CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Questions and Answers

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (aligned to ISACA CRISC guidance)

When vulnerabilities are discovered, the CRISC approach requires first understanding the risk those vulnerabilities represent before deciding on actions. Evaluating the associated risk means analyzing the likelihood that the vulnerabilities will be exploited and the potential impact on financial reporting, confidentiality, integrity, and availability of core systems. Only after this analysis can the risk practitioner prioritize which vulnerabilities to address, decide on appropriate treatment options, and determine whether remediation is cost-effective and aligned to risk appetite. Immediately remediating without assessment may misallocate resources or disrupt critical services. Initiating incident response is appropriate when an actual incident or compromise is detected, not merely the existence of vulnerabilities. Estimating remediation cost is important but comes after understanding the significance of the risk.

The best tool to enable risk-based decision making in support of a business continuity plan (BCP) is an impact analysis. An impact analysis is a process of identifying and evaluating the potential effects of an interruption or disruption of business operations on the organization’scritical functions, processes, and resources. An impact analysis can help to determine the recovery priorities, objectives, and strategies forthe BCP. Control analysis, root cause analysis, and threat analysis are other possible tools, but they are not as effective as an impact analysis. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

 Internal Audit Review:

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

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

 Steps in Audit Review:

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

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

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

 Importance of Audit Review:

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

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

 Comparing Other Validation Methods:

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

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

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

 References:

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

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

Risk scenario description and risk ID

Risk owner and other stakeholders

Risk response strategy and objectives

Risk response actions and tasks

Resources, costs, and benefits

Roles and responsibilities

Timeline and milestones

Performance indicators and monitoring mechanisms

Contingency plans and triggers

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

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

The 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.

Instead of relying solely on the provider’s internal assessment, the client should validate control effectiveness throughindependent audit reports(e.g., SOC 2 Type II). These provide third-party assurance.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The most important thing to include in a risk assessment of an emerging technology is the impact and likelihood ratings of the risks associated with the technology. Impact and likelihood ratings are the measures of the potential consequences and probabilities of the risk events that could affect the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives. Impact and likelihood ratings can help to evaluate the level andnature of the risk exposure, and to prioritize the risks for further analysis and response. Impact and likelihood ratings can also help to communicate the risk profile and appetite of the enterprise, and to support the risk-based decision making. Risk response plans, risk and control ownership, and key controls are not as important as impact and likelihood ratings, as they are the outputs or outcomes of the risk assessment process, and not the inputs or components of the risk assessment process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

A strong risk-aware culture is reflected by transparent communication about risks. Open discussions signify employee engagement and ownership of risk-related issues.

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 notdirectly 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

Data archival processes should be the primary focus of a risk practitioner when ensuring that organization records are being retained for a sufficient period of time to meet legal obligations, because data archival processes ensure that records are stored securely, reliably, and accessibly for as long as they are needed. Data archival processes also help to manage the storage capacity, retention policies, and disposal procedures of records. Data duplication processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for backup and recovery purposes, not for long-term retention. Data anonymization processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for privacy and confidentiality purposes, not for legal compliance. Data protection processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for security and integrity purposes, not for retention requirements. References = Free ISACA CRISC Sample Questions and Study Guide

Inherent risk reflects exposure before controls. When regulatory requirements change, they can alter compliance obligations, legal exposure, and the baseline inherent risk of processes.

ISACA’s CRISC framework specifies:

“Significant changes to regulatory or legal environments are triggers for reassessing inherent and residual risk.”

A (risk tolerance) affects acceptance, not inherent risk itself.

C (KRIs) and D (benchmarks) measure and compare risk but do not trigger reassessment directly.

Hence, B is correct.

CRISC Reference: Domain 2 – IT Risk Assessment, Topic: Risk Triggers and Environmental Changes.

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

Identifying stakeholders ensures that all perspectives are considered, contributing to a holistic view of risk and improving communication and response planning.

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

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.

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

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

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

Capability to be measured precisely and accurately

Relevant (measuring the right thing associated with decisions)2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Enhance the incident management and problem management processes and capabilities5

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

IoT devices often lack strong built-in security, and CRISC stresses that the most serious risk is insufficient network isolation, because it exposes the entire enterprise network. If IoT devices are placed on the same network as business systems, an attacker who compromises an IoT device can move laterally to critical assets. This significantly increases the risk of a major security incident. Insecure transmission protocols are a concern but can be mitigated with encryption layers. Sensor interoperability and performance issues are operational problems but do not pose major security threats. Proper segmentation, isolation, and VLAN separation are the most critical controls for IoT risk reduction.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A risk response is the action or plan that is taken to address a specific risk that has been identified, analyzed, and evaluated. It can be one of the following types: mitigate, transfer, avoid, or accept.

The highest priority when developing a risk response is to ensure that it aligns with the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its goals. The risk appetite is usually expressed as a range or a threshold, and it is aligned with the organization’s strategy and culture.

Aligning the risk response with the organization’s risk appetite ensures that the risk response is consistent, appropriate, and proportional to the level and nature of the risk, and that it supports the organization’s objectives and values. It also helps to optimize the balance between risk and return, and to create and protect value for the organization and its stakeholders.

The other options are not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because they do not address the fundamental question of whether the risk response is suitable and acceptable for the organization.

The risk response addresses the risk with a holistic view means that the risk response considers the interrelationships and dependencies among the risk sources, events, impacts, and responses, and the potential secondary and residual effects of the risk response. This is important to ensure that the risk response is comprehensive and effective, and that it does not create new or unintended risks, but it is not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because it does not indicate whether the risk response is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The risk response is based on a cost-benefit analysis means that the risk response compares the expected costs and benefits of implementing the risk response, and selects the risk response that provides the most favorable net outcome. This is important to ensure that the risk response is efficient and economical, and that it maximizes the return on investment, but it is not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because it does not indicate whether the risk response is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The risk response is accounted for in the budget means that the risk response is included in the financial plan and allocation of resources for the organization or the project. This is important toensure that the risk response is feasible and realistic, and that it has the necessary funding and support, but it is not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because it does not indicate whether the risk response is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 147

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite is the most influential factor when management makes risk response decisions, as it helps to define the boundaries and thresholds for acceptable risk levels, and to align the risk responses with the organization’s strategy, goals, and culture. Risk appetite alsohelps to balance the potential benefits and costs of risk responses, and to communicate the risk expectations and preferences to the stakeholders. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 192.

Conducting a proof of concept in a non-production environment ensures that any potential issues or vulnerabilities in the AI technology do not affect live systems or data. This approach allows for thorough testing and evaluation without risking operational disruptions or data breaches.

 A benchmark analysis is a process of comparing the organization’s performance, practices, and processes with those of other organizations in the same industry or sector. A benchmark analysis can provide the most useful information when determining the frequency of risk assessments, because it can help the organization to identify the best practices, standards, and expectations for security risk management in its industry. A benchmark analysis can also help the organization to assess its current level of maturity, capability, and compliance in relation to security risk management, and to determine the gaps and areas for improvement. By conducting a benchmark analysis, the organization can establish a realistic and appropriate frequency of risk assessments that aligns with its industry norms and its own risk profile. The other options are not as useful as a benchmark analysis, because they do not provide a comprehensive and relevant view of the security risk management landscape, but rather focus on specific or partial aspects of the organization’s situation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 18.

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 whendeveloping 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 addressany 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 reflector influence the organization’s risk culture. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-9.

The effectiveness of an IT risk management function depends on how well it can identify, analyze, evaluate, and treat the IT-related risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance. To achieve this, the IT risk management function needs to have processes that are updated and monitored on a continuous basis, so that they can capture the changes in the IT environment, the business context, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the regulatory requirements. Updating and monitoring the IT risk management processes also helps to ensure that they are consistent, reliable, and efficient, and that they provide timely and accurate information for decision making and reporting12. Aligning the IT risk management processes to an industry-accepted framework is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. A framework provides a common language, structure, and methodology for IT risk management, but it does not guarantee that the processes are updated and monitored on a continuous basis. A framework also needs to be customized and adapted to the specific needs and context of theorganization3. Reviewing and approving the IT risk management processes by senior management is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. Senior management support and endorsement are essential for establishing the tone and culture of IT risk management, as well as for allocating the necessary resources and authority for the function. However, senior management review and approval alone do not ensure that the processes are updated and monitored on a continuous basis. Senior management also need to oversee and evaluate the performance and outcomes of the IT riskmanagement function4. Periodically assessing the IT risk management processes against regulatory requirements is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. Regulatory compliance is one of the objectives and drivers of IT risk management, and it requires the function to adhere to the applicable laws, rules, and standards. However, regulatory requirements are not the only source of IT risk, and they may not cover all the aspects and dimensions of IT risk management.Moreover, periodic assessment may not be sufficient to capture the dynamic and evolving nature of IT risk. Therefore, the IT risk management processes need to be updated and monitored on a continuous basis, not only to meet the regulatoryrequirements, but also to address the other sources and impacts of IT risk5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Process, pp. 121-123.

Qualitative measures are methods of expressing risk levels using descriptive terms, such as high, medium, or low, based on subjective criteria, such as likelihood, impact, or severity. Qualitative measures are often used to identify and prioritize risks, and to communicate risk information to stakeholders1.

Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the risk response has been implemented. Residual risk reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response, and the need for further action or monitoring2.

Emerging threats are new or evolving sources or causes of risk that have the potential to adversely affect the organization’s objectives, assets, or operations. Emerging threats are oftencharacterized by uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity, and may require innovative or adaptive risk responses3.

The best reason to use qualitative measures to express residual risk levels related to emerging threats is that qualitative measures are better able to incorporate expert judgment. Expert judgment is the opinion or advice of a person or a group of people who have specialized knowledge, skills, or experience in a particular domain or field. Expert judgment can help to:

Provide insights and perspectives on the nature and characteristics of the emerging threats, and their possible causes and consequences

Assess the likelihood and impact of the emerging threats, and their interactions and dependencies with other risks

Evaluate the suitability and effectiveness of the risk responses, and their alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

Identify and recommend the best practices and lessons learned for managing the emerging threats, and for improving the risk management process45

Qualitative measures are better able to incorporate expert judgment than quantitative measures, which are methods of expressing risk levels using numerical or measurable values, such as percentages, probabilities, or monetary amounts. Quantitative measures are often used to estimate and analyze risks, and to support risk decision making1. However, quantitative measures may not be suitable or feasible for expressing residual risk levels related to emerging threats, because:

Quantitative measures require reliable and sufficient data and information, which may not be available or accessible for the emerging threats

Quantitative measures rely on mathematical models and techniques, which may not be able to capture or reflect the complexity and uncertainty of the emerging threats

Quantitative measures may create a false sense of precision or accuracy, which may not be justified or warranted for the emerging threats

Quantitative measures may be influenced or manipulated by biases or assumptions, which may not be valid or appropriate for the emerging threats67

Therefore, qualitative measures are better able to incorporate expert judgment, which can enhance the understanding and management of the residual risk levels related to emerging threats.

The other options are not the best reasons to use qualitative measures to express residual risk levels related to emerging threats, but rather some of the advantages or disadvantages of qualitative measures. Qualitative measures require less ongoing monitoring than quantitative measures, because they are simpler and easier to apply and update. However, this does not mean that qualitative measures can eliminate or reduce the need for monitoring, which is an essential part of the risk management process. Qualitative measures are better aligned to regulatory requirements than quantitative measures, because they are more consistent and comparable across different domains and contexts. However, this does not mean that qualitative measures can satisfy or comply with all the regulatory requirements, which may vary depending on theindustry or sector. Qualitative measures are easier to update than quantitative measures, because they do not depend on complex calculations or formulas. However, this does not mean that qualitative measures can always reflect the current or accurate risk levels, which may change over time or due to external factors. References =

Qualitative Risk Analysis vs. Quantitative Risk Analysis - ISACA

Residual Risk - ISACA

Emerging Threats - ISACA

Expert Judgment - ISACA

Expert Judgment in Project Management: Narrowing the Theory-Practice Gap

Quantitative Risk Analysis - ISACA

Quantitative Risk Analysis: A Critical Review

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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

In a SaaS model, while the provider manages the infrastructure and application,data ownership and ultimate responsibilityfor its confidentiality remains with thecustomer's data owner, including due diligence and contractual safeguards.

A risk profile is a summary of the key risks that an organization faces, along with the corresponding risk responses, risk owners, and risk indicators1. A risk profile is a useful tool for communicating and reporting the risk status and performance to the management and other stakeholders2. When developing a risk profile for management approval, the most useful information to include is the residual risk and the risk appetite, because:

Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses3. It indicates the degree of exposure or uncertainty that the organization still faces, and the potential impact or consequences of the risk events. Residual risk helps the management to evaluate the effectiveness and adequacy of the risk responses, and to decide whether to accept, reduce, transfer, or avoid the risk4.

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives5. It reflects the organization’s risk culture, strategy, and priorities, and provides a basis for setting risk thresholds and targets. Risk appetite helps the management to align the risk profile with the organizational goals and values, and to ensure that the risk responses are consistent and proportional to the risk level6.

The other options are not the most useful information when developing a risk profile for management approval, because:

Strength of detective and preventative controls is a measure of how well the controls can identify or prevent the occurrence or impact of the risk events7. It is a part of the risk response information, but it does not provide a comprehensive or holistic view of the risk profile. It does not show the residual risk or the risk appetite, which are more relevant and important for the management approval.

Effectiveness and efficiency of controls is a measure of how well the controls achieve their intended objectives and how well they use the available resources8. It is a part of the risk performance information, but it does not provide a complete or balanced view of the risk profile.It does not show the residual risk or the risk appetite, which are more significant and meaningful for the management approval.

Inherent risk and risk tolerance are related but different concepts from residual risk and risk appetite. Inherent risk is the level of risk that exists before the implementation of risk responses3. Risk tolerance is the acceptable variation or deviation from the risk appetite or the risk objectives5. They are useful for the risk assessment and analysis, but they do not provide the current or desired state of the risk profile. They do not show the residual risk or the risk appetite, which are more critical and valuable for the management approval.

References =

Risk Profile - CIO Wiki

Risk Profile: Definition, Example, and How to Create One

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

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

Preventive and Detective Controls - CIO Wiki

Control Effectiveness and Efficiency - CIO Wiki

Noncompliance cost reflects the impact or penalties from deviating from policies. Per ISACA governance best practices, exceptions should only be granted when this cost is understood and deemed acceptable relative to business needs.

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

A project sponsor is the person or group who provides the financial, political, or organizational support for a project, and who has the authority to approve or reject the project’s objectives, scope, budget, schedule, and deliverables.

The primary recipient of reports showing the progress of a current IT risk mitigation project should be the project sponsor, because they are ultimately responsible for the success or failure of the project, and they need to be informed of the project’s status, issues, risks, and achievements on a regular basis.

The other options are not the primary recipients of reports showing the progress of a current IT risk mitigation project. They are either secondary or not essential for project reporting.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 21

Information Technology & Security, page 15

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 13

 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 mosthelpful 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.

Reevaluating the design of the key risk indicators (KRIs) is the best recommendation when a KRI is generating an excessive volume of events, because it helps to determine whether the KRI is relevant, reliable, and valid, and whether it needs to be modified or replaced. A KRI is a metric or indicator that helps to monitor and evaluate the likelihood or impact of a risk, or the effectiveness or efficiency of a control. A KRI can be quantitative or qualitative, and can be derived from internal or external sources. An event is an occurrence or incident that may indicate a change or trend in the risk level or performance. A KRI that generates an excessivevolume of events may indicate that the KRI is not well-designed or well-aligned with the risk objectives or criteria, and that it may produce false positives or negatives, or irrelevant or misleading information. Therefore, reevaluating the design of the KRIs is the best recommendation, as it helps to improve the quality and usefulness of the KRIs, and to avoid unnecessary or inappropriate actions or responses. Developing a corresponding key performance indicator (KPI), monitoring KRIs within a specific timeframe, and activating the incident response plan are all possible actions to perform after reevaluating the design of the KRIs, but they are not the best recommendation, as they do not address the root cause of the excessive volume of events. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 97

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

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.

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

Cybersecurity incident response procedures are the plans and actions that an organization takes to respond to and recover from a cybersecurity attack. They include identifying the source and scope of the attack, containing and eradicating the threat, restoring normal operations, and analyzing the root cause and lessons learned. Reviewing cybersecurity incident response procedures is the most effective course of action when the probability of a successful cybersecurity attack is increasing and the potential loss could exceed the organization’s risk appetite, as it helps to prepare the organization for minimizing the impact and duration of the attack, as well as improving the resilience and security posture of the organization.

The RPO defines how much data loss is acceptable during system failure. If not clearly defined, restoration may skip key data, leading to incomplete recovery. ISACA guidelines highlight that alignment of RPO/RTO with business objectives is critical for viable DR planning

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

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

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

 The effectiveness of an employee deprovisioning process can be measured by the number of days taken to remove access after staff separation dates, as this indicates how quickly and completely the organisation can revoke the privileges of former employees and reduce the risk of unauthorized access or data leakage. The number of days taken for IT to remove access after receipt of HR instructions is a measure of the efficiency of the IT department, but not the overall process. The number of termination requests processed per reporting period is a measure of the volume of the process, but not the quality or timeliness. The number of days taken for HR to provide instructions to IT after staff separation dates is a measure of the performance of the HR department, but not the entire process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 152.

 A risk heat map is a graphical tool that displays the risk events in a matrix based on their likelihood and impact. Risk events that are coded with the same color will have a similar risk likelihood, which is the probability or frequency of occurrence of a risk event. Risk score, riskimpact, and risk response are other possible attributes of risk events, but they are not represented by the color coding in a risk heatmap. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

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.

Avoiding the risk means eliminating the source of the risk or changing the likelihood or impact to zero. In this case, the source of the risk is the collection of customers’ personally identifiable information (Pll), which could be exposed to unauthorized parties and result in severe fines. Therefore, the best action to avoid the risk is to modify the business processes to stop collecting Pll, as this would eliminate the possibility of data leakage and the associated consequences. The other options are not as effective as modifying the business processes, because they do not avoid the risk, but rather mitigate or transfer the risk, as explained below:

A. Reduce retention periods for Pll data is a mitigation action, as it reduces the impact of the risk by minimizing the amount of data that could be leaked and the duration of exposure.

