CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Questions and Answers

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

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

References

1Standardized Scoring for Security and Risk Metrics - ISACA

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

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

 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 areas to address first when classifying and prioritizing risk responses are those with high cost effectiveness ratios and high risk levels, as they represent the most optimal and urgent risk responses that can reduce the risk exposure and impact significantly with a reasonable cost. The other options are not the areas to address first, as they may indicate suboptimal or less urgent risk responses that may not align with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

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

The data owner should be accountable for ensuring that media containing financial information are adequately destroyed per an organization’s data disposal policy, as they have the authority and responsibility to define the classification, retention, and disposal requirements for the data they own. The compliance manager, the data architect, and the chief information officer (CIO) are not the best choices, as they have different roles and responsibilities related to data governance, design, and strategy, respectively, but they do not own the data. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

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

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

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

Physical Destruction:

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

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

Comparison with Other Methods:

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

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

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

Security Best Practices:

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

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

References:

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

Risk response options are the most important factor to determine as a result of a risk assessment, as they involve selecting the optimal strategy and actions to address the identified and assessed risks, and align them with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. Process ownership, risk appetite statement, and risk tolerance levels are not the most important factors, as they are more related to the governance, definition, or communication of the risk, respectively, rather than the response to the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 108.

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

A root cause analysis is a systematic process of identifying the underlying factors that caused the noncompliant conditions during the review of a control procedure. A root cause analysis can help to prevent the recurrence of the noncompliance, improve the effectiveness of the control procedure, and enhance the risk management process. A root cause analysis can be performed using various tools and techniques, such as the 5 whys, fishbone diagram, Pareto chart, or fault tree analysis. The other options are not as appropriate as a root cause analysis, because they do not address the source of the problem, but rather the symptoms or consequences of the noncompliance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, page 130.

The primary reason an organization should include background checks on roles with elevated access to production as part of its hiring process is to reduce internal threats. Internal threats are the risks that originate from within the organization, such as employees, contractors, or partners. Roles with elevated access to production have the privilege and ability to access, modify, or delete sensitive or critical data and systems. If these roles are assigned to individuals who have malicious intent, criminal records, or conflicts of interest, they may pose a significant threat to the organization’s security, integrity, and availability. By conducting background checks, the organization can verify the identity, credentials, and history of the candidates, and prevent or minimize the possibility of hiring untrustworthy or unsuitable individuals. The other options are not as important as reducing internal threats, as they are related to the outcomes, impacts, or requirements of the roles with elevated access to production, not the reasons for conducting background checks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

Integrating risk and security requirements in an organization’s enterprise architecture (EA) helps to ensure that information assets are consistently managed throughout their life cycle, and that the risks associated with them are identified and mitigated. (Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 5th Edition, page 112)

 The data owner is accountable for the confidentiality of the data that is outsourced to a third party with servers located in a foreign country. The data owner is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility to classify, label, and protect the data according to the organization’s policies and standards. The data owner is also responsible for defining the data access rights and privileges, and for ensuring that the data is handled in compliance with the applicable laws and regulations. The data owner retains the accountability for the data even when it is outsourced to a third party, and must monitor and evaluate the security performance and compliance of the service provider. The third-party data custodian, the data custodian, and the regional office executive are not accountable for the confidentiality of the data, as they have different roles and responsibilities in the outsourcing process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.2, page 2461

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 654.

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the contracts department is responsible for drafting, reviewing, and negotiating contracts with vendors and other third parties. The contracts department should ensure that the contracts include adequate clauses and terms to address the risks and controls related to the vendor services and activities. Therefore, the best course of action for the risk practitioner when finding a missing clause to control privileged access to the organization’s systems by vendor employees is to report this concern to the contracts department for further action. The contracts department can then revise the contract to include the necessary clause, or seek alternative solutions to mitigate the risk of unauthorized or inappropriate access by vendor employees. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 229.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics that provide information about the achievement of specific goals or objectives.

Prior to selecting KPIs, it is most important to ensure that measurement objectives are defined. This means that the desired outcomes and targets of the goals or objectives are clearly stated and aligned with the organization’s strategy and vision.

Defining measurement objectives helps to select the most relevant and meaningful KPIs that can accurately reflect the progress and performance of the goals or objectives. It also helps to establish the criteria and standards for evaluating and reporting the results and outcomes of the KPIs.

The other options are not the most important things to ensure prior to selecting KPIs. They are either secondary or not essential for KPIs.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 16

Information Technology & Security, page 10

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 8

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

 The situation where the cost of maintaining a control has grown to exceed the potential loss is best described as an over-controlled environment, as it indicates that the control is not cost-effective and may be unnecessary or excessive. Insufficient risk tolerance, optimized control management, and effective risk management are not the best descriptions, as they do not reflect the imbalance between the control cost and the potential loss. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 149.

When assessing the likelihood that a recently discovered software vulnerability will be exploited, the most important consideration is the skill level required of a threat actor. Here's an explanation:

Skill Level of Threat Actors:

The skill level required to exploit a vulnerability determines how accessible the exploit is to potential attackers.

If a vulnerability requires advanced technical skills to exploit, it is less likely to be targeted by less sophisticated attackers.

Conversely, if the exploit can be easily executed with minimal skills, it increases the likelihood of widespread exploitation.

Factors Influencing Likelihood of Exploitation:

Availability of Exploit Tools: If automated tools or scripts are available to exploit the vulnerability, even less skilled attackers can take advantage of it.

Publication of Exploit Details: If the vulnerability and its exploitation method are widely published, it becomes more accessible to a broader range of attackers.

Assessment of Likelihood:

Security teams assess the skill level required by analyzing whether the exploit is straightforward or complex.

They also consider the presence of exploit kits in the wild that could lower the barrier to entry for potential attackers.

Comparison with Other Factors:

Amount of PII Disclosed: While important, it relates more to the impact rather than the likelihood of exploitation.

Ability to Detect and Trace: This is crucial for response but does not directly influence the likelihood of exploitation.

Amount of Data Exposed: Similar to PII, this factor pertains to the impact rather than the likelihood of exploitation.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the importance of understanding the threat landscape, including the skill level of potential attackers (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2.1 Internal Threats).

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the risk register is a tool that records the results of risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment. It should be updated whenever there is a change in the risk profile, such as when a vulnerability is closed or a new threat is identified. Updating the risk register allows the organization to monitor the current status of risks and the effectiveness of risk responses. Therefore, the next course of action after implementing changes to close an identified vulnerability is to update the risk register with the new information. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 191.

Restricting access to the risk register on a need-to-know basis is important because it contains vulnerabilities and threats that could expose the organization to potential harm or loss if they are disclosed or exploited by unauthorized parties. The risk register is a tool that captures and documents the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes1. The risk register contains sensitive information such as the sources and causes of risk, the potential impacts and consequences of risk, the likelihood and frequency of risk occurrence, and the risk response actions and plans1. If this information is accessed by unauthorized parties, such as competitors, hackers, or malicious insiders, they could use it to launch attacks, sabotage operations, or gain an unfair advantage over the organization. Therefore, access to the risk register should be limited to those who have a legitimate need and authorization to view, modify, or use the information, such as the risk owners, managers, or practitioners

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

oRespond quickly and effectively to any potential or actual incidents

oReduce the impact and damage of cyberattacks

oImprove its security posture and resilience

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

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

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

References =

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

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

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

References: The answer is based on the following sources:

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

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

•Effective Risk Management Strategies | CRISC Exam Preparation3

The best way to ensure ongoing control effectiveness is to measure trends in control performance. This will help to monitor and evaluate how well the controls are achieving their objectives, and to identify any deviations or anomalies that may indicate control failures or weaknesses. Measuring trends in control performance also helps to provide feedback and assurance to the stakeholders and decision makers, and to support continuous improvement and optimization of the control environment. Establishing policies and procedures, periodically reviewing control design, and obtaining management control attestations are good practices, but they are not the best way to ensure control effectiveness. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.2, page 1071

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 650.

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

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

 Zero Trust Architecture:

Zero Trust is a security concept centered on the belief that organizations should not automatically trust anything inside or outside their perimeters and must verify everything attempting to connect to their systems.

 Basic Tenets of Zero Trust:

The primary principle is "never trust, always verify." This means every access request is authenticated, authorized, and encrypted regardless of where it originates.

Zero Trust requires securing all communication, whether it occurs within the internal network or comes from external sources. This approach prevents lateral movement by potential attackers who have breached the network perimeter.

 Key Components:

Authentication and Authorization: Continuous verification of user identities and access privileges.

Microsegmentation: Dividing the network into small, isolated segments to limit the spread of threats.

Encryption: Ensuring that all data, whether at rest or in transit, is encrypted to protect its confidentiality and integrity.

 Other Options:

Incoming Traffic Inspection: While important, this is just one aspect of Zero Trust.

Security Frameworks and Libraries: These are tools and guidelines to implement security but do not define the core tenets of Zero Trust.

Digital Identities: Implementing digital identities is part of the broader Zero Trust strategy but not a standalone tenet.

 References:

The CISSP Study Guide explains the Zero Trust architecture and its emphasis on securing all communications regardless of network location (Sybex CISSP Study Guide, Chapter 8: Principles of Security Models, Design, and Capabilities)​​.

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

The three lines of defense model is a framework that defines the roles and responsibilities of different functions in an organization for managing risks and ensuring effective internal control1. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense: the operational management and staff who are responsible for implementing and maintaining the internal control system and managing the risks within their areas of activity

The second line of defense: the oversight functions, such as risk management, compliance, and quality assurance, who provide guidance, support, and monitoring to the first line of defense and ensure that the internal control system is designed and operating effectively

The third line of defense: the internal audit function, who provides independent and objective assurance to the board and senior management on the adequacy and effectiveness of the internal control system and the performance of the first and second lines of defense2

The three lines of defense model facilitates a completely independent review of test results for evaluating control effectiveness, because it ensures that the internal audit function, as the third line of defense, has the authority, independence, and competence to conduct objective and unbiased assessments of the internal control system and report its findings and recommendations to the board and senior management3. The internal audit function can also use the test results from the first and second lines of defense as inputs for its own audit planning and testing, and verify their validity and reliability4.

References = The Three Lines of Defense in Effective Risk Management and Control - IIA, The Three Lines Model - IIA, The Role of Internal Audit in the Three Lines of Defense - IIA, Evaluating and Improving Internal Control in Organizations - IFAC

Risk appetite should be the primary driver for periodically reviewing and adjusting key risk indicators (KRIs), because it reflects the level of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. KRIs should be aligned with the risk appetite and adjusted accordingly when the risk appetite changes due to internal or external factors. The other options are not the primary drivers, although they may also influence the review and adjustment of KRIs. Risk impact, risk likelihood, and control self-assessments (CSAs) are secondary drivers that depend on the risk appetite. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers

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

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

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

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

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

Artificial intelligence (AI) solutions can offer significant benefits to an organization, such as improved efficiency, accuracy, and innovation. However, AI also poses new challenges and risks that need to be considered and addressed by senior management. Some of these risks include:

Ethical and social risks: AI solutions may have unintended or undesirable impacts on human values, rights, and behaviors, such as privacy, fairness, accountability, and transparency. For example, AI systems may exhibit bias, discrimination, or manipulation, or may infringe on personal data or autonomy.

Technical and operational risks: AI solutions may have vulnerabilities, errors, or failures that affect their performance, reliability, or security. For example, AI systems may be subject to hacking, tampering, or misuse, or may malfunction or produce inaccurate or harmful outcomes.

Legal and regulatory risks: AI solutions may have unclear or conflicting legal or regulatory implications or obligations, such as liability, compliance, or governance. For example, AI systems may raise questions about ownership, responsibility, or accountability, or may violate existing laws or regulations, or create new ones.

Therefore, a risk practitioner should communicate to senior management that AI potentially introduces new types of risk that need to be identified, assessed, and managed in alignment with the organization’s objectives, values, and risk appetite. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 113.

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

 A risk portfolio is a collection of risks that an organization faces or may face in the future. Analyzing trends in key control indicators (KCIs) best enables a risk practitioner to proactively identify impacts on an organization’s risk portfolio, as KCIs measure and monitor the performance and effectiveness of the risk controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks. By analyzing the trends in KCIs, a risk practitioner can assess the current and potential risk exposure of the organization, and identify any changes or emerging risks that may affect the risk portfolio. Analyzing trends in KCIs can also help to evaluate the cost and benefit of the risk controls, and to determine the need for enhancing, modifying, or implementing new controls. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 246. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 246. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

A risk map is a visual tool that helps to communicate risk to management by showing the likelihood and impact of different risks on a matrix1. A risk map can help to:

Identify the most critical risks that need immediate attention or action

Compare and prioritize risks based on their severity and probability

Align risk management strategies with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

Communicate risk information in a clear and concise way that is easy to understand and interpret2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IT Risk Resources | ISACA

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

Cross Site Scripting Prevention Cheat Sheet - OWASP

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

Difference Between XSS and SQL Injection - GeeksforGeeks

 Establishing clear accountability for risk is the best way for an organization to enable risk treatment decisions, as it ensures that the risk owners and stakeholders have the authority and responsibility to manage and mitigate the risks that they are assigned to. Establishing clear accountability for risk also facilitates communication and collaboration among the risk owners and stakeholders, and enables them to monitor and report the risk status and performance. Establishing clear accountability for risk also supports the risk governance and culture of the organization, and aligns the risk management process with the organization’s strategy and objectives. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 250. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 250. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 250. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

By identifying critical data, the organization can:

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

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

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

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

References = Guide to Developing a Data Protection Management Programme

A denial-of-service (DoS) attack is a type of cyberattack that aims to disrupt or disable the normal functioning of a system or network by overwhelming it with excessive traffic or requests.

The chief technology officer (CTO) has decided to accept the risk associated with the potential loss from a DoS attack. This means that the CTO has determined that the cost or effort of implementing or maintaining controls to prevent or reduce the impact of a DoS attack is not justified by the expected benefits or savings, and that the organization is willing to bear the consequences of a DoS attack if it occurs.

The best course of action for the risk practitioner in this situation is to identify key risk indicators (KRIs) for ongoing monitoring. This means that the risk practitioner should define and measure the metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to the DoS attack risk, such as the frequency, duration, or severity of the attacks, the availability, performance, or security of the systems or networks, the customer satisfaction, reputation, or revenue of the organization, etc.

Identifying KRIs for ongoing monitoring helps to track and evaluate the actual results and outcomes of the risk acceptance decision, compare them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identify any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and report them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

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

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

A risk profile report is a document that summarizes the current status and trends of the risks that an organization faces, as well as the actions taken or planned to manage them1. A risk profile report is a useful tool for senior management to monitor and oversee the organization’s risk management performance and to make informed decisions and adjustments as needed2. One of the key components of a risk profile report is the key performance indicators (KPIs), which are metrics used to measure and evaluate the achievement of the organization’s objectives and strategies3. KPIs are aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and they have specific targets or benchmarks that indicate the desired level of performance4. Therefore, if the KPIs are outside of targets, it means that the organization is not meeting its objectives and strategies, and that there may be gaps or issues in the risk management process or the risk response actions. This is a cause for further action by senior management, as they need to investigate the root causes of the deviation, assess the impact and implications of the underperformance, and take corrective or preventive measures to improve the situation and bring the KPIs back to the targets. Incomplete KPI trend data, new KRIs, and lagging KRIs are not the most critical statements in a risk profile report that require further action by senior management, as they do not directly indicate a failure or a problem in the risk management performance or the achievement of the objectives and strategies. Incomplete KPI trend data means that there is missing or insufficient information on the historical or projected changes in the KPIs over time. This may affect the accuracy and reliability of the risk profile report, but it does not necessarily mean that the KPIs are outside of targets or that the objectives and strategies are not met. Senior management may need to request or obtain the complete KPI trend data, but this is not as urgent or important as addressing the KPIs that are outside of targets. New KRIs means that there are additional or revised metrics used to measure and monitor the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system within the organization. This may reflect the changes or updates in the risk environment, the risk appetite and tolerance, or the risk assessment methodology. However, new KRIs do not directly indicate a failure or a problem in the risk management performance or the achievement of the objectives and strategies. Senior management may need to review and approve the new KRIs, but this is not as urgent or important as addressing the KPIs that are outside of targets. Lagging KRIs means that there are metrics that measure and monitor the level of risk after a risk event has occurred or a risk response has been implemented. This may provide useful feedback and lessons learned for the risk management process, but it does not directly indicate a failure or a problem in the risk management performance or the achievement of the objectives and strategies. Senior management may need to analyze and evaluate the lagging KRIs, but this is not as urgent or important as addressing the KPIs that are outside of targets. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.3: Risk Reporting, pp. 201-205.

The most important thing for a risk practitioner to ensure once a risk action plan has been completed is that the risk owner has validated the outcomes, as this means that the risk owner has confirmed that the risk response has been implemented and that the risk level has been reduced to an acceptable level. The risk owner is the person or entity with the authority and responsibility to manage a particular risk, and they should evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk action plan, and report any issues or changes. The risk action plan is a document that outlines the specific actions, resources, responsibilities, and timelines for implementing a risk response. The other options are not the most important things for a risk practitioner to ensure once a risk action plan has been completed, although they may be useful or necessary steps. Updating the risk register is a good practice, but it should be done after the risk owner has validated the outcomes and with the consent of the risk owner. Mapping the control objectives to the risk objectives is a part of the risk response design, but it does not measure the actual achievement of the risk objectives. Achieving the requirements is a desired result, but it does not guarantee that the risk owner has validated the outcomes or that the risk level has been reduced to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 146.

 Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging the existence and potential impact of a risk, but deciding not to take any action to reduce or eliminate it. Risk acceptance can be appropriate when the cost or effort of implementing a risk response outweighs the benefit, or when there are no feasible or effective risk responses available. An organization has identified that terminated employee accounts are not disabled or deleted within the time required by corporate policy, which poses a security risk to the organization. The organization is unsure of the reason for this issue, and has decided to monitor the situation for three months to obtain more information, rather than taking any immediate action to resolve the issue. As a result of this decision, the risk has been accepted, as the organization has chosen to tolerate the risk exposure for a certain period of time, and has not implemented any controls or measures to prevent or reduce the risk occurrence or impact. References = Risk Response Strategies: Avoid, Transfer, Mitigate, Accept, Risk Response Strategies: What They Are and How to Use Them, Risk Response Strategy: Definition, Types, and Examples.

A compliance-based CSA focuses on ensuring that the business unit follows the policies and procedures established by the enterprise, regardless of the actual risk level or impact of the controls.

A risk-based CSA focuses on identifying and evaluating the risks that may affect the business unit’s objectives, and designing and implementing controls that are appropriate to mitigate those risks.

A compliance-based CSA may not capture all the high-risk issues that exist in a business unit, especially if they are not aligned with the enterprise’s standards or expectations.

A risk-based CSA may identify more high-risk issues than a compliance-based CSA, because it considers both internal and external factors that may affect the business unit’s performance or security.

Therefore, a difference in results between a previous control self-assessment (CSA) and an audit indicates that either one of them was not risk-based, but rather compliance-based.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 9

Information Technology & Security, page 3

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 1

The most helpful activity for a risk practitioner when ensuring that mitigated risk remains within acceptable limits is to implement a process for ongoing monitoring of control effectiveness. This would enable the risk practitioner to track the performance of the controls, identify any deviations or gaps, and take corrective actions as needed. Ongoing monitoring of control effectiveness would also provide assurance that the risk responses are working as intended, and that the residual risk is aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 188.

Embedding risk management into processes that are aligned with business drivers is the most effective way to integrate risk and compliance management, as it ensures that the risk management objectives and activities are consistent and supportive of the enterprise’s strategic goals and values. It also enables the identification and management of risks and compliance requirements across the enterprise, and the optimization of risk and compliance resources and performance. Embedding risk management into compliance decision-making, designing corrective actions to improve risk response capabilities, and conducting regular self-assessments to verify compliance are not ways to integrate risk and compliance management, but rather components or outcomes of the risk and compliance management process. References = CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 202.

The best approach to identify relevant risk scenarios is to engage line management in risk assessment workshops. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how a risk event could occur and what the consequences could be1. Identifying risk scenarios can help to understand and communicate the nature and impact of the risks, and to design and evaluate the risk responses2. To identify relevant risk scenarios, it is important to involve the people who are responsible for or affected by the risks, such as the line managers. Line managers are the managers who oversee the operational activities and processes of the organization, and who report to the senior or executive management3. By engaging line managers in risk assessment workshops, the organization can:

Leverage the line managers’ knowledge and experience of the operational environment, the business objectives, the stakeholder expectations, and the potential threats and opportunities4.

Encourage the line managers’ participation and collaboration in the risk identification and analysis process, and foster a risk-aware culture and mindset5.

Enhance the line managers’ ownership and accountability of the risks and the risk responses, and ensure their alignment and commitment to the risk management strategy and objectives6.

The other options are not the best approaches to identify relevant risk scenarios, because:

Escalating the situation to risk leadership is not an effective or efficient way to identify risk scenarios, as it may bypass or undermine the line managers’ role and responsibility in the risk management process. Risk leadership is the function or role that provides the vision, direction, and guidance for the risk management activities and initiatives of the organization7. Escalating the situation to risk leadership may imply that the line managers are not capable or willing to identify and manage the risks, or that the risk leadership is not aware or involved in the risk management process. This may create confusion, conflict, or distrust among the risk management stakeholders, and reduce the quality and credibility of the risk scenarios.

Engaging internal audit for risk assessment workshops is not a suitable or appropriate way to identify risk scenarios, as it may violate the independence and objectivity of the internal audit function. Internal audit is an independent and objective assurance and consulting activity that evaluates and improves the effectiveness of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes8. Engaging internal audit for risk assessment workshops may compromise the internal audit’s role and mandate, as it may create a conflict of interest or a self-review threat. Internal audit should not be involved in the risk identification and analysis process, but rather provide assurance or advice on the adequacy and reliability of the process.

Reviewing system and process documentation is not a sufficient or comprehensive way to identify risk scenarios, as it may overlook or miss some important or emerging risks. System and process documentation are the records or artifacts that describe the structure, functions, features, and requirements of the organization’s systems and processes. Reviewing system and process documentation can help to identify some risks that are related to the design, implementation, or operation of the systems and processes, but it cannot capture all the risks that may affect the organization. Some risks may arise from external or internal factors that are not reflected or updated in the system and process documentation, such as changes in the market, technology, regulation, or stakeholder expectations.

References =

Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack - ISACA

Line Manager - CIO Wiki

Engaging Line Managers in Risk Management - IRM

Risk Culture - CIO Wiki

Risk Ownership - CIO Wiki

Risk Leadership - CIO Wiki

Internal Audit - CIO Wiki

[System Documentation - CIO Wiki]

 Risk is inefficiently controlled when the annual cost of the control exceeds the annual loss expectancy (ALE) of the risk, as this means that the organization is spending more on the control than the potential loss that the control is supposed to prevent or reduce. This indicates that the control is not cost-effective or optimal, and that the organization should consider alternative or complementary controls that can lower the cost or increase the benefit of the risk management. Control is ineffective and should be strengthened when the control does not reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk to an acceptable level, regardless of the cost. Risk is efficiently controlled when the annual cost of the control is equal to or less than the annual loss expectancy (ALE) of the risk, as this means that the organization is spending less or equal on the control than the potential loss that the control is supposed to prevent or reduce. Control is weak and should be removed when the control does not provide any benefit or value to the risk management, regardless of the cost. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question205; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 205.

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

Potential theft of personal information should be of greatest concern for an organization that has detected unauthorized logins to its client database servers, as it poses a serious threat to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the client data and the reputation and trust of the organization. Potential theft of personal information is a scenario that involves the unauthorized access, disclosure, or use of the client data by malicious actors, such as hackers, competitors, or insiders. Potential theft of personal information can have significant impacts and consequences for the organization and its clients, such as:

It can compromise the privacy and security of the client data, and expose the clients to identity theft, fraud, or blackmail.

It can violate the legal and regulatory obligations and requirements of the organization, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), or the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), and result in fines, penalties, or lawsuits.

It can damage the reputation and credibility of the organization, and erode the confidence and loyalty of the clients, and lead to loss of business or market share.

The other options are not the greatest concerns for an organization that has detected unauthorized logins to its client database servers. Potential increase in regulatory scrutiny is a possible consequence of the unauthorized logins, as it may trigger audits, investigations, or sanctions by the relevant authorities, but it is not the most critical or immediate concern. Potential system downtime is a possible consequence of the unauthorized logins, as it may disrupt or degrade the performance or availability of the database servers or the applications that depend on them, but it is not the most severe or lasting concern. Potential legal risk is a possible consequence of the unauthorized logins, as it may expose the organization to litigation or liability claims by the affected clients or parties, but it is not the most direct or urgent concern. References = Data Breach Response: A Guide for Business - Federal Trade Commission, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, How to Prevent Unauthorized Access to Your Database - ScaleGrid

The best course of action for the risk practitioner upon learning that the number of failed back-up attempts continually exceeds the current risk threshold is to inquire about the status of any planned corrective actions. This would help the risk practitioner to understand the root causes of the problem, the progress of the remediation efforts, and the expected timeline for resolution. It would also help the risk practitioner to provide guidance and support to the responsible parties, and to escalate the issue if necessary. Inquiring about the status of any planned corrective actions would demonstrate the risk practitioner’s proactive and collaborative approach to risk management, and ensure that the risk exposure is reduced to an acceptable level as soon as possible. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.3, page 2371

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

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

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

 A risk profile is a summary of the key risks that affect an organization, a business unit, a process, or a project. A risk profile can help stakeholders understand the current and potential exposure to various sources of uncertainty, and prioritize the risk response accordingly. A risk profile should be aligned with the business objectives, which are the desired outcomes or results that the organization or the business unit wants to achieve. Updating the risk profile with risk assessment results best enables the risk profile to serve as an effective resource to support business objectives, because it ensures that the risk profile reflects the most accurate and up-to-date information about the risks and their impacts. Risk assessment is the process of analyzing and evaluating the likelihood and consequences of the identified risks, and comparing them with the risk criteria and appetite. Risk assessment results can provide valuable insights into the risk level, trend, and exposure, and help identify the most critical and relevant risks that need attention and action. Updating the risk profile with risk assessment results can help align the risk profile with the business objectives, by showing how the risks may affect the achievement of the objectives, and how the risk response can support or enhance the objectives. Updating the risk profile with risk assessment results can also help communicate and justify the risk profile to the business stakeholders, and obtain their feedback and approval. References = Risk Management Essentials: How to Develop a Risk Profile (TRN2-J07), Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA, Using Risk Assessment to Support Decision Making - ISACA.

A risk map is the best method to ensure that the risk is measurable against the organization’s risk appetite, as it is a graphical tool that displays the level and priority of risks based on their likelihood and impact, as well as other factors such as velocity, persistence, and urgency. A risk map can help to compare and communicate the risk levels across different business units, processes, and projects, and to align them with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. A risk map can also help to identify the gaps and overlaps in risk management, and to support the decision making and resource allocation for risk response. A cause-and-effect diagram is a tool that helps to identify and analyze the root causes and consequences of a risk or a problem, but it does not measure the risk against the organization’s risk appetite. A maturity model is a tool that helps to assess and improve the capability and performance of a process or a function, but it does not measure the risk against the organization’s risk appetite. A technology strategy plan is a document that outlines the vision, goals, and objectives of the organization’s use of information and technology, but it does not measure the risk against the organization’s risk appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Assessment, page 97.

The stakeholders who are PRIMARILY responsible for determining enterprise IT risk appetite are the executive management and the board of directors, because they are the ones who set the strategic direction and objectives of the enterprise, and who define the acceptable level of risk exposure and tolerance for achieving those objectives. The other options are not the primary stakeholders, because:

Option A: Audit and compliance management are responsible for providing assurance and oversight on the effectiveness of the risk management process and the compliance with internal and external requirements, but they do not determine the enterprise IT risk appetite.

Option B: The CIO and the CFO are responsible for managing the IT resources and the financial resources of the enterprise, respectively, but they do not determine the enterprise IT risk appetite.

Option C: Enterprise risk management and business process owners are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks that affect their domains, but they do not determine the enterprise IT risk appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 83.

 The ratio of emergency fixes to total changes is the best metric to determine if the change management program is performing as expected, because it reflects the quality and stability of the changes that are implemented in the production environment. A high ratio of emergency fixes to total changes indicates that the change management program is not effective, as it means that many changes are causing problems or failures that require urgent correction. A low ratio of emergency fixes to total changes indicates that the change management program is effective, as it means that most changes are well-planned, tested, and approved, and do not cause significant disruptions or defects. The ratio of emergency fixes to total changes can also help identify the root causes of the problems, the gaps in the change management process, and the areas for improvement. For example, if the ratio of emergency fixes to total changes is high, it may indicate that the change management program has issues with the following aspects: - Change request and approval: The change management program may not have a clear and consistent process for requesting, reviewing, and approving changes, or the process may not be followed by all stakeholders. - Change impact analysis: The change management program may not have a comprehensive and systematic method for assessing the potential impact of the changes on the business processes, the IT systems, the users, and the customers. - Change testing and validation: The change management program may not have adequate testing and validation procedures to ensure that the changes meet the requirements and specifications, and do not introduce errors or vulnerabilities. - Change communication and training: The change management program may not have effective communication and training strategies to inform and educate the affected parties about the changes and their implications. - Change implementation and monitoring: The change management program may not have proper implementation and monitoring plans or tools to ensure that the changes are executed smoothly and successfully, and that any issues or incidents are detected and resolved promptly. Therefore, the ratio of emergency fixes to total changes is the best metric to determine if the change management program is performing as expected, as it can provide valuable feedback and insights for the change management program and its improvement. References = How to Measure Change Management Effectiveness: Metrics, Tools & Processes1, Metrics for Measuring Change Management2, Driving Value with Change Management Metrics3, Must-Know Organizational Change Management Metrics

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

The most important factor to the effective monitoring of KRIs is determining threshold levels. This means that the acceptable or unacceptable values or ranges of the KRIs are defined and agreed upon by the relevant stakeholders.

Determining threshold levels helps to evaluate the actual performance and impact of the risks, compare them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identify any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and report them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.

The other options are not the most important factors to the effective monitoring of KRIs. They are either secondary or not essential for KRIs.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

Project Delta should be deferred by management, as it has the lowest return on investment (ROI) among the four competing projects. ROI is a measure of the profitability or efficiency of a project, calculated by dividing the net benefits by the total costs. Project Delta has a net benefit of $100,000 and a total cost of $200,000, resulting in an ROI of 0.5. The other projects have higher ROIs: Project Alpha has an ROI of 1.0, Project Bravo has an ROI of 0.8, and Project Charlie has an ROI of 0.6. Therefore, Project Delta is the least attractive option for reducing overall IT risk, and management should prioritize the other projects instead. References = How to Manage Project Risk: A 5-Step Guide; Matching the right projects with the right resources; Risk Types in Project Management

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

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

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

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.

Control testing is the process of verifying that the risk mitigation controls are designed and operating effectively, and that they achieve the intended objectives and outcomes. Control testing can involve various methods, such as observation, inspection, inquiry, re-performance, or simulation. Control testing results can provide evidence and assurance that the implementation of a risk mitigation control has been completed as intended, and that the control is functioning properly and consistently. Control testing results can also identify any issues or deficiencies in the control design or operation, and recommend corrective actions or improvements. The other options are not as helpful as control testing results, because they do not provide a direct and objective verification of the control implementation, but rather focus on other aspects or outputs of the risk management process, as explained below:

A. An updated risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their characteristics, and their status. An updated risk register can reflect the changes in the risk profile and exposure after the implementation of a risk mitigation control, but it does not verify that the control implementation has been completed as intended, or that the control is effective and reliable.

B. Risk assessment results are the outputs of the risk analysis and evaluation process, which measure the impact and likelihood of the risks, and assign a risk rating and priority. Risk assessment results can indicate the level of risk exposure and the need for risk mitigation controls, but they do not verify that the control implementation has been completed as intended, or that the control is effective and reliable.

C. Technical control validation is the process of ensuring that the technical aspects of a control, such as hardware, software, or network components, are configured and functioning correctly. Technical control validation can verify that the control implementation meets the technical specifications and requirements, but it does not verify that the control implementation has been completed as intended, or that the control is effective and reliable from a business perspective. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, page 130.

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

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

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

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

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

The risk profile of an organization is a summary of the key risks that affect its objectives, operations, and performance. The risk profile can help senior management understand the current and potential exposure of the organization to various sources of uncertainty, and prioritize the risk response accordingly. An external security audit can reveal multiple findings related to control noncompliance, which indicate that the existing controls are not adequate, effective, or aligned with the organization’s risk appetite. These findings can have a significant impact on the organization’s risk profile, as they can increase the likelihood and/or impact of adverse events, such as data breaches, cyberattacks, regulatory fines, reputational damage, etc. Therefore, the most important information that the risk practitioner should communicate to senior management is the impact to the organization’s risk profile, as it can help them make informed decisions about the risk response and allocation of resources. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Risk Profile, p. 193-195.

The data custodian is the person who is responsible for implementing and maintaining security controls to protect the data entrusted to them by the data owner. The data custodian is typically a system administrator or a security systems administrator who has the technical skills and access rights to manage the security systems and processes that safeguard the data. The data custodian’s responsibilities include, but are not limited to: Installing, configuring, and updating security systems such as firewalls, anti-virus software, encryption tools, etc. Monitoring network traffic and system logs to detect and respond to security incidents. Conducting regular security assessments and audits to ensure compliance with security policies and standards. Implementing backup and recovery procedures to ensure data availability and integrity. The data custodian works under the direction and guidance of the data owner, who is the person who has the authority and accountability for the data and its use. The data owner defines the data classification, the data retention period, and the data access rights and privileges. The data owner also approves any changes to the security controls or the data itself. The data owner is typically a senior manager or a business unit leader who has the business knowledge and responsibility for the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: Data Classification, pp. 11-131

 According to the CRISC 351-400 topic3 Flashcards, the greatest concern when using a generic set of IT risk scenarios for risk analysis is that the risk factors might not be relevant to the organization. This is because generic risk scenarios are not tailored to the specific context, objectives, and environment of the organization, and they may not capture the unique threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts that the organization faces. Therefore, using generic risk scenarios may result in inaccurate or incomplete risk assessment and analysis, and may lead to ineffective or inappropriate risk responses. To avoid this, the organization should customize the risk scenarios to reflect its own situation and needs, and involve the relevant stakeholders and experts in the process. References = CRISC 351-400 topic3 Flashcards, Generic IT Risk Scenarios for Risk Analysis: The Greatest Concern

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the potential causes, impacts, and responses of a risk event. Risk scenarios are useful tools for identifying, analyzing, and communicating risks in a clear and understandable way. The most important factor when developing risk scenarios is to ensure that they are relevant to the organization, as this helps to capture the specific context, objectives, processes, and resources of the organization, and to reflect the actual risk exposure and appetite of the organization. Relevant risk scenarios also help to engage and involve the stakeholders, and to facilitate risk-based decision making and action planning. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 206.

