CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Questions and Answers

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Projected Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Risk Treatment Plan - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

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

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Control - CIO Wiki

Benchmarking - CIO Wiki

[Risk Treatment - CIO Wiki]

The best way to facilitate the alignment of IT risk management with enterprise risk management (ERM) is to link IT risk scenarios to enterprise strategy, because this ensures that the IT risks are considered in the context of the enterprise’s mission, vision, and goals. Linking IT risk scenarios to enterprise strategy also helps to prioritize the IT risks based on their impact and relevance to the enterprise’s objectives, and to select the appropriate risk responses and resources. The other options are not the best ways to facilitate the alignment of IT risk management with ERM, because they do not address the integration or alignment of the IT and enterprise perspectives. Adopting qualitative or quantitative enterprise risk assessment methods, and linking IT risk scenarios to technology objectives are examples of techniques or tools that can be used to perform IT risk management or ERM, but they do not ensure the alignment or consistency of the two processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.3, p. 22.

 Reduced ability to evaluate key risk indicators (KRIs) will have the greatest impact on the ability to monitor risk when an information system for a key business operation is moved from an in-house application to a Software as a Service (SaaS) vendor, as it may limit the visibility and control over the risk exposure and performance of the system. KRIs are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the effectiveness of risk response strategies, and they should be aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and objectives. When the system is moved to a SaaS vendor, the enterprise may lose access to the data and processes that are used to calculate and report the KRIs, or the KRIs may become irrelevant or inconsistent with the vendor’s environment and standards. This may impair the ability to monitor risk and to take timely and appropriate actions to manage risk. Reduced access to internal audit reports, dependency on the vendor’s key performance indicators (KPIs), and dependency on service level agreements (SLAs) are not the greatest impacts on the ability to monitor risk, as they do not affect the measurement and reporting of the risk status and performance, but rather the assurance and evaluation of the system quality and reliability. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question221; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 221.

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

What is Malware? - Definition from Techopedia

Common Types of Malware and Their Impact - Techopedia

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

The 10 Best Malware Protection Solutions Compared for 2024 - Techopedia

The Cost of Malware Attacks - Security Boulevard

The Impact of Malware on Business - Kaspersky

What is Patch Management? - Definition from Techopedia

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The most important topic to cover in a risk awareness training program for all staff is the policy compliance requirements and exceptions process. This topic would help the staff to understand the enterprise’s risk policies, standards, and procedures, and how they apply to their roles and responsibilities. It would also help the staff to know the process for requesting, approving, and documenting any exceptions to the policies, and the consequences of non-compliance. This topic would enhance the staff’s risk awareness and responsibility, and foster a culture of compliance and accountability within the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 2491

The best way to protect company sensitive information from being exposed when an organization allows employee use of social media accounts for work purposes is to require employees to sign nondisclosure agreements. Nondisclosure agreements are legal contracts that prohibit the employees from disclosing or sharing the company sensitive information with unauthorized parties, such as competitors, media, or regulators. Nondisclosure agreements also specify the scope, duration, and conditions of the nondisclosure obligation, and the penalties or remedies for breaching the agreement. Requiring employees to sign nondisclosure agreements is the best way to protect company sensitive information, as it helps to prevent or deter the employees from exposing or leaking the company sensitive information on social media, and to hold the employees accountable and liable for their actions. Requiring employees to sign nondisclosure agreements also helps to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements for data protection and privacy. Educating employees on what needs to be kept confidential, implementing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution, and taking punitive action against employees who expose confidential data are also useful ways, but they are not as effective as requiring employees to sign nondisclosure agreements, as they are either dependent on the employees’ awareness or behavior, or reactive or corrective measures, rather than proactive or preventive measures. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Business Impact Analysis | Ready.gov

Business Impact Analysis Toolkit | Smartsheet

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

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

Cost Benefit Analysis - ISACA

[Regulatory Compliance - ISACA]

[Impact Analysis - ISACA]

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

 The most important factor when deciding on a control to mitigate risk exposure is the cost-benefit analysis. This is a process that compares the costs and benefits of implementing a control, and determines whether the control is worth the investment. A cost-benefit analysis helps to ensure that the control is efficient and effective in reducing the risk to an acceptable level, and that it does not introduce new risks or adversely affect other objectives. A cost-benefit analysis also helps to prioritize the controls based on their value and feasibility, and to allocate the resources accordingly. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.5, page 1861

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk taxonomy is the system of classification and categorization of risks based on common characteristics and attributes. Risk taxonomy is necessary to enable an IT risk register to be consolidated with the rest of the organization’s risk register, because it helps to ensure consistency, comparability, and alignment of the risks across the organization. Risk taxonomy also helps to facilitate the communication, reporting, and aggregation of the risks. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not essential for consolidating the risk registers. Risk response is the action taken to address the risk, which may vary depending on the risk level and strategy. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept, which may differ across the organization’s units and functions. Risk ranking is the process of prioritizing the risks based on their impact and likelihood, which may change over time and context. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, page 69.

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

The best tool for communicating strategic risk priorities is a heat map. A heat map is a graphical representation of the risk profile of an enterprise, showing the likelihood and impact of various risks on a matrix. A heat map can help to highlight the most significant risks that require attention, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance levels of the enterprise. A heat map can also facilitate the comparison of risks across different business units, processes, or objectives, and enable the communication of risk information to stakeholders in a clear and concise manner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, page 240.

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

The control owner is the person who is responsible for designing, implementing, monitoring, and maintaining a control. The control owner is best suited to determine whether a new control properly mitigates data loss risk within a system, as they have the most knowledge and authority over the control. The control owner should also evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the control and report any issues or gaps to the risk owner.

The other options are not the best suited to determine whether a new control properly mitigates data loss risk within a system. The data owner is the person who has the accountability and authority over the data and its classification. The data owner may not have the technical expertise or access to evaluate the new control. The risk owner is the person who has the accountability and authority to manage a specific risk. The risk owner may not have the detailed knowledge or involvement in the new control. The system owner is the person who has the accountability and authority over the system and its operation. The system owner may not have the direct responsibility or oversight of the new control. References = CRISC TOPIC 3 EXAM SHORT Flashcards, CRISC-1-50 topic3 Flashcards, CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question609

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

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

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

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

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

References =

Key Control Indicator (KCI) - CIO Wiki

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

Indicators - Program Evaluation - CDC

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

Internal Audit Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) - AuditBoard

Hierarchy of Controls - NIOSH - CDC

The organization’s process owner should own the risk of exposing the payroll data due to a control weakness at the third party, because the process owner is the person who is responsible for the business process that generates, uses, or transfers the payroll data. The process owner should also ensure that the third party complies with the contractual obligations and service level agreements that define the expected performance and security standards of the payroll data processing. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not the primary owners of the risk, although they may also be involved in the risk management process. The third party’s IT operations manager, the third party’s chief risk officer (CRO), and the organization’s risk practitioner are examples of secondary owners or stakeholders of the risk, who may provide support, guidance, or oversight to the risk owner, but they are not accountable for the risk or the risk response strategy. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

Policies and standards are the primary documents that define the organization’s expectations and requirements for information security and risk management. They provide the basis for establishing controls, procedures, roles, and responsibilities. Policies and standards should be updated following a change in legislation requiring notification to individuals impacted by data breaches, to ensure compliance with the new legal obligations and to align with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Updating policies and standards can also help to communicate the changes to the relevant stakeholders and to provide guidance for implementing and monitoring the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, p. 28-29

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

Automated data indicating that risk has been reduced provides the most tenable evidence that a business process control is effective, because it shows the actual impact and outcome of the control on the risk level. A demonstration that the control is operating as designed, a successful walk-through of the associated risk assessment, and a management attestation that the control is operating effectively are not the most tenable evidence, because they are based on subjective judgments, assumptions, or expectations, not on objective facts or results. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

 The most important consideration when implementing ethical remote work monitoring is to inform the employees of how they are being monitored, because this respects their privacy rights and expectations, and ensures their consent and compliance with the monitoring policy. Informing the employees of how they are being monitored also helps to build trust and transparency between the employer and the employees, and reduces the potential legal or ethical issues that may arise from the monitoring activities. The other options are not the most important considerations, although they may also be relevant for ethical remote work monitoring. Monitoring only during official hours of business, reporting on nonproductive employees to management, and integrating multiple data monitoring sources into security incident response procedures are examples of operational or technical aspects of remote work monitoring, not ethical aspects. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

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

The best indicator of an effective IT security awareness program is the decreased success rate of internal phishing tests. Phishing is a type of social engineering attack that attempts to trick the users into revealing their personal or confidential information, or clicking on malicious links or attachments, by impersonating a legitimate entity or person. Internal phishing tests are simulated phishing attacks that are conducted by the enterprise to test the awareness and behavior of the employees in response to phishing emails. A decreased success rate of internal phishing tests means that fewer employees fall victim to the phishing attempts, and that they are more aware and vigilant of the phishing threats and techniques. A decreased success rate of internal phishing tests also implies that the IT security awareness program has effectively educated and trained the employees on how to recognize and report phishing emails, and how to protect themselves and the enterprise from phishing attacks. A decreased number of reported security incidents, a number of disciplinary actions issued for security violations, and a number of employees that complete security training are not as good indicators of an effective IT security awareness program as a decreased success rate of internal phishing tests, as they do not directly measure the awareness and behavior of the employees in relation to phishing, and may be influenced by other factors such as reporting mechanisms, enforcement policies, and training availability. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 220.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

Threshold - CIO Wiki

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

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Reporting - CIO Wiki

Regulatory Compliance - CIO Wiki

[Regulatory Risk - CIO Wiki]

[Qualitative Data - CIO Wiki

A system availability risk scenario is a situation where a system or a service is not accessible or functional due to a failure or an attack. The likelihood of such a scenario depends on the vulnerabilities or weaknesses that exist in the system or the service, and the threats or attackers that could exploit them. Therefore, by scanning the critical systems or services for vulnerabilities and analyzing the results, one can estimate the probability or frequency of a system availability risk scenario1.

A vulnerability scan is a process of identifying and evaluating the potential security risks in a system or a service. A vulnerability scan report provides a list of vulnerabilities that have been detected, categorized by their severity levels, and accompanied by remediation recommendations. By reviewing the report, one can understand the current security posture of the system or the service, and the actions that need to be taken to address the vulnerabilities2.

The other options are not the best ways to determine the likelihood of a system availability risk scenario, but rather some of the factors or outcomes of it. Availability of fault tolerant software is a factor that can reduce the likelihood of a system availability risk scenario, as it means that the software can continue to operate without interruption even if some of its components fail. Fault tolerant software can achieve this by using backup or redundant components, or by implementing error detection and correction mechanisms3. Strategic plan for business growth is an outcome of a system availability risk scenario, as it can affect the organization’s objectives and strategies. A system availability risk scenario can have negative impacts on the organization’s performance, reputation, customer satisfaction, and competitive advantage, and thus hamper its growth potential4. Redundancy of technical infrastructure is a factor that can reduce the likelihood of a system availability risk scenario, as it means that the infrastructure has duplicate or alternative devices or paths that can take over in case of a failure or an attack. Redundancy of technical infrastructure can ensure network availability and prevent data loss5. References =

Describe the risk scenarios | NZ Digital government

How to Read a Vulnerability Scan Report | Evolve Security

Learn about Fault Tolerant Servers | What is Fault Tolerance?-Stratus

The Importance of Redundancies in Your Infrastructure - INAP

What is Redundancy? - Your IT Department

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key Control Indicators - ISACA

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

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

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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

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

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

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

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

This can help to:

Ensure that the implemented measures are effective and efficient in reducing the risk level to an acceptable level, and that they are aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization2.

Identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may arise from the deviation from the approved risk action plan, and recommend and implement appropriate improvement actions or contingency plans3.

Communicate and report the results and outcomes of the validation to the relevant stakeholders, such as the risk owner, the risk committee, or the chief risk officer, and obtain their feedback and approval4.

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

Reporting the observation to the chief risk officer (CRO) is not the best course of action, as it may not provide sufficient information or evidence to support the deviation from the approved risk action plan. The CRO may not be able to evaluate or approve the implemented risk mitigation measures without knowing their adequacy or impact on the risk level5.

Updating the risk register with the implemented risk mitigation actions is not the best course of action, as it may not reflect the current or accurate risk status or performance. The risk register is a document that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses6. Updating the risk register without validating the adequacy of the implemented risk mitigation measures may create inconsistencies or inaccuracies in the risk register.

Reverting the implemented mitigation measures until approval is obtained is not the best course of action, as it may expose the organization to higher or unacceptable levels of risk. Reverting the implemented mitigation measures may undo or negate the benefits or outcomes of the risk mitigation, and may increase the likelihood or impact of the risk events7.

References =

ISACA Risk Starter Kit provides risk management templates and policies

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Risk Reporting - CIO Wiki

Chief Risk Officer - CIO Wiki

Risk Register - CIO Wiki

Risk Mitigation - CIO Wiki

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

Requirements - CIO Wiki

Change Control - CIO Wiki

Scope Creep - CIO Wiki

Quality - CIO Wiki

Stakeholder Management - CIO Wiki

[Software Testing - CIO Wiki]

[Integrated Development Environment (IDE) - CIO Wiki]

[Quality Requirements - CIO Wiki]

[Software Development Life Cycle - CIO Wiki]

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

Key performance indicators (KPIs) will best support management reporting on risk, as they help to measure and monitor the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and control processes. KPIs are metrics or measures that provide information on the current or potential performance of a specific activity, process, or objective. KPIs can be classified into two types: leading and lagging. Leading KPIs are predictive indicators that provide early warning signals or trends of future performance. Lagging KPIs are outcome indicators that reflect the actual or historical performance.

KPIs help to support management reporting on risk by providing the following benefits:

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

They facilitate a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating risk performance across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

They support the alignment of risk management and control activities with the organizational strategy and objectives, and help to evaluate the achievement of the desired outcomes.

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

They provide feedback and learning opportunities for the risk management and control processes, and help to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best choices to support management reporting on risk. Control self-assessment (CSA) is a process that involves the participation and involvement of the staff and managers in assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of the internal controls within their areas of responsibility, but it does not provide a comprehensive or objective view of the risk performance. Risk policy requirements are the documents that define the principles, rules, and guidelines for the risk management and control processes, but they do not provide actual or potential information on the risk performance. A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the information and status of the identified risks and their responses, but it does not measure or monitor the risk performance. References = Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Risk Management - Resolver, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Risk Reporting - Open Risk Manual

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

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

 Continuity planning is the process of developing strategies and plans to ensure the continuity of critical business functions and processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. Continuity planning involves identifying the risks, impacts, and recovery options for various scenarios, as well as testing and updating the plans regularly. The primary advantage of involving end users in continuity planning is that they have a better understanding of specific business needs, such as the operational requirements, the customer expectations, and the dependencies and interdependencies of the business processes. End users can provide valuable input and feedback on the continuity plans, as well as participate in the testing and validation of the plans. End users can also help to ensure the alignment of the continuity plans with the business objectives and priorities, as well as the compliance with the relevant standards and regulations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, p. 204-205

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

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

The risk owner is the person or entity that has the accountability and authority to manage a risk. The risk owner should be accountable for monitoring the control environment to ensure controls are effective, as they are responsible for implementing, maintaining, and improving the risk controls, and for reporting and communicating the risk status and performance. The risk owner should also ensure that the controls are aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise, and that they support the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives and value creation. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 244.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

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

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

What is shadow IT? - Article | SailPoint

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

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

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

Enterprise Architecture Governance - CIO Wiki

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

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

A vulnerability report for the IT infrastructure is a document that identifies and evaluates the weaknesses or gaps in the IT systems, networks, or devices that could be exploited by threats or cause incidents. By analyzing the latest vulnerability report, one can conclude the existence and extent of control weaknesses in the IT infrastructure, because control weaknesses are the deficiencies or failures of the controls that are supposed to prevent, detect, or correct the vulnerabilities. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not directly concluded by analyzing the latest vulnerability report. The likelihood of a threat, the impact of technology risk, and the impact of operational risk are examples of risk factors or consequences that depend on the vulnerability and the threat, but they are not determined by the vulnerability report alone. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The best way to ensure the effective decision-making of an IT risk management committee is to enroll key stakeholders as members. Key stakeholders are the individuals or groups who have an interest or influence in the IT risk management process, such as business owners, senior management, IT managers, auditors, regulators, customers, and suppliers. By involving key stakeholders in the IT risk management committee, the committee can benefit from their diverse perspectives, expertise, and experience, and ensure that the IT risk management decisions are aligned with the business objectives, priorities, and expectations. Key stakeholders can also provide valuable input, feedback, and support for the IT risk management activities, and help communicate and implement the IT risk management decisions across the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

The most appropriate key risk indicator (KRI) for backup media that is recycled monthly is the percentage of failed restore tests. A KRI is a metric that measures the likelihood or impact of a risk, and provides an early warning signal of a potential risk event. The percentage of failed restore tests is a KRI that reflects the quality and reliability of the backup media, and indicates the possibility of data loss or corruption. A high percentage of failed restore tests would suggest that the backup media is not functioning properly, and that the risk of data unavailability is increasing. Therefore, this KRI would help the risk practitioner to monitor the risk and take corrective actions as needed. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.2, page 235.

 A cost-benefit analysis is a tool that compares the costs and benefits of different alternatives, such as updating software or continuing to use end-of-life software. A cost-benefit analysis can provide the most helpful information to justify investing in updated software, as it can show the potential savings, benefits, and risks of each option, and help the decision-makers choose the best course of action. A cost-benefit analysis can also include qualitative factors, such as security, compliance, performance, and customer satisfaction, that may be affected by the software update. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 231. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 8. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 231. CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question231.

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

Data usage exceeding individual consent presents the greatest risk to the organization’s reputation, as it violates the privacy and trust of the customers and exposes the organization to legal and regulatory liabilities. Customers have the right to know and control how their personal data is collected, processed, and shared by the organization, and they expect the organization to respect their preferences and comply with the applicable laws and standards. If the organization uses the data for purposes beyond the scope of the consent, or without obtaining the consent in the first place, it may damage its reputation and lose its customers’ loyalty and confidence. Third-party software used for data analytics, revenue generated from data analytics, and use of a data analytics system are not inherently risky to the organization’s reputation, as long as they are transparent, secure, and ethical. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers - The Knowledge Academy; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 203.

Executive management should be primarily responsible for establishing an organization’s IT risk culture, as they have the authority and accountability to define and communicate the vision, mission, values, and objectives of the organization, and to set the tone and direction for the IT risk management and control processes. Executive management is the highest level of management in an organization, and it consists of the board of directors, the chief executive officer (CEO), and other senior executives. Executive management is responsible for the strategic planning and decision making of the organization, and for ensuring the alignment of the organizational strategy and objectives with the stakeholder expectations and requirements.

Executive management should be primarily responsible for establishing an organization’s IT risk culture by providing the following benefits:

It demonstrates the leadership and commitment of the executive management to the IT risk management and control processes, and to the achievement of the organizational strategy and objectives.

It influences and motivates the behavior and attitude of the staff and managers towards IT risk management and control, and fosters a culture of risk awareness, ownership, and accountability across the organization.

It defines and communicates the IT risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and guides and supports the development and implementation of the IT risk policies, standards, and procedures.

It allocates and monitors the resources and performance of the IT risk management and control processes, and ensures the effectiveness and efficiency of the IT risk governance and oversight.

The other options are not the primary choices for establishing an organization’s IT risk culture. Business process owner is the person who has the responsibility and authority over the design, execution, and performance of a specific business process, and they are accountable for the risks and controls associated with their process, but they do not have the overall or strategic responsibility for the IT risk culture. Risk management is the function or department that is responsible for managing and monitoring the IT risk management and control processes, and for providing advice and guidance to the executive management and the business units, but they do not have the ultimate or final responsibility for the IT risk culture. IT management is the function or department that is responsible for managing and maintaining the IT operations and security, and for supporting the IT risk management and control processes, but they do not have the highest or broadest responsibility for the IT risk culture. References = Risk Culture - Open Risk Manual, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, The 6 key elements to creating and maintaining a good risk culture

Continuous data backup controls are the best recommendation to further reduce the impact of ransomware attacks, as they enable the organization to restore the data that has been encrypted or deleted by the ransomware without paying the ransom or losing the data. Continuous data backup controls ensure that the data is regularly and automatically backed up to a secure and separate location, and that the backup data is tested and verified for integrity and availability. Two-factor authentication, encryption for data at rest, and encryption for data in motion are not the best recommendations to further reduce the impact of ransomware attacks, as they do not address the recovery of the data that has been compromised by the ransomware. These controls may help to prevent or mitigate ransomware attacks, but not to reduce their impact. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 207; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 207.

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

Disaster recovery plans are essential for ensuring the continuity and resilience of business operations in the event of a disruption or disaster. However, creating and maintaining separate disaster recovery plans for each business unit may not be cost-effective or efficient, as it may result in duplication, inconsistency, or gaps in the plans. Therefore, the best course of action would be to evaluate opportunities to combine disaster recovery plans across the business units, where possible and appropriate. This would help to achieve economies of scale, standardization, and alignment of the plans, as well as reduce complexity and costs. However, this does not mean that all disaster recovery plans should be identical or centralized, as different business units may have different risk profiles, recovery objectives, and requirements. Therefore, the combined disaster recovery plans should still be tailored and customized to suit the specific needs and characteristics of each business unit. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2, page 71.

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

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

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

A balanced scorecard is a strategic management tool that helps to measure and communicate the performance of an organization or a program against its goals and objectives. A balanced scorecard typically consists of four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth. Each perspective has a set of key performance indicators (KPIs) that reflect the critical success factors and desired outcomes of the organization or the program1.

A balanced scorecard is most useful for reporting on the overall status and effectiveness of the IT risk management program, because it can provide a comprehensive and balanced view of the program’s performance across multiple dimensions. A balanced scorecard can help to align the IT risk management program with the business strategy and vision, and to demonstrate the value and impact of the program to the stakeholders. A balanced scorecard can also help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the IT risk management program, and to monitor and improve the program’s processes and outcomes2.