B. Move Pll to a highly-secured outsourced site is a transfer action, as it shifts the responsibility of protecting the data to a third party, but does not eliminate the risk of data leakage.

D. Implement strong encryption for Pll is a mitigation action, as it reduces the likelihood of the risk by making the data unreadable to unauthorized parties, but does not eliminate the risk of data leakage. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 40.

The person who should be accountable for resolving the situation where a root cause analysis indicates a major service disruption due to a lack of competency of newly hired IT system administrators is the chief information officer (CIO). The CIO is the senior executive who is responsible for the overall management and governance of the IT function within the organization, including the IT strategy, objectives, policies, processes, and resources. The CIO is also accountable for the performance and value of the IT services and systems, and for ensuring that they meet the needs and expectations of the business and its stakeholders. The CIO should be accountable for resolving the situation, because it involves a major IT service disruption that could affect the organization’s operations and reputation, and because it is related to the IT staff competency and capability, which are under the CIO’s authority and responsibility. The other options are not as accountable as the CIO, although they may have some roles or involvement inthe situation. The HR training director, the business process owner, and the HR recruitment manager are not directly responsible for the IT function or the IT service delivery, and they may not have the authority or the expertise to resolve the situation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 2-3.

The best course of action when a risk practitioner identifies a database application that has been developed and implemented by the business independently of IT is to include the application in IT risk assessments. IT risk assessments are the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT-related risks that could affect the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives. By including the application in IT risk assessments, the risk practitioner can identify the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts associated with the application, and recommend the appropriatecontrols and mitigation strategies to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Escalating the concern to senior management, documenting the reasons for the exception, and proposing that the application be transferred to IT are not the best courses of action, as they do not address the risk exposure and impact of the application, and may not be feasible or desirable for the business. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 47.

Technical control owners are responsible for the day-to-day operation and maintenance of controls. Their primary accountability is to ensure that controls are effectively implemented and continue to operate as intended to mitigate associated risks.

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

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

 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 type of indicators to measure the effectiveness of an organization’s firewall rule set are key control indicators (KCIs). A firewall is a device or software that filters the network traffic based on a set of rules or policies. A firewall rule set is the configuration of the firewall that defines the criteria for allowing or blocking the traffic. A key control indicator is a metric that measures the performance and effectiveness of a control in achieving its objectives and mitigating the risks. A key control indicator can help to evaluate the adequacy and efficiency of the firewall rule set, and to identify any gaps, weaknesses, or issues that need to be addressed.Key risk indicators (KRIs), key management indicators (KMIs), and key performance indicators (KPIs) are not as suitable as key control indicators, as they measure different aspects of the risk management process, such as the level and nature of the risk exposure, the alignment and integration of the risk management activities, and the achievement of the risk management goals and targets. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 220.

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.

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 andobjective 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

The most important reason to validate that risk responses have been executed as outlined in the risk response plan is to ensure that the residual risk is at an acceptable level. Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying a risk response. The risk response plan is the document thatdescribes the actions and resources needed to address the risk. Validating the risk response execution is the process of verifying that the risk response actions have been performed as planned, and that they have achieved the desired results. Validating the risk response execution helps to measure and monitor the residual risk, and to ensure that it is within the risk tolerance of the organization and its stakeholders. The other reasons are not as important as ensuring that the residual risk is at an acceptable level, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of validating the risk response execution. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

 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.

An increase in system vulnerabilities directly correlates with an elevated exposure to potential threats. Identifying more vulnerabilities signals a need to re-evaluate the risk environment.

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 Riskand Information Systems Control – Question208; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 208.

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.

The risk practitioner’s BEST course of action is to validate the transfer of risk and update the register to reflect the change, because outsourcing the backup and recovery procedures to a third-party cloud provider does not eliminate the risk, but rather transfers it to the service provider. The risk practitioner should verify that the service provider has adequate controls and capabilities to handle the backup and recovery procedures, and that the contractual agreement specifies the roles and responsibilities of both parties. The risk practitioner should also update the risk register to reflect the new risk owner and the residual risk level. The other options are not the best course of action, because:

Option A: Accepting the risk and documenting contingency plans for data disruption is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk practitioner is still responsible for the risk, even though it has been transferred to the service provider. Contingency plans are also reactive measures, rather than proactive ones.

Option B: Removing the associated risk scenario from the risk register due to avoidance is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk has been eliminated, which is not the case. The risk still exists, but it has been transferred to the service provider. The risk register should reflect the current risk status and ownership.

Option C: Mitigating the risk with compensating controls enforced by the third-party cloud provider is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk practitioner is still involved in the risk management process, even though the risk has been transferred to the service provider. The risk practitioner should rely on the service provider’s controls and capabilities, andmonitor their performance and compliance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 196.

 The most important consideration when communicating the risk associated with technology end-of-life to business owners is the cost and benefit of the risk response options. Technology end-of-life is the situation when a technology product or service is no longer supported by the vendor or manufacturer, and may pose security, compatibility, or performance issues. The risk practitioner should communicate the cost and benefit of the possible risk responses, such as replacing, upgrading, or maintaining the technology, to the business owners, and help them to make informed and rational decisions. Security and availability, maintainability and reliability, and performance and productivity are other possible considerations, but they are not as important as the cost and benefit. 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 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.

Risk assessment is a key process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the risks associated with the implementation of an emerging technology. It helps to determine the potential impact and likelihood of the risks, as well as the appropriate risk responses and controls. Lack of risk assessment can lead to poor decision making, inadequate risk mitigation, and unexpected consequences. Therefore, it should be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner reviewing the implementation of an emerging technology. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, p. 226-227

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

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 orinvolvement 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

IT control status reporting is the process of collecting and analyzing data about the effectiveness and efficiency of IT controls. IT controls are the policies, procedures, and practices that ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of IT resources and information. IT control status reporting helps to monitor the performance of IT controls against the predefined objectives and criteria, and to identify any gaps or issues that need to be addressed. IT control status reporting also provides information to the stakeholders about the current status and progress of IT control implementation and improvement.

The primary purpose of IT control status reporting is to facilitate the comparison of the current and desired states of IT controls. This means that IT control status reporting helps to evaluate the gap between the actual and expected performance of IT controls, and to determine the actions and resources needed to close the gap. IT control status reporting also helps to align the IT controls with the business goals and strategies, and to ensure that the IT controls are delivering value to the organization. By comparing the current and desired states of IT controls, IT control status reporting enables continuous improvement and optimization of IT control processes and outcomes.

The other options are not the primary purpose of IT control status reporting, but rather some of the benefits or outcomes of it. IT control status reporting can help to ensure compliance with IT governance strategy,but it is not the main reason for doing it. IT governance is the framework that defines the roles, responsibilities, and relationships among the stakeholders involved in ITdecision making and oversight. IT control status reporting can support IT governance by providing relevant and reliable information to the stakeholders, and by demonstrating the accountability and transparency of IT control activities. However, IT control status reporting is not the same as IT governance, and it is not the only way to ensure compliance with IT governance strategy.

IT control status reporting can also assist internal audit in evaluating and initiating remediation efforts, but it is not the main objective of it. Internal audit is an independent and objective assurance and consulting activity that evaluates the adequacy and effectiveness of IT controls, and provides recommendations for improvement. IT control status reporting can provide input and evidence to the internal audit process, and help to identify the areas of IT control that need further review or testing. IT control status reporting can also help to monitor and track the implementation of the audit findings and recommendations, and to verify the results of the remediation efforts. However, IT control status reporting is not the same as internal audit, and it is not the only source of information for internal audit.

Finally, IT control status reporting can benchmark IT controls with industry standards, but it is not the main goal of it. Industry standards are the best practices or guidelines that define the minimum requirements or expectations for IT control performance and quality. IT control status reporting can help to compare the IT controls with the industry standards, and to identify the areas of IT control that need to be enhanced or updated. IT control status reporting can also help to demonstrate the compliance or conformance of IT controls with the industry standards, and to provide assurance to the external parties or regulators. However, IT control status reporting is not the same as industry standards, and it is not the only way to benchmark IT controls. References =

Service Reporting in ITIL: Process, Objectives and Examples - KnowledgeHut

Anatomy of an effective status report - Project Management Institute

How to Create a Project Status Report [Template & Examples]

Communicating Document Control Progress on a Project

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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

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.

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

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

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and owners. The greatest concern when maintaining a risk register is that significant changes in risk factors are excluded. Risk factors are the internal and external variables that influence the occurrence and impact of risks. Risk factors can change over time due to changes in the business environment, the IT landscape, the threat landscape, or the regulatory requirements. If the risk register does not reflect the significant changes in risk factors, it may not provide an accurate and current view of the enterprise’s risk profile and may not support effective risk management decisions and actions. The other options are not as concerning as the exclusion of significant changes in risk factors, as they involve different aspects of the risk register:

Impacts are recorded in qualitative terms means that the risk register uses descriptive scales, such as low, medium, and high, to measure the potential consequences of the risks. This may not be asprecise or consistent as quantitative measures, such as monetary values or percentages, but it does not necessarily affect the validity or usefulness of the risk register.