A vulnerability management process is a process that identifies, analyzes, prioritizes, and remediates the vulnerabilities in the IT systems and applications. The effectiveness of a vulnerability management process can be measured by the key performance indicators (KPIs) that reflect the achievement of the process objectives and the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. The best KPI to measure the effectiveness of a vulnerability management process is the percentage of vulnerabilities remediated within the agreed service level. This KPI indicates how well the process is able to address the vulnerabilities in a timely and efficient manner, and reduce the exposure and impact of the risks associated with the vulnerabilities. The other options are not as good as the percentage of vulnerabilities remediated within the agreed service level, as they may not reflect the quality or timeliness of the remediation actions, or the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2.1, pp. 171-172.

A risk owner is the individual who is accountable for the management of a specific risk. A risk owner can decide to accept a high-impact risk if the control that mitigates the risk is adversely affecting the process efficiency. However, before updating the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the identified risks and their responses, it is most important for the risk practitioner to obtain approval from senior management. Senior management is the group of executives who have the authority and responsibility for the strategic direction and performance of the organization. Obtaining approval from senior management can help ensure that the risk acceptance decision is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and policies, and that the potential consequences of the high-impact risk are understood and accepted by the top-level decision makers. Obtaining approval from senior management can also help communicate and justify the risk acceptance decision to other stakeholders, such as regulators, auditors, customers, etc., and avoid any conflicts or misunderstandings that may arise from the risk acceptance decision. References = Why Assigning a Risk Owner is Important and How to Do It Right, Risk Ownership: A brief guide, Creating a Risk Register: All You Need to Know.

Quantifying the value of a single asset helps the organization to understand the consequences of risk materializing, as it indicates how much impact or loss the organization would suffer if the asset is compromised, damaged, or destroyed by a threat. The value of an asset can be determined by various methods, such as the cost of acquisition, replacement, or restoration, the market value, the income or revenue generated, or the impact on the business objectives or reputation. The other options are not the best description of what quantifying the value of a single asset helps the organization to understand, as they are either too broad (overall effectiveness of risk management, necessity of developing a risk strategy) or not directly related to the asset value (organization’s risk threshold). References = IT Asset Valuation, Risk Assessment and Control Implementation Model; How to quantify assets?; Asset Valuation - Definition, Methods, and Importance

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

According to the Operational Risk: Overview, Importance, and Examples article, operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people, and systems. One of the factors that can increase operational risk is the complexity of IT infrastructure, which refers to the number, variety, and interdependence of IT components, such as hardware, software, networks, and data. A complex IT infrastructure can pose challenges for IT management, such as increased costs, reduced performance, lower reliability, higher vulnerability, and more difficulty in troubleshooting and maintenance. Therefore, minimizing the complexity of IT infrastructure can help reduce IT operational risk, as it can simplify IT operations, improve IT efficiency and effectiveness, enhance IT security and resilience, and facilitate IT innovation and adaptation. References = Operational Risk: Overview, Importance, and Examples

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

Personally identifiable information (PII) is any information that can be used to identify, contact, or locate an individual, such as name, address, phone number, email, social security number, etc1. PII is subject to various laws and regulations that aim to protect the privacy and security of individuals’ data1. Organizations that collect, store, process, or transmit PII have a responsibility to safeguard it from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction1.

One of the best practices for protecting PII is to implement access controls, which are mechanisms that restrict access to PII based on the principle of least privilege2. Access controls ensure that only authorized personnel who have a legitimate need to access PII can do so, and that they can only perform the actions that are necessary for their roles and responsibilities2. Access controls can be implemented at different levels, such as network, system, application, or data level, and can use various methods, such as passwords, tokens, biometrics, encryption, etc2.

If an organization’s shared drive contains PII that can be accessed by all personnel, this poses a high risk of data breach, theft, loss, or misuse, which could result in legal, financial, reputational, or operational consequences for the organization and the individuals whose data is compromised3. Therefore, the most effective risk response is to protect the sensitive information with access controls, such as:

Classify the PII according to its sensitivity and impact level, and assign appropriate labels and permissions to the data files and folders2.

Restrict access to the shared drive to only those personnel who have a valid business reason to access the PII, and grant them the minimum level of access required to perform their tasks2.

Implement strong authentication and authorization mechanisms, such as multifactor authentication, role-based access control, or attribute-based access control, to verify the identity and privileges of the users who access the shared drive2.

Encrypt the PII stored on the shared drive, and use secure protocols and channels to transmit the data over the network2.

Monitor and audit the access and activities on the shared drive, and generate logs and reports to detect and respond to any unauthorized or anomalous events2.

The other options are not as effective as access controls, because they do not directly address the root cause of the risk, which is the lack of access restrictions on the shared drive. Implementing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution, which is a tool that monitors and prevents the leakage of sensitive data, may help to detect and block some unauthorized data transfers, but it does not prevent unauthorized access or viewing of the PII on the shared drive4. Re-communicating the data protection policy, which is a document that defines the rules and responsibilities for handling PII, may help to raise awareness and compliance among the personnel, but it does not enforce or verify the actual implementation of the policy. Implementing a data encryption solution, which is a technique that transforms the PII into an unreadable format, may help to protect the confidentiality of the data, but it does not prevent unauthorized access or modification of the data, and it may introduce additional complexity and overhead to the data management process.

References = Guide to Protecting the Confidentiality of Personally Identifiable Information (PII), Best Practices for Protecting PII, How to Secure Personally Identifiable Information against Loss or Compromise, Data Loss Prevention (DLP) | Microsoft 365 security, [Protecting Personal Information: A Guide for Business], [Encryption - Wikipedia]

The most significant benefit of using a consistent risk ranking methodology across an organization is that it enables a clear understanding of risk levels, as this facilitates the comparison and prioritization of risks, the communication and reporting of risks, and the alignment of risk management with the enterprise’s objectives and strategy. A consistent risk ranking methodology is a set of criteria and scales that are used to measure and rate the likelihood and impact of risks, as well as other factors such as urgency, velocity, and persistence. A consistent risk ranking methodology ensures that the risk assessment results are objective, reliable, and comparable across different business units, processes, and projects. The other options are not the most significant benefits of using a consistent risk ranking methodology, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of doing so. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Assessment, page 97.

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

 The first step when developing a business case to drive the adoption of a risk remediation project by senior management is to identify the objectives of the project. The objectives are the specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that the project aims to accomplish. The objectives should be aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, as well as the identified business problem or opportunity. The objectives should also reflect the expected benefits and outcomes of the project, such as reducing the risk exposure, enhancing the security posture, or improving the business performance. Identifying the objectives is the first step because it provides the direction, scope, and justification for the project, and it serves as the basis for evaluating the alternative solutions, estimating the costs and benefits, and communicating the value proposition to the senior management and other stakeholders. The other options are not the first step, although they may be subsequent or concurrent steps in the business case development process. Calculating the cost is a part of the financial analysis, which estimates the total expenditure and funding sources of the project, but it does not define the purpose or the scope of the project. Analyzing cost-effectiveness is a part of the economic analysis, which compares the costs and benefits of the alternative solutions and recommends the optimal one, but it does not specify the goals or the criteria of the project. Determining the stakeholders is a part of the stakeholder analysis, which identifies and assesses the interests, expectations, and influence of the parties involved in or affected by the project, but it does not establish the objectives or the rationale of the project. References = Business case: 7 key steps to build it and use it - Twproject: project …, Guide to developing the Project Business Case - GOV.UK, How to Write a Business Case: Template & Examples | Adobe Workfront

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.

 The most important thing for an organization to have in place when developing a risk management framework is a strategic approach to risk including an established risk appetite, as this provides the direction, scope, and objectives of the risk management process, and defines the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or avoid in pursuit of its goals. A strategic approach to risk aligns the risk management framework with the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, and ensures that the risk management activities support the achievement of the desired outcomes. An established risk appetite sets the boundaries and criteria for risk decision making, and guides the selection and implementation of risk responses. The other options are not the most important things for an organization to have in place when developing a risk management framework, although they may be useful or necessary components of it. A risk-based internal audit plan is a tool that helps to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of the risk management framework, but it does not define or drive the risk management process. A control function within the risk management team is a role that helps to implement and monitor the risk controls, but it does not determine or influence the risk strategy or appetite. An organization-wide risk awareness training program is a method that helps to enhance the risk culture and competence of the organization, but it does not establish or communicate the risk approach or appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, page 23.

Senior management participation is essential for the success of an organization’s risk management framework, as it demonstrates the commitment, support, and leadership for the risk management activities. Senior management participation also ensures that the risk management framework is aligned with the organization’s strategy, objectives, and culture, and that the risk management roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and communicated. Senior management participation also facilitates the allocation of adequate resources, the establishment of risk appetite and tolerance, and the monitoring and reporting of risk performance. Therefore, the lack of senior management participation should be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner, as it indicates a low level of risk maturity and a high level of risk exposure. The other options are not as concerning as the lack of senior management participation, because they do not affect the risk management framework as significantly, and they can be addressed or improved with the involvement of senior management, as explained below:

A. Unclear organizational risk appetite is a deficiency that can affect the risk management framework, as it can lead to inconsistent or inappropriate risk decisions and responses. However, this deficiency can be resolved or mitigated with the participation of senior management, who can define and communicate the risk appetite and tolerance for the organization, and ensure that they are aligned with the organization’s strategy and objectives.

C. Use of highly customized control frameworks is a deficiency that can affect the risk management framework, as it can create complexity, confusion, or duplication in the control design and implementation. However, this deficiency can be resolved or mitigated with the participation of senior management, who can review and rationalize the control frameworks, and ensure that they are relevant, effective, and efficient for the organization’s risk profile and environment.

D. Reliance on qualitative analysis methods is a deficiency that can affect the risk management framework, as it can limit the accuracy, reliability, and comparability of the risk information and assessment. However, this deficiency can be resolved or mitigated with the participation of senior management, who can support and promote the use of quantitative analysis methods, such as the FAIR framework1, and provide the necessary data, tools, and skills for the risk analysis and evaluation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 18.

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

Inherent risk rating is a measure of the natural level of risk that is part of an application, before any controls are applied1. Inherent risk rating helps to identify and prioritize the applications that pose the highest risk to the organization and require the most attention and resources for risk management2. The responsibility for determining the inherent risk rating of an application should belong to the risk practitioner, as they have the expertise and knowledge to perform a comprehensive and consistent risk assessment of the application, using a standard methodology and criteria3. The risk practitioner should also communicate and report the inherent risk rating of the application to the relevant stakeholders, such as the application owner, senior management, and business process owner, and provide recommendations for risk mitigation4. The application owner, senior management, and business process owner are not the best choices for determining the inherent risk rating of an application, as they may not have the same level of skill and objectivity as the risk practitioner. The application owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the application and its performance5. The application owner may be involved in providing input and feedback to the risk practitioner during the risk assessment process, but they may not be able to assess the inherent risk rating of the application independently and impartially, as they may have a vested interest in the application’s success and reputation6. Senior management is the group of executives who set the strategic direction and objectives of the organization and oversee its performance7. Senior management may be involved in approving and endorsing the risk assessment process and its results, but they may not be able to assess the inherent risk rating of the application in detail and depth, as they may have a broader and higher-level perspective of the organization’s risk profile and priorities8. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for a business process that is supported or enabled by the application. The business process owner may be involved in providing input and feedback to the risk practitioner during the risk assessment process, but they may not be able to assess the inherent risk rating of the application accurately and comprehensively, as they may have a limited and specific view of the application’s functionality and value. References = 2: Introduction to application risk rating & assessment | Infosec3: Application Security Risk: Assessment and Modeling - ISACA4: Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.1: Inherent Risk Rating - Shared Assessments - Third Party Risk Management5: [Application Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] 6: Perform Inherent Risk Analysis - Oracle7: [Senior Management - Definition, Roles and Responsibilities] 8: Rating Inherent and Residual Risk - Barn Owl : [Business Process Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] : [Business Process Owner - Roles and Responsibilities]

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

The best way to mitigate the risk of customer identity theft is to implement layered security. Layered security is a defense-in-depth approach that applies multiple and diverse security controls at different levels and stages of the information system and the data lifecycle. Layered security can include physical, technical, and administrative controls, such as locks, firewalls, encryption, authentication, authorization, backup, audit, and policy. Layered security can help to protect the customer data and identity from unauthorized access, use, modification, disclosure, or destruction, by creating multiple barriers and deterrents for potential attackers, and by reducing the impact and likelihood of a successful breach. Layered security can also help to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements and standards for data privacy and protection, such as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), and the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS)123. The other options are not the best way to mitigate the risk of customer identity theft, although they may be useful or complementary to layered security. Implementing monitoring techniques is a part of the layered security approach, but it is not sufficient, as it mainly focuses on detecting and responding to the incidents, rather than preventing or deterring them. Outsourcing to a local processor is a business decision that may or may not improve the security of the customer data and identity, depending on the quality and reliability of the service provider, and the terms and conditions of the outsourcing contract. Conducting an awareness campaign is a good practice that can help to educate and inform the customers and the employees about the common types, methods, and indicators of identity theft, and the best practices and precautions to prevent or report it, but it does not directly apply or enforce any security controls to the information system or the data.

 The best key performance indicator (KPI) of the effectiveness of the policy requiring staff members to take a minimum of five consecutive days leave per year to mitigate the risk of malicious insider activities is the percentage of staff members taking leave according to the policy. A KPI is a quantifiable measure that evaluates the performance of a process, activity, or outcome against a predefined target or objective. The percentage of staff members taking leave according to the policy is the best KPI, because it directly measures the compliance and adherence of the staff members to the policy, which is the main objective of the policy. The policy aims to reduce the risk of malicious insider activities by forcing the staff members to take a break from their work, which can help to deter, detect, or prevent any fraudulent or unauthorized actions, such as data theft, sabotage, or manipulation12. The percentage of staff members taking leave according to the policy can also help to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the policy implementation and enforcement, and to identify and address any gaps or issues in the policy design or execution. The other options are not the best KPI, although they may be related or influential to the policy effectiveness. The number of malicious activities occurring during staff members’ leave is a measure of the occurrence and impact of the risk events that the policy aims to mitigate, but it is not a direct measure of the policy performance or compliance. The number of malicious activities occurring during staff members’ leave may also be affected by other factors or controls, such as the security systems, the audit procedures, or the external threats, which may not reflect the policy effectiveness. The percentage of staff members seeking exception to the policy is a measure of the resistance or dissatisfaction of the staff members to the policy, but it is not a direct measure of the policy performance or compliance. The percentage of staff members seeking exception to the policy may also be influenced by other factors or circumstances, such as the workload, the personal preferences, or the organizational culture, which may not indicate the policy effectiveness. The financial loss incurred due to malicious activities during staff members’ leave is a measure of the consequence and severity of the risk events that the policy aims to mitigate, but it is not a direct measure of the policy performance or compliance. The financial loss incurred due to malicious activities during staff members’ leave may also vary depending on the type, scale, or frequency of the malicious activities, or the recovery or compensation actions, which may not represent the policy effectiveness. References = How To Measure Risk Management KPI & Metrics - ERM Software, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs): The Ultimate Guide - ClearPoint Strategy

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 also helps 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.

 The most likely effect on the associated risk when the effectiveness of a control has decreased is that the residual risk changes. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses or controls. If the control becomes less effective, the residual risk will increase, as the risk exposure and impact will be higher than expected. The risk impact, the risk classification, and the inherent risk are not likely to change when the effectiveness of a control has decreased, as they are more related to the nature and characteristics of the risk, rather than the control performance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.4, page 541

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 652.

 Testing a disaster recovery plan is essential to ensure its effectiveness and identify any gaps or weaknesses that might hinder the recovery process. Without testing, the organization may face longer service interruptions than anticipated, which could result in loss of revenue, customer dissatisfaction, reputational damage, and regulatory penalties. Some of the best practices for disaster recovery testing are1:

Test many scenarios

Test regularly

Document everything

Keep everyone updated

Define metrics

Evaluate the results

Test your disaster recovery plan

References = Best Practices For Disaster Recovery Testing | Snyk

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

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

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

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

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

To help ensure all applicable risk scenarios are incorporated into the risk register, it is most important to review the risk assessment results, which are the outputs of the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that affect a project or an organization. The risk assessment results provide information on the sources, causes, impacts, likelihood, and severity of the risks, as well as the existing controls and their effectiveness. The risk assessment results help to determine the risk level and priority of each risk scenario, and to select the most appropriate risk response strategy. The risk assessment results are the basis for creating and updating the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their characteristics, responses, owners, and status12. The other options are not the most important factors to review, as they are either derived from or dependent on the risk assessment results. The risk mitigation approach is the plan and actions to reduce the impact or likelihood of the risks, and it is based on the risk assessment results. The cost-benefit analysis is the comparison of the costs and benefits of implementing the risk response strategy, and it is influenced by the risk assessment results. The vulnerability assessment results are the identification and measurement of the weaknesses or gaps in the information systems or resources, and they are part of the risk assessment results. References = Risk Assessment in Project Management | PMI; Risk Assessment Process: Definition, Steps, and Examples; Risk Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics; Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; What Is a Risk Register? | Smartsheet

According to the Guide to Implementing an IT Risk Management Framework, the first activity that should be performed when establishing IT risk management processes is to assess the goals and culture of the organization. This is because the goals and culture of the organization define the context and scope of the IT risk management process, and influence the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. By assessing the goals and culture of the organization, the IT risk manager can align the IT risk management process with the organization’s strategy, vision, mission, values, and objectives. The IT risk manager can also identify the key stakeholders, roles, and responsibilities involved in the IT risk management process, and ensure that they have the necessary skills, knowledge, and resources to perform their tasks effectively. Additionally, the IT risk manager can establish the communication and reporting mechanisms for the IT risk management process, and ensure that they are consistent with the organization’s culture and expectations. References = Guide to Implementing an IT Risk Management Framework, An Overview of the Risk Management Process

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

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, probabilities, responses, and owners. It is a living document that should be updated regularly to reflect the changes in the risk environment and the status of the risk responses12. The best way to improve a risk register is to ensure that it is updated based upon significant events, such as:

New risks are identified or existing risks are eliminated

Risk probabilities or impacts change due to internal or external factors

Risk responses are implemented or modified

Risk owners or stakeholders change

Risk incidents or issues occur

Risk thresholds or appetite change

Risk reporting or communication requirements change

Updating the risk register based upon significant events can help to:

Maintain the accuracy and relevance of the risk information

Enhance the risk awareness and accountability of the risk owners and stakeholders

Support the risk monitoring and reporting activities

Facilitate the risk evaluation and decision-making processes

Improve the risk management performance and maturity

References =

Risk Register - Project Management Knowledge

How to Create a Risk Register: A Step-by-Step Guide - ProjectManager.com

The most common concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider is unauthorized data usage, which means the misuse, disclosure, or theft of the organization’s data by the service provider or its employees, contractors, or subcontractors1. Unauthorized data usage can pose significant risks to the organization, such as:

Data security and privacy breaches, which can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data, and expose the organization to legal liability, regulatory penalties, reputational damage, or loss of trust and credibility2.