The other options are not as useful as a balanced scorecard for reporting on the overall status and effectiveness of the IT risk management program. A capability maturity level is a measure of the maturity and quality of a process or a practice, based on a predefined set of criteria and standards. A capability maturity level can help to assess and benchmark the IT risk management program’s processes and practices, but it does not provide a holistic view of the program’s performance and results3. An internal audit plan is a document that outlines the scope, objectives, and methodology of an internal audit activity. An internal audit plan can help to evaluate and verify the IT risk management program’s controls and compliance, but it does not provide a strategic view of the program’s goals and outcomes4. A control self-assessment (CSA) is a technique that involves the participation of the process owners and the staff in assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of their own controls. A CSA can help to enhance the awareness and ownership of the IT risk management program’s controls, but it does not provide an objective and independent view of the program’s performance and impact. References =

Balanced Scorecard Basics - Balanced Scorecard Institute

Using the Balanced Scorecard to Measure and Manage IT Risk

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Overview

Internal Audit Planning: The Basics - The IIA

[Control Self-Assessment - ISACA]

According to the GDPR, personal data shall be collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes1. This means that a business unit can only use personal information for a different purpose if it has obtained the consent of the data subject, or if it has a clear legal basis or obligation to do so2. Therefore, informed consent should be the first consideration when a business unit wants to use personal information for a purpose other than for which it was originally collected.

References = GDPR Article 5 (1) (b) and Article 6 (4)1, ICO Principle (b): Purpose limitation2

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

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

Insecure data transmission protocols should be of greatest concern when an organization is implementing internet of Things (IoT) technology to control temperature and lighting in its headquarters, because they can expose the IoT devices and data to unauthorized access, interception, or manipulation. Insecure data transmission protocols can also compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the IoT system and the information it collects and transmits. The other options are not the greatest concerns, although they may also pose some challenges or risks to the IoT implementation. Insufficient network isolation, impact on network performance, and lack of interoperability between sensors are examples of technical or operational issues that can affect the functionality, efficiency, or compatibility of the IoT system, but they do not have the same severity or impact as insecure data transmission protocols. References = CRISC Sample Questions 2024

The risk management process is the systematic and continuous process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or assets1. The risk management process should be aligned with the organization’s overall risk management framework and strategy, and support the organization’s value creation and protection2.

Having the risk management process reviewed by a third party is a good practice that can provide various benefits for the organization, such as:

Enhancing the credibility and reliability of the risk management process and outcomes

Identifying and addressing any weaknesses, gaps, or errors in the risk management process and controls

Providing independent and objective feedback and recommendations for improving the risk management process and performance

Ensuring compliance with the relevant laws, regulations, and standards for risk management3

Among the four options given, the primary reason to have the risk management process reviewed by a third party is to obtain an objective view of process gaps and systemic errors. This means that the third party can help to:

Assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk management process and its alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

Detect and report any inconsistencies, inefficiencies, or inaccuracies in the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, or treatment activities

Identify and prioritize the root causes and consequences of the process gaps and systemic errors, and their impact on the organization’s risk exposure and acceptance

Suggest and implement corrective or preventive actions that can resolve or mitigate the process gaps and systemic errors, and prevent their recurrence

References = Risk Management Process - ISO 31000, Enterprise Risk Management - Wikipedia, How to Select a Third-Party Risk Management Framework

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

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

The most important concern to address when formulating a social media policy to address information leakage is sharing company information on social media. Information leakage is the unauthorized or unintentional disclosure of confidential or sensitive information to unauthorized parties. Social media is a platform that enables the users to create and share content, such as text, images, videos, or links, with other users or the public. Sharing company information on social media is the most important concern, as it could expose the company’s trade secrets, intellectual property, customer data, financial data, or strategic plans to competitors, hackers, or regulators. Sharing company information on social media could also damage the company’s reputation, trust, or credibility, and result in legal or regulatory penalties, fines, or lawsuits. Therefore, a social media policy should clearly define what constitutes company information, and what are the rules and guidelines for sharing or not sharing company information on social media. A social media policy should also specify the roles and responsibilities of the employees, managers, and the social media team, and the consequences and sanctions for violating the policy. Sharing personal information on social media, using social media to maintain contact with business associates, and using social media for personal purposes during working hours are not as important as sharing company information on social media, as they do not directly involve the leakage of company information, and they may not have significant impact or risk on the company. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217

The best recommendation for a risk practitioner when an employee lost a personal mobile device that may contain sensitive corporate information is to initiate a remote data wipe. A remote data wipe is a process of erasing the data stored on a device remotely, using a command sent over a network or a wireless connection. A remote data wipe can help to prevent the unauthorized access, use, disclosure, or theft of the sensitive corporate information, and to minimize the potential impact of the loss on the enterprise’s reputation, operations, and compliance. A remote data wipe can also help to comply with the data breach notification laws and regulations, and to reduce the legal liability and penalties. Conducting a risk analysis, invoking the incident response plan, and disabling the user account are not as immediate and effective as initiating a remote data wipe, as they do not address the primary risk of data exposure and loss. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

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

KRIs provide early warnings about potential deviations from the organization's risk appetite. These indicators enable proactive measures to prevent risk levels from exceeding acceptable thresholds, a critical component of Risk Monitoring and Reporting.

Risk scenarios should reflect probable events to ensure relevance and practicality in risk assessments. This guidance supports the Risk Identification and Scenario Development process.

The acceptance of control costs that exceed risk exposure most likely demonstrates corporate culture misalignment, as it indicates that the organization is not following the principles and values of effective risk management, and that there is a lack of communication and coordination among the risk owners and stakeholders. Corporate culture misalignment can also result in inefficient and wasteful use of resources, and reduced risk-return trade-off. The organization should align its corporate culture with its risk appetite and tolerance, and ensure that the control costs are proportional and justified by the risk exposure and the expected benefits. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 255. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 255. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the greatest benefit of analyzing logs collected from different systems is to detect developing threats earlier, because it helps to identify and correlate the patterns, trends, and anomalies that may indicate a potential attack or compromise. Log analysis is the process of examining and interpreting the log data generated by various systems, such as firewalls, servers, routers, and applications. Log analysis can provide valuable insights into the activities and events that occur on the systems, and can enable the timely detection and response to the emerging threats. The other options are not the greatest benefits of analyzing logs, as they are less proactive or less strategic than detecting developing threats earlier. Maintaining a record of incidents is a benefit of logging, but not of analyzing logs, as it involves storing and preserving the log data for future reference. Facilitating forensic investigations is a benefit of analyzing logs, but it is a reactive and tactical activity that occurs after an incident has happened. Identifying security violations is a benefit of analyzing logs, but it is a specific and operational activity that focuses on the compliance and enforcement of the security policies and standards. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 263.

 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

The potential impact of events is the estimated magnitude and likelihood of the consequences that may result from a risk scenario. The potential impact of events can help key stakeholders understand the severity and urgency of the risk, and prioritize the appropriate response actions. The potential impact of events can be expressed in quantitative or qualitative terms, such as financial loss, operational disruption, reputational damage, legal liability, etc. The potential impact of events is the most important information to include when reporting on an increasing trend of ransomware attacks in the industry, as it can help stakeholders assess the level of risk exposure and the adequacy of the existing controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Risk Analysis, p. 87-89.

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 second line of defense is a group of functions that provide oversight, guidance, and monitoring of the risk management activities of the first line of defense. The second line of defense includes risk management, compliance, and internal control departments. Their key responsibility is to monitor the effectiveness of the control activities implemented by the first line of defense, and to report any issues or gaps to senior management and the board. The second line of defense also supports the first line of defense by providing frameworks, policies, tools, and techniques to identify, measure, and manage risks. The other options are not the key responsibility of the second line of defense, as explained below:

A. Implementing control activities is the responsibility of the first line of defense, which consists of the business units and process owners that own and manage the risks associated with their daily operations.

C. Conducting control self-assessments is a technique used by the first line of defense to evaluate the design and operation of their own controls, and to identify and report any deficiencies or improvement opportunities.

D. Owning risk scenarios is the responsibility of the first line of defense, which is accountable for the risks inherent in their business activities, and for developing and executing risk response strategies. References = Modernizing The Three Lines of Defense Model | Deloitte US, The second line of defence: fit for purpose, not an uncomfortable fit | Knowledge | Linklaters, COSO’s Take on the Three Lines of Defense | ERM - Enterprise Risk Management, Three Lines of Defense | Risk Management - Schneider Downs CPAs, What is the Three Lines of Defense Approach to Risk Management?

The primary reason for periodically monitoring key risk indicators (KRIs) is to detect changes in the risk profile of the enterprise. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks. By monitoring KRIs, the enterprise can identify any deviations from the expected risk level, and take appropriate actions to adjust the risk response or the risk appetite. Monitoring KRIs also helps to validate the effectiveness of risk mitigation controls and the accuracy of risk assessments. Rectifying errors in results of KRIs, reducing costs of risk mitigation controls, and continually improving risk assessments are possible benefits of monitoring KRIs, but they are not the primary reason. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.1.2, page 175.

The primary focus of an independent review of a risk management process is to evaluate the maturity of the process, which means the extent to which the process is aligned with the organization’s objectives, culture, and governance, and how well it is integrated, implemented, and monitored across the organization. A mature risk management process is one that is consistent, effective, efficient, and adaptable to changing circumstances and environments. A maturity assessment can help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the risk management process, as well as the opportunities and challenges for improvement. The other options are not the primary focus, but they may be secondary or tertiary aspects of the review. Accuracy of risk tolerance levels is a measure of how well the organization defines and communicates its risk appetite and risk limits, which are important inputs for the risk management process, but not the main outcome. Consistency of risk process results is a measure of how reliable and repeatable the risk management process is, which reflects the quality and validity of the data, assumptions, methods, and tools used in the process, but not the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the process. Participation of stakeholders is a measure of how well the organization engages and involves its internal and external stakeholders in the risk management process, which enhances the awareness, ownership, and accountability of the process, but not the alignment and integration of the process. References = Assessing the Risk Management Process, p. 9-10.

 IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how IT-related events or incidents could adversely affect an organization’s objectives, assets, or operations. IT risk scenarios can help to identify, analyze, and prioritize IT risks, and to develop appropriate responses and controls1.

An enterprise-wide risk register is a document that records and tracks the significant risks that an organization faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. An enterprise-wide risk register can help to provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the organization’s risk profile, and to support the decision making and reporting of the risk management function2.

The best practice that facilitates the incorporation of IT risk scenarios into the enterprise-wide risk register is to develop IT risk scenarios in the context of organizational objectives. This means that IT risk scenarios should be aligned with and derived from the organization’s strategic goals, mission, vision, and values. IT risk scenarios should also consider the interdependencies and interactions between IT and other business domains, and the potential impact of IT risks on the organization’s performance and reputation3.

By developing IT risk scenarios in the context of organizational objectives, the organization can ensure that the IT risk scenarios are relevant, realistic, and meaningful for the enterprise-wide risk management. The organization can also ensure that the IT risk scenarios are consistent and comparable with other types of risk scenarios, such as financial, operational, or reputational risk scenarios. This can facilitate the integration and consolidation of IT risk scenarios into the enterprise-wide risk register, and enable a holistic and balanced assessment and reporting of the organization’s risks4.

