and expectations for security management, and may be communicated and enforced effectively across the organization.

D. Number of changes to firewall rules is a metric that measures the number and type of the modifications made to the firewall configuration, which controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules. An upward trend in this metric may indicate that the firewall is being adjusted, optimized, or customized, which may increase or decrease the firewall performance and security. However, this metric does not necessarily imply a risk to the organization, as the changes to the firewall rules may be justified, authorized, and validated, following the established firewall management procedures and controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. Security Policy Exceptions: What Are They and How to Manage Them, Security Policy Exceptions: How to Handle Them in a Secure Manner, Security Policy Exceptions: A Necessary Evil?

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

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures the changes in the level of risk exposure, such as by monitoring the risk drivers, triggers, or events. A KRI indicates a reduction in the percentage of appropriately patched servers means that the enterprise is not applying the latest security updates or fixes to its servers, which could expose them to vulnerabilities or threats. The best course of action for the risk practitioner when a KRI indicates a reduction in the percentage of appropriately patched servers is to determine changes in the risk level. The risk level is the measure of the impact and likelihood of the risk, and it should be consistent and comparable across the enterprise and over time. By determining changes in the risk level, the risk practitioner can assess the current or emerging risks, and decide on the appropriate risk response strategy and actions. The other options are not the best course of action, as they involve different aspects or outcomes of the risk management process:

Outsource the vulnerability management process means that the enterprise transfers the responsibility or burden of identifying, analyzing, prioritizing, and remediating the vulnerabilities in the IT systems and applications to a third party, such as a vendor or a contractor. This may not be a feasible or effective way to address the risk of unpatched servers, as it may not reduce the exposure or impact of the risk, or may introduce new risks, such as contractual disputes, quality issues, or intellectual property rights.

Review the patch management process means that the enterprise evaluates the existing procedures and practices for applying the security updates or fixes to the servers, and identifies the gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. This may be a useful step in the risk management process, but it is not the best course of action, as it may not provide immediate or sufficient information or action to address the risk of unpatched servers, or may not account for the uncertainties or complexities of the risk.

Add agenda item to the next risk committee meeting means that the enterprise communicates the risk of unpatched servers to the senior executives who oversee the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provide guidance and direction to the risk owners and practitioners. This may be a helpful step in the risk management process, but it is not the best course of action, as it may not provide timely or adequate information or action to address the risk of unpatched servers, or may not reflect the urgency or priority of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2.1, pp. 171-172.

According to the Gaining the competitive edge – measuring and assessing an organization’s risk culture article, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite should be aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and values, and should reflect the organization’s risk culture and capabilities. One of the main considerations when validating an organization’s risk appetite is the capacity to withstand loss, which is the ability of the organization to absorb the impact of adverse events without jeopardizing its viability or reputation. The capacity to withstand loss depends on various factors, such as the financial strength, the operational resilience, the governance structure, and the stakeholder expectations of the organization. By assessing the capacity to withstand loss, the organization can determine if its risk appetite is realistic and appropriate, or if it needs to be adjusted to match its risk profile and environment. References = Gaining the competitive edge – measuring and assessing an organization’s risk culture

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a branch of computer science that aims to create machines or systems that can perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as learning, reasoning, decision making, etc.

An organization that is considering adopting AI should be aware of the potential risks and challenges that may arise from using AI, such as ethical, legal, social, technical, operational, or security issues.

The most important course of action for the risk practitioner is to identify applicable risk scenarios. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the context and objectives of the AI adoption, the stakeholders and their expectations, the data and information sources and quality, the AI models and algorithms and their reliability, the AI outputs and outcomes and their impact, and the AI governance and oversight mechanisms and their effectiveness.

Identifying applicable risk scenarios helps to assess the likelihood and impact of the risks, prioritize the risks, design and implement appropriate risk responses, monitor and evaluate the risk performance, and report and communicate the risk status and issues.