Data quality and accuracy issues, which can affect the reliability and validity of the data, and impair the decision-making, reporting, or performance of the organization3.

Data ownership and control issues, which can limit the access and rights of the organization to its own data, and create dependency or lock-in with the service provider4.

The other options are not the most common concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, because:

Lack of technical expertise is a potential but not prevalent concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, as it may affect the quality and efficiency of the services provided by the service provider, and the compatibility and integration of the services with the organization’s systems and processes5. However, most service providers have sufficient technical expertise in their domain or field, and they can offer specialized skills or resources that the organization may not have internally6.

Combining incompatible duties is a possible but not frequent concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, as it may create conflicts of interest or segregation of duties issues for the service provider or the organization, and increase the risk of errors, fraud, or abuse7. However, most service providers have adequate governance and control mechanisms to prevent or mitigate such issues, and they can adhere to the organization’s policies and standards regarding the separation of duties8.

Denial of service attacks is a rare but not common concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, as it may disrupt the availability or functionality of the services provided by the service provider, and affect the operations or continuity of the organization. However, most service providers have robust security measures and contingency plans to protect and recover from such attacks, and they can ensure the resilience and reliability of the services.

References =

Unauthorized Data Usage - CIO Wiki

What is outsourcing? Definitions, benefits, challenges, processes, advice | CIO

The Pros and Cons of Outsourcing in 2023 - GrowthForce

13 Common Problems of Outsourcing and How to Avoid Them - ENOU Labs

The Top 10 Problems with Outsourcing Implementation - SSON

10 problems with outsourcing (+ Solutions for each) - Time Doctor Blog

Segregation of Duties - CIO Wiki

Outsourcing Governance - CIO Wiki

[Denial-of-Service Attack - CIO Wiki]

[Business Continuity Planning - CIO Wiki]

Software as a service (SaaS) is a cloud computing model that provides software applications over the internet, without requiring the customer to install or maintain them on their own devices1. SaaS applications can offer many benefits, such as scalability, accessibility, and cost-efficiency, but they also pose security risks, such as data breaches, unauthorized access, and compliance violations2.

One of the best ways to protect an organization against breaches when using a SaaS application is to use data loss prevention (DLP) tools. DLP tools are software solutions that monitor, detect, and prevent the unauthorized transmission or leakage of sensitive data from an organization’s network or devices3. DLP tools can help an organization to:

Identify and classify sensitive data, such as personal information, intellectual property, or financial records, and apply appropriate policies and controls to protect them

Encrypt data in transit and at rest, and use secure protocols and encryption keys to ensure data confidentiality and integrity

Block or alert on suspicious or malicious data transfers, such as unauthorized uploads, downloads, or sharing of data to external sources or devices

Audit and report on data activities and incidents, and provide evidence for compliance with data protection regulations and standards, such as GDPR, HIPAA, or PCI-DSS4

References = What is SaaS?, Top 7 SaaS Security Risks (and How to Fix Them), What is Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?, Data Loss Prevention (DLP) for SaaS Applications

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls. It is important for a risk practitioner to verify that the residual risk is within the acceptable levels defined by the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. This ensures that the controls are effective in reducing the risk exposure to an acceptable level and align with the enterprise’s objectives and strategy. References = CRISC Review Manual 27th Edition, page 131. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers.

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

 The most important consideration for protecting data assets in a business application system is to ensure that the application controls are aligned with the data classification rules. Data classification rules define the level of sensitivity, confidentiality, and criticality of the data, and the corresponding security requirements and controls. Application controls are the policies, procedures, and technical measures that are implemented at the application level to ensure the security, integrity, and availability of the data. Application controls should be designed and configured to match the data classification rules, so that the data is protected according to its value and risk. For example, if the data is classified as highly confidential, the application controls should enforce strong authentication, encryption, access control, logging, and auditing mechanisms. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 214.

Multi-factor authentication is the most effective way to mitigate the risk of unauthorized access to the system, as it requires the users to provide more than one piece of evidence to prove their identity, such as a password, a token, a biometric feature, etc. This reduces the likelihood of compromising the credentials and ensures that only authorized users can perform maintenance on the system.

Single sign-on is a convenience feature that allows users to access multiple systems with one set of credentials, but it does not address the risk of sharing credentials among multiple users.

Audit trail review is a detective control that can help identify and investigate unauthorized access to the system, but it does not prevent or mitigate the risk of credential compromise.

Data encryption at rest is a security measure that protects the data stored on the system from unauthorized access, but it does not prevent or mitigate the risk of credential compromise. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, page 107-108.

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

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

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

Balanced Scorecard Basics - Balanced Scorecard Institute

Using the Balanced Scorecard to Measure and Manage IT Risk

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Overview

Internal Audit Planning: The Basics - The IIA

[Control Self-Assessment - ISACA]

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, such as 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 most important consideration when sharing risk management updates with executive management is ensuring relevance to organizational goals. This means that the risk information presented should align with the strategic objectives and priorities of the organization, and demonstrate how risk management supports the achievement of those goals. Executive management is responsible for setting the direction and vision of the organization, and therefore needs to understand how risk management contributes to the value creation and protection of the organization. By ensuring relevance to organizational goals, risk management updates can help executive management make informed decisions, allocate resources, and communicate with stakeholders.

Some of the ways to ensure relevance to organizational goals are:

Linking risk management updates to the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy

Highlighting the key risks and opportunities that affect the organization’s performance and competitiveness

Providing clear and concise risk reports that focus on the most critical and material risks

Using a common risk language and framework that is understood by executive management

Providing actionable recommendations and solutions to address the identified risks

Aligning risk management updates with the organization’s reporting cycle and governance structure

References =

The Importance of Integrating Risk Management with Strategy

Four steps for managing risk at the CEO level

5 Key Principles of Successful Risk Management

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Data Leakage - ISACA

Hard Drive Shredding Services | Hard Drive Destruction & Disposal

Hard Drive Shredding and Destruction Service | CompuCycle

Electronic Destruction & Recycling | Shred Nations

Degaussing - ISACA

Encryption - ISACA

Certificate of Destruction - ISACA

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The 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.

 A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions and resources required to implement the chosen risk response for a specific risk scenario. A risk response can be to accept, avoid, transfer, or mitigate the risk. The effectiveness of a risk treatment plan can be measured by how well it reduces the risk exposure and achieves the desired outcomes. The best evidence that a selected risk treatment plan is effective is to evaluate the residual risk level, which is the remaining risk after the risk treatment plan has been implemented. The residual risk level should be within the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and should reflect the actual risk reduction and value creation of the risk treatment plan. Evaluating the residual risk level can also help to identify any gaps or issues that need to be addressed, and to monitor and report on the risk performance and improvement. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, p. 108-109

Fraudulent transactions are those that involve deception, manipulation, or misrepresentation of information or data to obtain an unauthorized or improper benefit or advantage1. Fraudulent transactions can pose significant risks and losses for an organization, such as financial damages, legal liabilities, reputational damages, or operational disruptions2.

Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems are integrated software applications that support the core business processes and functions of an organization, such as accounting, finance, human resources, supply chain, inventory, or customer relationship management3. ERP systems can facilitate the efficiency, accuracy, and security of business transactions, but they can also be vulnerable to fraudulent transactions, such as:

Creating fake vendors or customers and processing false invoices or payments

Manipulating or falsifying financial or accounting data or reports

Changing or deleting critical or sensitive information or records

Abusing or misusing access privileges or credentials

Bypassing or compromising the system controls or security measures4

The design of procedures to prevent fraudulent transactions within an ERP system should be based on the control environment. The control environment is the set of standards, processes, and structures that provide the basis for carrying out internal control across the organization. The control environment comprises the following elements:

The tone at the top, which reflects the leadership’s commitment and attitude towards internal control and ethical conduct

The organizational structure, which defines the roles and responsibilities, reporting lines, and authority levels for internal control

The human resource policies and practices, which ensure that the staff have the appropriate skills, competencies, and incentives for internal control

The risk assessment process, which identifies and evaluates the potential risks and threats to the organization’s objectives and transactions

The control activities, which are the specific policies, procedures, and mechanisms that prevent, detect, or correct errors or fraud in transactions

The information and communication systems, which provide reliable and timely data and information for internal control and decision-making

The monitoring and evaluation activities, which measure and report the performance and effectiveness of internal control and ensure continuous improvement

By basing the design of procedures to prevent fraudulent transactions within an ERP system on the control environment, the organization can:

Ensure that the procedures are aligned with the organization’s objectives, values, and expectations regarding internal control and fraud prevention

Provide clear and consistent guidance and instructions for the staff and stakeholders involved in the transactions and the ERP system

Implement adequate and appropriate controls and safeguards to mitigate the risks and vulnerabilities of the transactions and the ERP system

Monitor and evaluate the compliance and effectiveness of the procedures and the ERP system, and identify and address any issues or gaps

References = What is Fraud?, Fraud Risk Management - AICPA, What is ERP?, ERP Fraud: How to Prevent It - ERP Focus, [COSO – Control Environment - Deloitte], [How to use COSO to assess IT controls - Journal of Accountancy]

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

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that measures the achievement of a specific goal or objective. A KPI should be relevant, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound. For measuring the effectiveness of an antivirus program, a possible goal is to ensure that all IT assets are protected from malware infections. A KPI that can measure this goal is the percentage of IT assets with current malware definitions, which indicates how well the antivirus program can detect and prevent the latest malware threats. The higher the percentage, the more effective the antivirus program is. Therefore, this is the best KPI among the given options. References =

Cybersecurity KPIs to Track + Examples — RiskOptics - Reciprocity

Which of the following is the BEST key performance indicator (KPI) to …

Indicators - Program Evaluation - CDC

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

 The greatest concern with the situation of combining the second and third lines of defense in a new department that reports to a recently appointed C-level executive is that the independence of the internal third line of defense may be compromised. The second line of defense is the function that oversees and supports the risk management activities of the first line of defense, which is the function that owns and manages the risks. The third line of defense is the function that provides independent assurance of the risk management activities, such as the internal audit function. Combining the second and third lines of defense in a new department may compromise the independence of the internal third line of defense, as it may create a conflict of interest, bias, or influence among the functions, and impair the objectivity, credibility, and quality of the assurance activities. The independence of the internal third line of defense is essential for ensuring that the risk management activities are performed in a consistent and effective manner, and that the issues and gaps are identified and reported without fear or favor. The risk governance approach of the second and third lines of defense may differ, cost reductions may negatively impact the productivity of other departments, and the new structure may not be aligned to the organization’s internal control framework are also concerns, but they are not as great as the compromise of the independence of the internal third line of defense, as they do not directly affect the assurance and accountability of the risk management activities. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

 Cost-benefit analysis is the most helpful tool to show risk reduction based on when developing risk treatment alternatives for a business case, because it compares the expected costs and benefits of each alternative and helps to select the most optimal and feasible one. Cost-benefit analysis also helps to justify the investment and resources required for the risk treatment plan and to demonstrate the value and return of the risk reduction. The other options are not the most helpful tools, although they may also be considered when developing risk treatment alternatives. Risk appetite, regulatory guidelines, and control efficiency are examples of factors or criteria that influence the selection of risk treatment alternatives, but they do not show the risk reduction based on the alternatives. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

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 risk register is a document that records and tracks the information about the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, such as the risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, status, owner, response, etc.

When developing a new risk register, a risk practitioner should focus on risk identification. This is the process of finding, recognizing, and describing the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, using various techniques, such as brainstorming, interviews, checklists, surveys, etc.

Risk identification helps to create a comprehensive and accurate list of the risks that need to be managed, and to provide the basis for the subsequent risk analysis and evaluation, risk response planning, and risk monitoring and control.

The other options are not the risk management activities that a risk practitioner should focus on when developing a new risk register. They are either subsequent or parallel to risk identification.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 29

Information Technology & Security, page 23

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 21

A RACI matrix is a tool that assigns the roles and responsibilities for each risk, such as who is responsible, accountable, consulted, and informed. A RACI matrix helps to clarify the expectations and accountabilities for each risk owner and stakeholder, and to ensure that the risk is managed and monitored effectively and efficiently.

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their likelihood, impact, and mitigation strategies. A risk register does not assign the accountability for each risk, but rather the ownership and response.

A risk catalog is a collection of risks that have been identified and categorized based on common attributes, such as source, type, or impact. A risk catalog does not assign the accountability for each risk, but rather the classification and description.

A risk scenario is a technique that simulates the possible outcomes of different risk events and assesses their impact on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. A risk scenario does not assign the accountability for each risk, but rather the analysis and evaluation.

References: CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question216; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 216.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The most important factor to communicate to senior management during the initial implementation of a risk management program is the desired risk level, which is the level of risk that the organization aims to achieve in order to fulfill its objectives and strategy1. The desired risk level can help to:

Define and communicate 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 objectives2.

Guide and align the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes, and ensure that the risks are consistent and proportional to the desired risk level3.

Measure and monitor the risk performance and outcome, and ensure that the actual risk level is within the desired risk level, or take corrective actions if needed4.

The other factors are not the most important to communicate to senior management, because:

Regulatory compliance is a necessary but not sufficient factor to communicate to senior management, as it ensures that the risk management program complies with the applicable laws, rules, or standards that govern the organization’s activities and operations5. However, regulatory compliance does not guarantee that the risk management program is relevant and useful for the organization’s specific objectives and strategy.

Risk ownership is a desirable but not essential factor to communicate to senior management, as it assigns the roles and responsibilities for managing the risks and implementing the risk responses to the appropriate individuals or entities within the organization. However, risk ownership does not ensure that the risk management program is effective and efficient in achieving the desired risk level.

Best practices are a useful but not critical factor to communicate to senior management, as they provide the guidelines and standards for designing and implementing the risk management program, based on the experience and knowledge of the industry or the profession. However, best practices do not ensure that the risk management program is suitable and feasible for the organization’s specific context and capabilities.

References =

Desired Risk Level - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Management Process - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring - CIO Wiki

Regulatory Compliance - CIO Wiki

[Risk Ownership - CIO Wiki]

[Best Practice - CIO Wiki]

[Risk Management - CIO Wiki]

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

 A cost-benefit analysis of the control versus probable legal action is the best way to inform decision-makers about the value of a notice and consent control for the collection of personal information, as it quantifies the potential benefits and costs of implementing the control and compares them with the potential consequences of not implementing the control. This helps the decision-makers to evaluate the trade-offs and the return on investment of the control.

A comparison of the costs of notice and consent control options is not sufficient to inform decision-makers about the value of the control, as it does not consider the benefits or the risks of the control.

Examples of regulatory fines incurred by industry peers for noncompliance are not the best way to inform decision-makers about the value of the control, as they are based on historical data and may not reflect the current or future situation of the enterprise.

A report of critical controls showing the importance of notice and consent is not the best way to inform decision-makers about the value of the control, as it does not provide any quantitative or comparative data to support the decision. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, page 140-1411

 Customer behavior data is the information that reflects how customers interact with a brand, product, or service, such as their preferences, needs, motivations, and feedback1. Collecting customer behavior data through social media advertising can help an organization to understand its target market, improve its customer experience, and optimize its marketing strategies2.

However, collecting customer behavior data through social media advertising also poses significant business risks, especially for a global organization that operates in different countries. Among the four options given, the most important business risk to be considered is the regulatory requirements that may differ in each country. This means that the organization should:

Be aware of the different laws and regulations that govern the collection, processing, storage, and transfer of personal data in each country, such as the GDPR in the EU, the CCPA in California, or the PDPA in Singapore3

Ensure that the organization complies with the relevant data protection and privacy rules and standards in each country, such as obtaining consent, providing notice, ensuring security, and respecting rights4

Avoid or mitigate the potential legal, financial, reputational, or operational consequences of violating the data protection and privacy laws and regulations in each country, such as fines, lawsuits, sanctions, or loss of trust5

References = What is Customer Behavior Data?, How to Collect Customer Behavior Data for Marketing, Data Protection Laws Around the World, Data Protection and Privacy: The Age of Intelligent Machines, The Risks of Non-Compliance with Data Protection Laws

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

Organizational risk culture is the term describing the values, beliefs, knowledge, attitudes and understanding about risk shared by a group of people with a common purpose. Organizational risk culture influences how the organization identifies, assesses, and manages risks, and how it aligns its risk appetite and tolerance with its objectives and strategies1.