The other options are not as effective as developing IT risk scenarios in the context of organizational objectives for incorporating IT risk scenarios into the enterprise-wide risk register. Developing key risk indicators (KRIs) for key IT risk scenarios can help to monitor and measure the IT risk exposure and performance, but it does not ensure that the IT risk scenarios are aligned with the organizational objectives or integrated with other risk scenarios. Assessing IT risk scenarios by the enterprise risk management team can help to validate and prioritize the IT risk scenarios, but it does not ensure that the IT risk scenarios are derived from the organizational objectives or consistent with other risk scenarios. Approving risk appetites for IT risk scenarios by key business stakeholders can help to establish the acceptable level of IT risk taking and tolerance, but it does not ensure that the IT risk scenarios are based on the organizational objectives or comparable with other risk scenarios. References =

IT Risk Scenario Development - ISACA

Risk Register - ISACA

Identifying Risks and Scenarios Threatening the Organization as an Enterprise - A New Enterprise Risk Identification Framework

Risk Register 2021-2022 - UNECE

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

Alignment to business objectives is the most important factor when developing a business case for a proposed security investment, because it demonstrates how the investment will support the enterprise’s mission, vision, and goals. A business case should show how the security investment will contribute to the value creation, risk reduction, and performance improvement of the enterprise. The other options are not the most important factors, although they may also be included in the business case. The identification of control requirements, the consideration of new business strategies, and the inclusion of strategy for regulatory compliance are secondary factors that depend on the alignment to business objectives. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers

Conducting root cause analyses for risk events is the first recommendation that a risk practitioner should make when an increasing trend of risk events and subsequent losses has been identified, as this helps to identify the underlying causes and sources of the risk events, and to determine the appropriate actions to address them. Root cause analysis is a systematic process of collecting and analyzing data, finding the root causes, and implementing solutions to prevent recurrence or reduce the impact of the risk events. Educating personnel on risk mitigation strategies, integrating the risk event and incident management processes, and implementing controls to prevent future risk events are not the first recommendations, but rather the possible outcomes or actions of conducting root cause analyses for risk events. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question208; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 208.

 The number of projects going live without a security review is the best key control indicator (KCI) to indicate whether security requirements are identified and managed throughout a project life cycle, because it measures the compliance and effectiveness of the security review process. A security review is a process that ensures that the security requirements are defined, implemented, tested, and verified for each project, and that any security risks or issues are identified and resolved before the project is deployed. The number of projects going live without a security review should be minimized or eliminated, as it indicates a failure or weakness of the security review process. The other options are not the best KCIs, because they do not directly measure the identification and management of security requirements. The number of employees completing project-specific security training, the number of security projects started in core departments, and the number of security-related status reports submitted by project managers are examples of input or output indicators that measure the activities or results of the project, but not the security requirements. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

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

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

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

References:

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

•ISACA, Auditing Applications, Part 12

The most important factor when identifying an organization’s risk exposure associated with IoT devices is visibility into all networked devices. This means having a comprehensive inventory of all the IoT devices connected to the organization’s network, as well as their configurations, functions, and security status. Visibility enables the organization to identify the potential threats and vulnerabilities that IoT devices pose, as well as the impact and likelihood of those risks. Visibility also helps the organization to monitor the behavior and performance of IoT devices, detect any anomalies or incidents, and respond accordingly. Without visibility, the organization may be unaware of the existence, location, or condition of some IoT devices, which could lead to undetected breaches, data loss, or operational disruptions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, Page 28; 8 Internet of Things Threats and Risks to Be Aware of - SecurityScorecard Blog.

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

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 vendor must host data in a specific geographic location to ensure that the data is protected by the applicable data protection laws of the EU or the country where the data originates. This is especially important for SaaS customers who transfer personal data from the EU to third countries, as they need to comply with the GDPR and the new Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) that regulate such transfers. The vendor must also provide adequate security measures and guarantees to protect the data from unauthorized access, disclosure, or loss. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: IT Risk Mitigation, Section 5.3: IT Risk Mitigation Strategies and Approaches, Page 253; Data Protection – New EU Standard Contractual Clauses - Bodle Law.

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

Obtaining a holistic view of IT strategy risk is the primary benefit of conducting a risk workshop using a top-down approach instead of a bottom-up approach, because it helps to identify and assess the risks that may affect the alignment and integration of IT with the organization’s objectives and strategy. A risk workshop is a collaborative and interactive method of conducting a risk assessment, where the risk practitioner facilitates a group discussion with the relevant stakeholders to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks and their controls. A top-down approach is a method of conducting a risk workshop that starts from the high-level or strategic perspective, and then drills down to the lower-level or operational details. A bottom-up approach is a method of conducting a risk workshop that starts from the low-level or operational details, and then aggregates them to the higher-level or strategic perspective. A top-down approach can offer a holistic view of IT strategy risk, as it helps to understand the big picture and the interrelationships of the risks and their impacts across the organization. A bottom-up approach can offer a detailed view of specific project or process risk, as it helps to capture the granular and technical aspects of the risks and their controls. Therefore, obtaining a holistic view of IT strategy risk is the primary benefit of using a top-down approach, as it supports the strategic alignment and integration of IT with the organization. Identifying specific project risk, understanding risk associated with complex processes, and incorporating subject matter expertise are all possible benefits of conducting a risk workshop, but they are not the primary benefit of using a top-down approach, as they are more suitable for a bottom-up approach. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 87

Organizational objectives should be the primary input to determine risk tolerance, as they define the desired outcomes and performance of the organization, and guide the selection of the acceptable level of risk that the organization is willing to take to achieve those objectives. Regulatory requirements, annual loss expectancy (ALE), and risk management costs are not the primary inputs, as they are more related to the external or internal constraints or factors that affect the risk tolerance, rather than the drivers or determinants of the risk tolerance. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

Risk scenarios require the identification of specific risk events to ensure they are realistic and actionable. This process is fundamental to effective risk assessments and responses, forming a core part of the Risk Scenario Development methodology.

A risk assessment with stakeholders is the best course of action because it will help the risk practitioner to evaluate the value and risk of the third-party blockchain integration platform in relation to the organization’s objectives, risk appetite, and risk tolerance. A risk assessment will also help to identify and prioritize the risks and opportunities associated with the platform, and to develop appropriate risk responses and controls.

References: The answer is based on the following sources:

•CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, pages 75-761

•CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 12 Month Subscription, Question ID: QID-10012

 Role of the System Owner:

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

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

 Effectiveness of Technical Controls:

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

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

 Comparing Other Roles:

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

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

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

 Supporting Information:

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

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

Risk appetite reflects the organization’s tolerance for risk, including noncompliance risks. Senior management’s determination of acceptable risk levels influences strategic decisions, aligning with the principles of Governance and Risk Management.

The primary concern for an organization planning to transfer and store its customer data with an offshore cloud service provider is data privacy. Data privacy is the protection of personal information from unauthorized or unlawful access, use, disclosure, or transfer. Data privacy is governed by various laws, regulations, and standards that vary across different jurisdictions and sectors. An organization that transfers and stores its customer data with an offshore cloud service provider should ensure that the data privacy rights and obligations of the customers, the organization, and the cloud service provider are clearly defined and agreed upon, and that the data is protected according to the applicable data privacy requirements. An organization should also conduct due diligence and risk assessment on the offshore cloud service provider, and monitor and audit its performance and compliance on a regular basis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 127123

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

The type of control that has been applied when an organization provides legal text explaining the rights and expected behavior of users accessing a system from geographic locations that have strong privacy regulations is directive. A directive control is a control that guides or instructs the users or the staff on the policies, procedures, or standards that they need to follow or comply with when performing their tasks or activities. A directive control can help to prevent or reduce the risk of non-compliance, errors, or violations, by ensuring that the users or the staff are aware and informed of the expectations and requirements of the organization or the system. A directive control can also help to enforce the accountability and responsibility of the users or the staff, and to support the audit and monitoring of their actions and behaviors. Providing legal text explaining the rights and expected behavior of users accessing a system from geographic locations that have strong privacy regulations is an example of a directive control, as it informs the users of the legal obligations and consequences of using the system, and instructs them on how to protect their privacy and the privacy of others. Detective, preventive, and compensating are not the correct types of control, as they do not match the definition or the purpose of the control that has been applied. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

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

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

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

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

IT Risk Resources | ISACA

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

Cross Site Scripting Prevention Cheat Sheet - OWASP

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

Difference Between XSS and SQL Injection - GeeksforGeeks

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

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

Risk Acceptance Framework:

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

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

Importance of Authorized Individuals:

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

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

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

References:

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

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

The 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.

Conducting a root cause analysis is the best course of action for an IT business owner following an unexpected increase in emergency changes, as it helps to identify and address the underlying cause(s) of the problem and prevent it from recurring in the future. A root cause analysis is a systematic process of finding and resolving the fundamental factors that contribute to a specific issue or event. A root cause analysis can help to improve the quality and reliability of the IT services and processes, reduce the costs and risks associated with emergency changes, and enhance the customer satisfaction and trust.

The other options are not the best courses of action for an IT business owner following an unexpected increase in emergency changes. Evaluating the impact to control objectives is an important step to assess the potential consequences of the emergency changes on the IT governance and risk management, but it does not provide a solution or mitigation strategy for the problem. Validating the adequacy of current processes is a good practice to ensure that the IT processes are aligned with the business needs and objectives, but it does not address the specific cause(s) of the emergency changes. Reconfiguring the IT infrastructure is a possible action to implement the emergency changes, but it does not prevent the occurrence or recurrence of the problem. References = IT Business Owner’s Best Course of Action Following Unexpected Increase …, ITIL Change Types: Standard vs Normal vs Emergency - Freshworks, Emergency Change Management: Please Stop The Drama

The likelihood rating in the risk register is a measure of how probable it is that a risk event will occur, given the current conditions and controls. The risk practitioner should change the likelihood rating if there is a significant change in the effectiveness of the controls that are implemented to prevent or reduce the risk. For example, if a control becomes obsolete, ineffective, or bypassed, the likelihood rating should increase, as the risk event becomes more likely to happen. Conversely, if a control becomes more efficient, reliable, or robust, the likelihood rating should decrease, as the risk event becomes less likely to happen. The other options are not likely to cause a change in the likelihood rating, as they are not directly related to the probability of the risk event. Risk appetite is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Control cost is the amount of resources that are required to implement and maintain a control. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that an organization is willing to allow for a risk to deviate from its desired level or expected outcome. These factors may influence the risk response or the risk acceptance, but not the likelihood rating. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: Risk Register, p. 25-26.

A risk profile is a summary of the risks that an organization faces and their likelihood and impact. Consistently recording risk assessment results in the risk register can help improve the accuracy of risk profiles by providing a reliable and up-to-date source of information on the current risk situation, the risk response actions, and the residual risk levels. A risk register is a tool that captures and documents the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes2. A risk register can also facilitate risk communication, monitoring, and reporting2.

Assessment of organizational risk appetite, compliance with best practice, and accountability for loss events are not the primary benefits of consistently recording risk assessment results in the risk register. These are possible outcomes or objectives of risk management, but they do not directly depend on the risk register.

Key risk indicators are designed to provide early warnings about increasing risk exposure, enabling timely risk mitigation efforts. This supports proactive risk management, as outlined in the Risk Monitoring and Reporting domain of CRISC.

Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after applying controls or other risk treatments. A critical patch is a type of control that aims to reduce the risk of a known vulnerability being exploited by attackers. If the patch implementation fails, the control is ineffective and the risk is not reduced. Therefore, the residual risk is increased, as the organization is still exposed to the potential negative consequences of the vulnerability.

References:

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

•ISACA, Practical Patch Management and Mitigation2

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

 Data Protection Controls:

Evaluating existing data protection controls involves reviewing and assessing the measures in place to protect sensitive data from breaches.

This includes technical, administrative, and physical controls designed to prevent unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, or destruction of data.

 Steps in Evaluation:

Review Current Controls: Assess the effectiveness of encryption, access controls, data masking, and other security measures.