Executive management does not perform periodic reviews means that the risk register is not regularly evaluated and updated by the senior leaders of the enterprise. This may indicate a lack of management commitment or oversight for risk management, but it does not directly affect the quality or completeness of the risk register.

IT risk is not linked with IT assets means that the risk register does not associate the identified risks with the specific IT resources, such as hardware, software, data, or services, that are affected by or contribute to the risks. This may limit the visibility and traceability of the risks, but it does not necessarily affect the identification or assessment of the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2.2, pp. 21-22.

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 oftransforming 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.

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

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

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 theemergency 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

The effectiveness of risk response options is the best criteria when selecting a risk response, because it reflects the degree to which the response can reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk, or enhance the benefit or opportunity of the risk. The effectiveness of risk response options can be evaluated by considering factors such as cost, feasibility, timeliness, and alignment with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite. The other options are not as good as the effectiveness of risk response options, because they do not measure the outcome or value of the response, but rather focus on the input or process of the response, as explained below:

A. Capability to implement the response is a criteria that considers the availability and adequacy of the resources, skills, and knowledge required to execute the response. While this is an important factor to consider, it does not indicate how well the response can address the risk or achieve the desired result.

B. Importance of IT risk within the enterprise is a criteria that considers the significance and priority of the risk in relation to the organization’s strategy, objectives, and operations. Whilethis is an important factor to consider, it does not indicate how well the response can address the risk or achieve the desired result.

D. Alignment of response to industry standards is a criteria that considers the compliance and conformity of the response with the best practices, norms, and expectations of the industry or sector. While this is an important factor to consider, it does not indicate how well the response can address the risk or achieve the desired result. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 40. How to Select Your Risk Responses -Rebel’s Guide to Project Management, Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips, Risk Responses - options for managing risk - Stakeholdermap.com

The risk scenario associated with data loss at the organization’s cloud provider should be reassigned to the data owner, as they have the authority and responsibility to define the classification, retention, and disposal requirements for the data they own, and to manage the risk and controls related to the data. The risk scenario should not be assigned to the cloud provider, as they are an external party that may not have the same interest or accountability as the organization. Senior management, chief risk officer (CRO), and vendor manager are not the best choices, as they have different roles and responsibilities related to risk governance, strategy, or oversight, respectively, but they do not own the data. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

A control owner's primary responsibility is to ensure that the controls under their purview are effectively implemented and functioning as intended to mitigate associated risks. This involves regular monitoring, evaluation, and reporting on the performance of controls to maintain the organization's risk posture within acceptable limits.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (aligned to ISACA CRISC guidance)

The risk register is a living document. CRISC states it should be maintained so that it accurately reflects current risk conditions, including changes in threats, vulnerabilities, impacts, controls, and ownership. Therefore, it is most important to update entries when aspects of the risk scenario change—for example, when a new control is implemented, business processes change, threat activity increases, or the magnitude of impact alters. Waiting until KRI thresholds are reached may delay updating until risk is already elevated. Updating only when internal audit requires it or just before a periodic review undermines real-time visibility and decision-making. Timely updates when the scenario changes support effective monitoring, reporting, and governance, ensuring that management decisions are based on current, not outdated, risk information.

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

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

Purpose of Warning Banners

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

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

Effectiveness as a Deterrent Control

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

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

Comparison with Other Control Types

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

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

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

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

References

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

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

Alignment to Business Objective (Answer C):

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

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

A. The scenario is aligned to business control processes:

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

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

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

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

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

The main benefit of using key risk indicators (KRIs) for an organization is that they provide an early warning that a risk threshold is about to be reached. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. KRIs also help to trigger timely and appropriate risk responses, before the risk becomes unmanageable orunacceptable. The other options are not the main benefit of using KRIs, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes. KRIs signal that a change in the control environment has occurred, provide a basis to set the risk appetite for an organization, and assist in the preparation of the organization’s risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

The conditional approval of the CIO’s proposal indicates the organization’s risk appetite. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. By setting a limit for expenditures before final approval, senior management isexpressing their willingness to take a calculated risk with the new technology, but also their desire to control the potential loss or harm. Risk capacity, management capability, and treatment strategy are other possible factors, but they are not as relevant as risk appetite. 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 strongest evidence to support a risk response decision is a memo indicating risk acceptance. A memo is a formal and written document that can clearly communicate the rationale, criteria, and approval of the risk acceptance decision. Verbal majority acceptance of risk by committee, list of compensating controls, and IT audit follow-up responses are weaker evidence, as they may not be documented, verified, or aligned with the risk response decision. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

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

Modifying logs before analysis compromises the integrity and reliability of monitoring processes. This action creates a risk of inaccurate data feeding into key risk indicators, which undermines the effectiveness of monitoring and decision-making. Maintaining log integrity is a foundational practice inRisk Monitoring and Reporting.

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 ofcomparing 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 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 afailure 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 areexamples 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

The effectiveness of risk treatment determines whether the selected response sufficiently mitigates the identified risk. This consideration ensures alignment with risk appetite and reduces residual risk to acceptable levels, reflecting the priorities set out in theRisk Response and Treatmentdomain of CRISC.

 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. Reviewing the risk register is the best way to help an organization gain insight into its overall risk profile, which is the summary of the nature and level of risk that the organization faces. By reviewing the risk register, the organization can obtain a comprehensive and holistic view of the sources, causes, and consequences of the risks, their likelihood and impact, their interrelationships and dependencies, and their alignment with therisk appetite and tolerance. The risk register can also help the organization to prioritize the risks, allocate the resources, select the risk responses, monitor the risk performance, and evaluate the risk outcomes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

 The average gap between actual and agreed response times is the best measure of the efficiency of an incident response process, as it indicates how well the process meets the service level agreements (SLAs) and the expectations of the stakeholders. A smaller gap means that the process is more efficient and effective in resolving incidents within the agreed time frame. The other options are not the best measures of the efficiency of an incident response process, as they do not directly reflect the performance of the process against the SLAs. The number of incidents escalated to management may indicate the complexity or severity of the incidents, but not the efficiency of the process. The average time between changes and updating of escalation matrix may indicate the agility or flexibility of the process, but not the efficiency of the process. The number of incidents lacking responses may indicate the capacity or availability of the process, but not the efficiency of the process. References = Top 5 Incident Response Metrics with Real-World Examples & Impact; Mastering Incident Response: Best Practices for Effective Handling; The Five Steps of Incident Response

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

Embedding risk management into day-to-day business processes reflects organizational maturity and integration. It ensures employees consider risk in operational decisions and continuously support the risk management framework.

A compensating control addresses risk when the primary control cannot meet the required objectives due to practical constraints.

Assigning ownership to each risk scenario is fundamental in risk management. Without designated owners, there is a lack of accountability, which can lead to risks not being adequately managed or mitigated. The absence of assigned owners means that no one is responsible for monitoring, reporting, or addressing the risk, increasing the likelihood of adverse outcomes.

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.

Obtaining input from business management is the best way to enable the development of a successful IT strategy focused on business risk mitigation, because it helps to align and integrate the IT objectives and activities with the business goals and priorities. An IT strategy is a plan that defines how IT supports and enables the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy. A business risk mitigation is a process that aims to reduce or eliminate the risks that may affect the achievement of the business objectives or expectations. Obtaining input from business management is the best way to ensure that the IT strategy is relevant, realistic, and responsive to the business needs and challenges, and that the IT risks are identified, assessed, and managed in accordance with the business risk appetite and tolerance. Providing risk awareness training for business units, understanding the business controls currently in place, and conducting a businessimpact analysis (BIA) are all useful ways to support the development of an IT strategy focused on business risk mitigation, but they are not the best way, as they do not directly involve the input and feedback from business management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 37

 The best control to minimize the risk associated with scope creep in software development is an established process for project change management. Scope creep is the uncontrolled expansion of the project scope due to changes in requirements, specifications, or expectations. A project change management process can help to prevent or reduce scope creep by defining the procedures for requesting, reviewing, approving, and implementing changes in the project. Retention of test data and results, business management review of functional requirements, and segregation between development, test, and production are other possible controls, but they are not as effective as a project change management process. References = ISACA Certified in Riskand Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

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

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

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

Optimize the value and benefits of the risk response

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

Coordinate and communicate the risk response with the relevant stakeholders

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

 The average time to identify critical information security incidents is the best indicator of effective information security incident management, as it measures how quickly the organization can detect and respond to the most severe threats to its information assets. The faster the organization can identify critical incidents, the lower the potential impact and damage they can cause. The average time to identify critical incidents also reflects the efficiency and accuracy of the monitoring and reporting mechanisms, as well as the awareness and training of the staff and stakeholders. The other options are not the best indicators of effective information security incident management, as they do not directly measure the performance or quality of the incident response process. The monthly trend of information security-related incidents may show the frequency or severity of the incidents, but not how well they are managed. The frequency of information security incident response plan testing may show the preparedness or maturity of the organization, but not the actual effectiveness of the plan. The percentage of high-risk security incidents may show the risk exposure or appetite of the organization, but not the risk mitigationor treatment. References = 7 Types of Information Security Incidents and How to Respond; Annex A.16: Information Security Incident Management - ISMS.online; CISM Isaca Exam Questions and Answers - CertLibrary.com

The most important objective of information security controls is to provide measurable risk reduction. Information security controls are the policies, procedures, techniques, or technologies that are implemented to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information assets. The main purpose of information security controls is to reduce the risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure,modification, or destruction of information assets, and to ensure that the information assets support the enterprise’s objectives and performance. Information security controls should be measurable, meaning that they should have clear and quantifiable criteria for evaluating their effectiveness and efficiency in reducing the risk exposure to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, page 1151

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. One of the elements of risk appetite is the enterprise’s capacity to absorb loss, which is the maximum amount of loss that an organization can withstand without jeopardizing its existence or strategic objectives. The effectiveness of compensating controls, the residual risk affected by preventive controls, and the amount of inherent risk considered appropriate are not elements of risk appetite, but rather factors that influence the risk assessment and responseprocesses. References = [CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version)], page 41; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, question 196.