The best indication of a mature organizational risk culture is that risk owners understand and accept accountability for risk, because it means that the organization:

Clearly defines and assigns the roles and responsibilities of the risk owners, who are the individuals or groups who have the authority and ability to manage the risks within their scope or domain

Empowers and supports the risk owners to perform their risk management duties, such as identifying, assessing, responding, monitoring, and reporting the risks

Holds the risk owners accountable for the outcomes and consequences of the risks, and evaluates their performance and compliance with the risk policies, standards, and procedures

Encourages and rewards the risk owners for demonstrating risk awareness and competence, and for contributing to the risk management improvement and learning23

The other options are not the best indications of a mature organizational risk culture, but rather some of the elements or aspects of it. Corporate risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Corporate risk appetite is communicated to staff members to guide their risk decision making and behavior, and to ensure the consistency and alignment of the risk taking and tolerance across the organization. Risk policy is the document that establishes the principles, framework, and process for managing the risks within the organization. Risk policy is published and acknowledged by employees to ensure their awareness and compliance with the risk management expectations and requirements. Management is the group of individuals who have the authority and responsibility to direct and control the organization’s activities and resources. Management encourages the reporting of policy breaches to ensure the transparency and accountability of the risk management performance and outcomes, and to identify and address the risk management issues and gaps4. References =

Risk culture - Institute of Risk Management

Risk Owner - ISACA

Taking control of organizational risk culture | McKinsey

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide early warning signals of potential risk events or changes in the risk profile of an organization. They help to monitor the risk exposure and performance of the organization against its risk appetite and tolerance. They also enable timely and proactive risk responses and mitigation actions. Establishing KRIs is the most helpful in preventing risk events from materializing, as they can alert the organization of emerging risks and trigger preventive measures before the risks become significant or materialize. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, p. 114-115

 A vulnerability is a weakness or flaw that can be exploited by a threat to cause harm or damage to an asset. Employees holding the door open for others, so that trailing employees do not have to stop and swipe their own ID badges, is a behavior that best represents a vulnerability, as it bypasses the security control of the ID badge system, and allows unauthorized or unauthenticated access to the premises. This behavior can increase the risk of physical or logical security breaches, such as theft, vandalism, sabotage, or espionage. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 258. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 258. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

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

Risk response strategy is the approach that an organization takes to address the risks that it faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. Risk response strategy involves selecting and implementing the appropriate risk response options, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, or acceptance, for each risk, based on the risk level, the risk appetite, and the cost-benefit analysis1.

The most important consideration for senior management when developing a risk response strategy is the risk appetite of the organization. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk attitude and its willingness to take on risk in specific scenarios. Risk appetite is usually expressed in a qualitative statement approved by the board of directors2.

Considering the risk appetite of the organization is essential for developing a risk response strategy, because it can help to:

Align the risk response strategy with the overall business strategy and vision, and ensure that the risk response options support the achievement of the organizational objectives

Balance the risk response strategy with the expected benefits and opportunities, and ensure that the risk response options do not eliminate or reduce the potential value or performance of the organization

Enhance the risk response strategy with the stakeholder expectations and requirements, and ensure that the risk response options meet the needs and interests of the customers, suppliers, partners, regulators, and other parties

Optimize the risk response strategy with the available resources and capabilities, and ensure that the risk response options are feasible and cost-effective for the organization34

The other options are not as important as the risk appetite of the organization for developing a risk response strategy, but rather some of the factors or outcomes of it. Cost of controls is the amount of resources and funds that are required to implement and maintain the risk response controls, such as policies, procedures, or technologies, that aim to prevent or reduce the negative effects of the risks. Cost of controls is a factor that can affect the selection and implementation of the risk response options, but it is not the primary consideration for developing the risk response strategy. Risk tolerance is the acceptable variation in the outcomes related to specific objectives or risks. Risk tolerance is a factor that can measure the risk analysis and guide the risk response, but it is not the primary consideration for developing the risk response strategy. Probability definition is the process of estimating the likelihood or frequency of the risk events, based on historical data, statistical analysis, expert judgment, or other methods. Probability definition is an outcome of the risk analysis that can inform the risk response, but it is not the primary consideration for developing the risk response strategy. References =

Risk Response - ISACA

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

Risk Response Strategies: Types & Examples (+ Free Template)

Risk Response Strategy - ISACA

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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

Residual risk is the remaining risk after the risk response has been implemented. Residual risk can be expressed as a combination of the probability and impact of the risk scenario, or as a single value such as loss expectancy. Residual risk can be compared with the inherent risk, which is the risk level before considering the existing controls or responses, to evaluate the risk reduction and value creation of the risk response. Senior management has asked the risk practitioner for the overall residual risk level for a process that contains numerous risk scenarios. The best way to provide this information is to calculate the average of anticipated residual risk levels for each risk scenario, and to present it as a single value or a range. This can help to provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the residual risk exposure and performance of the process, as well as to align it with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. The sum of residual risk levels for each scenario, the loss expectancy for aggregated risk scenarios, or the highest loss expectancy among the risk scenarios are not the best ways to provide the overall residual risk level, as they may overestimate or underestimate the risk exposure and performance of the process, and may not reflect the actual risk reduction and value creation of the risk response. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, p. 108-109

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

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

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

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

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

The best indicator of the condition of a risk management program is the amount of residual risk. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses. Residual risk reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management program in reducing the risk exposure to an acceptable level, and in aligning the risk profile with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. A low amount of residual risk indicates that the risk management program is performing well, and that the controls are adequate and appropriate. A high amount of residual risk indicates that the risk management program is not functioning properly, and that the controls are insufficient or ineffective. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2, page 191

 The first step when conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) is identifying critical information assets. A BIA is a process of analyzing the potential impacts of disruptive events on the business processes, functions, and resources. A BIA identifies the criticality, dependencies, recovery priorities, and recovery objectives of the business processes, and quantifies the financial and non-financial impacts of disruption. Information assets are the data, information, and knowledge that are essential for the operation and performance of the business processes. Identifying critical information assets is the first step of the BIA, as it helps to determine which information assets are vital for the continuity and recovery of the business processes, and which information assets are most vulnerable or exposed to the disruptive events. Identifying critical information assets also helps to scope and focus the BIA on the most important and relevant information assets, and to avoid unnecessary or redundant analysis. Identifying events impacting continuity of operations, creating a data classification scheme, and analyzing previous risk assessment results are not the first steps of the BIA, as they are either the inputs or the outputs of the BIA, and they depend on the identification of critical information assets. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 130.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the primary purpose of periodically reviewing an organization’s risk profile is to enable risk-based decision making, because it helps to ensure that the risk information is current, relevant, and accurate. The risk profile is a snapshot of the organization’s risk exposure at a given point in time, based on the risk identification, analysis, and evaluation processes. Periodically reviewing the risk profile allows the organization to monitor the changes in the risk environment, the effectiveness of the risk responses, and the impact of the risk events. This enables the organization to make informed decisions about the risk management strategies and priorities. The other options are not the primary purpose of periodically reviewing the risk profile, as they are related to other aspects of the risk management process. Aligning business objectives with risk appetite is the purpose of establishing the risk context, which defines the scope and boundaries of the risk management activities. Designing and implementing risk response action plans is the purpose of the risk response process, which involves selecting and executing the appropriate risk responses. Updating risk responses in the risk register is the outcome of the risk monitoring and reporting process, which involves tracking the risk performance and communicating the risk information to the stakeholders. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.4, page 86.

Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk tolerance is an important component of the corporate risk profile, as it defines the boundaries and limits of the acceptable risk exposure for the organization. Comparing the risk tolerance against the corporate risk profile can help to ensure that the organization’s risk strategy and objectives are aligned with its risk appetite and capacity, and that the organization is not taking on more risk than it can handle or afford. Comparing the risk tolerance against the corporate risk profile can also help to monitor and adjust the risk management process and controls, and to optimize the risk-return trade-off. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 249. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 249. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 249. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

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

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

A risk treatment plan typically includes the following elements2:

Risk description: A brief summary of the risk, its causes, and its consequences.

Risk owner: The person or entity who is responsible for managing the risk and implementing the risk treatment plan.

Risk response: The strategy or method chosen to deal with the risk, such as avoid, reduce, transfer, or accept.

Risk actions: The specific tasks or steps that need to be performed to execute the risk response.

Risk resources: The human, financial, technical, or other resources that are required or available to support the risk actions.

Risk timeline: The schedule or deadline for completing the risk actions and achieving the desired risk level.

By recommending a risk treatment plan, the risk practitioner can help the organization to:

Analyze and prioritize the vulnerabilities detected on the systems, and determine their impact and likelihood.

Evaluate and compare the possible risk responses, and select the most suitable and feasible one for each vulnerability.

Define and assign the roles and responsibilities for the risk treatment process, and ensure the accountability and collaboration of the stakeholders.

Monitor and measure the progress and effectiveness of the risk treatment process, and report the results and outcomes to the management.

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

Recommending the business change the application is not a realistic or practical option, as it may be costly, time-consuming, or technically challenging to modify the application to make it compatible with the updated servers. It may also create other issues or risks, such as compatibility problems with other systems, performance degradation, or user dissatisfaction.

Including the risk in the next quarterly update to management is not a proactive or timely option, as it may delay or defer the risk treatment process and increase the exposure or vulnerability of the systems. It may also indicate a lack of urgency or importance of the risk, and undermine the credibility or trust of the management.

Implementing compensating controls is not a sufficient or comprehensive option, as it may not address the root cause or the source of the risk. Compensating controls are alternative or additional controls that are implemented when the primary or preferred controls are not feasible or effective3. They may reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk, but they may not eliminate or resolve the risk.

References =

Risk Treatment Plan - CIO Wiki

Risk Treatment Plan Template - ISACA

Compensating Control - CIO Wiki

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

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

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

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

References =

Threat - CIO Wiki

Vulnerability - CIO Wiki

Risk Identification - CIO Wiki

Risk Identification and Analysis - The National Academies Press

Risk Analysis - CIO Wiki

Service level agreements (SLA) are contracts that define the expected level of performance and quality of service that an IT service provider will deliver to its customers. SLA are the best indicators that an organization has implemented IT performance requirements, as they specify the measurable and verifiable criteria that the IT service provider must meet or exceed, such as availability, reliability, security, and responsiveness. SLA also establish the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved, the methods of monitoring and reporting the service performance, and the consequences of non-compliance or breach of the agreement. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 232. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 232. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 232.

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

What is Malware? - Definition from Techopedia

Common Types of Malware and Their Impact - Techopedia

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

The 10 Best Malware Protection Solutions Compared for 2024 - Techopedia

The Cost of Malware Attacks - Security Boulevard

The Impact of Malware on Business - Kaspersky

What is Patch Management? - Definition from Techopedia

Identifying potential sources of risk is the first step in the risk identification process, which is essential for developing a thorough understanding of risk scenarios. Sources of risk can be internal or external, and can include factors such as people, processes, technology, environment, regulations, and events. Identifying potential sources of risk can help to generate a comprehensive list of risk scenarios that can affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Identifying potential sources of risk can also help to raise risk awareness among the employees and to foster a risk culture within the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, p. 66-67

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 27

Information Technology & Security, page 21

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 19

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

The control owner is the person who is accountable for ensuring that a control is designed, implemented, and operated effectively to mitigate risk. The control owner is also responsible for monitoring the performance of the control and reporting any issues or deficiencies. The risk manager is the person who oversees the risk management process and ensures that risks are identified, assessed, and treated appropriately. The control operator is the person who executes the control activities on a day-to-day basis. The risk treatment owner is the person who is accountable for implementing the risk response strategy and ensuring that the residual risk is within the acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, p. 181.

Measurability and consistency are the most essential attributes of an effective key control indicator (KCI), because they ensure that the KCI can be quantified, compared, and reported over time. A KCI should be able to measure the performance or effectiveness of a control in mitigating a risk and provide consistent results across different periods, sources, and methods. The other options are not the most essential attributes, although they may also be desirable for a KCI. Flexibility and adaptability are not the most essential attributes, because they may compromise the reliability and comparability of the KCI. Robustness and resilience are not the most essential attributes, because they are more relevant for the control itself, not the KCI. Optimal cost and benefit are not the most essential attributes, because they are more related to the value and feasibility of the KCI, not the quality and accuracy of the KCI. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers

 A violation of segregation of duties is when the same person performs two or more conflicting tasks that could compromise the security or integrity of a system or process. In the context of IT risk management, segregation of duties aims to prevent fraud, errors, sabotage, theft, misuse of information, and other security breaches. One of the common categories of functions to be separated is the authorization function, which involves evaluating and approving transactions or changes. Another category is the custody function, which involves managing or accessing physical or digital assets. A programmer who writes and promotes code into production is performing both the authorization and the custody functions, which creates a high-risk conflict. The programmer could introduce malicious or erroneous code into the system without proper review or approval, and potentially cause harm to the organization or its stakeholders. Therefore, this scenario is a violation of segregation of duties. References =

Segregation of Duties: Examples of Roles, Duties & Violations

Separation of duties - Wikipedia

Segregation of duties: prevent fraud and error - eftsure

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

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

 A RACI chart is a matrix that defines the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders in relation to the IT risk management process. RACI stands for Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed. A RACI chart would be most helpful when communicating roles associated with the IT risk management process, as it clarifies who is responsible for performing the tasks, who is accountable for the outcomes, who is consulted for input and feedback, and who is informed of the progress and results. A RACI chart can help to avoid confusion, duplication, and conflict among the stakeholders, and to ensure that the IT risk management process is executed effectively and efficiently. A skills matrix, job descriptions, and an organizational chart are not as helpful as a RACI chart, as they do not specify the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders in relation to the IT risk management process, and may not reflect the actual involvement and contribution of the stakeholders. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 35.

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

Scenario analysis and stress testing are the best methods to enable an organization to determine whether external emerging risk factors will impact the organization’s risk profile, as they help to simulate and evaluate the potential outcomes and effects of various risk events and scenarios on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. Scenario analysis and stress testing can help to identify and assess the impact of external emerging risk factors, such as changes in the market, technology, regulation, or environment, and to measure the resilience and preparedness of the enterprise to cope with these factors. Control identification and mitigation, adoption of a compliance-based approach, and prevention and detection techniques are not the best methods to enable an organization to determine whether external emerging risk factors will impact the organization’s risk profile, as they do not help to simulate and evaluate the potential outcomes and effects of various risk events and scenarios, but rather to manage and monitor the existing or known risks. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 223.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the next course of action when a risk practitioner finds the IT department’s recovery time objective (RTO) for a key system does not align with the enterprise’s business continuity plan (BCP) is to consult with the IT department to update the RTO. The RTO is the maximum acceptable time that an application, computer, network, or system can be down after an unexpected disaster, failure, or comparable event takes place. The RTO should be aligned with the BCP, which is a set of policies, procedures, and resources that enable the organization to continue or resume its critical business functions in the event of a disruption. Consulting with the IT department to update the RTO helps to:

Ensure that the RTO reflects the current business requirements and expectations for the availability and recovery of the key system

Evaluate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of achieving the RTO with the existing IT resources and capabilities

Identify and implement the necessary changes or improvements in the IT infrastructure, processes, and controls to meet the RTO

Test and validate the RTO and the IT recovery procedures and verify their compatibility and consistency with the BCP

Communicate and coordinate the RTO and the IT recovery plan with the relevant stakeholders, such as the business owner, the risk owner, and the senior management

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

The best way to ensure that identified risk scenarios are addressed is to review the implementation of the risk response. The risk response is the action or plan that is taken to reduce, avoid, transfer, or accept the risk, depending on the chosen risk treatment option1. Reviewing the implementation of the risk response means checking whether the risk response actions are executed as planned, whether they are effective and efficient in mitigating the risk, and whether they are aligned with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite2. Reviewing the implementation of the risk response helps to monitor and control the risk, identify any gaps or issues, and make any necessary adjustments or improvements. The other options are not the best ways to ensure that identified risk scenarios are addressed, as they are either less comprehensive or less specific than reviewing the implementation of the risk response. Creating a separate risk register for key business units is a way of documenting and tracking the risks that affect different parts of the organization. However, this is not the same as addressing the risk scenarios, as it does not indicate how the risks are treated or resolved. Performing real-time monitoring of threats is a way of detecting and responding to any changes or events that may increase the likelihood or impact of the risks. However, this is not the same as addressing the risk scenarios, as it does not measure the effectiveness or efficiency of the risk response actions. Performing regular risk control self-assessments is a way of evaluating and testing the design and operation of the controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks. However, this is not the same as addressing the risk scenarios, as it does not cover the other aspects of the risk response, such as risk avoidance, transfer, or acceptance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.7, Page 59.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), risk management strategies are primarily adopted to achieve acceptable residual risk levels, which are the remaining risk levels after implementing risk response actions. Residual risk levels should be aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance, which are the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives and the acceptable variation in outcomes related to specific performance measures linked to objectives. Risk management strategies are the approaches or methods used to address risks, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, sharing, or acceptance. Risk management strategies should be based on a cost-benefit analysis of the alternatives available and the value of the assets at risk.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 166-1691

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

 A control self-assessment (CSA) is a technique that allows managers and work teams directly involved in business units, functions, or processes to participate in assessing the organization’s risk management and control processes. The main purpose of conducting a CSA is to gain a better understanding of the control effectiveness in the organization, which means how well the controls are designed, implemented, and operated to achieve the desired outcomes and mitigate the risks. A CSA can help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the existing controls, as well as the gaps and opportunities for improvement. A CSA can also help to enhance the awareness, ownership, and accountability of the control environment among the managers and staff. The other options are not the main purpose of conducting a CSA, although they may be related or beneficial. Gaining a better understanding of the risk in the organization is a result of conducting a CSA, but it is not the primary goal. The primary goal is to evaluate the controls that address the risks, not the risks themselves. Adjusting the controls prior to an external audit is a possible action that may follow a CSA, but it is not the reason for conducting a CSA. The reason for conducting a CSA is to improve the control effectiveness, not to prepare for an audit. Reducing the dependency on external audits is a potential benefit of conducting a CSA, but it is not the objective of conducting a CSA. The objective of conducting a CSA is to enhance the internal control assurance, not to replace the external audit assurance. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 153-1541; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 802

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

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

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

Prioritize the compliance gaps based on their urgency and importance

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

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

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

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are the metrics or measures that provide information and insight on the level and trend of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. KRIs can help the organization to monitor and communicate the risks, and to support the decision making and planning for the risk management.