Identify Gaps: Determine if there are any weaknesses or vulnerabilities in the current controls.

Recommend Improvements: Suggest enhancements or additional controls to address identified gaps.

 Importance of Evaluation:

Provides the board with a clear understanding of the organization’s current security posture and exposure to data breaches.

Helps in identifying areas where additional controls or improvements are needed to mitigate risks effectively.

 Comparing Other Actions:

Reassess Risk Appetite and Tolerance Levels: Important but secondary to understanding current controls.

Evaluate Data Sensitivity: Useful but should be part of a broader assessment of existing controls.

Review Data Retention Policy: Relevant for compliance but not directly addressing the immediate concern of data breaches.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the importance of evaluating data protection controls to understand and mitigate risks (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 4: Information Technology and Security, Section 4.4 Data Protection and Privacy)​​.

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.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, enterprise architecture (EA) is a comprehensive framework that defines the structure and operation of an organization, including its business processes, information systems, technology infrastructure, organizational structure, and strategic objectives2. An EA program is a set of principles, policies, standards, and guidelines that govern the development and implementation of the EA3. By having an approved EA program, an organization can ensure that its risk management is aligned with its goals and objectives, as the EA provides a clear and consistent vision of the desired state and direction of the organization, as well as the means to achieve and measure it4. The EA also helps to identify and prioritize the risks and opportunities that may affect the organization’s performance and resilience. The other options are not as effective or relevant as option D, as they do not directly relate to the alignment of risk management with organizational goals and objectives. Option A, having approved policies that provide operational boundaries, is more related to the governance and compliance of risk management, not its alignment. Option B, having organizational controls to manage risk appetite, is more related to the implementation and monitoring of risk management, not its alignment. Option C, continually evaluating environmental changes that impact risk, is more related to the identification and assessment of risk management, not its alignment.

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

The most important consideration when establishing a contingency plan and an alternate processing site for a company that has located its computer center on a moderate earthquake fault is that the alternative site does not reside on the same fault no matter how far the distance apart, as it ensures that the alternative site is not affected by the same earthquake event that may disrupt the primary site, and that the business continuity and recovery objectives can be met. The other options are not the most important considerations, as they are more related to the backup, priority, or readiness of the alternative site, respectively, rather than the location of the alternative site. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

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.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, an enterprise-wide ethics training and awareness program is one of the key elements of a strong risk culture, as it helps to promote ethical behavior, raise awareness of risk management principles and practices, and foster a culture of accountability and transparency2

1: Developing Collective Risk Leadership Through CRISC - ISACA 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 23

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

The first course of action for the risk practitioner when identifying ineffective controls is to determine whether the impact of the control failure is outside the risk appetite of the organization. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. If the impact is within the risk appetite, the risk practitioner may decide to accept the risk or monitor the situation. If the impact is outside the risk appetite, the risk practitioner may need to escalate the issue, report the ineffective control, request a formal acceptance of risk, or deploy a compensating control.

References: The answer is based on the following sources:

•CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, pages 149-1501

•CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 12 Month Subscription, Question ID: QID-10042

•Effective Risk Management Strategies | CRISC Exam Preparation3

The business process owner should own the risk of customer data leakage caused by the service provider, as they have the responsibility and authority over the design, execution, and performance of the business process. The business process owner is also accountable for the risks and controls associated with their process, and they can provide valuable input and feedback on the likelihood and impact of customer data leakage on the process outcomes and objectives.

The other options are not the best choices for owning the risk of customer data leakage caused by the service provider. The service provider is responsible for delivering and supporting the billing function and ensuring the security and privacy of the customer data, but they may not have the full visibility or understanding of the business process and objectives. The vendor risk manager is responsible for managing and monitoring the vendor relationship and performance, but they may not have the direct involvement or influence on the business process and its risks and controls. The legal counsel is responsible for providing legal advice and guidance on the contractual and regulatory obligations and implications of the outsourcing arrangement, but they may not have the detailed knowledge or experience of the business process and its risks and controls. References = Guide to Vendor Risk Assessment | Smartsheet, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Data Ownership: Considerations for Risk Management - ISACA

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

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

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

•Risk acceptance is a status quo risk response, where the risk owner acknowledges the risk exists but accepts it with minimal response1. Risk acceptance may be appropriate when the cost of other risk responses exceeds the value that would be gained, or when the risk is below the risk acceptance criteria2.

•Risk acceptance criteria are the criteria used as a basis for decisions about acceptable risk2. They should be established before conducting a risk assessment, and they may be influenced by factors such as utility, equality, technology, and risk perception2. Different organizations and countries may have different risk acceptance criteria, depending on their context and values3.

•In this scenario, the organization has conducted a risk assessment for regulatory compliance, and has identified only one possible mitigating control. However, the cost of the control is higher than the penalty of noncompliance, which implies that the risk is below the risk acceptance criteria. Therefore, the best recommendation is to accept the risk with management sign-off, which means that the management agrees to take the risk and is accountable for the consequences.

•Ignoring the risk until the regulatory body conducts a compliance check (option B) is not a good recommendation, as it may expose the organization to legal, financial, or reputational damage. Moreover, ignoring the risk may violate the principle of risk reduction, which states that risks should be reduced wherever practicable2.

•Mitigating the risk with the identified control (option C) is not a good recommendation, as it may not be cost-effective or efficient for the organization. The cost of the control is higher than the penalty of noncompliance, which means that the organization would spend more resources than necessary to reduce the risk. Moreover, mitigating the risk may not be aligned with the principle of utility, which states that resources should be used as efficiently as possible for the society as a whole2.

•Transferring the risk by buying insurance (option D) is not a good recommendation, as it may not be feasible or beneficial for the organization. Transferring the risk means that the organization shifts the responsibility or burden of the risk to another party, such as an insurer, a contractor, or a partner1. However, transferring the risk does not eliminate the risk, and it may incur additional costs or complications for the organization. Moreover, transferring the risk may not be possible or acceptable for some types of regulatory compliance risks, such as those related to health, safety, or environmental standards3.

References:

•Compliance risk assessments - Deloitte United States

•Compliance Risk Assessment [5 Key Steps] | Hyperproof

•Compliance Risk Assessments | Deloitte US

•Risk Acceptance Criteria: Overview of ALARP and Similar Methodologies as Practiced Worldwide

•Risk Assessment 4. Risk acceptance criteria - Norwegian University of Science and Technology

•Risk Acceptance - Institute of Internal Auditors

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.

Defining risk response options is performed after a risk assessment is completed. A risk assessment is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that affect the enterprise’s objectives and operations. After a risk assessment is completed, the enterprise needs to define the risk response options, which are the actions that can be taken to address the risks. The risk response options include accepting, avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or exploiting the risks. Defining risk response options helps to select the most appropriate and effective strategy to manage the risks. Defining risk taxonomy, identifying vulnerabilities, and conducting an impact analysis are performed before or during a risk assessment, not after. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.4, page 541

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 644.

A quantitative method provides objective metrics to establish impact levels, which is essential for tiering assets based on their criticality. This aligns with Risk Assessment Best Practices.

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

Least privilege is the best way to reduce the likelihood of an individual performing a potentially harmful action as the result of unnecessary entitlement, because it limits the access and permissions of the individual to the minimum level that is required to perform their role or function, and prevents the individual from accessing or modifying the resources or data that are not relevant or authorized. An entitlement is a right or privilege that grants an individual the ability to access or use a resource or data, such as a file, a system, or an application. An unnecessary entitlement is an entitlement that is not needed or justified for the individual’s role or function, and may pose a risk of unauthorized or inappropriate access or use of the resource or data. A potentially harmful action is an action that may cause harm or damage to the organization or its objectives, such as a data breach, a fraud, or a sabotage. Least privilege is the best way, as it helps to minimize the exposure and impact of the unnecessary entitlement, and to reduce the likelihood and severity of the potentially harmful action. Application monitoring, separation of duty, and nonrepudiation are all possible ways to reduce the likelihood of an individual performing a potentially harmful action as the result of unnecessary entitlement, but they are not the best way, as they do not directly address the unnecessary entitlement, and may not prevent the potentially harmful action. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 200

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

References:

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

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

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

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.

Scanning the Internet for Unauthorized Usage:

Proactive Detection: Continuously scanning the internet helps in identifying unauthorized use of the enterprise’s brand, allowing for timely action to mitigate such activities.

Protection of Brand Integrity: By detecting unauthorized usage early, the organization can take steps to protect its brand reputation and prevent potential misuse or fraud.

Steps Involved:

Automated Monitoring Tools: Use automated tools to scan websites, social media platforms, and other online spaces for unauthorized use of the brand.

Incident Response: Develop a response plan to address incidents of unauthorized usage, including legal actions and takedown requests.

Comparison with Other Options:

Utilizing Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Technology: DLP focuses on preventing data breaches and leaks within the organization, not on monitoring external brand misuse.

Monitoring the Enterprise's Use of the Internet: Internal monitoring does not address external unauthorized use of the brand.

Developing Training and Awareness Campaigns: These are important for internal awareness but do not directly mitigate the risk of external fraudulent use.

Best Practices:

Regular Updates: Continuously update scanning tools and techniques to adapt to new methods of brand misuse.

Legal Support: Ensure legal frameworks are in place to act quickly against unauthorized usage.

CRISC Review Manual: Highlights the importance of proactive monitoring for brand protection and provides guidelines for effective implementation​​.

ISACA Guidelines: Discuss the role of external monitoring in identifying and addressing unauthorized use of the organization’s brand​​.

References:

Effectiveness of risk treatment ensures that the implemented response aligns with risk reduction goals, meeting regulatory and strategic objectives. This is a core principle of the Risk Response domain, prioritizing responses that best mitigate identified risks.

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

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

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

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

Requiring MFA increases the security of digital wallets by adding an additional layer of authentication, making it harder for unauthorized users to gain access. This aligns with Access Control Standards and significantly reduces the likelihood of fraud.

 Encrypting data before it leaves the organization is the best way to protect sensitive data from administrators within a public cloud, as it ensures that the data is secured at the source and remains encrypted throughout the transmission and storage in the cloud. Using an encrypted tunnel to connect to the cloud, encrypting the data in the cloud database, and encrypting physical hard drives within the cloud are not the best ways, as they may not prevent the cloud administrators from accessing the data or the encryption keys, or may not protect the data from unauthorized interception or modification during the transmission. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 153.

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

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

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

The second line of defense provides oversight functions, ensuring that risks and controls are effectively managed. This includes policy enforcement, compliance monitoring, and risk program evaluation, aligning with the organizational risk governance structure as described in the CRISC framework.

Internet of Things (IoT) is an emerging technology that refers to the network of devices, such as cameras, sensors, appliances, or vehicles, that can communicate and exchange data via the internet. IoT is frequently used for botnet distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, which are cyberattacks that aim to disrupt or disable a target’s online services by overwhelming them with traffic from multiple sources. IoT devices are often unsecured, unpatched, or misconfigured, which makes them vulnerable to being infected by malware and controlled by attackers. Attackers can use IoT devices to create large and powerful botnets that can launch DDoS attacks against various targets, such as websites, servers, or networks. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, IoT is one of the key emerging technologies that pose new IT risks, including DDoS attacks1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, IoT is the correct answer to this question2. According to the web search results, IoT devices are commonly used for botnet DDoS attacks, such as the Mirai botnet, the Emotet botnet, and the BoT-IoT dataset345.