A possible action that a risk practitioner should do next when an increased industry trend of external cyber attacks is identified is A. Conduct a threat and vulnerability analysis. A threat and vulnerability analysis is a process of identifying and assessing the potential sources and methodsof cyber attacks, as well as the weaknesses and gaps in the organization’s information systems and security controls12 By conducting a threat and vulnerability analysis, a risk practitioner can determine the level of exposure and risk that the organization faces from external cyber attacks, and prioritize the actions and resources needed to mitigate or prevent them3 A threat and vulnerability analysis can also help to update the risk impact rating and the key risk indicator in the risk register, as well as to notify senior management of the new risk scenario, but these are subsequent steps that follow after the analysis is completed. Therefore, the first action that a risk practitioner should do next is to conduct a threat and vulnerability analysis.

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that reflects how well an organization is achieving its goals and objectives. A KPI should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. For an IT department that has organized training sessions to improve user awareness of organizational information security policies, the best KPI to reflect the effectiveness of the training is the percentage of staff members who complete the training with a passing score. This KPI measures the level of knowledge and understanding of the security policies among the staff members, as well as the quality and impact of the training sessions. It also indicates whether the training sessions have met the predefined criteria and standards for success. A high percentage of staff members who complete the training with a passing score implies that the training sessions have been effective in improving user awareness of organizational information security policies. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, p. 117-118

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

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

Peak bandwidth usage is the most helpful in defining an early-warning threshold associated with insufficient network bandwidth. Peak bandwidth usage is the maximum amount of data that istransferred over a network connection at a given time. It indicates the highest demand and stress on the network resources and capacity. By monitoring the peak bandwidth usage, the organization can identify the potential bottlenecks, slowdowns, and disruptions that may occur due to insufficient network bandwidth. The organization can also plan and allocate the network bandwidth accordingly to meet the peak demand and avoid service degradation. The other options are not as helpful as peak bandwidth usage, as they do not reflect the actual or potential network performance issues that may arise due to insufficient network bandwidth. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.3: Key Risk Indicators, page 197.

Updating a risk register with assessment results for a key project must primarily capture action plans to address risk scenarios requiring treatment.

Risk Register Purpose:

Documentation of Risks:The risk register is a central repository for all identified risks and their respective treatment plans. It ensures that all risks are documented, tracked, and managed throughout the project lifecycle.

Action Plans:It is crucial to document action plans for risks that require treatment. This ensures that there are clear strategies in place to mitigate or manage these risks.

Importance of Action Plans:

Mitigation and Management:Action plans detail the steps necessary to mitigate identified risks, providing a clear path for risk management. This is vital for ensuring that risks do not negatively impact the project.

Accountability and Tracking:Including action plans in the risk register assigns responsibility and timelines for risk treatment, which is essential for accountability and tracking progress.

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

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

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

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

References

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

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

•How to Build a SaaS Disaster Recovery Plan | Acsense

Senior management requires high-level, decision-relevant information. CRISC guidance states that the most valuable elements to communicate are areas of elevated risk, because these represent conditions that may exceed risk appetite or require immediate action. Changes in mitigation plans and audit findings are important operational details but do not provide a clear picture of current exposure. Industry benchmarks offer context but do not describe the organization’s actual risk posture. Highlighting elevated risks helps executives prioritize resources, make treatment decisions, and determine whether escalations are required.

When risk exceeds tolerance, the appropriate action is to engage the risk treatment process. This involves evaluating and implementing appropriate responses such as mitigation, transfer, or acceptance.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the risk register is the most useful component of the review of the overall risk profile from the targeted organization, as it providesa comprehensive and up-to-date record of the identified risks, their likelihood and impact, their risk response actions, and their residual risk levels. The risk register helps to:

Understand the current and potential threats and vulnerabilities that may affect the targeted organization’s objectives and performance

Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management processes and controls implemented by the targeted organization

Identify the gaps or weaknesses in the risk management practices and capabilities of the targeted organization

Assess the compatibility and alignment of the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the targeted organization with the acquiring organization

Estimate the value and benefits of the acquisition and the potential risks and costs involved

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 38-391

The main benefit of using a top-down approach to develop risk scenarios is that it establishes the relationship between risk events and organizational objectives. A top-down approach is a method of risk identification and analysis that starts with the organization’s strategic objectives and then identifies the potential risk events that could affect or prevent the achievement of those objectives. A top-down approach helps to establish the relationship between risk events and organizational objectives, because it links the risk scenarios to the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and it prioritizes the risk scenarios based on their impact and relevance to the organization’s objectives. A top-down approach also helps to align and communicate the risk scenarios with the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, and business units, and to facilitate the risk response and monitoring activities. The other options are not the main benefit of using a top-down approach, although they may be part of or derived from the top-down approach. Describing risk events specific to technology used by the enterprise, using hypothetical and generic risk events specific to the enterprise, and helping management and the risk practitioner to refine risk scenarios are all activities or outcomes that could be performed or achieved by using a top-down approach, but they are not the primary purpose or result of the top-down approach. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

An IT risk profile is a document that summarizes the IT-related risks that an organization faces, as well as the information and actions related to those risks, such as the risk description, assessment, response, status, and owner. An IT risk profile is a valuable tool for managing and communicating IT risks and their impact on the organization’s objectives and operations. The best description of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions is that it helps assess the effects of IT decisions on risk exposure. This means that the IT risk profile can help toevaluate the potential consequences and implications of different IT choices or actions on the level and nature of the IT risks that the organization faces. The IT risk profile can also help to identify and address the gaps or opportunities for improvement in the IT risk management process and performance. The other options are not the best descriptions of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions, although they may be related or beneficial. Comparing performance levels of IT assets to value delivered is a technique to measure and optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of the IT resources and activities that support the organization’s goals and needs. However, this technique does not necessarily involve the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the output and outcome of the IT assets, not the input and impact of the IT risks. Facilitating the alignment of strategic IT objectives to business objectives is a technique toensure that the IT strategy and plans are consistent and compatible with the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, and objectives. However, this technique does not depend on the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the direction and purpose of the IT objectives, not the probability and threat of the IT risks. Providing input to business managers when preparing a business case for new IT projects is a technique to support and justify the initiation and implementation of new IT initiatives that can create value or solve problems for the organization. However, this technique does not require the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the cost and benefit of the IT projects, not the risk and response of the IT risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 962; IT Risk Management Guide for 2022 | CIO Insight3; IT Risk Management Process, Frameworks & Templates4

The most helpful information to review when determining a system’s criticality is the associated business impact analysis (BIA). A BIA is a process of identifying and evaluating the potential effects of disruptions to the organization’s critical business functions and processes. A BIA can help to determine the system’s criticality by assessing its impact on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value. Process flow, service level agreement (SLA), and system architecture are other possible information sources, but they are not as helpful as the BIA. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

Train all staff on relevant information security best practices, because it helps to increase the awareness and understanding of the employees regarding the acceptable use policy and its purpose, and to improve their skills and knowledge on how to protect and handle confidential information. An acceptable use policy is a document that outlines the standards and expectations for the proper usage of the organization’s IT resources, such as systems, applications, networks, or devices, and the consequences of non-compliance. Confidential information is information that is sensitive or proprietary, and may cause harm or damage to the organizationor its stakeholders if disclosed or compromised, such as trade secrets, customer data, or financial records. Training all staff on relevant information security best practices is the best way to reinforce the effectiveness of the policy, as it helps to ensure that the employees are aware of and comply with the policy, and that they adopt the appropriate behaviors and techniques to prevent or mitigate the risk of disclosing confidential information.

Communicating sanctions for policy violations to all staff, obtaining signed acceptance of the new policy from employees, and implementing data loss prevention (DLP) within the corporate network are all possible ways to reinforce the effectiveness of the policy, but they are not the best way, as they do not directly address the awareness and understanding of the employees regarding the policy and its purpose, and they may not be sufficient or effective to prevent or mitigate the risk of disclosing confidential information.

Developing a risk treatment plan is the best way to facilitate the mitigation of identified gaps between current and desired risk environment states. A risk treatment plan is a document that outlines the actions and resources needed to implement the chosen risk response strategy for each risk scenario. A risk treatment plan should include the following elements:

Risk scenario description and risk ID

Risk owner and other stakeholders

Risk response strategy and objectives

Risk response actions and tasks

Resources, costs, and benefits

Roles and responsibilities

Timeline and milestones

Performance indicators and monitoring mechanisms

Contingency plans and triggers

A risk treatment plan helps to close the gaps between the current and desired risk environment states by providing a clear and comprehensive roadmap for risk mitigation. It also helps to ensure that the risk response actions are aligned with the organizational risk appetite, objectives, and priorities. A risk treatment plan also facilitates the communication, coordination, and collaboration among the risk owners and other stakeholders involved in the risk mitigation process.