The other options are not the most important courses of action for the risk practitioner. They are either secondary or not essential for AI risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 24

Information Technology & Security, page 18

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 16

Annual loss expectancy (ALE) is a method to assign a monetary value to risk by multiplying the probability of a risk event by the potential loss associated with that event1. ALE can be used to compare the costs and benefits of different risk mitigation options and to determine the optimal level of investment in risk management2. Business impact analysis (BIA) is a process to identify and evaluate the potential effects of a disruption on the critical functions and processes of an organization3. BIA can help to forecast the impacts of a risk event, but it does not assign a monetary value to the risk itself. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is a technique to compare the costs and benefits of a project, decision, or action4. CBA can help to evaluate the feasibility and profitability of a risk mitigation option, but it does not assign a monetary value to the risk itself. Inherent vulnerabilities are the weaknesses or flaws in a system, process, or asset that expose it to potential threats5. Inherent vulnerabilities can increase the likelihood or impact of a risk event, but they do not assign a monetary value to the risk itself. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2: Risk Analysis, pp. 77-81.

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

 Computer-enabled fraud is the use of information technology (IT) to commit or conceal fraudulent activities, such as theft, manipulation, or unauthorized access of data, systems, or networks. Computer-enabled fraud can pose significant risks to an organization, such as financial loss, reputational damage, legal liability, or regulatory sanctions. Therefore, an organization should establish a comprehensive and effective framework to prevent, detect, and respond to computer-enabled fraud. The framework should involve three lines of defense, which are the roles and responsibilities of different functions within the organization to manage and control risks. The first line of defense consists of the business owners, whose role is to identify, assess, and manage risks, including computer-enabled fraud risks. The primary responsibility of the first line of defense related to computer-enabled fraud is to implement processes to detect and deter fraud. This means designing and executing controls that can prevent or reduce the occurrence of computer-enabled fraud, such as authentication, authorization, encryption, logging, or segregation of duties. This also means monitoring and reporting any suspicious or anomalous activities or transactions that may indicate computer-enabled fraud, such as unusual patterns, volumes, or frequencies of data or system access or usage. Implementing processes to detect and deter fraud can help the first line of defense to protect the organization’s assets, data, and reputation from computer-enabled fraud, and to comply with the organization’s policies and regulations. References = Three Lines of Defence, Roles of Three Lines of Defense for Information Security and Governance, THE THREE LINES OF DEFENSE IN EFFECTIVE RISK MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL, The Three Lines of Defense.

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

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

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

Prioritize the compliance gaps based on their urgency and importance

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2: 10 security risks of wearables | CSO Online2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

5: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA3

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

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

: Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

The number of security incidents escalated to senior management is a metric that indicates the severity or complexity of security incidents, and the involvement or awareness of the senior management in the security incident handling process56. However, this metric does not measure the effectiveness or efficiency of the process, or the ability of the process to prevent or reduce security incidents56.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A 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, and evaluates 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

The risk associated with malicious functionality in outsourced application development is that the vendor may introduce unauthorized or harmful code into the enterprise’s system, which could compromise its security, integrity, or performance.

To mitigate this risk, the enterprise should perform an in-depth code review with an expert who can verify that the code meets the specifications, standards, and quality requirements, and that it does not contain any malicious or unwanted functionality.

A code review is a systematic examination of the source code of a software program, which can identify errors, vulnerabilities, inefficiencies, or deviations from best practices. A code review can also ensure that the code is consistent, readable, maintainable, and well-documented.

An expert is someone who has the knowledge, skills, and experience to perform the code review effectively and efficiently. An expert may be an internal or external resource, depending on the availability, cost, and independence of the reviewer.

A code review should be performed before the code is deployed to the production environment, and preferably at multiple stages of the development life cycle, such as design, testing, and integration.

A code review can also be complemented by other techniques, such as automated code analysis, testing, and scanning tools, which can detect common or known issues in the code. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, p. 143

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 143

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Service delivery and performance

Data security and privacy

Compliance with regulations and standards

Incident management and reporting

Business continuity and disaster recovery

Change management and configuration control

Intellectual property rights and licensing

Termination and data egress

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

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

The 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A corporate risk register is a document that records and tracks the significant risks that the organization faces, and the responses and actions that are taken to address them34.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: IT Risk Scenarios - Morland-Austin3