When moving critical assets to the cloud, the most important KPI to include in the SLA is the percentage of standard supplier uptime, which measures the availability and reliability of the cloud service provider. This KPI indicates how often the cloud service is operational and accessible, and how well it meets the agreed service level objectives. A high percentage of standard supplier uptime means that the cloud service provider can deliver the expected performance and functionality of the critical assets, and minimize the risk of service disruptions, downtime, or data loss. The percentage of standard supplier uptime should be aligned with the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery requirements, and should be monitored and reported regularly by the cloud service provider. The SLA should also specify the compensation or remediation actions in case of any breach of the agreed percentage of standard supplier uptime.

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

•What is an SLA? Best practices for service-level agreements3

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

The 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

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

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.

Updating IT Policy Framework for Cloud Usage:

Gap Analysis: The first step in updating the IT policy framework is to conduct a gap analysis to identify discrepancies between the current state and the desired target framework for cloud usage.

Assessment of Current State: This involves reviewing existing policies, controls, and practices related to cloud usage to understand current capabilities and limitations.

Target Framework Definition: Define the desired state based on industry best practices, regulatory requirements, and organizational objectives.

Importance of Gap Analysis:

Focused Improvements: Identifying gaps allows the organization to focus on specific areas that need enhancement to align with best practices and compliance requirements.

Resource Allocation: Helps in allocating resources effectively to address the most critical gaps first.

Comparison with Other Options:

Consult with Industry Peers: Useful for gathering insights but should follow the gap analysis to ensure relevance to the organization’s specific context.

Evaluate Adherence to Existing Policies: Part of the gap analysis but not the initial step.

Adopt Industry-leading Framework: Important for long-term strategy but should be based on identified gaps.

Best Practices:

Comprehensive Review: Conduct a thorough review of existing policies and compare them with industry standards.

Stakeholder Involvement: Engage relevant stakeholders in the gap analysis to ensure all perspectives are considered.

CRISC Review Manual: Emphasizes the importance of gap analysis in aligning IT policies with cloud computing frameworks and best practices .

ISACA Guidelines: Recommend conducting gap analysis as a foundational step in updating IT policy frameworks to ensure comprehensive and effective cloud governance .

References:

The risk practitioner’s best recommendation after recovery steps have been completed is B. Perform a root cause analysis. A root cause analysis is a process of identifying and assessing the underlying causes of a problem or an incident. By performing a root cause analysis, the risk practitioner can help the organization to understand how and why the cyber attack happened, what vulnerabilities and gaps were exploited, and what actions and controls can be implemented to prevent or mitigate similar incidents in the future12

A root cause analysis can also help the organization to improve its incident response plan, which is a set of instructions to help IT staff detect, respond to, and recover from network security incidents3 A root cause analysis can provide valuable feedback and lessons learned from the cyber attack, and help the organization to update and test its incident response plan accordingly45

Developing new key risk indicators, recommending the purchase of cyber insurance, and reviewing the incident response plan are all possible actions that the risk practitioner can take after a cyber attack, but they are not the best recommendation. Developing new key risk indicators can help the organization to monitor and measure its risk exposure and performance, but it does not address the root causes of the cyber attack12 Recommending the purchase of cyber insurance can help the organization to hedge against the financial losses caused by cyber incidents, but it does not prevent or solve the underlying issues67 Reviewing the incident response plan can help the organization to evaluate its effectiveness and identify areas for improvement, but it does not explain how and why the cyber attack occurred345

Therefore, the best recommendation is to perform a root cause analysis, as it can help the organization to understand, resolve, and prevent the cyber attack and its consequences12

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

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

 The ultimate goal of conducting a privacy impact analysis (PIA) is to identify gaps in data protection controls, as it involves assessing the privacy risks and impacts of collecting, using, storing, and disclosing personally identifiable information (PII), and determining the adequacy and effectiveness of the existing or proposed controls to mitigate those risks and impacts. Developing a customer notification plan, identifying PII, and determining gaps in data identification processes are possible steps or outcomes of conducting a PIA, but they are not the ultimate goal, as they do not address the root cause or solution of the privacy issues. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

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 primary reason for logging is to provide evidence of activities, ensuring accountability and traceability. This supports investigations, audits, and compliance requirements, aligning with Control Monitoring and Reporting standards.

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

Mapping granular scenarios to high-level register items ensures consistency and alignment across different levels of risk management. This approach supports Integrated Risk Management Frameworks.

An incentive program is most likely implemented to manage the risk associated with loss of employees, as it aims to motivate, retain, and reward the employees who have valuable skills, knowledge, and experience, and to reduce the risk of employee turnover, dissatisfaction, or underperformance. Data, reputation, and customer lists are not the organizational assets that are most likely managed by an incentive program, as they are more related to the information, image, or relationship of the organization, respectively, rather than the human capital of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

A heat map is a graphical representation of the organization’s risk profile that shows the relative level of risk for each risk category or event. A heat map uses colors, shapes, or symbols to indicate the magnitude and likelihood of each risk, as well as its trend and status. A heat map offers the simplest overview of changes in the organization’s risk profile, as it allows the risk decision-makers to quickly identify the most significant risks, the areas of improvement or deterioration, and the gaps or overlaps in risk management. A heat map can also be used to communicate the risk profile to senior management and other stakeholders in a clear and concise manner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Risk Assessment Methods and Techniques, Page 77; Future Risks: How organizations see changes in risk management - Aon.

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

 AI in Heuristic Security Systems:

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

 Risk of Misclassification:

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

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

 Impact of Misclassification:

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

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

 Comparing Other Risks:

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

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

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

 References:

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

 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) .

Data Privacy Principles:

Consent and Purpose Limitation: According to data privacy regulations like GDPR, data subjects must provide explicit consent for specific purposes. Using data for purposes beyond what was consented to violates these principles, posing significant compliance risks.

Transparency and Accountability: Organizations must be transparent about how they use personal data and ensure accountability in data processing. Using data without consent undermines this transparency and accountability.

Greatest Risk of Noncompliance:

Legal and Regulatory Risks: Using personal data without consent can lead to severe penalties under laws like GDPR and CPRA. These laws impose heavy fines for noncompliance, making this scenario the highest risk.

Reputational Damage: Unauthorized use of personal data can severely damage an organization’s reputation, leading to loss of customer trust and potential financial losses.

Operational Impact: Ensuring compliance with consent requirements is fundamental to an organization's data processing activities. Failure to do so can disrupt business operations and necessitate significant remediation efforts.

Comparison with Other Options:

Making Data Available to a Larger Audience of Customers: While potentially risky, this does not inherently violate data privacy principles if done within consented uses.

Data Not Being Disposed According to the Retention Policy: This poses risks related to data minimization and retention principles but is less severe than unauthorized data use.

Personal Data Not Being De-identified Properly: This is a significant risk but typically involves fewer direct legal and regulatory implications compared to using data without consent.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Discusses the importance of informed consent and the principles of data privacy, emphasizing the severe implications of using personal data without consent .

ISACA Guidelines: Highlight the need for transparency and accountability in data processing, aligning with global privacy regulations .

Data encryption is the best method to protect organizational data within a production cloud environment, as it ensures the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data. Data encryption is the process of transforming data into an unreadable format using a secret key or algorithm, so that only authorized parties can access and decrypt the data. Data encryption can protect data at rest (stored in the cloud) and data in transit (transferred over the network) from unauthorized access, modification, or deletion by malicious actors or accidental errors. Data encryption can also help organizations comply with legal, regulatory, and contractual requirements for data protection and privacy, such as GDPR, CCPA, and PCI DSS.

References:

•The Complexity Conundrum: Simplifying Data Security1

•Practical Data Security and Privacy for GDPR and CCPA2

 Understanding Business Impact Analysis (BIA):

BIA is a process used to identify and evaluate the potential effects (impact) of interruptions to critical business operations as a result of a disaster, accident, or emergency.

It helps quantify the potential loss impact of cyber risks by assessing the financial and operational consequences of disruptions.

 Quantifying Loss Impact:

BIA involves determining the value of business processes and the impact of their loss. This includes evaluating factors such as revenue loss, additional operational costs, legal penalties, and reputational damage.

By analyzing the criticality of business functions and their dependencies, BIA provides a detailed understanding of potential impacts, aiding in the development of risk mitigation strategies.

 Comparing Other Techniques:

Cost-Benefit Analysis: Useful for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of controls but does not provide a comprehensive assessment of potential loss impacts.

Penetration Testing: Identifies vulnerabilities but does not quantify the business impact of exploiting those vulnerabilities.

Security Assessment: Evaluates security controls but is not focused on the broader business impact of potential disruptions.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the role of BIA in assessing the impact of risks on business operations and quantifying potential losses (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.7 Business Impact Analysis)​​.

Risk Appetite:

Risk appetite defines the level of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. It serves as a benchmark for evaluating and prioritizing risk responses.

Prioritizing Risk Responses:

When determining how to address risks, the primary consideration should be whether the residual risk falls within the organization’s risk appetite.

If a risk exceeds the appetite, it needs to be mitigated, transferred, or avoided. If it is within the appetite, it might be accepted.

Influence of Other Factors:

Residual Risk: Important but must be evaluated against the risk appetite to determine if it is acceptable.

Mitigation Cost: Relevant for decision-making but secondary to aligning with risk appetite.

Inherent Risk: Initial risk assessment before controls are applied, but prioritization is based on residual risk and risk appetite.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual highlights the role of risk appetite in guiding the prioritization of risk responses (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.2.1 Prioritizing Risk Responses)​​.

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

Perform a Risk Assessment:

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

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

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

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

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

Best Practices:

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

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

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

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

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

References:

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks which tool is best for aggregating data from multiple systems to identify abnormal behavior.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Cyber threat intelligence: Provides information on potential threats but does not aggregate data from multiple systems for behavior analysis.

B. Anti-malware software: Focuses on detecting and removing malware, not aggregating data from multiple sources.

C. Endpoint detection and response (EDR): Monitors endpoints for suspicious activity but is more limited in scope compared to SIEM systems.

D. SIEM systems: Security Information and Event Management systems collect, aggregate, and analyze data from various sources to identify and respond to abnormal behavior.

 Detailed Explanation:

SIEM Systems: SIEM systems are designed to aggregate and analyze security data from multiple sources such as network devices, servers, and applications. They provide real-time analysis of security alerts generated by hardware and software.

Functionality: SIEM systems use advanced analytics to correlate data from different sources and detect patterns that indicate abnormal behavior. This makes them highly effective in identifying and responding to security incidents.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, mentions the importance of centralized monitoring systems like SIEM for effective risk management​​.

 Understanding Strategic Risk:

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

 Reputational Impact of Cybersecurity Breaches:

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

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

 Classification of Risk:

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

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

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

 Strategic Risk and Reputation:

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

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

 References:

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

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

Change management is the best way to prevent an unscheduled application of a patch, because it ensures that any changes to the IT environment are planned, approved, tested, and documented. Change management is a process that controls the implementation of changes to IT systems, applications, infrastructure, or processes. It aims to minimize the risk of disruption, errors, or failures caused by changes. Applying a patch is a type of change that may affect the security, functionality, or performance of an IT system or application. Therefore, applying a patch should follow the change management process and schedule, and avoid any unscheduled or unauthorized patching. Network-based access controls, compensating controls, and segregation of duties are all useful controls to protect the IT environment from unauthorized or malicious access, but they do not prevent an unscheduled application of a patch, as they do not address the change management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.2, page 211

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.