The other options are not the best ways to facilitate the mitigation of identified gaps between current and desired risk environment states. Validating organizational risk appetite is an important step in establishing the risk criteria and thresholds for the risk assessment process, but it does not directly address the gaps between the current and desired risk environment states. Reviewing results of prior risk assessments can provide useful insights and lessons learned for the current risk assessment process, but it does not necessarily lead to the development and implementation of effective risk response actions. Including the current and desired states in the risk register can help to document and monitor the risk scenarios and their status, but it does not provide the details and guidance for risk mitigation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4: Risk Response, Section 4.2: Risk Treatment, p. 189-191.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Risk Register - ISACA

Risk Analysis - ISACA

Risk Register 2021-2022 - UNECE

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

[Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance - ISACA]

[Enterprise Risk Assessment - ISACA]

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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

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

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

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

The primary objective for selecting risk response options is to reduce risk to an acceptable level. Risk response options are the possible actions that can be taken to address the risks that have been identified and analyzed in the risk management process. Risk response options can be classified into four categories: avoid, transfer, mitigate, and accept for negative risks (or threats), and exploit, share, enhance, and accept for positive risks (or opportunities). The selection of the risk response options depends on various factors, such as the risk level, the risk appetite and tolerance, the cost and benefit, and the feasibility and availability of the options. The main goal of selecting the risk response options is to reduce the risk to a level that is acceptable to the organization, which means that the risk exposure is within the boundaries of the risk criteria and the risk appetite. The other options are not the primary objective for selecting risk response options, although they may be related or beneficial. Identifying compensating controls is a technique to implement additional or alternative controls when the existing controls are not effective or sufficient to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Minimizing residual risk is a result of selecting and implementing the risk response options, but it is not the main purpose. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response, and it may or may not be acceptable depending on the risk appetite and tolerance. Reducing risk factors is a method to decrease the likelihood or impact of the risk by addressing the root causes or sources of the risk. However,reducing risk factors does not necessarily mean that the risk is reduced to an acceptable level,as there may be other factors or uncertainties that affect the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 862

The best input for conducting a review of emerging risk is the annual threat reports. Emerging risk is the risk that arises from new or evolving sources, or from existing sources that have not been previously considered or recognized. Emerging risk may have significant impact on the organization’s objectives, strategies, operations, or reputation, and may require new or different risk responses. Annual threat reports are the reports that provide information and analysis on the current and future trends, developments, and challenges in the threat landscape, such as cyberattacks, natural disasters, geopolitical conflicts, or pandemics. Annual threat reports can help to identify and assess the emerging risk, as they can provide insights into the sources, drivers, indicators, and scenarios of the emerging risk, as well as the potential impact and likelihood of the emerging risk. Annual threat reports can also help to benchmark and compare the organization’s risk exposure and preparedness with the industry and the peers, and to prioritize and respond to the emerging risk. Audit reports, industry benchmarks, and financial forecasts are not as useful as annual threat reports, as they do not focus on the emerging risk, and may not capture the latest or future changes in the threat landscape. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

This behavior represents intentional circumvention of control, requiring formal documentation and assessment as a noncompliance risk scenario.

CRISC principle:

“When control circumvention occurs, the risk practitioner should document the event as a noncompliance risk scenario to evaluate its impact and treatment.”

The other options—auditing, probability updates, or cost analysis—may follow, but the first step is formal recognition of the risk within the risk register via a new scenario.

CRISC Reference: Domain 2 – IT Risk Assessment, Topic: Scenario Development and Control Evaluation.

The most important factor for the risk practitioner to understand when creating an initial IT risk register is the organizational objectives. The organizational objectives are the specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that the organization aims to accomplish. The organizational objectives should be aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, as well as the stakeholder expectations and needs. The organizational objectives should also reflect the desired outcomes and benefits of the organization, such as increasing revenue, reducing costs, improving quality, or enhancing customer satisfaction. Understanding the organizational objectives is the most important factor when creating an initial IT risk register, because it provides the context, scope, and criteria for identifying, analyzing, and prioritizing the IT risks that may affect or be affected by the organizational objectives.Understanding the organizational objectives also helps to align the IT risk management process with the organizational risk management process, and to communicate the value and impact of the IT risks and the IT risk responses to the senior management and other stakeholders. The other options are not the most important factor, although they may be relevant or influential to the IT risk register. Enterprise architecture (EA) is a conceptual blueprint that defines the structure and operation of an organization. EA describes the current and future state of the organization in terms of its business processes, information systems, and technology infrastructure, and the relationships and dependencies among them. EA also provides the principles, standards, and guidelines for designing, developing, and implementing the organization’s solutions and services. EA can help to understand the IT risk sources, causes, and effects, as well as the IT risk mitigation options and opportunities, but it does not define the purpose or the scope of the IT risk register. Control environment is the set of policies, procedures, and mechanisms that ensure the reliability, security, and quality of the organization’s activities and information. Control environment includes the tone and culture at the top, the roles and responsibilities for governance and oversight, the internal control framework and methodology, and the monitoring and reporting systems. Control environment can help to assess the IT risk levels and the IT risk responses, as well as to ensure the compliance and accountability of the IT risk management process, but it does not provide the context or the criteria for the IT risk register. IT objectives are the specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that the IT function aims to accomplish. IT objectives should be aligned and consistent with the organizational objectives, as well as the IT strategy and IT governance. IT objectives should also reflect the expected outcomes and benefits of the IT function, such as delivering value, enabling innovation, or supporting transformation. IT objectives can help to identify and prioritize the IT risks that may affect or be affected by the IT objectives, but they are not the same as or more important than the organizational objectives. References = Three Steps to Creating a Simple IT Risk Register - Gartner, Risk Register Template and Examples | Prioritize and Manage Risk, IT Resources | Knowledge & Insights | ISACA

The most essential factor for an effective change control environment is the separation of development and production environments. This ensures that changes are tested and verified in a controlled environment before being implemented in the live environment, reducing the risk of errors, failures, and unauthorized modifications. Business management approval of change requests, requirement of an implementation rollback plan, and IT management review of implemented changes are important elements of change control, but they are not as essential as the separation of environments. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1.2, page 123.

The next step for the risk practitioner when a key external technology supplier refuses to provide control design and effectiveness information is to review the supplier’s contractual obligations. The contract between the organization and the supplier should specify the terms and conditions for the provision of the service or function, including the requirements for control design and effectiveness information. By reviewing the contract, the risk practitioner can determine if the supplier is breaching the contract and take appropriate actions to enforce the contract or terminate the relationship. Escalating the non-cooperation to management, excluding applicable controls from the assessment, and requesting risk acceptance from the business process owner are other possible steps, but they are not as effective as reviewing the supplier’s contractual obligations. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

Documented procedures are the best way to enable effective IT control implementation. Documented procedures are the specific actions or steps that are performed to achieve the IT control objectives and mitigate the IT risks. Documented procedures provide clear guidance, consistency, and accountability for the IT control activities. Documented procedures also help to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the IT controls, and to identify and address any gaps or weaknesses. The other options are not as effective as documented procedures, although they may support or complement the IT control implementation. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of IT risks, but they do not specify how to implement the IT controls. Information security policies and standards are high-level statements that define the IT security goals and requirements, but they do not detail how to implement the IT controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 1-15.

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

IT risk is a subset of enterprise risk. Integration ensures IT risks are visible and prioritized alongside strategic and operational risks.

CRISC framework explains:

“Integration of IT risk management with ERM ensures that technology-related risks are appropriately represented in the overall corporate risk profile and reporting structure.”

Hence, D is correct.

CRISC Reference: Domain 1 – IT Risk Governance, Topic: Enterprise and IT Risk Integration.

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

 Developing IT Risk Scenarios:

Risk scenarios are hypothetical events that describe potential threats and their impact on business operations. These scenarios are essential for identifying and assessing risks.

 Importance of Potential Impact Events:

Events that could potentially impact the business provide the most useful information for developing risk scenarios because they directly relate to the organization’s objectives and operations.

Understanding these events helps in crafting realistic and relevant risk scenarios that can guide risk assessment and mitigation efforts.

 Components of Risk Scenarios:

Threat Actors:Identify who might exploit vulnerabilities.

Threat Events:Describe the specific events that could impact the business.

Business Impact:Assess how these events would affect business operations, finances, reputation, etc.

 Using Impact Events for Scenario Development:

Focusing on events that could disrupt critical business functions ensures that the scenarios are relevant and actionable.

It enables the risk practitioner to communicate the potential consequences effectively to stakeholders and prioritize mitigation efforts accordingly.

 Comparing Other Information Sources:

Published Vulnerabilities:Useful for understanding specific threats but may not directly relate to business impact.

Threat Actors:Important for identifying potential sources of risk but not sufficient alone for scenario development.