To implement the most effective monitoring of KRIs, one of the essential elements that needs to be in place is threshold definition, which is the process of establishing and specifying the acceptable or tolerable ranges or limits for the KRIs, based on the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Threshold definition can help the organization to monitor KRIs by providing the following benefits:

It can enable the comparison and evaluation of the actual or current values of the KRIs with the expected or desired values of the KRIs, and to identify and quantify the deviations or variations that may indicate the changes or developments in the risk level or performance.

It can trigger the alerts or notifications when the values of the KRIs exceed or fall below the thresholds, and to initiate the appropriate actions or responses to address or correct the risks and their impacts.

It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the alignment and integration of the KRIs with the organization’s risk management function, and for the compliance with the organization’s risk policies and standards.

The other options are not the essential elements that need to be in place to implement the most effective monitoring of KRIs, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of threshold definition, which is to establish and specify the acceptable or tolerable ranges or limits for the KRIs.

Escalation procedures are 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. Escalation procedures can help the organization to monitor KRIs by ensuring the awareness and involvement of the stakeholders, but they are not the essential elements that need to be in place, because they do not establish and specify the acceptable or tolerable ranges or limits for the KRIs.

Automated data feed is the process of using a software tool or system to collect and transmit the data or information that are related or relevant to the KRIs, and to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and timeliness of the data or information. Automated data feed can help the organization to monitor KRIs by providing the data or information that are necessary and relevant for the KRIs, but they are not the essential elements that need to be in place, because they do not establish and specify the acceptable or tolerable ranges or limits for the KRIs.

Controls monitoring is the process of verifying and validating the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls that are intended to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the information systems and resources that are affected by the risks. Controls monitoring can help the organization to monitor KRIs by providing the assurance and evidence on the performance and compliance of the controls, but they are not the essential elements that need to be in place, because they do not establish and specify the acceptable or tolerable ranges or limits for the KRIs. 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 206

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

A risk map, also known as a risk heat map, is a visual tool that helps an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios by plotting them on a matrix based on their likelihood and impact. A risk map can help to compare and contrast different risk scenarios, as well as to identify the most critical and urgent risks that require attention. A risk map can also help to communicate and report the risk profile and status to the stakeholders and decision makers. Therefore, the placement on the risk map would best help an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios. The other options are not the best ways to help an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios, although they may be relevant and useful. Industry best practices are the standards or guidelines that are widely accepted and followed by the organizations in a specific industry or domain. Industry best practices can help to benchmark and improve the risk management process and performance, but they may not reflect the specific risk context and needs of the enterprise. Degree of variances in the risk is the measure of the variability or uncertainty of the risk, which may affect the accuracy or reliability of the risk assessment and response. Degree of variances in the risk can help to adjust and refine the risk analysis and treatment, but it may not indicate the priority or importance of the risk. Cost of risk mitigation is the amount of resources or expenses that are required or allocated to implement the risk response actions, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risk. Cost of risk mitigation can help to evaluate and optimize the risk response options, but it may not determine the priority or urgency of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 892

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

An organization’s policies are the set of rules and guidelines that define the organization’s objectives, expectations, and responsibilities for its activities and operations. They provide the direction and framework for the organization’s governance, risk management, and compliance functions.

The most important characteristic of an organization’s policies is to reflect 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.

Reflecting the organization’s risk appetite in its policies ensures that the policies are consistent, appropriate, and proportional to the level and nature of the risks that the organization faces, and that they support the organization’s objectives and values. It also helps to optimize the balance between risk and return, and to create and protect value for the organization and its stakeholders.

The other options are not the most important characteristic of an organization’s policies, because they do not address the fundamental question of whether the policies are suitable and acceptable for the organization.

The risk assessment methodology is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. It involves determining the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their significance and urgency. The risk assessment methodology is important to inform and support the organization’s policies, but it is not the most important characteristic of the policies, because it does not indicate whether the policies are aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The capabilities are the resources and abilities that the organization has or can acquire to achieve its objectives and manage its risks. They include the people, processes, technologies, and assets that the organization uses or relies on. The capabilities are important to enable and implement the organization’s policies, but they are not the most important characteristic of the policies, because they do not indicate whether the policies are aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The asset value is the worth or importance of the assets that the organization owns or controls, and that may be affected by the risks that the organization faces. The assets include the tangible and intangible resources that the organization uses or relies on, such as data, information, systems, infrastructure, reputation, etc. The asset value is important to measure and monitor the organization’s policies, but it is not the most important characteristic of the policies, because it does not indicate whether the policies are 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 148

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

Applying risk appetite is the most important topic to cover in a training session to communicate risk assessment methodologies. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. It is a key element of the risk management framework and influences the risk assessment process. Applying risk appetite helps to ensure a consistent risk view within the organization by providing a common basis for evaluating and prioritizing risks, aligning risk responses with business goals, and communicating risk information to stakeholders. The other options are not the most important topics to cover in a training session to communicate risk assessment methodologies, although they may be relevant and useful. Applying risk factors is a technique to quantify or qualify the likelihood and impact of risks based on predefined criteria or scales. Referencing risk event data is a source of information to identify and analyze risks based on historical or current incidents. Understanding risk culture is a factor that affects the risk behavior and attitude of the organization and its people. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 40-411; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 612

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the right to audit the provider is the most important factor to help define the IT risk associated with outsourcing activity to a cloud-based service provider, as it enables the organization to verify the compliance and performance of the provider with the contractual obligations and service level agreements. The right to audit the provider helps to:

Assess the security, availability, confidentiality, integrity, and privacy of the data and processes hosted by the provider

Identify and evaluate the risks and controls related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s infrastructure

Monitor and measure the quality and effectiveness of the cloud-based services and the provider’s governance and management practices

Report and resolve any issues or incidents related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s operations

Ensure the alignment of the cloud-based services and the provider’s policies and standards with the organization’s objectives and requirements

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 176-1771

 The business application owner should have the authority to accept the associated risk, because they are responsible for the performance and outcomes of the critical application, and they understand the business requirements, expectations, and impact of the application. The business application owner can also evaluate the trade-offs between the potential benefits and costs of the application, and the potential risks and consequences of a disruption or failure of the application. The business application owner can also communicate and justify their risk acceptance decision to the senior management and other stakeholders, and ensure that the risk is monitored and reviewed regularly. The other options are less appropriate to have the authority to accept the associated risk. The business continuity director is responsible for overseeing the planning and execution of the business continuity strategy, which includes ensuring the availability and resilience of the critical business processes and applications. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. The disaster recovery manager is responsible for managing the recovery and restoration of the IT systems and applications in the event of a disaster or disruption. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. The data center manager is responsible for managing the operation and maintenance of the data center infrastructure, which includes providing the physical and environmental security, power, cooling, and network connectivity for the IT systems and applications. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 181

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

A root cause analysis is a process of identifying and understanding the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in a problem or incident that has occurred or may occur in the organization. A root cause analysis can provide useful insights and solutions on the origin and nature of the problem or incident, and prevent or reduce its recurrence or impact.

Performing a root cause analysis is the risk practitioner’s best recommendation when the number of tickets to rework application code has significantly exceeded the established threshold, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:

Why did the application code require rework?

What were the errors or defects in the application code?

How did the errors or defects affect the functionality or usability of the application?

Who was responsible or accountable for the application code development and testing?

When and how were the errors or defects detected and reported?

What were the costs or consequences of the rework for the organization and its stakeholders?

How can the errors or defects be prevented or minimized in the future?

Performing a root cause analysis can help the organization to improve and optimize the application code quality and performance, and to reduce or eliminate the need for rework. It can also help the organization to align the application code development and testing with the organization’s objectives and requirements, and to comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the risk practitioner’s best recommendations when the number of tickets to rework application code has significantly exceeded the established threshold, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of performing a root cause analysis, which is to identify and understand the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in the problem or incident.

Performing a code review is a process of examining and evaluating the application code for its quality, functionality, and security, using the input and feedback from the peers, experts, or tools. Performing a code review can help the organization to identify and resolve the errors or defects in the application code, but it is not the risk practitioner’s best recommendation, because it does not indicate why the application code required rework, and how the errors or defects affected the organization and its stakeholders.

Implementing version control software is a process of using a software tool to manage and track the changes and modifications to the application code, and to ensure the consistency and integrity of the application code. Implementing version control software can help the organization to control and monitor the application code development and testing, but it is not the risk practitioner’s best recommendation, because it does not indicate why the application code required rework, and how the errors or defects affected the organization and its stakeholders.

Implementing training on coding best practices is a process of providing and facilitating the learning and development of the skills and knowledge on the principles, guidelines, and standards for the application code development and testing. Implementing training on coding best practices can help the organization to enhance the competence and performance of the application code developers and testers, but it is not the risk practitioner’s best recommendation, because it does not indicate why the application code required rework, and how the errors or defects affected the organization and its stakeholders. 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 189

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

New risk exposures due to changes in the business environment are the possibilities and impacts of new or emerging threats or opportunities that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation, as a result of changes in the internal or external factors that influence the organization’s operations, such as technology, competition, regulation, or customer behavior12.

The most helpful tool in identifying new risk exposures due to changes in the business environment is a SWOT analysis, which is a technique that involves identifying and analyzing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) that are relevant to the organization’s situation, goals, and capabilities34.

A SWOT analysis is the most helpful tool because it helps the organization to scan and assess the business environment, and to identify and prioritize the new or emerging risk exposures that may arise from the changes in the environment34.

A SWOT analysis is also the most helpful tool because it helps the organization to align and adapt its strategy and actions to the changes in the environment, and to leverage its strengths and opportunities, and mitigate its weaknesses and threats34.

The other options are not the most helpful tools, but rather possible sources or inputs that may be used in a SWOT analysis. For example:

Standard operating procedures are documents that describe the routine tasks and processes that are performed by the organization, and the policies and standards that govern them56. However, these documents are not the most helpful tools because they may not reflect or capture the changes in the business environment, and they may need to be revised or updated to address the new or emerging risk exposures56.

Industry benchmarking is a technique that involves comparing and contrasting the performance and practices of the organization with those of the similar or leading organizations in the same or related industry, and identifying the gaps or opportunities for improvement78. However, this technique is not the most helpful tool because it may not provide a comprehensive or holistic view of the business environment, and it may not align with the organization’s specific situation, goals, or capabilities78.

Control gap analysis is a technique that involves assessing and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls that are designed and implemented to mitigate the risks, and identifying and addressing the areas or aspects that need to be improved or added . However, this technique is not the most helpful tool because it is reactive rather than proactive, and it may not identify or anticipate the new or emerging risk exposures that may result from the changes in the business environment . References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: SWOT Analysis - ISACA1

4: SWOT Analysis: What It Is and When to Use It2

5: Standard Operating Procedure - Wikipedia3

6: How to Write Effective Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)4

7: Benchmarking - Wikipedia5

8: Benchmarking: Definition, Types, Process, Advantages & Examples6

: Control Gap Analysis - ISACA7

: Control Gap Analysis: A Step-by-Step Guide8

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the most effective approach to mitigate the risk associated with data loss due to users sending sensitive information by email without using encryption is to block unencrypted outgoing emails which contain sensitive data. This is an example of a risk avoidance strategy, which aims to eliminate the risk by removing the source of the risk or the activity that causes the risk. Blocking unencrypted outgoing emails which contain sensitive data can prevent unauthorized access, disclosure, modification or destruction of the sensitive information, and thus protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the data. This approach can also deter users from violating the encryption policy and enforce compliance with the security standards and regulations.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 167-1681

A risk response action plan is a document that outlines the specific tasks, resources, timelines, and deliverables for the risk responses, which are the actions or strategies that are taken to address the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation12.

The most useful tool when measuring the progress of a risk response action plan is an up-to-date risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the significant risks that the organization faces, and the responses and actions that are taken to address them34.

An up-to-date risk register is the most useful tool because it provides a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and the status and performance of the risk responses and actions34.

An up-to-date risk register is also the most useful tool because it enables the monitoring and evaluation of the risk response action plan, and the identification and communication of any issues or gaps that need to be resolved or improved34.

The other options are not the most useful tools, but rather possible metrics or indicators that may be used to measure the progress of a risk response action plan. For example:

Percentage of mitigated risk scenarios is a metric that measures the proportion of risk scenarios that have been reduced or eliminated by the risk responses and actions56. However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not capture the residual or emerging risks that may arise after the risk responses and actions56.

Annual loss expectancy (ALE) changes is a metric that measures the difference between the expected annual losses before and after the risk responses and actions78. However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not reflect the qualitative or intangible impacts of the risks or the risk responses and actions78.

Resource expenditure against budget is a metric that measures the amount of resources and funds that have been spent or allocated for the risk responses and actions, compared to the planned or estimated budget . However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not indicate the effectiveness or efficiency of the risk responses and actions . References =

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

2: How to Create the Ultimate Risk Response Plan | Wrike2

3: Risk Register Template and Examples | Prioritize and Manage Risk3

4: Risk Register Examples for Cybersecurity Leaders4

5: Risk Scenarios Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

6: Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, ISACA, 2019

7: Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) - Definition and Examples5

8: Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) Calculator6

: Project Budgeting: How to Estimate Costs and Manage Budgets7

: Project Budget Template - Download Free Excel Template8

 The most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization is clearly defined roles and responsibilities. The three lines of defense model is a framework that outlines the roles and responsibilities of different functions or groups within the organization in relation to risk management and internal control1. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense, which consists of the operational management and staff who own and manage the risks associated with their activities and processes. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks, as well as designing, implementing, and operating the controls.

The second line of defense, which consists of the specialized functions or units that provide oversight, guidance, and support to the first line of defense in managing the risks and controls. They are responsible for developing and maintaining the risk management framework, policies, and standards, as well as monitoring and reporting on the risk and control performance.

The third line of defense, which consists of the internal audit function that provides independent and objective assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and internal control system. They are responsible for evaluating and testing the design and operation of the risks and controls, as well as reporting and recommending improvements to the senior management and the board. Clearly defined roles and responsibilities are essential for ensuring that the three lines of defense model works effectively and efficiently. They help to avoid confusion, duplication, or gaps in the risk management and internal control activities, as well as to ensure accountability, coordination, and communication among the different functions or groups. They also help to establish the appropriate level of independence, authority, and competence for each line of defense, as well as to align the risk management and internal control objectives and strategies with the organization’s goals and values2. The other options are not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as they are either less relevant or less specific than clearly defined roles and responsibilities. A robust risk aggregation tool set is a set of methods or techniques that enable the organization to collect, consolidate, and analyze the risk data and information from different sources, levels, or perspectives. A robust risk aggregation tool set can help to enhance the risk identification, assessment, and reporting processes, as well as to support the risk decision making and prioritization. However, a robust risk aggregation tool set is not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as it does not address the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups in relation to risk management and internal control. A well-established risk management committee is a group of senior executives or managers who are responsible for overseeing and directing the risk management activities and performance of the organization. A well-established risk management committee can help to ensure the alignment and integration of the risk management objectives and strategies with the organization’s goals and values, as well as to provide guidance and support to the different functions or groups involved in risk management and internal control. However, a well-established risk management committee is not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as it does not cover the roles and responsibilities of the operational management and staff, the specialized functions or units, or the internal audit function. Well-documented and communicated escalation procedures are the steps or actions that are taken to report and resolve any issues or incidents that may affect the risk management and internal control activities or performance of the organization. Well-documented and communicated escalation procedures can help to ensure the timely and appropriate response and resolution of the issues or incidents, as well as to inform and involve the relevant stakeholders and authorities. However, well-documented and communicated escalation procedures are not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as they do not define the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups in relation to risk management and internal control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 85.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Enhance the security awareness and resilience of the organization

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

Corporate culture is the set of values, beliefs, and norms that shape the behavior and attitude of an organization and its people. Corporate culture alignment is the degree of consistency and compatibility between the corporate culture and the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, and objectives. Corporate culture misalignment is the situation where the corporate culture is not aligned with the organization’s goals and expectations, and may hinder or undermine the achievement of those goals. The acceptance of control costs that exceed risk exposure is most likely an example of corporate culture misalignment, as it indicates that the organization is not following a rational and optimal approach to risk management. The organization is spending more resources on controlling risks than the potential benefits or losses that the risks entail, which may result in inefficiency, waste, or opportunity cost. The organization may also be overemphasizing the importance of risk avoidance or mitigation, and neglecting the potential value creation or innovation that may arise from taking or accepting some risks. The other options are not the best answers, as they do not explain the situation of accepting control costs that exceed risk exposure. Low risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is not willing to accept. Low risk tolerance may lead to excessive or unnecessary controls, but it does not necessarily mean that the control costs exceed the risk exposure. High risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is willing to accept. High risk tolerance may lead to insufficient or ineffective controls, but it does not imply that the control costs exceed the risk exposure. Corporate culture alignment is the situation where the corporate culture is aligned with the organization’s goals and expectations, and supports and facilitates the achievement of those goals. Corporate culture alignment would not result in accepting control costs that exceed risk exposure, as it would imply a balanced and rational approach to risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 812

The most important outcome of reviewing the risk management process is assuring that the risk profile supports the IT objectives, because this ensures that the organization is managing its IT-related risks in alignment with its business goals and priorities. The risk profile is a summary of the key risks that the organization faces, their likelihood, impact, and response strategies. The IT objectives are the specific and measurable outcomes that the organization expects to achieve from its IT investments and activities. By reviewing the risk management process, the organization can evaluate whether the risk profile is accurate, complete, and up-to-date, and whether the risk responses are effective, efficient, and consistent with the IT objectives. The review can also identify any gaps, issues, or opportunities for improvement in the risk management process, and provide recommendations for enhancing the process and its outcomes. The review can also help to communicate and report the value and performance of the risk management process to the senior management, the board of directors, and other stakeholders. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

The most important requirement for monitoring key risk indicators (KRIs) using log analysis is providing accurate logs in a timely manner, because this ensures that the risk data is reliable, relevant, and up-to-date. Logs are records of events or activities that occur in IT systems, such as network traffic, user actions, system errors, or security incidents. Log analysis is the process of reviewing and interpreting logs to identify and assess risks, such as performance issues, operational failures, compliance violations, or cyberattacks. By providing accurate logs in a timely manner, an organization can monitor the current status and trends of its KRIs, which are metrics that measure the level and impact of risks. Accurate logs mean that the logs are complete, consistent, and free of errors or anomalies that may distort the risk data. Timely logs mean that the logs are available as soon as possible after the events or activities occur, and that they are updated frequently to reflect the latest changes. Providing accurate logs in a timely manner can help an organization to detect and respond to risks promptly, and to support risk-based decision making and reporting. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 22

A primary benefit of engaging the risk owner during the risk assessment process is prioritization of risk action plans across departments, because this helps to ensure that the most critical and relevant risks are addressed first, and that the resources and efforts are allocated and coordinated efficiently and effectively. A risk owner is the person or group who is responsible for the day-to-day management and mitigation of a specific risk, and who has the authority and accountability to make risk-related decisions. A risk assessment is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value. A risk action plan is the set of actions and tasks that are designed and implemented to reduce the likelihood and impact of a risk, or to exploit the opportunities that a risk may create. By engaging the risk owner during the risk assessment process, the organization can benefit from the following advantages:

The risk owner can provide valuable input and feedback on the risk identification, analysis, and evaluation, based on their knowledge, experience, and perspective of the risk and its context.