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks what best enables the integration of IT risk management across an organization.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Enterprise risk management (ERM) framework: Provides a comprehensive approach to integrating risk management across the entire organization.

B. Enterprise-wide risk awareness training: Important for education but doesn't ensure integration.

C. Robust risk reporting practices: Crucial for communication but not integration.

D. Risk management policies: Necessary but need to be part of an overall framework for effective integration.

 Detailed Explanation:

ERM Framework: An ERM framework ensures that risk management practices are standardized and integrated throughout the organization. It aligns risk management with business objectives, ensuring that IT risk is considered within the broader context of enterprise risk.

Comprehensive Approach: ERM covers all aspects of risk, including IT, and facilitates a unified approach to managing risk across all departments and levels.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, details the role of an ERM framework in integrating risk management practices across an organization​​.

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that provides information on the level of exposure to a given risk. Changes in risk trend data indicate that the likelihood or probability of a risk occurring has changed. Therefore, the frequency of risk occurrence should be updated in the risk register to reflect the current risk profile. The impact, cost, and legal aspects of risk realization are not directly affected by the changes in risk trend data, unless the nature or severity of the risk has also changed. (Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 5th Edition, page 972

The best option to protect against a future recurrence of unauthorized access by a service provider’s administrator is D. Contractual requirements. Data encryption, intrusion prevention system, and two-factor authentication are all technical measures that can enhance the security of the data stored in the Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) model, but they do not prevent the service provider’s administrator from accessing the data if they have the necessary credentials, keys, or permissions. Contractual requirements, on the other hand, are legal obligations that bind the service provider to respect the customer’s privacy and confidentiality, and to limit the access to the data to only authorized and necessary personnel. Contractual requirements can also specify the penalties or remedies for any breach of contract, which can deter the service provider’s administrator from violating the terms of the agreement. Therefore, contractual requirements are the most effective way to protect against a future recurrence of unauthorized access by a service provider’s administrator12

1: What is Data Encryption? | Forcepoint 2: The elements of a contract: understanding contract requirements - Juro

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.

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

References:

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

•ISACA, Tips for Prioritizing Risk in Your Risk Register2

A 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.

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

When a risk practitioner identifies an increasing trend of employees copying company information unrelated to their job functions to USB drives, the element of the risk register that should be updated is the risk likelihood. Here’s why:

Risk Likelihood:

Risk likelihood refers to the probability that a risk event will occur.

Observing an increasing trend of inappropriate behavior (such as copying sensitive information) indicates a higher probability of occurrence, thus increasing the risk likelihood.

Risk Impact:

While the impact of such actions could be significant, the increasing trend specifically affects the likelihood rather than the immediate impact.

The risk impact remains constant unless there is a change in the potential damage caused by the action.

Key Risk Indicator (KRI):

This observation might serve as a KRI, but the immediate action is to update the likelihood in the risk register, reflecting the increased probability.

Risk Appetite:

Risk appetite defines the level of risk an organization is willing to accept. This observation suggests a deviation but does not directly affect the risk appetite itself.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of regularly updating the risk likelihood based on new observations and trends (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.9.1 Inherent Risk).

Senior management involvement is a critical driver for the success of any risk management program. Without their engagement, there is a lack of strategic oversight, resource allocation, and prioritization of risk management initiatives, directly impacting the organization's ability to meet risk objectives. This is emphasized in the Governance Principles of CRISC.

The percentage of unpatched systems is best classified as a Key Risk Indicator (KRI). KRIs are metrics used by organizations to provide an early signal of increasing risk exposures in various areas of the business. Here’s a detailed explanation:

Understanding KRIs:

Definition: KRIs are specific metrics that provide insights into the risk level of an organization. They help in identifying potential risks that could impact the business negatively if not addressed promptly.

Purpose: KRIs are used to monitor the effectiveness of risk management strategies and to provide an early warning system for emerging risks.

Percentage of Unpatched Systems as a KRI:

Indicator of Vulnerability: The percentage of unpatched systems directly indicates how vulnerable an organization is to cyber threats. Unpatched systems are a common entry point for attackers, making this metric critical for assessing the organization's exposure to cyber risks.

Impact on Security Posture: A high percentage of unpatched systems can significantly increase the likelihood of security incidents, making it a valuable metric for risk management.

Proactive Risk Management: By monitoring this KRI, organizations can take proactive measures to address vulnerabilities before they are exploited.

Comparison with Other Options:

Threat Vector: A threat vector refers to the path or means by which a threat can reach and impact an asset. It is not a metric like the percentage of unpatched systems.

Critical Success Factor (CSF): CSFs are essential elements necessary for an organization to achieve its mission. While important, they are not specific metrics used to measure risk.

Key Performance Indicator (KPI): KPIs measure how effectively an organization is achieving its key business objectives. While related, KPIs focus on performance rather than risk exposure.

CRISC Review Manual: Provides detailed insights into KRIs and their role in risk management.

ISACA Risk IT Framework: Discusses the use of KRIs in monitoring and managing IT risks effectively.

References:

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

References:

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

•ISACA, The Role of Ethics in Risk Management2

The greatest challenge to assigning of the associated risk entries when an organization has used generic risk scenarios to populate its risk register is that the risk scenarios are not applicable. Generic risk scenarios are risk scenarios that are based on common or typical situations that may affect many organizations or industries. They are useful for providing a general overview or reference of the potential risks, but they may not be relevant, specific, or realistic for a particular organization or context. Therefore, using generic risk scenarios may result in inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading risk entries that do not reflect the actual risk profile or appetite of the organization. The other options are not as challenging as the risk scenarios being not applicable, as they are related to the quantity, quality, or aggregation of the risk scenarios, not the suitability or validity of the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

Risk scenario development is a process that involves identifying and describing the potential risk events that can affect an organization’s objectives and operations. Risk scenario development requires the input and participation of various stakeholders, such as the management, the staff, the customers, the suppliers, the regulators, and the competitors. The primary benefit of stakeholder involvement in risk scenario development is that it increases the awareness of emerging business threats, meaning that it helps to identify and anticipate the new or changing sources and impacts of risk that may not be captured by the existing risk assessment methods or tools. Stakeholder involvement can also help to improve the quality and completeness of the risk scenarios, as well as to enhance the communication and collaboration among the stakeholders regarding the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1.1, p. 66-67

The primary basis for prioritizing risk responses is the impact of the risk. The impact of the risk is the consequence or effect of the risk on the organization’s objectives or operations, such as financial loss, reputational damage, operational disruption, or legal liability. The impact of the risk is one of the key dimensions of risk analysis, along with the likelihood of the risk. The impact of the risk helps to determine the severity and priority of the risk, and to select the most appropriate and effective risk response. The impact of the risk also helps to evaluate the cost-benefit and trade-off of the risk response, and to measure the residual risk and the risk performance. The other options are not the primary basis for prioritizing risk responses, although they may be considered or influenced by the impact of the risk. The replacement cost of the business asset, the cost of risk mitigation controls, and the classification of the business asset are all factors that could affect the value or importance of the business asset, but they do not necessarily reflect the impact of the risk on the business asset or the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-25.

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

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

An IT risk threat analysis is best used to establish risk scenarios. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that may affect the achievement of the IT objectives. A risk scenario consists of three elements: a threat, a vulnerability, and an impact. A threat is a potential cause of an unwanted incident. A vulnerability is a weakness or flaw that can be exploited by a threat. An impact is the consequence or effect of the incident on the IT objectives. An IT risk threat analysis is a technique that identifies and evaluates the threats that may pose a risk to the IT assets and processes. An IT risk threat analysis can help to establish risk scenarios by providing the information and context for the threat element of the risk scenario. The other options are not as directly related to an IT risk threat analysis, as they are related to the outcomes, measures, or responsibilities of the IT risk management process, not the inputs or sources of the IT risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

 Risk tolerance is the best term to describe the situation where an organization has agreed to a 99% availability for its online services and will not accept availability that falls below 98.5%. Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk tolerance defines the acceptable variation in outcomes related to specific performance measures, such as availability, reliability, or security. Risk tolerance is usually expressed as a range, such as 99% +/- 0.5%. Risk mitigation, risk evaluation, and risk appetite are not the correct terms to describe this situation, because they refer to different aspects of risk management, such as reducing, assessing, or pursuing risk, respectively. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

A risk profile is a summary of the nature and level of risk that an organization faces. It includes information such as the sources, causes, and consequences of the risks, their likelihood and impact, their interrelationships and dependencies, and their alignment with the risk appetite and tolerance. A risk profile is influenced by various factors, such as the organization’s objectives, strategies, activities, processes, resources, capabilities, culture, etc. When an organization configures a new business division, the factor that is most likely to be affected is the risk profile, as the new business division may introduce new or change existing risks, opportunities, and uncertainties that may affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives. Therefore, the organization should update its risk profile to reflect the current and potential risks associated with the new business division, and implement the appropriate risk management actions to optimize the risk exposure and performance. References = 4

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

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

The best course of action for the risk practitioner who has identified that the agreed RTO with a SaaS provider is longer than the business expectation is to collaborate with the risk owner to determine the risk response plan. The risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage the risk within their scope of responsibility. The risk response plan is the document that describes the actions and resources needed to address the risk. By collaborating with the risk owner, the risk practitioner can help to analyze the gap between the agreed RTO and the business expectation, evaluate the potential impact and consequences, and select the most appropriate risk response option, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Documenting the gap in the risk register, including a right to audit clause in the service provider contract, or advising the risk owner to accept the risk are not the best courses of action, because they do not address the root cause of the problem, or provide a solution to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

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

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

The completion of a project for implementing a new control would most likely require a risk practitioner to update the risk register. The risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their analysis, and their responses. The completion of a project for implementing a new control means that a risk response has been executed and a new control has been established. This may affect the likelihood and/or impact of the related risks, and the residual risk level. Therefore, the risk practitioner should update the risk register to reflect the current status and outcome of the risk response and the new control. The other options are not as likely to require a risk practitioner to update the risk register, as they are related to the reporting, planning, or assessment of the risks or the controls, not the implementation or completion of the risk response or the new control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

Risk exposure is the product of risk likelihood and risk impact ratings. It represents the potential loss or damage that may result from a risk event. After implementing countermeasures, the risk likelihood and/or impact ratings may change, depending on the effectiveness of the countermeasures. Therefore, the risk exposure must also change to reflect the updated risk ratings. The other components of the register, such as risk owner, risk impact rating, and risk likelihood rating, may or may not change depending on the nature and scope of the countermeasures. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

If preventive controls cannot be implemented due to technology limitations, the first step to reduce risk is to evaluate alternative controls. Alternative controls are those that can achieve the same or similar objectives as the original preventive controls, but using different methods or technologies. For example, if a firewall cannot be installed due to hardware compatibility issues, an alternative control could be a network segmentation or a proxy server. Evaluating alternative controls requires assessing their feasibility, effectiveness, efficiency, and cost-benefit. Redefining the business process, developing a plan to upgrade technology, and defining a process for monitoring risk are also possible actions to reduce risk, but they are not the first step, and they may not be feasible or desirable in some situations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

The risk practitioner’s primary consideration when participating in development of a new IT risk strategy should be the risk culture of the organization. Risk culture is the set of values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors that shape how the organization perceives, manages, and responds to risks. Risk culture influences the organization’s risk appetite, risk objectives, risk policies, risk processes, and risk performance. The risk practitioner should consider the risk culture when developing a new IT risk strategy, because it helps to align the IT risk strategy with the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and to ensure that the IT risk strategy is supported and accepted by the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, employees, customers, regulators, etc. The risk practitioner should also consider the risk culture when developing a new IT risk strategy, because it helps to identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may affect the implementation and effectiveness of the IT risk strategy, such as lack of awareness, communication, coordination, or accountability. The other options are not the primary consideration for the risk practitioner, although they may be related to the IT risk strategy. Scale of technology, risk indicators, and proposed risk budget are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the IT risk strategy, but they do not necessarily reflect or influence the organization’s risk culture. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-9.