IT Assets:Relevant for risk assessment but secondary to understanding potential impact events.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the importance of considering events that could impact the business when developing risk scenarios (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4 Risk Scenario Development)​​.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a risk owner is the person who is accountable for the risk and its associated mitigation actions. The risk owner is responsible for monitoring the risk, reporting the risk status, and implementing the risk response. Therefore, the most appropriate risk owner would be the individual who is accountable for loss if the risk materializes, as it implies that they have the authority and the incentive to manage the risk effectively. The other options are not the most appropriate risk owners, as they are not directly accountable for the risk or its consequences. The person who is in charge of information security is responsible for overseeing the IT security function and ensuring that the IT security policy is enforced, but they may not have the authority or the resources to manage the risk. The person who is responsible for enterprise risk management (ERM) is responsible for establishing and maintaining the ERM framework and processes, but they may not have the knowledge or the involvement to manage the risk. The person who can implement remediation action plans is responsible for executing the risk response, but they may not have the decision-making power or the accountability to manage the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.2, page 108.

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

When evaluating enterprise IT risk management, it is most important to confirm the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to take in order to meet its strategic objectives3. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that an organization is willing to accept around its risk appetite4. By confirming the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, the evaluation can:

Ensure that the enterprise IT risk management is consistent and compatible with the organization’s risk culture and vision

Provide clear and measurable criteria and boundaries for assessing and prioritizing the IT risks and their impacts

Guide the selection and implementation of the appropriate risk responses and controls that balance the costs and benefits of risk mitigation

Enable the monitoring and reporting of the IT risk performance and outcomes, and the adjustment of the IT risk strategy and objectives as needed5

References = Enterprise IT Risk Management - ISACA, Enterprise Risk Management - Wikipedia, Risk Appetite - COSO, Risk Tolerance - COSO, Risk Appetite and Tolerance - IRM

 According to the Data Roles and Responsibilities article, the business owner is the person who has authority over the business process that is supported by the data. The business owner is responsible for defining the access roles to protect the sensitive data within the application, as well as approving the access requests and ensuring the compliance with the data policies andstandards. The business owner may delegate this responsibility to a data steward, who is a person who acts on behalf of the business owner to manage the data quality, security, and usage. Therefore, the answer is D. Business owner. References = Data Roles and Responsibilities

The risk practitioner’s most important action related to the decision to commit to a business activity with the knowledge that the risk exposure is higher than the risk appetite is to document formal acceptance of the risk. Formal acceptance of the risk means that the organization acknowledges and agrees to bear the risk and its potential consequences. Formal acceptance of the risk should be documented and approved by the appropriate authority level, such as senior management or the board of directors. Formal acceptance of the risk should also include the rationale, assumptions, and conditions for accepting the risk, as well as the monitoring and reporting mechanisms for the risk. Formal acceptance of the risk provides evidence and accountability for the risk management decision and helps to avoid disputes or misunderstandings in the future. The other options are not as important as documenting formalacceptance of the risk, as they are related to the alternatives, adjustments, or rejections of the risk, not the actual acceptance of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

The risk appetite of an organization is the amount and type of risk that it is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives1. Technology risk is the risk related to the use of information and technology in theorganization2. If an organization has raised its risk appetite for technology risk, it means that it is willing to accept more risk in exchange for more potential benefits from technology initiatives. This would likely result in lower risk management cost, as the organization would spend less on implementing and maintaining controls to mitigate technology risk. The other options are not the most likely results of raising the risk appetite for technology risk. Increased inherent risk is the risk before considering the effect of controls3, and it is not directly affected by the risk appetite. Higher risk management cost would be the opposite of the expected outcome, as the organization would reduce its risk management efforts. Decreased residual risk is the risk after considering the effect of controls3, and it would also be the opposite of the expected outcome, as the organization would accept more risk exposure. References = Organisations must define their IT risk appetite and tolerance; IT Risk Resources; CRISC | What Accurate CRISC Free Download Is

A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing is the best option to inform stakeholders risk decision-making, as it provides an accurate and timely assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s control environment. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing is a document that summarizes the results of the testing activities performed on the organization’s internal controls, such as design, implementation, operation, and monitoring. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing should include the following elements:

The scope, objectives, and methodology of the controls testing

The criteria and standards used to evaluate the controls

The findings and observations of the testing process

The root causes and impacts of the identified deficiencies

The recommendations and action plans to address the deficiencies

The roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders involved in the remediation process

A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing helps to inform stakeholders risk decision-making by providing them with relevant and reliable information on the current state of the organization’s control environment. It also helps to identify and prioritize the areas for improvement and enhancement of the control environment. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing also facilitates the communication, collaboration, and accountability among the stakeholders involved in the risk management and control processes.

The other options are not the best options to inform stakeholders risk decision-making. The audit plan for the upcoming period is a document that outlines the scope, objectives, and methodology of the planned audit activities, but it does not provide any information on the actual performance of the organization’s control environment. Spend to date on mitigating control implementation is a measure of the resources and costs incurred to implement the risk response actions, but it does not indicate the effectiveness or efficiency of the control environment. A status report of control deployment is a document that tracks and monitors the progress and performance of the control implementation process, but it does not evaluate the quality or adequacy of the control environment. References = Internal Control Deficiencies: Identification,Reporting andCommunication, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Internal Control Testing: Techniques, Types, and Examples

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

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

 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.

Changes in organizational structure often affect risk appetite, which defines the amount and type of risk an organization is willing to accept. Revalidating the corporate risk appetite ensures that the organization’s risk-taking aligns with its new structure, strategic goals, and culture. While reviewing KRIs and communicating the risk profile are important, they follow after confirming risk appetite alignment. Implementing a new assessment process is not always necessary unless structural changes fundamentally affect risk assessment scope【5:83, 5:104†CRISC_SentenceinNOTE30.pptx】.

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

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

Information systems control deficiencies are the weaknesses or flaws in the design or implementation of the controls that are intended to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the information systems and resources. Information systems control deficiencies may reduce the effectiveness or efficiency of the controls, and expose the organization to various risks, such as unauthorized access, data loss, system failure, etc.

Reviewing results from control self-assessment (CSA) is the best way to identify information systems control deficiencies, because CSA is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the information systems controls, using the input and feedback from the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the information systems activities or functions. CSA can help the organization to identify and document the information systems control deficiencies, and to align them with the organization’s information systems objectives and requirements.

CSA can be performed using various techniques, such as questionnaires, surveys, interviews, workshops, etc. CSA can also be integrated with the organization’s governance, risk management, and compliance functions, and aligned with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the best ways to identify information systems control deficiencies, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that CSA provides, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the organization.

Vulnerability and threat analysis is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems that can be exploited or compromised by the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. Vulnerability and threat analysis can help the organization to assess and prioritize the risks, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the risks, but it is not the best way to identify information systems control deficiencies, because it does not indicate whether the existing information systems controls are adequate and effective, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

Control remediation planning is a process of selecting and implementing the actions or plans to address or correct the information systems control deficiencies that have been identified,analyzed, and evaluated. Control remediation planning involves choosing one ofthe following types of control responses: mitigate, transfer, avoid, or accept. Control remediation planning can help the organization to improve and optimize the information systems controls, and to reduce or eliminate the information systems control deficiencies, but it is not the best way to identify information systems control deficiencies, because it is a subsequent or follow-up process that depends on the prior identification of the information systems control deficiencies.

User acceptance testing (UAT) is a process of verifying and validating the functionality and usability of the information systems and resources, using the input and feedback from the endusers or customers that interact with the information systems and resources. UAT can help the organization to ensure that the information systems and resources meet the user or customer expectations and requirements, and to identify and resolve any issues or defects that may affect the user or customer satisfaction, but it is not the best way to identify information systems control deficiencies, because it does not focus on the information systems controls, and it may not cover all the relevant or significant information systems control deficiencies that may exist or arise. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 186

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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.

Involving stakeholders ensures all perspectives are considered, leading to more accurate risk identification, assessment, and prioritization.

Thelatest security assessmentprovides a detailed evaluation of the control’s performance and identifies gaps or weaknesses. This is critical for determining the effectiveness of a system security control in mitigating threats.

KRI thresholds are the levels or points that trigger an action or a response when a KRI reaches or exceeds them. They reflect the risk appetite of the organization, which is the amount and type of risk that it is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. A new privacy regulation may reduce the risk appetite of the organization, as it may impose stricter requirements and penalties for non-compliance. Therefore, the organization may need to adjust its KRI thresholds to lower levels, to ensure that it can identify and manage privacy risks more effectively and proactively

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 theawareness and behavior of the employees in relation to phishing, and may be influenced by otherfactors such as reporting mechanisms, enforcement policies, and training availability. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 220.

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

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.

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite is influenced by various factors, such as the organization’s mission, vision, values, culture, stakeholders, resources, capabilities, etc. However, the factor that has the greatest influence on the organization’s risk appetite is the business objectives and strategies, which are the desired outcomes and the plans to achieve them. The business objectives and strategies define the direction and scope of the organization, and the risk appetite reflects the level of risk that the organization is prepared to take to accomplish them. The risk appetite should be aligned with the business objectives and strategies, andshould provide guidance for the risk management activities and decisions. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 61.

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

References

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

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

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

KRIs must be aligned to business processes to ensure they reflect actual risk conditions affecting critical operations. Misalignment can lead to inaccurate monitoring and ineffective response.