2: Risk Scenarios Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

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

4: Risk Register Examples for Cybersecurity Leaders4

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

8: Security Incident Reporting and Response, ISACA, 2019

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

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

: The Control Process | Principles of Management2

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

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

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

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

Optimize the value and benefits of the risk response

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

Coordinate and communicate the risk response with the relevant stakeholders

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

The 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Top Four Damaging Consequences of Data Leakage | ZeroFox1

2: 8 Data Leak Prevention Strategies for 2023 | UpGuard2

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

4: Data Classification Policy Template - IT Governance USA4

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

6: Encryption Policy Template - IT Governance USA6

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Reviewing changes to edit checks is a technique that involves examining and evaluating the modifications or updates to the edit checks, which are rules or validations that are applied to the data on the database to ensure their accuracy, completeness, and consistency9 . However, this technique is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the edit checks are bypassed or disabled9 . References =

1: Database Security: Attacks and Solutions | SpringerLink2

2: Unauthorised Modification of Data With Intent to Cause Impairment3

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia4

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva5

5: Database Access Control - Wikipedia6

6: Database Access Control: Best Practices for Database Security7

7: Data Reconciliation - Wikipedia8

8: Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection9

9: Edit Check - Wikipedia

: Edit Checks: A Data Quality Tool

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk Assessment for the Production Process1

2: Risk Assessment for Industrial Equipment2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

A risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that may affect the enterprise’s objectives and operations. It involves determining the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their significance and urgency.

A WiFi access point is a device that allows wireless devices to connect to a wired network using radio signals. It can provide convenience and flexibility for users, but it can also introduce security risks, such as unauthorized access, data leakage, malware infection, or denial of service attacks.

If departments have installed their own WiFi access points on the enterprise network, without proper authorization, configuration, or monitoring, it means that they have bypassed the network security policy and controls, and created potential vulnerabilities and exposures for the enterprise.

The most important information to include in a report to senior management is the potential business impact of this risk, which is the estimated loss or damage that the enterprise may suffer if the risk materializes. The potential business impact can be expressed in terms of financial, operational, reputational, or legal consequences, and it can help senior management to understand the severity and urgency of the risk, and to decide on the appropriate risk response and allocation of resources.

The other options are not the most important information to include in a report to senior management, because they do not convey the magnitude and significance of the risk, and they may not be relevant or actionable for senior management.

The network security policy is the set of rules and guidelines that define the security objectives, requirements, and responsibilities for the enterprise network. It is important to have a clear and comprehensive network security policy, and to ensure that it is communicated, enforced, and monitored across the enterprise, but it is not the most important information to include in a report to senior management, because it does not indicate the actual or potential impact of the risk, and it may not reflect the current or desired state of the network security.

The WiFi access point configuration is the set of parameters and settings that define the functionality, performance, and security of the WiFi access point. It is important to have a secure and consistent WiFi access point configuration, and to follow the best practices and standards for wireless network security, but it is not the most important information to include in a report to senior management, because it does not indicate the actual or potential impact of the risk, and it may not be relevant or understandable for senior management.

The planned remediation actions are the steps and measures that are intended to mitigate, transfer, avoid, or accept the risk, and to restore the normal operation and security of the enterprise network. It is important to have a feasible and effective plan for remediation actions, and to implement and monitor them in a timely and efficient manner, but it is not the most important information to include in a report to senior management, because it does not indicate the actual or potential impact of the risk, and it may not be feasible or appropriate without senior management’s approval or support. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 146

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

4: ProjectManagement.com - How to Implement Risk Responses2

5: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

6: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

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

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

Implement and monitor the cybersecurity controls and processes

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

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

Continuously improve the cybersecurity capabilities and maturity

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

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

A systems interruption caused by a personal USB device plugged into the corporate network by an IT employee who bypassed internal control procedures is a serious breach of information security and IT risk management. The person who should be accountable for this incident is the chief information officer (CIO), who is responsible for overseeing the IT function and ensuring compliance with IT policies and standards. The CIO should also ensure that appropriate corrective and preventive actions are taken to prevent such incidents from recurring and to mitigate the impact of the systems interruption on the business operations and objectives. The CIO should also report the incident to the senior management and the board of directors, and communicate with the relevant stakeholders about the incident and the actions taken. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 181