The risk owner can help to develop and implement the risk action plan, based on their understanding of the risk objectives, expectations, and outcomes, and their ability to influence and control the risk factors and sources.

The risk owner can help to prioritize the risk action plan, based on their assessment of the risk severity, urgency, and importance, and their consideration of the costs, benefits, and feasibility of the risk actions.

The risk owner can help to coordinate the risk action plan across departments, by communicating and collaborating with other risk owners, stakeholders, and resources, and by aligning and integrating the risk actions with the organization’s strategy, processes, and culture. References = Risk Owners — What Do They Do1

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures the level and trend of a risk that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance1. A KRI threshold is a predefined value or range that indicates the acceptable or tolerable level of risk for the organization2. The organization’s risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that it is willing to take in order to meet its strategic goals3. Therefore, the most likely reason for senior management’s response is that the KRI threshold needs to be revised to better align with the organization’s risk appetite. This means that the current threshold is either too low or too high, resulting in false alarms or missed signals. By adjusting the threshold to reflect the organization’s risk appetite, senior management can ensure that the KRI provides relevant and actionable information for risk management and decision making. The other options are not the most likely reasons for senior management’s response, as they imply that the KRI is faulty, irrelevant, or misunderstood. The underlying data source for the KRI is using inaccurate data and needs to be corrected. This option assumes that the KRI is based on erroneous or unreliable data, which would affect its validity and reliability. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to verify the data quality and accuracy before using the KRI for risk monitoring and reporting. The KRI is not providing useful information and should be removed from the KRI inventory. This option assumes that the KRI is not aligned with the organization’s objectives, strategies, or risk profile, which would affect its usefulness and value. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to review and update the KRI inventory periodically to ensure that the KRIs are relevant and meaningful for risk management. Senior management does not understand the KRI and should undergo risk training. This option assumes that senior management lacks the knowledge or skills to interpret and use the KRI for risk management, which would affect their competence and confidence. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to have sufficient risk awareness and education to understand and apply the KRI for risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.4, Page 53.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), periodically reviewing controls per the risk treatment plan would best help to ensure that identified risk is efficiently managed, as it involves verifying the effectiveness and efficiency of the implemented risk response actions and identifying any gaps or changes in the risk profile. Periodically reviewing controls per the risk treatment plan helps to:

Confirm that the controls are operating as intended and producing the desired outcomes

Detect any deviations, errors, or weaknesses in the controls and their performance

Evaluate the adequacy and appropriateness of the controls in relation to the current risk environment and the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address any issues or deficiencies in the controls

Update the risk register and the risk treatment plan to reflect the current risk status and the residual risk levels

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 215-2161

A technical vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in the design or implementation of an information system or resource that can be exploited or compromised by a threat or source of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A technical vulnerability may be caused by various factors, such as human error, system failure, process inefficiency, resource limitation, etc.

A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the technical vulnerabilities that exist or may arise in the organization’s information systems or resources, and determining their severity and impact. A vulnerability assessment 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.

The best response to the scenario of a recently discovered technical vulnerability being actively exploited is to conduct a vulnerability assessment, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:

What is the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how does it affect the functionality or security of the information system or resource?

How is the technical vulnerability being exploited or compromised, and by whom or what?

What are the potential consequences or impacts of the exploitation or compromise of the technical vulnerability for the organization and its stakeholders?

How can the technical vulnerability be detected and reported, and what are the available or feasible options or solutions to address or correct it?

Conducting a vulnerability assessment can help the organization to improve and optimize the information system or resource quality and performance, and to reduce or eliminate the technical vulnerability. It can also help the organization to align the information system or resource with the organization’s objectives and requirements, and to comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the best responses to the scenario of a recently discovered technical vulnerability being actively exploited, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of conducting a vulnerability assessment, which is to identify and evaluate the technical vulnerability, and to determine its severity and impact.

Assessing the vulnerability management process is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the process that is used to identify, analyze, evaluate, and communicate the technical vulnerabilities, and to align them with the organization’s objectives and requirements. Assessing the vulnerability management process can help the organization to improve and optimize the process, and to reduce or eliminate the gaps or weaknesses in the process, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders.

Conducting a control self-assessment is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls that are intended to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the information systems and resources, using the input and feedback from the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the information systems activities or functions. Conducting a control self-assessment can help the organization to identify and document the control deficiencies, and to align them with the organization’s objectives and requirements, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders.

Reassessing the inherent risk of the target is a process of reevaluating and recalculating the amount and type of risk that exists in the absence of any controls, and that is inherent to the nature or characteristics of the target, which is the information system or resource that is affected by the technical vulnerability. Reassessing the inherent risk of the target can help the organization to understand and document the risk exposure or level, and to align it with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders. 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 195

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A consolidated view into the organization’s risk profile is a comprehensive and integrated representation of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

The most helpful material to provide a consolidated view into the organization’s risk profile is the IT risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the IT-related risks, their sources, impacts, likelihoods, responses, owners, and statuses within the organization34.

The IT risk register is the most helpful material because it provides a complete and consistent overview of the IT risk landscape, and enables the identification, analysis, evaluation, treatment, monitoring, and communication of IT risks across the organization34.

The IT risk register is also the most helpful material because it supports the project prioritization and resource allocation decisions, by highlighting the most significant and relevant IT risks, and by showing the alignment of the IT risk responses with the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, and objectives34.

The other options are not the most helpful materials, but rather possible inputs or outputs of the IT risk register. For example:

A list of key risk indicators (KRIs) is a set of metrics that measure the occurrence or status of IT risks, and provide timely and relevant information and feedback to the organization56. However, a list of KRIs is not the most helpful material because it does not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a snapshot or a trend of selected IT risks56.

Internal audit reports are documents that present the findings and recommendations of the internal audit function, which evaluates the adequacy and effectiveness of the IT risk management and control processes within the organization78. However, internal audit reports are not the most helpful material because they do not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a periodic and independent assessment of specific IT risk areas78.

A list of approved projects is a document that records and tracks the IT projects that have been authorized and funded by the organization, and their objectives, scope, schedule, budget, and status . However, a list of approved projects is not the most helpful material because it does not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a summary of the IT project portfolio . References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: IT Risk Register Template, ISACA, 2019

4: IT Risk Register Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

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

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

7: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

8: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

: IT Project Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

: IT Project Management Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2018

The audit planning process is the process of defining and describing the scope, objectives, and approach of the internal audit that is performed to assess and evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. The audit planning process involves identifying and prioritizing the audit areas, topics, or issues, and allocating the audit resources, time, and budget.

The most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process is the annual risk assessment results, which are the outcomes or outputs of the risk assessment process that measures and compares the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizes them based on their significance and urgency. The annual risk assessment results can help the internal audit department to plan the audit by providing the following information:

The level and priority of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization if they materialize.

The gap or difference between the current and desired level of risk, and the extent or degree to which the risk responses or controls contribute to or affect the gap or difference.

The cost-benefit or feasibility analysis of the possible actions or plans to address or correct the risks and their responses, and the expected or desired outcomes or benefits that they may provide for the organization.

The other options are not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that the annual risk assessment results provide, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the internal audit department.

Closed management action plans from the previous audit are the actions or plans that have been implemented or completed by the management to address or correct the findings or recommendations from the previous internal audit that was performed. Closed management action plans from the previous audit can provide useful information on the progress and performance of the management in improving and optimizing the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions, but they are not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because they do not indicate the current or accurate state and performance of the organization’s risk profile, and they may not cover all the relevant or emerging risks that may exist or arise.

An updated vulnerability management report is a report that provides the information and status of the vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. An updated vulnerability management report can provide useful information on the existence and severity of the vulnerabilities, and the actions or plans to mitigate or prevent them, but it is not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because it does not indicate the likelihood and impact of the risk scenarios that are associated with the vulnerabilities, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization.

A list of identified generic risk scenarios is a list that contains the descriptions or representations of the possible or hypothetical situations or events that may cause or result in a risk for the organization, without specifying the details or characteristics of the risk source, event, cause, or impact. A list of identified generic risk scenarios can provide useful information on the types or categories of the risks that may affect the organization, but it is not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because it does not indicate the level and priority of the risks, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 188

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 A rule-based data loss prevention (DLP) tool is a software solution that identifies and helps prevent unsafe or inappropriate sharing, transfer, or use of sensitive data. It can help an organization monitor and protect sensitive information across on-premises systems, cloud-based locations, and endpoint devices. It can also help an organization comply with regulations such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). A rule-based DLP tool works by comparing content to the organization’s DLP policy, which defines how the organization labels, shares, and protects data without exposing it to unauthorized users. The tool can then apply protective actions such as encryption, access restrictions, and alerts. As a result of implementing a rule-based DLP tool, the most likely change is the reduction of risk likelihood, which is the probability of a risk event occurring. By detecting and preventing data breaches, exfiltration, or unwanted destruction of sensitive data, a rule-based DLP tool can lower the chance of such incidents happening and thus decrease the risk likelihood. The other options are less likely to change as a result of implementing a rule-based DLP tool. Risk velocity is the speed at which a risk event impacts an organization, which depends on factors such as the nature of the threat, the response time, and the recovery process. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, which depends on factors such as the organization’s culture, strategy, and stakeholder expectations. Risk impact is the potential loss or damage that a risk event can cause to an organization, which depends on factors such as the severity of the incident, the extent of the exposure, and the resilience of the organization. While a rule-based DLP tool may have some influence on these factors, it is not the primary driver of change for them. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 13

Global standards related to risk management are documents that provide the principles, guidelines, and best practices for managing risk in a consistent, effective, and efficient manner across different organizations, sectors, and regions12.

The primary reason for a risk practitioner to use global standards related to risk management is to continuously improve risk management processes, which are the activities and tasks that enable the organization to identify, analyze, evaluate, treat, monitor, and communicate the risks that may affect its objectives, performance, and value creation34.

Continuously improving risk management processes is the primary reason because it helps the organization to enhance its risk management capabilities and maturity, and to adapt to the changing risk environment and stakeholder expectations34.

Continuously improving risk management processes is also the primary reason because it supports the achievement of the organization’s goals and the delivery of value to the stakeholders, which are the ultimate purpose and outcome of risk management34.

The other options are not the primary reason, but rather possible benefits or objectives that may result from using global standards related to risk management. For example:

Building an organizational risk-aware culture is a benefit of using global standards related to risk management that involves creating and maintaining a shared understanding, attitude, and behavior towards risk among the organization’s employees and leaders, and fostering a culture of accountability, transparency, and learning34. However, this benefit is not the primary reason because it is an enabler and a consequence of continuously improving risk management processes, rather than a driver or a goal34.

Complying with legal and regulatory requirements is an objective of using global standards related to risk management that involves meeting and exceeding the expectations and obligations of the external authorities or bodies that govern or oversee the organization’s activities and operations, such as laws, regulations, standards, or contracts34. However, this objective is not the primary reason because it is a constraint and a challenge of continuously improving risk management processes, rather than a motivation or a benefit34.

Identifying gaps in risk management practices is an objective of using global standards related to risk management that involves assessing and comparing the current and desired state of the organization’s risk management processes, and identifying the areas or aspects that need to be improved or addressed34. However, this objective is not the primary reason because it is a step and a tool of continuously improving risk management processes, rather than a reason or a result34. References =

1: ISO - ISO 31000 — Risk management1

2: Risk Management Standards2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

The risk landscape is the set of internal and external factors and conditions that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, and create or influence the risks that the organization faces. The risk landscape is dynamic and complex, and it may change over time due to various drivers or events, such as technological innovations, market trends, regulatory changes, customer preferences, competitor actions, environmental issues, etc.

The best way to identify changes to the risk landscape is threat modeling, which is the process of identifying, analyzing, and prioritizing the potential threats or sources of harm that may exploit the vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems, and cause adverse impacts or consequences for the organization. Threat modeling can help the organization to anticipate and prepare for the changes in the risk landscape, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the threats.

Threat modeling can be performed using various techniques, such as brainstorming, scenario analysis, attack trees, STRIDE, DREAD, etc. Threat modeling can also be integrated with the risk management process, and aligned with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite.

The other options are not the best ways to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they do not provide the same level of proactivity, comprehensiveness, and effectiveness of identifying and addressing the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Internal audit reports are the documents that provide the results and findings of the internal audits that are performed to assess and evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. Internal audit reports can provide useful information and recommendations on the current state and performance of the organization, and identify the issues or gaps that need to be addressed or improved, but they are not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they are usually retrospective and reactive, and they may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Access reviews are the processes of verifying and validating the access rights and privileges that are granted to the users or entities that interact with the organization’s assets, processes, or systems, and ensuring that they are appropriate and authorized. Access reviews can provide useful information and feedback on the security and compliance of the organization’s access management, and identify and revoke any unauthorized or unnecessary access rights or privileges, but they are not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they are usually periodic and specific, and they may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Root cause analysis is the process of identifying and understanding the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in a problem or incident that has occurred or may occur in the organization. Root cause analysis can provide useful insights and solutions on the origin and nature of the problem or incident, and prevent or reduce its recurrence or impact, but it is not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because it is usually retrospective and reactive, and it may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 167

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A risk taxonomy is a classification or categorization system that defines and organizes the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. It includes the risk domains, categories, subcategories, elements, attributes, etc., and the relationships and dependencies among them. A risk taxonomy can help the organization to identify, analyze, evaluate, and communicate the risks, and to align them with the organization’s strategy and culture.

The most important consideration when developing an organization’s risk taxonomy is the business context, which is the set of internal and external factors and conditions that influence and shape the organization’s objectives, operations, and performance. It includes the organization’s vision, mission, values, goals, stakeholders, resources, capabilities, processes, systems, etc., as well as the market, industry, regulatory, social, environmental, etc., factors and conditions that affect the organization.

Considering the business context when developing an organization’s risk taxonomy ensures that the risk taxonomy is relevant, appropriate, and proportional to the organization’s needs and expectations, and that it supports the organization’s objectives and values. It also helps to ensure that the risk taxonomy is consistent and compatible with the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions, and that it reflects the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance.

The other options are not the most important considerations when developing an organization’s risk taxonomy, because they do not address the fundamental question of whether the risk taxonomy is suitable and acceptable for the organization.

Leading industry frameworks are the established or recognized models or standards that provide the principles, guidelines, and best practices for the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. Leading industry frameworks can provide useful references and benchmarks when developing an organization’s risk taxonomy, but they are not the most important consideration, because they may not be specific or applicable to the organization’s business context, and they may not reflect the organization’s objectives and values.

Regulatory requirements are the rules or obligations that the organization must comply with, as imposed or enforced by the relevant authorities or regulators. Regulatory requirements can provide important inputs and constraints when developing an organization’s risk taxonomy, but they are not the most important consideration, because they may not be comprehensive or sufficient for the organization’s business context, and they may not support the organization’s objectives and values.