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

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

As part of business continuity planning, the most important thing to include in a business impact analysis (BIA) is an industry standard framework. A BIA is a process of identifying and analyzing the potential effects of disruptions to the critical business functions and processes. An industry standard framework is a set of best practices, guidelines, and methodologies that provide a consistent and comprehensive approach to conducting a BIA. An industry standard framework can help to ensure that the BIA is complete, accurate, and reliable, and that it covers all the relevant aspects, such as the scope, objectives, criteria, methods, data sources, and reporting. An industry standard framework can also help to benchmark the BIA results against the industry norms and expectations, and to align the BIA with the business continuity strategy and plan. The other options are not as important as an industry standard framework, as they are related to the specific steps, activities, or outputs of the BIA, not the overall structure and quality of the BIA. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

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

The most important factor to the effectiveness of key performance indicators (KPIs) is relevance. KPIs are metrics that measure the achievement of the objectives or the performance of the processes. Relevance means that the KPIs are aligned with and support the strategic goals and priorities of the organization, and that they reflect the current and desired state of the outcomes or outputs. Relevance also means that the KPIs are meaningful and useful for the decision makers and stakeholders, and that they provide clear and actionable information for improvement or optimization. The other options are not as important as relevance, as they are related to the approval, review, or automation of the KPIs, not the quality or value of the KPIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

The internal auditor is the best suited to provide objective input when updating residual risk to reflect the results of control effectiveness. The internal auditor is an independent and impartial function that evaluates the adequacy and effectiveness of the internal controls and reports on the findings and recommendations. The internal auditor can provide an unbiased and reliable assessment of the residual risk, which is the risk that remains after the controls are applied. The other options are not as objective as the internal auditor, as they may have vested interests or conflicts of interest in the control environment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

 A control is a measure or action that is implemented to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk event, or to enhance the benefits or opportunities of a risk event. A control owner is a person who is assigned the responsibility and authority for the design, implementation, operation, and maintenance of a control. The most appropriate person to be assigned ownership of a control is the individual accountable for monitoring control effectiveness, which is the process of measuring and evaluating the performance and compliance of the control. By assigning the control ownership to the individual accountable for monitoring control effectiveness, the organization can ensure that the control is aligned with the risk objectives, operates as intended, and delivers the expected results. References = 4

The best approach to mitigate the risk associated with a control deficiency is to implement compensating controls. A control deficiency is a situation where a control is missing, ineffective, or inefficient, and cannot provide reasonable assurance that the objectives or requirements are met. A compensating control is a control that provides an alternative or additional measure of protection when the primary or preferred control is not feasible or effective. A compensating control can help to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk associated with the control deficiency, and maintain the compliance or performance level. The other options are not as effective as implementing compensating controls, as they are related to the analysis, assessment, or provision of the risk, not the mitigation of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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

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

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

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

The best recommendation for a risk practitioner upon learning that an employee inadvertently disclosed sensitive data to a vendor is to invoke the incident response plan. An incident response plan is a document that defines the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for detecting, analyzing, containing, eradicating, recovering, and reporting on security incidents that could affect the organization’s IT systems or data. An incident response plan helps to protect and restore the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the organization’s information assets, and to comply with the relevant laws, regulations, standards, and contracts. Invoking the incident response plan is the best recommendation, because it helps to respond to and mitigate the security incident, and to minimize the damage and impact of the data disclosure. Invoking the incident response plan also helps to communicate and coordinate the incident response actions and strategies with the internal and external stakeholders, such as the data owners, users, custodians, and regulators, and to report and disclose the incident as required. The other options are not as effective as invoking the incident response plan, although they may be part of or derived from the incident response plan. Enrolling the employee in additional security training, conducting an internal audit, and instructing the vendor to delete the data are all examples of corrective or preventive actions, which may help to prevent or deter the recurrence of the data disclosure, or to verify or validate the data security, but they do not necessarily address or resolve the current security incident. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 5-32.

 A vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in the IT system or environment that could be exploited by a threat. A threat event is an occurrence or action that exploits a vulnerability and causes harm or damage to the IT system or environment. The lack of data to measure threat events is the most important factor, because it may affect the accuracy and reliability of the risk assessment and evaluation, and consequently, the risk response and strategy. The lack of data to measure threat events may also create challenges or risks for the organization, such as compliance, legal, reputational, or operational risks, or conflicts or inconsistencies with the organization’s risk appetite, risk objectives, or risk policies. The other options are not as important as the lack of data to measure threat events, although they may also influence the risk response and strategy. The likelihood and impact of threat events, the cost to implement the risk response, and the monetary value of the asset are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the risk response and strategy, but they do not necessarily affect the validity and quality of the risk assessment and evaluation

Conducting vulnerability scans is the best way for a risk practitioner to validate the effectiveness of a patching program. Vulnerability scans are automated tools that identify and report on the vulnerabilities in a system or network, such as missing patches, misconfigurations, or outdated software. Vulnerability scans can help the risk practitioner to verify that the patches have been applied correctly and consistently, and that there are no remaining or new vulnerabilities that need to be addressed. Conducting penetration testing, interviewing IT operations personnel, and reviewing change control board documentation are also useful methods to evaluate the patching program, but they are not as comprehensive, objective, or timely as vulnerability scans. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3, page 2-28.

A control is a measure or action that is implemented to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk event, or to enhance the benefits or opportunities of a risk event. A control owner is a person who is assigned the responsibility and authority for the design, implementation, operation, and maintenance of a control. A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the information about the identified risks, such as the risk description, category, owner, probability, impact, response strategy, status, and action plan. When an information security audit identified a risk resulting from the failure of an automated control, the person who is responsible for ensuring the risk register is updated accordingly is the control owner. The control owner should update the risk register with the information about the failed control, such as the cause, consequence, status, and action plan. The control owner should also monitor the performance and compliance of the control, and recommend any improvements or adjustments as needed.

Data anonymization is the most important control to ensure the privacy of customer information when participating in an industry benchmarking study that involves providing customer transaction records for analysis. Data anonymization is the process of removing or modifying personally identifiable information (PII) from data sets, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc., so that the data cannot be traced back to specific individuals. Data anonymization protects the confidentiality and privacy of customers, while still allowing for meaningful analysis and comparison of data. Nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), data cleansing, and data encryption are also useful controls, but they do not eliminate the risk of data breaches or unauthorized access to PII. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

 The best way to enable a risk-based decision when considering the use of an emerging technology for data processing is to perform a gap analysis. A gap analysis is a technique that compares the current state and the desired state of a process, system, or capability, and identifies the gaps or differences between them. A gap analysis can help to evaluate the benefits, costs, risks, and opportunities of using an emerging technology for data processing, and to determine the feasibility, suitability, and readiness of adopting the emerging technology. The other options are not as helpful as a gap analysis, as they are related to the specific aspects or components of the data processing, not the overall assessment and comparison of the current and desired state of the data processing. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: IT Risk Identification Methods, page 19.

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

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

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

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

The lack of integrity of data is the greatest concern when replication of a critical database used by two business units failed. Data integrity means that the data is accurate, complete, consistent, and reliable. If the replication failed, it means that the data in the primary and secondary databases may not be synchronized and may have discrepancies or errors. This could affect the quality and reliability of the data and the business processes that depend on it. The other options are not as concerning as the lack of integrity of data, as they are related to the efficiency, cost, or confidentiality of the data, which are less critical than the accuracy and reliability of the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

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

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

The most important step to ensure regulatory requirements are adequately addressed within an organization is to develop a policy framework that addresses regulatory requirements. A policy framework is a set of principles, rules, and standards that guide the organization’s actions and decisions. By developing a policy framework that addresses regulatory requirements, the organization can establish a clear and consistent direction, expectation, and accountability for complying with the relevant laws and regulations. Obtaining necessary resources, performing a gap analysis, and employing IT solutions are other possible steps, but they are not as important as developing a policy framework. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

The best representation of the desired risk posture for an organization is when the residual risk is lower than the risk tolerance. Residual risk is the remaining risk after the implementation of risk responses or controls. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of risk that the organization is willing to take or bear. The desired risk posture is when the organization has reduced the residual risk to a level that is equal to or lower than the risk tolerance, which means that the organization has achieved its risk objectives and is comfortable with the remaining risk exposure. The other options are not the best representation of the desired risk posture, as they indicate that the organization has not effectively managed its risk. Inherent risk is lower than risk tolerance means that the organization has not identified or assessed its risk properly, as inherent risk is the risk before any controls or responses are applied. Operational risk is higher than risk tolerance means that the organization has not implemented or monitored its risk responses or controls adequately, as operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people, and systems. Accepted risk is higher than risk tolerance means that the organization has not aligned its risk appetite and risk tolerance, as accepted risk is the risk that the organization chooses to retain or take without any further action. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 2-23.

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

A dashboard summarizing key risk indicators (KRIs) is the best way for a risk practitioner to present an annual risk management update to the board because it provides a concise and visual overview of the current risk status, trends, and performance of the organization. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help the board monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. A summary of risk response plans, a report with control environment assessment results, and a summary of IT risk scenarios are all useful information, but they are too detailed and technical for the board, who needs a high-level and strategic view of the risk management program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

It is most important that security controls for a new system be documented in the system requirements. The system requirements define the functional and non-functional specifications of the system, including the security controls that are needed to protect the system and its data. Documenting the security controls in the system requirements can help ensure that they are designed, developed, tested, and implemented as part of the system development life cycle. Testing requirements, the implementation plan, and the security policy are other documents that may include security controls, but they are not as important as the system requirements. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 5; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 212.

 Using anonymized data in a non-production environment is the best approach for an organization in a heavily regulated industry to comprehensively test application functionality. Anonymized data is data that has been stripped of any personally identifiable information (PII) or other sensitive data, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc. Anonymized data protects the privacy and security of the data, while still preserving the structure and format of the original data. Using anonymized data in a non-production environment allows the organization to test the application functionality without risking data breaches or violating regulations. Using production data, masked data, or test data in either production or non-production environments are not as optimal as using anonymized data, because they may introduce errors, inconsistencies, or vulnerabilities in the data or the application. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

 The best way to mitigate the ongoing risk associated with operating system (OS) vulnerabilities is to document and implement a patching process. A patching process is a set of procedures and guidelines that define how to identify, evaluate, test, apply, and monitor patches for the OS. Patches are updates or fixes that address the known vulnerabilities or bugs in the OS. By documenting and implementing a patching process, the organization can ensure that the OS is regularly updated and protected from the potential exploits or attacks that may exploit the vulnerabilities. The other options are not as effective as documenting and implementing a patching process, as they are related to the temporary, partial, or reactive measures to deal with the OS vulnerabilities, not the proactive and continuous measures to prevent or reduce the OS vulnerabilities. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.