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 vulnerabilitiesand 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 alternativedevices 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]

Awareness training is the most likely control that failed in this scenario, as it is designed to educate employees on the proper handling and protection of sensitive data, and the consequences of violating the organizational policy. Awareness training can help to prevent or reduce the occurrence of human errors, such as inadvertently removing a file from the premises, that may result in data loss or breach. The other options are not the most likely controls that failed, as they are either not directly related to the scenario or not sufficient to prevent the incident. Background checks are used to verify the identity, qualifications, and trustworthiness of potential or current employees, but they do not ensure that employees will always follow the policy or avoidmistakes. User access is used to restrict the access to information systems or resources based on the identity, role, or credentials of the user, but it does not prevent the user from copying or removing the data once they have access. Policy management is used to create, communicate, and enforce the organizational policy, but it does not ensure that employees will understand orcomply with the policy. References = Sensitive Data Essentials – The Lifecycle Of A Sensitive File; Personal data breach examples | ICO; How do I prevent staff accidentally sending personal information … - GCIT; 10 Ways to Protect Sensitive Employee Information; My personal data has been lost after a breach, what are my rights …

System owners hold ultimate accountability for managing risks associated with their systems, including vulnerability mitigation.

ISACA CRISC defines:

“The system owner is responsible for ensuring that security controls are implemented and that vulnerabilities identified in their systems are addressed.”

System administrators perform mitigation activities, but accountability (oversight and confirmation) remains with the system owner.

A: Data owners focus on data classification.

B: InfoSec managers oversee policy, not execution.

C: Admins implement controls but don’t own the risk.

D is correct because ownership equates to accountability.

CRISC Reference: Domain 1 – IT Risk Governance, Topic: Roles and Responsibilities in Risk Management.

The most important input when developing risk scenarios is the business objectives, as they provide the context and scope for the risk identification and analysis process. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the possible causes, events, and consequences of a risk. Risk scenarios help to understand and communicate the nature and impact of the risk, and to supportthe risk assessment and response planning. The business objectives are the goals andtargets that the organization wants to achieve through its processes, functions, and projects. The business objectives define the expected outcomes and performance of the organization, and the criteria for measuring and evaluating the success or failure of the organization. The business objectives also reflect the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, and the needs and expectations of the stakeholders. The other options are not the most important inputs when developing risk scenarios, although they may be useful or relevant information. Key performance indicators are metrics that measure and monitor the progress and achievement of the business objectives, but they do not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. The organization’s risk framework is the set of principles, policies, and processes that guide and support the risk management activities across the organization, but it does not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. Risk appetite is the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or avoid in pursuit of its business objectives, but it does not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 58.

Conducting social engineering testing is the best way to assess the effectiveness of the security awareness training, as it helps to measure and evaluate the actual behavior and response of the employees to simulated real-world attacks that exploit human vulnerabilities. Social engineering testing is a type of security testing that involves performing authorized and ethical hacking activities on the employees to manipulate them into revealing sensitive information, such as credentials, or performing malicious actions, suchas clicking on a phishing link or opening a malicious attachment. Social engineering testing can help to assess the effectiveness of the security awareness training by providing the following benefits:

It tests the employees’ knowledge and skills in recognizing and resisting social engineering attacks, such as phishing, vishing, baiting, or impersonation.

It identifies and measures the strengths and weaknesses of the employees’ security awareness and behavior, and the impact and severity of their actions on the security posture and risk exposure of the organization.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the employees to improve their security awareness and behavior, and to reinforce the key concepts and practices taught in the training.

It communicates and reports the results and findings of the testing to the management and the stakeholders, and supports the development and implementation of corrective or preventive actions.

The other options are not the best ways to assess the effectiveness of the security awareness training. Auditing security awareness training materials is a good practice to ensure that the training content is accurate, relevant, and up-to-date, but it does not measure or evaluate the employees’ security awareness and behavior. Administering an end-of-training quiz is a useful method to test the employees’ comprehension and retention of the training content, but it does not reflect or simulate the employees’ security awareness and behavior in real-world situations. Performing a vulnerability assessment is an important step to identify and analyze the potential vulnerabilities in the systems and software, but it does not assess or address the human vulnerabilities or the employees’ security awareness and behavior. References = 3 ways to assess the effectiveness of security awareness training …, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Measuring the Effectiveness of Security Awareness Training - Hut Six

The source that provides the most reliable evidence to support conclusions after completing an information systems controls assessment is the information generated by the systems, as it reflects the actual and objective data and results of the system operations and performance, and can be verified and tested against the control objectives and criteria. The other options are not the most reliable sources, as they may be subjective, biased, or incomplete, and may not reflect theactual or current state of the system controls, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

An intrusion detection system (IDS) is a network security tool that monitors network traffic and devices for known malicious activity, suspicious activity or security policy violations1. An IDS can generate alerts when it detects any potential threats, but not all alerts are accurate or relevant. There are two types of errors that can affect the performance and reliability of an IDS: false positives and false negatives2.

A false positive is when an IDS incorrectly flags a benign or normal activity as malicious or suspicious. For example, an IDS may alert on a legitimate network scan or a harmless software update. False positives can reduce the credibility and efficiency of an IDS, as they can overwhelm the security team with unnecessary alerts, distract them from the real threats, and cause them to ignore or disable the IDS3.

A false negative is when an IDS fails to flag a malicious or suspicious activity as such. For example, an IDS may miss a stealthy or novel attack that does not match any known signatures or patterns. False negatives can compromise the security and integrity of the network, as they can allow attackers to bypass the IDS and cause damage or steal data without being detected4.

The risk practitioner should recommend to analyze the alerts to minimize the false positives, because this is the best way to improve the accuracy and usefulness of the IDS. By analyzing the alerts, the risk practitioner can:

Identify the sources and causes of the false positives, such as misconfigured or outdated IDS rules, network anomalies, or legitimate traffic that resembles malicious traffic5.

Adjust or fine-tune the IDS settings, such as the alert threshold, the sensitivity level, the detection method, or the rule base, to reduce the number of false positives without increasing the risk of false negatives.

Validate or verify the alerts with other sources of information, such as logs, network traffic analysis, or threat intelligence, to confirm or dismiss the alerts as true or false positives.

Prioritize or classify the alerts based on their severity, impact, or likelihood, to focus on the most critical or relevant alerts and avoid alert fatigue.

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

Resetting the alert threshold based on peak traffic is not a reliable or effective way to minimize the false positives, as it may also increase the risk of false negatives. The alert threshold is the level of activity or deviation that triggers an alert from the IDS. If the threshold is set too high, the IDS may miss some malicious or suspicious activity that occurs below the threshold. If the threshold is set too low, the IDS may generate too many alerts for normal or benign activity that exceeds the threshold. The optimal threshold depends on various factors, such as the network size, topology, traffic volume, and baseline. Peak traffic is not a good indicator of the optimal threshold, as it may vary depending on the time, day, or season, and it may not reflect the normal or expected network behavior.

Analyzing the traffic to minimize the false negatives is not the main issue or goal in this scenario, as the problem is the high number of alerts, not the low number of alerts. Analyzing thetraffic can help to identify the malicious or suspicious activity that the IDS may have missed, but it does not address the root cause of the false positives or improve the IDS performance. Moreover, analyzing the traffic can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, especially for large or complex networks, and it may require specialized tools or skills that the risk practitioner may not have.

Sniffing the traffic using a network analyzer is not a suitable or feasible option in this scenario, as it may violate the privacy or security policies of the network or the organization. Sniffing the traffic means capturing and inspecting the network packets that are transmitted or received by the devices on the network. A network analyzer is a tool that can perform this function and display the packet data in a readable format. However, sniffing the traffic can also expose sensitive or confidential information, such as passwords, usernames, or credit card numbers, that may be contained in the packets. Therefore, sniffing the traffic may require authorization or consent from the network owners or users, and it may be restricted or prohibited by law or regulation.

References =

What is an intrusion detection system (IDS)? - IBM

Intrusion detection system - Wikipedia

What Are Intrusion Detection Systems? - MUO

12 Best Intrusion Detection System (IDS) Software 2024 - Comparitech

What is an Intrusion Detection System (IDS)? - Fortinet

[False Positive and False Negative in Intrusion Detection System]

[False Positives and False Negatives in Intrusion Detection Systems]

[How to Reduce False Positives for Your IDS/IPS]

[How to Set the Right Alert Thresholds for Your IDS/IPS]

[Network Traffic Analysis: What It Is and How It Works]

[What is a Network Analyzer? - Definition from Techopedia]

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (aligned to ISACA CRISC guidance)

The BIA identifies critical processes, maximum tolerable downtime, and the business impact of disruptions. CRISC and business continuity practices emphasize that the BCP must be aligned with BIA results. Comparing the BIA with the BCP ensures that recovery strategies, objectives (RTOs/RPOs), and supporting technologies specified in the BCP actually reflect the priorities and impact levels identified in the BIA for each operational area. Alternative facilities and backup/restoration procedures are important BCP components, but the primary reason for comparison is to validate that the chosen solutions and recovery targets match business requirements. The BIA does not primarily “quantify the cost of the technology environment”; cost analysis may follow but is not the core BIA purpose. Therefore, ensuring that BCP objectives and enabling technology are consistent with BIA findings is the key objective of the comparison.