IT strategy is the plan or direction that the organization follows to achieve its IT objectives and to align its IT resources and capabilities with its business objectives and needs. IT strategy can provide important inputs and alignment when developing an organization’s risk taxonomy, but it is not the most important consideration, because it may not cover all the relevant or significant risks that may affect the organization’s business context, and it may not reflect the organization’s objectives and values. 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 175

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 The best way to support risk-based decisions by senior management would be to map findings to objectives, because this would help them understand how the identified risks affect the achievement of the organization’s goals and priorities. Mapping findings to objectives would also help senior management evaluate the trade-offs between different risk responses and allocate resources accordingly. By linking risks to objectives, the risk practitioner can communicate the value and impact of risk management in a clear and relevant way. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

The recovery time objective (RTO) is a metric that defines the maximum acceptable time frame for restoring a system or service after a disruption. The RTO is determined by the business impact and requirements of the system or service, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The calculation of the RTO is necessary to determine the priority of restoration, which means the order and urgency of recovering the systems or services based on their criticality and dependency. The priority of restoration helps to optimize the use of resources and minimize the downtime and losses during a disaster recovery. The other options are not the correct answers, as they are not the main purpose of calculating the RTO. The time required to restore files is a factor that affects the RTO, but it is not the outcome of the RTO calculation. The point of synchronization is the point in time to which the data must be restored to ensure consistency and accuracy. The point of synchronization is related to the recovery point objective (RPO), not the RTO. The annual loss expectancy (ALE) is a measure of the expected loss per year due to a specific risk or threat. The ALE is calculated by multiplying the single loss expectancy (SLE) by the annualized rate of occurrence (ARO). The ALE is not directly related to the RTO, although it may influence the RTO determination. References = Recovery Time Objective (RTO) - What Is It, Examples, Calculation; CRISC Review Manual, pages 197-1981; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 842

Conducting phishing exercises would best help minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats, because they can help to raise awareness and educate employees about the common techniques and tactics used by social engineers, such as sending deceptive emails or text messages that ask for sensitive information or direct users to malicious websites. Phishing exercises are simulated attacks that test the employees’ ability to recognize and respond to social engineering attempts, and provide feedback and guidance on how to improve their security behavior. By conducting phishing exercises, the organization can measure and improve the employees’ level of security awareness and resilience, and reduce the likelihood and impact of falling victim to social engineering attacks. The other options are less effective ways to minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats. Enforcing employees’ sanctions can help to deter and punish employees who violate the security policies or procedures, but it may not prevent or reduce the occurrence of social engineering attacks, as they may target employees who are unaware, careless, or coerced by the attackers. Enforcing segregation of duties can help to prevent or limit the damage caused by social engineering attacks, by restricting the access and authority of employees to perform certain tasks or functions, but it may not address the root cause or source of the attacks, which is the human factor. Reviewing the organization’s risk appetite can help to define and communicate the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, but it may not directly affect or influence the employees’ behavior or attitude toward social engineering threats, which may depend on their individual or situational factors. References = How to Prevent and Mitigate Social Engineering Attacks 1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: The Control Process | Principles of Management4

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

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

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

Events exceeding risk thresholds are situations or occurrences that result in the actual level of risk exceeding the acceptable or tolerable level of risk, as defined by the organization’s risk appetite, criteria, and objectives12.

The most effective way to enable a business operations manager to identify events exceeding risk thresholds is to implement continuous monitoring, which is a process that involves collecting and analyzing data and information on the performance and status of the business processes, systems, and controls, and detecting and reporting any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate a risk event34.

Continuous monitoring is the most effective way because it provides timely and accurate visibility and insight into the risk landscape, and enables the business operations manager to identify and respond to the events exceeding risk thresholds before they escalate or cause significant harm or damage to the organization34.

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

The other options are not the most effective ways, but rather possible tools or techniques that may complement or enhance the continuous monitoring. For example:

A control self-assessment is a technique that involves engaging and empowering the business process owners and operators to evaluate and report on the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls that are designed and implemented to mitigate the risks56. However, this technique is not the most effective way because it is periodic rather than continuous, and it may not capture or communicate the events exceeding risk thresholds in a timely or consistent manner56.

Transaction logging is a tool that involves recording and storing the details and history of the transactions or activities that are performed by the business processes or systems, and providing an audit trail for verification or investigation purposes78. However, this tool is not the most effective way because it is passive rather than active, and it may not detect or report the events exceeding risk thresholds unless they are analyzed or queried78.

Benchmarking against peers is a technique that involves comparing and contrasting the performance and practices of the business processes or systems with those of the similar or leading organizations in the same or related industry, and identifying the gaps or opportunities for improvement . However, this technique is not the most effective way because it is external rather than internal, and it may not reflect or align with the organization’s specific risk appetite, criteria, and objectives . References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA1

4: Continuous Monitoring: A New Approach to Risk Management - ISACA Journal2

5: Risk and control self-assessment - KPMG Global3

6: Control Self Assessments - PwC4

7: Transaction Log - Wikipedia5

8: Transaction Logging - IBM6

: Benchmarking - Wikipedia7

: Benchmarking: Definition, Types, Process, Advantages & Examples

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

The organization’s risk appetite and tolerance are the most important topics to cover in a risk awareness training for senior management. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk tolerance is the level of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is prepared to accept. Senior management plays a key role in defining and communicating the risk appetite and tolerance, as well as ensuring that they are aligned with the organization’s strategy, culture, and values. By covering these topics in the training session, the risk practitioner can help senior management understand and articulate the risk preferences and boundaries of the organization, as well as monitor and adjust them as needed. The other options are not the most important topics to cover in a risk awareness training for senior management, although they may be relevant and useful. The organization’s strategic risk management projects are specific initiatives or activities that aim to identify, assess, and treat risks that may affect the organization’s objectives. Senior management roles and responsibilities are the duties and expectations that senior management has in relation to risk management, such as providing leadership, oversight, and support. Senior management allocation of risk management resources is the process of assigning and prioritizing the human, financial, and technical resources that are needed to implement and maintain risk management activities. These topics are more operational and tactical than strategic and may vary depending on the context and scope of the risk management function. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 40-411; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 732

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

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are quantifiable measures of progress toward an intended result, such as a strategic objective or a desired outcome12.

The most important factor when developing KPIs is the alignment to risk responses, which are the actions taken to address the risks that may affect the achievement of the intended result12.

Alignment to risk responses means that the KPIs should reflect the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk responses, and provide feedback and guidance for improving the risk responses12.

Alignment to risk responses also means that the KPIs should be consistent and compatible with the risk responses, and support the risk management process and objectives12.

The other options are not the most important factor, but rather possible aspects or features of KPIs that may vary depending on the context and purpose of the KPIs. For example:

Alignment to management reports is an aspect of KPIs that relates to the communication and presentation of the KPIs to the relevant stakeholders, such as senior management, board members, or external parties12. However, this aspect does not determine the quality or validity of the KPIs, or the alignment to the intended result12.

Alerts when risk thresholds are reached is a feature of KPIs that relates to the monitoring and control of the KPIs, and the triggering of actions or decisions when the KPIs exceed or fall below a certain level or range12. However, this feature does not define the content or scope of the KPIs, or the alignment to the intended result12.

Identification of trends is a feature of KPIs that relates to the analysis and interpretation of the KPIs, and the identification of patterns or changes in the KPIs over time or across different dimensions12. However, this feature does not specify the criteria or methodology of the KPIs, or the alignment to the intended result12. References =

1: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? Guide & Examples - Qlik3

2: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? - KPI.org4

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), a vulnerability is a flaw or weakness in an asset’s design, implementation, or operation and management that could be exploited by a threat. A delayed removal of employee access is a vulnerability, as it allows former employees to retain access to the organization’s IT assets and processes, which could lead to unauthorized disclosure, modification, or destruction of data or resources. A delayed removal of employee access could be caused by poor personnel management, lack of security awareness, or inadequate access control policies and procedures.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 32-331

A risk dashboard is a graphical tool that displays the key indicators and metrics of the organization’s IT risk profile, such as the risk level, status, trend, performance, etc., using charts, graphs, tables, etc. A risk dashboard can help the organization to monitor and communicate the IT risk profile, and to support the decision making and planning for the IT risk management.

A risk dashboard is the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it provides a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and highlights the most significant and relevant IT risks that need to be addressed or monitored. A risk dashboard can also help to compare and contrast the IT risk profile with the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite, and to identify the gaps or opportunities for improvement.

The other options are not the most effective tools in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because they do not provide the same level of visibility and clarity that a risk dashboard provides, and they may not be updated or aligned with the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite.

A risk self-assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, using the input and feedback from the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the IT activities or functions. A risk self-assessment can help the organization to understand and document the IT risk profile, and to align it with the organization’s IT strategy and culture, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not reflect the current or accurate state and performance of the IT risk profile, and it may not cover all the relevant or emerging IT risks that may exist or arise.

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the information and status of the identified IT risks and their responses. It includes the IT risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, priority, response, owner, action plan, status, etc. A risk register can help the organization to identify, analyze, evaluate, and communicate the IT risks and their responses, and to align them with the organization’s IT strategy and culture, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not provide a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and it may not highlight the most significant and relevant IT risks that need to be addressed or monitored.

A risk map is a graphical tool that displays the results of the IT risk analysis in a matrix format, using colors and symbols to indicate the level and priority of the IT risks. A risk map can show the distribution and comparison of the IT risks based on various criteria, such as likelihood, impact, category, source, etc. A risk map can help the organization to assess and prioritize the IT risks, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the IT risks, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not provide a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and it may not reflect the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite. 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 180

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that help organizations monitor and evaluate the level of risk they are exposed to. They provide early warning signals of potential issues that could affect the achievement of organizational goals12.

The most important data source for monitoring KRIs is automated logs collected from different systems, which are records that capture and store the details and history of the transactions or activities that are performed by the organization’s processes, systems, or controls34.

Automated logs collected from different systems are the most important data source because they provide timely and accurate data and information on the performance and status of the organization’s operations, and enable the detection and reporting of any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate a risk event34.

Automated logs collected from different systems are also the most important data source because they support the accountability and auditability of the organization’s operations, and facilitate the investigation and resolution of any risk event34.

The other options are not the most important data sources, but rather possible inputs or factors that may influence or affect the KRIs. For example:

Directives from legal and regulatory authorities are documents that provide the expectations and obligations of the external authorities or bodies that govern or oversee the organization’s activities and operations, such as laws, regulations, standards, or contracts5 . However, these documents are not the most important data source because they do not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the criteria or framework for risk compliance5 .

Audit reports from internal information systems audits are documents that provide the findings and recommendations of the independent and objective assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s information systems, processes, and controls . However, these documents are not the most important data source because they do not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the assurance or improvement for risk management .

Trend analysis of external risk factors is a technique that involves analyzing and forecasting the changes and impacts of the external factors that influence the organization’s operations, such as technology, competition, regulation, or customer behavior . However, this technique is not the most important data source because it does not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the insight or prediction for risk identification . References =

1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture1

2: Key risk indicator - Wikipedia2

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia3

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva4

5: Regulatory Compliance - Wikipedia5

: Regulatory Compliance Management Software | MetricStream

: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

: Trend Analysis - Investopedia

: Trend Analysis: A Definition and Examples

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

A third-party security assessment report is the most helpful to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider, because it provides an independent and objective evaluation of the cloud provider’s security posture, policies, and practices. A third-party security assessment report can help to verify and validate the cloud provider’s compliance with the relevant standards, regulations, and best practices, such as ISO 27001, PCI DSS, NIST, or CSA. A third-party security assessment report can also help to identify and address any gaps, weaknesses, or vulnerabilities in the cloud provider’s security controls, and to provide recommendations and guidance for improvement. A third-party security assessment report can also help to increase the trust and confidence of the cloud customers, and to facilitate the due diligence and risk management processes. The other options are less helpful to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider. A control self-assessment is a process that enables the cloud provider to assess its own security controls, using a predefined framework or questionnaire. However, a control self-assessment may not be as reliable or comprehensive as a third-party security assessment report, as it may be biased, incomplete, or inaccurate, and it may not cover all the aspects or dimensions of security. Internal audit reports from the vendor are documents that provide the results and findings of the internal audits conducted by the cloud provider’s own auditors, to verify and validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the security controls. However, internal audit reports from the vendor may not be as credible or trustworthy as a third-party security assessment report, as they may be influenced by the cloud provider’s interests, objectives, or agenda, and they may not follow the same standards or criteria as the external auditors. Service level agreement monitoring is a process that measures and evaluates the performance and availability of the cloud services, based on the predefined metrics and targets agreed between the cloud provider and the cloud customer. However, service level agreement monitoring may not be sufficient or relevant to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider, as it may not address the security aspects or requirements of the cloud services, such as confidentiality, integrity, or accountability, and it may not reflect the actual security risks or incidents that may occur in the cloud environment. References = Cloud Security Controls: Key Elements and 4 Control Frameworks 1

A recovery time objective (RTO) is the maximum acceptable time or duration that a business process or function can be disrupted or unavailable due to a disaster or incident, before it causes unacceptable or intolerable consequences for the organization. It is usually expressed in hours, days, or weeks, and it is aligned with the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements.

The primary factor in determining a RTO is the cost of downtime due to a disaster, which is the estimated loss or damage that the organization may suffer if a business process or function is disrupted or unavailable for a certain period of time. The cost of downtime can be expressed in terms of financial, operational, reputational, or legal consequences, and it can help the organization to assess the impact and urgency of the disaster, and to decide on the appropriate recovery strategy and resources.

The other options are not the primary factors in determining a RTO, because they do not address the fundamental question of how long the organization can tolerate the disruption or unavailability of a business process or function.

The cost of offsite backup premises is the cost of acquiring, maintaining, or using an alternative or secondary location or facility that can be used to resume or continue the business process or function in case of a disaster or incident. The cost of offsite backup premises is important to consider when selecting or implementing a recovery strategy, but it is not the primary factor in determining a RTO, because it does not indicate the impact or urgency of the disaster, and it may not reflect the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements.

The cost of testing the business continuity plan is the cost of conducting, evaluating, or improving the tests or exercises that are performed to verify or validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the business continuity plan, which is the document that describes the actions and procedures that the organization will take to recover or restore the business process or function in case of a disaster or incident. The cost of testing the business continuity plan is important to consider when developing or updating the business continuity plan, but it is not the primary factor in determining a RTO, because it does not indicate the impact or urgency of the disaster, and it may not reflect the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements.

The response time of the emergency action plan is the time or duration that it takes for the organization to initiate or execute the emergency action plan, which is the document that describes the immediate actions and procedures that the organization will take to protect the life, health, and safety of the people, and to minimize the damage or loss of the assets, in case of a disaster or incident. The response time of the emergency action plan is important to consider when preparing or reviewing the emergency action plan, but it is not the primary factor in determining a RTO, because it does not indicate the impact or urgency of the disaster, and it may not reflect the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 62-63, 66-67, 70-71, 74-75, 78-79

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 165

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Top Four Damaging Consequences of Data Leakage | ZeroFox1

2: 8 Data Leak Prevention Strategies for 2023 | UpGuard2

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

4: Data Classification Policy Template - IT Governance USA4

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

6: Encryption Policy Template - IT Governance USA6

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

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

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

A web-based service provider is an organization that offers online services or applications to its customers or users, such as e-commerce, social media, cloud computing, etc. A web-based service provider depends on the availability, reliability, and security of its web servers, networks, and systems to deliver its services or applications.

A low risk appetite for system outages means that the organization is not willing to accept a high level or frequency of system outages, which are interruptions or disruptions in the normal operation or functionality of the web servers, networks, or systems. System outages can cause customer dissatisfaction, revenue loss, reputation damage, or legal liability for the web-based service provider.

A current risk profile for online security is the current state or condition of the online security risks that may affect the web-based service provider’s objectives and operations. It includes the identification, analysis, and evaluation of the online security risks, and the prioritization and response to them based on their significance and urgency.

The most relevant observation to escalate to senior management is an increase in attempted distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, which are malicious attacks that aim to overwhelm or overload the web servers, networks, or systems with a large volume or frequency of requests or traffic, and prevent them from responding to legitimate requests or traffic. An increase in attempted DDoS attacks indicates a high likelihood and impact of system outages, and a high level of threat or vulnerability for the web-based service provider’s online security. Escalating this observation to senior management can help them to understand the severity and urgency of the risk, and to decide on the appropriate risk response and allocation of resources.

The other options are not the most relevant observations to escalate to senior management, because they do not indicate a high likelihood or impact of system outages, and they may not be relevant or actionable for senior management.

An increase in attempted website phishing attacks means an increase in malicious attempts to deceive or trick the web-based service provider’s customers or users into providing their personal or financial information, such as usernames, passwords, credit card numbers, etc., by impersonating the web-based service provider’s website or email. An increase in attempted website phishing attacks indicates a high level of threat or vulnerability for the web-based service provider’s online security, but it may not directly cause system outages, unless the phishing attacks are used to compromise the web servers, networks, or systems. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval.

A decrease in achievement of service level agreements (SLAs) means a decrease in the extent or degree to which the web-based service provider meets or exceeds the agreed or expected standards or criteria for the quality, performance, or availability of its services or applications, as specified in the contracts or agreements with its customers or users. A decrease in achievement of SLAs indicates a low level of customer satisfaction, retention, or loyalty, and a low level of competitiveness or profitability for the web-based service provider. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval.

A decrease in remediated web security vulnerabilities means a decrease in the number or percentage of web security vulnerabilities that have been identified and resolved or mitigated by the web-based service provider. Web security vulnerabilities are weaknesses or flaws in the web servers, networks, or systems that can be exploited by malicious attackers to compromise or damage the web-based service provider’s online security. A decrease in remediated web security vulnerabilities indicates a low level of effectiveness or efficiency for the web-based service provider’s web security controls or processes. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval. 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 161

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep