CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Questions and Answers

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

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

 Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure how well a specific control is performing in reducing the causes, consequences, or likelihood of a risk1. KCIs are used to evaluate the control operating effectiveness, which is the degree to which a control achieves its intended objectives and mitigates the risk2.

The primary reason to use KCIs to evaluate control operating effectiveness is to monitor the achievement of set objectives. This means that KCIs help to:

Track and report the progress and performance of the control against the predefined targets, standards, or benchmarks

Identify and address any gaps, deviations, or issues in the control operation or outcome

Provide feedback and assurance to the stakeholders and regulators on the adequacy and reliability of the control

Support the continuous improvement and optimization of the control3

References = Key Control Indicator (KCI) - CIO Wiki, Evaluating and Improving Internal Control in Organizations - IFAC, A Methodical Approach to Key Control Indicators

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

A risk treatment plan is a document that outlines the approach and actions to be taken to address the unacceptable risks identified in the risk assessment process1. A risk treatment plan should include the following components2:

The risk identification number and description

The risk treatment option chosen (e.g., avoid, reduce, share, or accept)

The risk treatment owner, who is responsible for implementing and monitoring the risk treatment

The risk treatment actions, which are the specific tasks or steps to be performed to execute the risk treatment

The risk treatment resources, which are the human, financial, or technical resources required to support the risk treatment

The risk treatment target date, which is the deadline for completing the risk treatment

The risk treatment performance indicators, which are the measures to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk treatment

The risk treatment status, which is the current progress or outcome of the risk treatment

Among the four options given, the most important component in a risk treatment plan is the treatment plan ownership. This is because the treatment plan ownership defines the accountability and authority for the risk treatment, and ensures that the risk treatment actions are carried out as planned and reported as required3. The treatment plan ownership also facilitates the communication and coordination among the stakeholders involved in the risk treatment, and enables the escalation and resolution of any issues or challenges that may arise during the risk treatment process4.

References = Risk Treatment (With Examples), ISO 27001 Risk Assessment & Risk Treatment: The Complete Guide, Risk Management Framework - Treat Risks, Risk Management Plan Components

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

User accounts provisioning is the process of creating, managing, and modifying user accounts within a system or an application, based on the user’s roles, responsibilities, and requirements. User accounts provisioning is an essential part of identity and access management (IAM), which aims to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the system or the application, and the information or resources that it handles or supports1.

The best key performance indicator (KPI) for monitoring adherence to an organization’s user accounts provisioning practices is the percentage of accounts without documented approval, because it can help to measure how well the organization follows the policies, standards, and procedures for user accounts provisioning, and how effectively the organization controls and audits the user accounts provisioning activities. The percentage of accounts without documented approval can indicate:

The level of compliance and accountability of the user accounts provisioning process, and the extent to which the user accounts provisioning requests and actions are authorized and verified by the appropriate parties, such as managers, IT staff, or security officers

The level of risk and exposure of the user accounts provisioning process, and the likelihood and impact of unauthorized or inappropriate user accounts provisioning, such as granting excessive or unnecessary access privileges, creating duplicate or fraudulent accounts, or violating legal or regulatory requirements

The level of quality and efficiency of the user accounts provisioning process, and the ability and capacity of the organization to manage and maintain the user accounts provisioning records and documents, such as forms, logs, or reports23

The other options are not the best KPIs for monitoring adherence to an organization’s user accounts provisioning practices, but rather some of the factors or outcomes of it. User accounts with default passwords are user accounts that have not changed their passwords from the initial or default values that are assigned by the system or the application. User accounts with default passwords are a factor that can increase the risk of unauthorized or malicious access to the system or the application, as the default passwords may be easily guessed or compromised by attackers. Active accounts belonging to former personnel are user accounts that have not been deactivated or deleted after the users have left the organization. Active accounts belonging to former personnel are an outcome of ineffective or inefficient user accounts deprovisioning, which is the process of revoking or removing the user accounts and access privileges when they are no longer needed or valid. Accounts with dormant activity are user accounts that have not been used or accessed for a long period of time. Accounts with dormant activity are an outcome of poor or inconsistent user accounts management, which is the process of updating or modifying the user accounts and access privileges according to the changes or needs of the users or the organization4. References =

User Provisioning for SaaS Apps: Top 10 Best Practices | Resmo

Top Identity and Access Management Metrics

KPI-driven approach to Identity & Access Management - Elimity

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The IT control environment is the set of standards, processes, and structures that provide the basis for carrying out IT internal control across the organization1. The IT control environment comprises the IT governance, IT policies and procedures, IT organizational structure, IT roles and responsibilities, IT competencies and training, and IT culture and ethics2. The effectiveness of the IT control environment can be measured by how well it supports the achievement of the organization’s IT objectives, such as IT reliability, security, compliance, and performance3.

One of the best ways to provide the most up-to-date information about the effectiveness of the organization’s overall IT control environment is to perform periodic penetration testing. Penetration testing is the process of simulating real-world cyberattacks on the organization’s IT systems, networks, and applications, to identify and exploit any vulnerabilities, weaknesses, or gaps in the IT control environment4. Penetration testing can help to:

Evaluate the current state and maturity of the IT control environment and its alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

Detect and prioritize the most critical and urgent IT risks and threats that may compromise the organization’s IT objectives or assets

Test and validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing IT controls and their ability to prevent, detect, or respond to cyberattacks

Provide recommendations and feedback for improving the IT control environment and enhancing the IT security posture and resilience of the organization

References = COSO – Control Environment - Deloitte, How to use COSO to assess IT controls - Journal of Accountancy, What is Penetration Testing?, [Penetration Testing: A Guide for Business Leaders]

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

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

Risk scenario description and risk ID

Risk owner and other stakeholders

Risk response strategy and objectives

Risk response actions and tasks

Resources, costs, and benefits

Roles and responsibilities

Timeline and milestones

Performance indicators and monitoring mechanisms

Contingency plans and triggers

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

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

The 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.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the most important reason for implementing change control procedures is to ensure that only approved changes are implemented, because it helps to prevent or minimize the risk of unauthorized or unintended changes that may affect the stability, security, or performance of the IT systems and processes. Change control procedures are the steps and activities that are followed to manage the initiation, review, approval, implementation, and verification of changes. Change control procedures also help to ensure that the changes are aligned with the business requirements and objectives, and that the changes are documented and communicated to the stakeholders. The other options are not the most important reason for implementing change control procedures, as they are related to other benefits or outcomes of the change control process. Timely evaluation of change events is the reason for implementing change management, which is the process of identifying, analyzing, and responding to the changes that may affect the IT systems and processes. An audit trail is the outcome of implementing change control procedures, as it provides a record of the changes and their impacts. Logging emergency changes is the exception of implementing change control procedures, as it allows for bypassing the normal approval process in case of urgent or critical changes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 177.

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.

The key to controlling escalating costs when an organization is having new software implemented under contract is change management, which is the process of identifying, evaluating, approving, and implementing changes to the project scope, schedule, budget, or quality1. Change management can help to control escalating costs by:

Establishing a clear and agreed-upon baseline for the project deliverables, requirements, and expectations, and ensuring that they are aligned with the contract terms and conditions2.

Defining and enforcing a formal and consistent change control process, which includes the roles and responsibilities, the criteria and methods, and the documentation and communication of the changes3.

Assessing and prioritizing the proposed changes, and determining their impact and feasibility, and their alignment with the project objectives and constraints4.

Obtaining the approval and authorization of the relevant stakeholders, such as the project sponsor, the project manager, the contractor, or the customer, before implementing the changes5.

Monitoring and measuring the performance and outcome of the changes, and ensuring that they are delivered within the agreed scope, schedule, budget, and quality6.

References =

Change Management - CIO Wiki

Project Scope Management - CIO Wiki

Change Control - CIO Wiki

Change Impact Analysis - CIO Wiki

Change Approval - CIO Wiki

Change Evaluation - CIO Wiki

Occurrences of specific events are the most likely to cause a key risk indicator (KRI) to exceed thresholds, as they represent the actual or potential realization of the risk. A KRI is a metric that measures the level of risk exposure and the effectiveness of risk response strategies, and it has predefined thresholds that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable risk status. When a specific event occurs that affects the risk, such as a security breach, a system failure, or a compliance violation, the KRI value may change and exceed the thresholds, triggering an alert or an action. A performance measurement, the risk tolerance level, and risk scenarios are not the most likely to cause a KRI to exceed thresholds, as they do not reflect the actual or potential occurrence of the risk, but rather the expected or desired outcome, limit, or simulation of the risk. References = [CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version)], page 121; CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 217.

The first step when addressing the situation of moving the payroll system to a SaaS application and complying with the new data privacy regulation is to understand the data flows. This means identifying where the data is collected, stored, processed, and transferred, and who has access to it. Understanding the data flows can help to determine the scope and impact of the regulation, as well as the potential risks and gaps in the current state. It can also help to identify the roles and responsibilities of the organization and the SaaS provider regarding data protection and compliance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1.2, p. 237-238

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.

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

When reviewing a report on the performance of control processes, it is most important to verify whether the residual risk objectives have been achieved, as this indicates the extent to which the control processes have reduced the risk to an acceptable level. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls, and it should be aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. Business process objectives, regulatory standards, and control process design are not the most important factors to verify, as they do not directly measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the control processes in managing the risk. References = CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 209.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the primary objective of providing an aggregated view of IT risk to business management is to enable consistent data on risk to be obtained, because it helps to ensure that the risk information is comparable, reliable, and accurate across the organization. An aggregated view of IT risk is a consolidated and comprehensive representation of the IT risk exposure and impact at the enterprise level, based on the risk identification, analysis, and evaluation processes. Providing an aggregated view of IT risk to business management allows them to understand the overall IT risk profile and performance, and to make informed decisions about the risk management strategies and priorities. The other options are not the primary objective of providing an aggregated view of IT risk, as they are related to other benefits or outcomes of the risk aggregation process. Allowing for proper review of risk tolerance is the objective of establishing the risk context, which defines the scope and boundaries of the risk management activities. Identifying dependencies for reporting risk is the outcome of the risk aggregation process, as it provides a clear and consistent structure and format for the risk communication and reporting. Providing consistent and clear terminology is the objective of developing the risk taxonomy, which is the system of classification and categorization of risks based on common characteristics and attributes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, page 69.

The primary goal of conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) as part of an overall continuity planning process is to identify critical business processes and the degree of reliance on support services. A BIA is a process of assessing the potential impact and consequences of a disruption or interruption of the business activities, operations, or functions. A continuity planning process is a process of developing, implementing, and maintaining a plan to ensure the continuity and recovery of the business activities, operations, or functions in the event of a disruption or interruption. The primary goal of conducting a BIA is to identify critical business processes and the degree of reliance on support services, which are the business processes that are essential for the survival and success of the business, and the support services that are required to enable or facilitate the critical business processes, such as IT systems, human resources, facilities, or suppliers. Identifying critical business processes and the degree of reliance on support services helps to determine the priorities and requirements for the continuity and recovery of the business activities, operations, or functions, and to select and implement the appropriate continuity and recovery strategies and solutions. Obtaining the support of executive management, mapping the business processes to supporting IT and other corporate resources, and documenting the disaster recovery process are not the primary goals of conducting a BIA, as they are either the benefits or the outputs of the BIA process, and they do not address the primary need of assessing the impact and consequences of the business disruption or interruption. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

Threshold - CIO Wiki

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

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Reporting - CIO Wiki

Regulatory Compliance - CIO Wiki

[Regulatory Risk - CIO Wiki]

[Qualitative Data - CIO Wiki

A 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]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key Control Indicators - ISACA

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

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

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

 The 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.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, recovery time objectives (RTOs) are the maximum acceptable time that an IT system can be inoperable without causing significant damage to the business operations and objectives. RTOs are determined by the business impact analysis (BIA) and are used to define the recovery strategies and priorities. Therefore, if the RTOs do not meet the business requirements, it would be the most significant deficiency in the BCP, as it would imply that the recovery plan is not aligned with the business needs and expectations. The other options are not the most significant deficiencies, as they do not directly affect the recovery time and the business continuity. BCP testing is not necessarily done in conjunction with the DRP, as they have different scopes and objectives. BCP testing can use different methods, such as walk-through, simulation, or full interruption, depending on the purpose and scope of the test. Each business location can have separate BCPs, as long as they are consistent with the enterprise-wide BCP and the business requirements. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.2, page 240.

The legal and regulatory risk associated with business conducted over the Internet is driven by the laws and regulations of each individual country. Legal and regulatory risk is the risk of non-compliance or violation of the applicable laws and regulations that govern the business activities, operations, or transactions. Business conducted over the Internet involves the use of the global network of interconnected computers and devices to exchange information, goods, or services across the geographic boundaries. Business conducted over the Internet may expose the enterprise to various legal and regulatory risks, such as data protection, privacy, security, intellectual property, consumer protection, taxation, or jurisdiction issues. The legal and regulatory risk associated with business conducted over the Internet is driven by the laws and regulations of each individual country, as each country may have different or conflicting laws and regulations that apply to the business conducted over the Internet, and that may change or vary over time. The laws and regulations of each individual country may also impose different or additional obligations, requirements, or restrictions on the enterprise, and may subject the enterprise to different or multiple enforcement actions, penalties, or disputes. The jurisdiction in which an organization has its principal headquarters, international law and a uniform set of regulations, and international standard-setting bodies are not the drivers of the legal and regulatory risk associated with business conducted over the Internet, as they do not reflect the diversity and complexity of the legal and regulatory landscape that the enterprise may face when conducting business over the Internet. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

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

Risk avoidance is a type of risk response that involves eliminating the risk entirely by not engaging in the activity that causes the risk or changing the conditions that create the risk1. Risk avoidance is usually applied when the potential impact or likelihood of the risk is high or unacceptable, and when the benefits of avoiding the risk outweigh the costs or losses of doing so2.

In this case, the organization has adopted risk avoidance as its risk response, because it has decided to postpone the decision that could trigger the risk. By delaying the decision, the organization is avoiding the risk of making a wrong or unfavorable choice among the multiple options. However, this may not be the best or most effective risk response, as it could also result in missed opportunities, wasted resources, or increased uncertainty3. The organization should consider the trade-offs and consequences of avoiding the risk, and explore other possible risk responses that could reduce or transfer the risk.

The other options are not the risk responses that the organization has adopted. Risk transfer means shifting the responsibility or burden of the risk to another party, such as a vendor or an insurer2. The organization has not transferred the risk to anyone else, but rather avoided it by postponing the decision. Risk mitigation means implementing controls or safeguards to minimize the negative effects of the risk2. The organization has not mitigated the risk by reducing its impact or likelihood, but rather avoided it by delaying the decision. Risk acceptance means acknowledging the risk and its consequences without taking any action to address it2. The organization has not accepted the risk by tolerating its potential outcomes, but rather avoided it by postponing the decision. References =

10 Risk Mitigation techniques you need to know - Stakeholdermap.com

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

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

Several network user accounts were recently created without the required management approvals. This indicates that there is a risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction of the network resources or data, which may affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the network.

The best recommendation to address this situation is to investigate the root cause of noncompliance. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the factors or reasons that led to the creation of the network user accounts without the required management approvals, such as human error, negligence, malice, system failure, process flaw, etc.

Investigating the root cause of noncompliance helps to identify and correct the source of the problem, prevent or reduce the recurrence of the problem, and improve the compliance and security of the network user accounts.

The other options are not the best recommendations to address this situation. They are either secondary or not effective for noncompliance.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 31

Information Technology & Security, page 25

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 23

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

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

Authentication logs are records of the attempts and results of logging into an IT system, network, or application, such as the user name, password, date, time, location, or device1. Authentication logs can help to verify and audit the identity and access of the users, and to detect and investigate any unauthorized or suspicious login activities, such as failed or repeated attempts, or unusual patterns or locations2.

Among the four options given, the discovery that authentication logs have been disabled should be of greatest concern to the organization. This is because disabling authentication logs can:

Prevent or hinder the organization from monitoring and controlling the access and activity of the users, especially the disgruntled, terminated IT administrator who may have malicious intentions or insider knowledge

Enable or facilitate the disgruntled, terminated IT administrator or other attackers to bypass or compromise the authentication mechanisms or policies, and gain unauthorized or elevated access to the IT systems, networks, or applications

Conceal or erase the evidence or traces of the login attempts or actions of the disgruntled, terminated IT administrator or other attackers, and make it difficult or impossible to identify, investigate, or prosecute them

Indicate or imply that the disgruntled, terminated IT administrator or other attackers have already breached or compromised the IT systems, networks, or applications, and have disabled the authentication logs to cover their tracks or avoid detection3

References = What is Authentication Logging?, Authentication Logging - Wikipedia, Fired admin cripples former employer’s network using old credentials

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

Determining if organizational risk is tolerable requires understanding the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives1. Understanding the organization’s risk appetite can help to:

Define and communicate the risk tolerance, which is the acceptable or unacceptable level of risk for each risk category or scenario2.

Guide and align the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes, and ensure that the risks are consistent and proportional to the risk appetite3.

Measure and monitor the risk performance and outcome, and ensure that the residual risk (the risk that remains after the risk responses) is within the risk appetite, or take corrective actions if needed4.

The other options are not the best ways to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, because:

Mapping residual risk with cost of controls is a useful but not sufficient way to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, as it provides a quantitative analysis of the trade-off between the risk level and the risk response cost5. However, mapping residual risk with cost of controls does not consider the qualitative aspects of the risk, such as the impact on the organization’s strategy, culture, or reputation.

Comparing against regulatory requirements is a necessary but not sufficient way to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, as it ensures that the organization complies with the applicable laws, rules, or standards that govern its activities and operations6. However, comparing against regulatory requirements does not guarantee that the organization meets its own objectives and expectations, which may be higher or lower than the regulatory requirements.

Comparing industry risk appetite with the organization’s risk appetite is a helpful but not sufficient way to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, as it provides a reference or a standard for benchmarking the organization’s risk level and performance with its peers or competitors7. However, comparing industry risk appetite with the organization’s risk appetite does not ensure that the organization addresses its specific or unique risks, which may differ from the industry risks.

References =

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

Risk Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Management Process - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring - CIO Wiki

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Regulatory Compliance - CIO Wiki

Benchmarking - CIO Wiki

Risk and Information Systems Control documents and learning resources by ISACA

The best way to prevent future occurrences of active network accounts belonging to former employees is to conduct a comprehensive review of access management processes. This review should include verifying that the access rights of all employees are updated regularly, especially when they change roles or leave the organization. The review should also ensure that there are clear policies and procedures for granting, modifying, and revoking access rights, and that these are followed consistently and documented properly. The review should also identify and address any gaps or weaknesses in the access management processes that could lead to unauthorized or inappropriate access. By conducting a comprehensive review of access management processes, the organization can improve its security posture and reduce the risk of data breaches or misuse of resources. References = IT audit: The ultimate guide [with checklist] | Zapier, IT auditing and controls – planning the IT audit [updated 2021]

IT governance is the process of ensuring that IT supports the organization’s objectives and strategies, and that IT risks are managed appropriately. IT governance involves defining the roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities of the IT stakeholders, establishing the IT policies, standards, and procedures, and monitoring and evaluating the IT performance and outcomes1.

An organization that automatically approves exceptions to security policies on a recurring basis is most likely the result of ineffective IT governance, because it indicates that the organization:

Lacks a clear and consistent IT strategy and direction, and does not align IT with the business goals and needs

Fails to implement and enforce the IT policies, standards, and procedures, and does not ensure the compliance and accountability of the IT users and providers

Neglects to identify and assess the IT risks, and does not implement the appropriate risk responses and controls

Does not monitor and measure the IT performance and outcomes, and does not review and improve the IT processes and practices23

The other options are not the most likely results of ineffective IT governance, but rather some of the possible causes or consequences of it. A lack of mitigating actions for identified risk is a possible consequence of ineffective IT governance, as it implies that the organization does not have a systematic and proactive approach to IT risk management, and does not address the IT risks in a timely and effective manner. Decreased threat levels is a possible cause of ineffective IT governance, as it may create a false sense of security and complacency, and reduce the motivation and urgency to implement and follow the IT policies, standards, and procedures. Ineffective service delivery is a possible consequence of ineffective IT governance, as it means that the organization does not deliver the IT services that meet the expectations and requirements of the customers and stakeholders, and does not ensure the quality and reliability of the IT services. References =

IT Governance - ISACA

IT Governance: What It Is and Why You Need It

IT Governance: The Benefits of an Effective Enterprise IT Governance Framework

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

Risk management maturity level is the degree to which an organization has developed and implemented a systematic and proactive approach to managing the risks that it faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. Risk management maturity level reflects the organization’s risk culture and capability, and its alignment with its objectives and strategies1.

The best measurement of an organization’s risk management maturity level is the key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics or measures that provide information on the current or potential exposure and performance of the organization in relation to specific risks. KRIs can help to:

Monitor and track the changes or trends in the risk level and the risk response over time

Identify and alert the risk issues or events that require attention or action

Evaluate and report the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management processes and practices

Support and inform the risk decision making and improvement23

KRIs can be classified into different types, such as:

Leading KRIs, which are forward-looking and predictive, and indicate the likelihood or probability of a risk event occurring in the future

Lagging KRIs, which are backward-looking and descriptive, and indicate the impact or consequence of a risk event that has already occurred

Quantitative KRIs, which are numerical or measurable, and indicate the magnitude or severity of a risk event or outcome

Qualitative KRIs, which are descriptive or subjective, and indicate the nature or characteristics of a risk event or outcome4

The other options are not the best measurements of an organization’s risk management maturity level, but rather some of the factors or outcomes of it. Level of residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the risk response has been implemented. Level of residual risk reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response, and the need for further action or monitoring. The results of a gap analysis are the differences between the current and the desired state of the risk management processes and practices. The results of a gap analysis reflect the completeness and coverage of the risk management activities, and the areas for improvement or enhancement. IT alignment to business objectives is the extent to which IT supports and enables the achievement of the organization’s goals and strategies. IT alignment to business objectives reflects the integration and coordination of the IT and business functions, and the optimization of the IT value and performance. References =

Risk Maturity Assessment Explained | Risk Maturity Model

Key Risk Indicators - ISACA

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

Key Risk Indicators: Types and Examples

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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

The issue of greatest concern when evaluating existing controls during a risk assessment is the presence of successive assessments with the same recurring vulnerabilities. This indicates that the controls are ineffective or inadequate in addressing the identified risks, and that the risk management process is not functioning properly. Recurring vulnerabilities expose the enterprise to potential losses, breaches, or incidents that could harm its objectives, reputation, or compliance. Therefore, it is essential to identify the root causes of the recurring vulnerabilities, implement corrective actions, and monitor the effectiveness of the controls on a regular basis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2, page 183.

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

 A risk register is a tool used to identify, assess, and prioritize risks in an organization. It typically includes a detailed description of each identified risk, an assessment of its likelihood and potential impact, and a plan for managing or mitigating the risk1. A risk register is usually created at the beginning of a project or a process, and is updated regularly throughout the risk management life cycle2.

The main reason for creating and maintaining a risk register is to account for identified key risk factors. This means that the risk register helps to:

Document and track all the relevant risks that may affect the project or the organization, and their sources, causes, and consequences

Provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk profile and exposure of the project or the organization

Support the decision-making and prioritization of the risk responses and controls, based on the risk appetite and tolerance of the project or the organization

Communicate and report the risk information and status to the stakeholders and regulators, and ensure transparency and accountability

Enable the continuous improvement and learning from the risk management process and outcomes3

References = What is a risk register and why is it important?, Purpose of a risk register: Here’s what a risk register is used for, Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2024], Risk Register - Wikipedia

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The 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

 IT asset inventory is the process of tracking and managing the financial, physical, licensing, and contractual aspects of IT assets throughout their life cycle1. IT assets include hardware, software, and network components that an organization values and uses to achieve its objectives2. A complete and accurate IT asset inventory can help an organization to optimize its IT budget, reduce security risks, ensure compliance, and improve performance3.

One of the best controls to enable an organization to ensure a complete and accurate IT asset inventory is performing network scanning for unknown devices. Network scanning is the process of identifying and collecting information about the devices connected to a network, such as their IP addresses, operating systems, open ports, services, and vulnerabilities4. Network scanning can help an organization to:

Discover and inventory all the IT assets on the network, including those that are unauthorized, unmanaged, or hidden

Detect and remove any rogue or malicious devices that may pose a threat to the network security or performance

Update and verify the asset inventory data regularly and automatically, and alert on any changes or discrepancies

Support the asset lifecycle management and maintenance activities, such as patching, upgrading, or retiring assets5

References = IT Asset Valuation, Risk Assessment and Control Implementation Model, ITAM: The ultimate guide to IT asset management, Navigating Security Threats with IT Inventory Management, Network Scanning - Wikipedia, 8 Best IT Asset Management Software (2024)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 It is most important for a risk practitioner to have an awareness of an organization’s processes in order to identify potential sources of risk, as this enables the risk practitioner to understand the objectives, activities, resources, dependencies, and outputs of the processes, and how they may be affected by internal or external factors that create uncertainty or variability. Identifying potential sources of risk is the first step in the risk identification process, which aims to find, recognize, and describe the risks that could affect the achievement of the organization’s goals. The other options are not the most important reasons for a risk practitioner to have an awareness of an organization’s processes, although they may be related or beneficial aspects of it. Performing a business impact analysis is a part of the risk analysis process, which aims to understand the nature and extent of the risks and their consequences on the organization’s objectives and functions. Establishing risk guidelines is a part of the risk governance process, which aims to define and communicate the risk management principles, policies, and roles across the organization. Understanding control design is a part of the risk response process, which aims to select and implement the appropriate actions to modify the risk level or achieve the risk objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 47.

 Robust organizational communication channels are the best way to support ethical IT risk management practices, as they enable transparent and consistent sharing of risk information and decisions among all stakeholders. Ethical IT risk management requires that the risk management process and outcomes are aligned with the enterprise’s values, objectives, and obligations, and that the risk management activities are conducted with integrity, accountability, and respect. Robust organizational communication channels facilitate these aspects by ensuring that the risk management roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and communicated, that the risk management policies and procedures are widely disseminated and understood, that the risk management performance and results are regularly reported and reviewed, and that the risk management feedback and improvement suggestions are solicited and addressed. Mapping of key risk indicators (KRIs) to corporate strategy, capability maturity models integrated with risk management frameworks, and rigorously enforced operational service level agreements (SLAs) are not directly related to ethical IT risk management practices, but rather to the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question201; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 201.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the organization’s culture is the most critical element to maximize the potential for a successful security implementation, because it influences the behavior, attitude, and perception of the stakeholders towards security. The organization’s culture includes the values, beliefs, norms, and practices that are shared by the members of the organization. A positive and supportive culture can foster the awareness, commitment, and collaboration of the stakeholders in achieving the security objectives and complying with the security policies and standards. The other options are not the most critical elements, as they are less influential or less challenging than the organization’s culture. The organization’s knowledge is the collective understanding and expertise of the organization regarding security, which can be enhanced through training and education. Ease of implementation is the degree of difficulty and complexity of implementing security, which can be reduced by using appropriate methods and tools. Industry-leading security tools are the best-in-class solutions and technologies that can provide effective and efficient security, which can be acquired through market research and evaluation. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 32.

 The best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the effectiveness of a disaster recovery test of critical business processes is the percentage of processes recovered within the recovery time and point objectives. Recovery time objective (RTO) is the maximum acceptable time period within which a business process or an IT service must be restored after a disruption. Recovery point objective (RPO) is the maximum acceptable amount of data loss measured in time before the disruption. The percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO indicates how well the disaster recovery test meets the business continuity and recovery requirements and expectations, and how effectively the disaster recovery plan and procedures are executed. The percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO can also help to identify the gaps, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement in the disaster recovery capabilities. Percentage of job failures identified and resolved during the recovery process, number of current test plans and procedures, and number of issues and action items resolved during the recovery test are not as good as the percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO, as they do not directly measure the achievement of the recovery objectives, and may not reflect the actual impact and performance of the disaster recovery test. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 130.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

A maturity model is a framework that describes the stages or levels of development and improvement of a certain domain, such as a process, a function, or an organization. A maturity model can help to evaluate the current state, identify the strengths and weaknesses, set the goals and objectives, and measure the performance and improvement over time. The primary benefit of using a maturity model is that it helps to evaluate the evolution of process improvements, meaning that it can help to track the progress and changes of the processes, as well as to identify the best practices and standards. A maturity model can also help to compare the processes with the industry benchmarks and competitors, as well as to align the processes with the business strategy and vision. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2.1, p. 118-119

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual, notifying network administrators before testing is the best mitigating control to reduce the risk introduced when conducting penetration tests, because it helps to avoid any disruption or damage to the network services and systems. Penetration testing is a technique that simulates an attack on the network to identify and exploit the vulnerabilities and weaknesses. Notifying network administrators before testing allows them to prepare for the test, monitor the test activities, and respond to any incidents or issues that may arise during the test. The other options are not the best mitigating controls, because they do not address the risk of network disruption or damage. Requiring the vendor to sign a nondisclosure agreement is a legal measure that protects the confidentiality of the network information, but it does not prevent the vendor from causing any harm to the network. Clearly defining the project scope is a planning activity that sets the boundaries and objectives of the test, but it does not ensure the safety and availability of the network. Performing background checks on the vendor is a due diligence activity that verifies the vendor’s credentials and reputation, but it does not guarantee the vendor’s performance or behavior. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2, page 181.

A data privacy officer is a role that is responsible for ensuring that the organization complies with the applicable laws, regulations, and standards regarding the collection, processing, storage, and disclosure of customer data1. A data privacy officer is also responsible for developing and implementing policies, procedures, and controls to protect the privacy and security of customer data, and to prevent or mitigate the risk of customer data loss2. A data privacy officer is the most helpful role in providing a high-level view of risk related to customer data loss, because:

A data privacy officer has the knowledge and expertise of the legal and ethical requirements and best practices for customer data protection, and can identify and assess the potential threats and vulnerabilities that may compromise customer data3.

A data privacy officer has the authority and accountability to oversee and monitor the customer data lifecycle, and to ensure that the organization follows the principles of data minimization, purpose limitation, accuracy, integrity, confidentiality, and accountability4.

A data privacy officer has the visibility and communication skills to report and advise the management and other stakeholders on the customer data risk profile, and to recommend and implement appropriate risk responses and improvement actions5.

The other options are not the most helpful roles in providing a high-level view of risk related to customer data loss, because:

A customer database manager is a role that is responsible for designing, developing, maintaining, and optimizing the database systems that store and manage customer data6. A customer database manager may have some technical skills and knowledge to protect the customer data from unauthorized access, modification, or deletion, but may not have the comprehensive or holistic view of the customer data risk, as they may focus only on the database level, and not on the organizational or regulatory level.

A customer data custodian is a role that is responsible for handling, processing, and storing customer data according to the instructions and permissions of the data owner7. A customer data custodian may have some operational duties and responsibilities to safeguard the customer data from accidental or intentional loss, damage, or disclosure, but may not have the strategic or analytical view of the customer data risk, as they may follow only the predefined rules and procedures, and not the risk management principles and practices.

An audit committee is a group of independent directors or members that is responsible for overseeing and evaluating the organization’s financial reporting, internal control, and audit functions. An audit committee may have some oversight and assurance roles and responsibilities to review and verify the organization’s compliance and performance regarding customer data protection, but may not have the direct or proactive view of the customer data risk, as they may rely only on the audit reports and findings, and not on the risk assessment and analysis.

References =

Data Privacy Officer - CIO Wiki

What is a Data Protection Officer (DPO)? - Definition from Techopedia

Data Privacy Officer: Roles and Responsibilities - ISACA

Data Protection Principles - CIO Wiki

Data Privacy Officer: How to Be One and Why You Need One - ISACA

Database Manager - CIO Wiki

Data Custodian - CIO Wiki

[Audit Committee - CIO Wiki]

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

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

Implementing automated log monitoring is the best control to detect an advanced persistent threat (APT), which is a stealthy and continuous attack on a target network or system. Automated log monitoring can help to identify anomalous or suspicious activities, such as unusual network traffic, unauthorized access attempts, or data exfiltration, that may indicate the presence of an APT. Utilizing antivirus systems and firewalls, conducting regular penetration tests, and monitoring social media activities are controls that help to prevent or mitigate APTs, but not to detect them. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers - The Knowledge Academy, question 200.

The first course of action for a risk practitioner when discovering a deficiency in a critical system that cannot be patched is to conduct a risk assessment. A risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that could affect the achievement of the objectives of the system or the organization. A risk assessment helps to determine the level and nature of the risk exposure, and to prioritize and respond to the risks. Conducting a risk assessment is the first course of action, as it helps to understand the source, cause, and impact of the deficiency, and to estimate the likelihood and consequences of the risk events that could exploit the deficiency. Conducting a risk assessment also helps to identify and evaluate the existing or potential controls or mitigations that could address the deficiency, and to recommend the appropriate risk treatment options. Reporting the issue to internal audit, submitting a request to change management, and reviewing the business impact assessment are not the first courses of action, as they are either the outputs or the inputs of the risk assessment process, and they do not address the primary need of assessing the risk situation and status. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

Architecture is the design and structure of a system or a process, such as an IT system or a business process. Architecture documentation is the document that describes and explains the architecture, such as its components, functions, relationships, requirements, constraints, or standards. Architecture documentation can help to understand, communicate, and improve the system or the process1.

An environment that lacks documentation of the architecture faces a great risk of unknown vulnerabilities, which are the weaknesses or flaws in the system or the process that could be exploited by threats or attackers, but are not identified or addressed by the organization. Unknown vulnerabilities can pose a serious risk to the organization, because they can:

Compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the system or the process, and the information or resources that it handles or supports

Cause financial, operational, reputational, or legal damages or losses to the organization, such as data breaches, fraud, errors, delays, or fines

Remain undetected or unresolved for a long time, and increase the exposure or impact of the risk over time

Require more resources or efforts to mitigate or recover from the risk, and reduce the efficiency or effectiveness of the risk management process23

Lack of documentation of the architecture can increase the risk of unknown vulnerabilities, because it can:

Prevent or hinder the identification and assessment of the vulnerabilities, and the evaluation and prioritization of the risks

Impede or delay the implementation and enforcement of the controls or safeguards to prevent or reduce the vulnerabilities, and the monitoring and reporting of the risk status and progress

Obstruct or limit the communication and coordination among the stakeholders, and the awareness and accountability of the risk owners and users

Restrict or hamper the review and improvement of the system or the process, and the learning and feedback of the risk management4

The other options are not the greatest risks associated with an environment that lacks documentation of the architecture, but rather some of the possible causes or consequences of it. Legacy technology systems are outdated or obsolete systems that are still in use by the organization, but are no longer supported or maintained by the vendors or developers. Legacy technology systems can be a cause of lack of documentation of the architecture, as they may have been developed or acquired without proper documentation, or the documentation may have been lost or discarded over time. Network isolation is the separation or segregation of a network or a system from other networks or systems, either physically or logically, to prevent or limit the access or communication between them. Network isolation can be a consequence of lack of documentation of the architecture, as it may result from the inability or difficulty to integrate or connect the system or the process with other systems or processes. Overlapping threats are threats that affect more than one system or process, or have similar or related sources or causes, such as natural disasters, cyberattacks, or human errors. Overlapping threats can be a consequence of lack of documentation of the architecture, as they may arise from the lack of understanding or coordination of the system or the process with other systems or processes. References =

Architecture Documentation - ISACA

Vulnerability - ISACA

The Risks of Not Having a Vulnerability Management Program

The Importance of Architecture Documentation - ISACA

[The Risk of Poor Document Control - ComplianceBridge]

[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.

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.

 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

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 best indicator of the risk appetite and tolerance level for the risk associated with business interruption caused by IT system failures is the recovery time objective (RTO). The RTO is the maximum acceptable time or duration that a business process or an IT system can be disrupted or interrupted before it causes unacceptable impact or harm to the business. The RTO reflects the risk appetite and tolerance level for the business interruption risk, as it indicates how much disruption or interruption the business can tolerate or accept, and how quickly the business needs to resume or recover the business process or the IT system. The RTO also helps to determine the priorities and requirements for the business continuity and recovery planning, and to select and implement the appropriate continuity and recovery strategies and solutions. Mean time to recover (MTTR), IT system criticality classification, and incident management service level agreement (SLA) are not the best indicators of the risk appetite and tolerance level for the business interruption risk, as they are either the measures or the outcomes of the business continuity and recovery performance, and they do not directly indicate how much disruption or interruption the business can tolerate or accept. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50

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

The best practice to mitigate risk related to enterprise-wide ethical decision making in a multi-national organization is to provide ongoing awareness training to support a common risk culture. A common risk culture is a set of shared values, beliefs, and behaviors that influence how the organization identifies, analyzes, responds to, and monitors risks. Ongoing awareness training can help to promote a common risk culture by educating the employees about the enterprise’s risk management objectives, policies, procedures, roles, and responsibilities, as well as the ethical standards and expectations that apply to their work. Ongoing awareness training can also help to reinforce the benefits of ethical decision making and the consequences of unethical behavior. Customized regional training on local laws and regulations, policies requiring central reporting of potential procedure exceptions, and zero-tolerance policies for risk taking by middle-level managers are also useful practices, but they are not as effective as ongoing awareness training to support a common risk culture. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 37.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

Risk Governance - CIO Wiki

Risk Governance Framework - CIO Wiki

Asset Identification - CIO Wiki

Asset Identification and Valuation - ISACA

Asset Criticality - CIO Wiki

Threat and Vulnerability Assessment - CIO Wiki

Risk Factor - CIO Wiki

[Risk Factor Analysis - CIO Wiki]

[Inherent Risk - CIO Wiki]

[Inherent Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

[Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

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

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

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

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

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

References =

Key Control Indicator (KCI) - CIO Wiki

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

Indicators - Program Evaluation - CDC

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

Internal Audit Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) - AuditBoard

Hierarchy of Controls - NIOSH - CDC

 Understanding the Question:

The question is about mitigating the impact of social engineering attacks that use AI technology to impersonate senior management personnel.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Training and awareness of employees for increased vigilance: This is the most proactive approach. Educating employees about the risks and signs of social engineering attacks enhances their ability to recognize and respond appropriately to such threats.

B. Increased monitoring of executive accounts: Useful but reactive; it doesn't prevent initial attempts.

C. Subscription to data breach monitoring sites: Helps detect breaches but doesn’t directly mitigate impersonation attacks.

D. Suspension and takedown of malicious domains or accounts: Reactive measure and might not be immediate or comprehensive.

 Detailed Explanation:

Importance of Training: Employees are often the first line of defense against social engineering attacks. Regular training ensures they are aware of the tactics used in such attacks, including those leveraging AI, and how to respond effectively.

Proactive Measure: Training increases vigilance and the likelihood of early detection, reducing the potential impact of the attack.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, discusses the importance of training and awareness programs in mitigating social engineering risks​​.

Internal audit provides independent assurance to the board and senior management regarding the effectiveness of risk management program implementation, consistent with Governance and Assurance Principles.

 The best person to own the unmitigated risk of the technology is the IT system owner. The IT system owner is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility for the acquisition, development, maintenance, and operation of the IT system. The IT system owner is also responsible for ensuring that the IT system meets the business requirements, security standards, and compliance obligations of the enterprise. The IT system owner should own the unmitigated risk of the technology, as they are in the best position to understand the nature and impact of the risk, and to implement the appropriate risk responses to reduce the risk exposure to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 251234

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

By identifying critical data, the organization can:

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

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

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

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

References = Guide to Developing a Data Protection Management Programme

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

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

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

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

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

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

IT Risk Scenario Development - ISACA

Risk Register - ISACA

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

Risk Register 2021-2022 - UNECE

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The percentage of unpatched IT assets is a KPI that measures the effectiveness of the IT asset management process in ensuring that the IT assets are updated with the latest security patches and are protected from vulnerabilities. This KPI reflects the compliance of the IT assets with the enterprise’s security policy and standards, and the ability of the IT asset management process to identify and remediate any gaps or risks in the IT asset inventory. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 5. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 4. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 4.

A treatment plan status is a report that shows the current status and progress of the risk mitigation actions and activities that are implemented to reduce the risk exposure of the organization. A treatment plan status would provide the most useful information to a risk owner when reviewing the progress of risk mitigation, as it can 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. A treatment plan status 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 257. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 257. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 257. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

The most helpful way to mitigate the risk associated with an application under development not meeting business objectives is to include key stakeholders in the review of user requirements, because this ensures that the application is designed and developed according to the needs and expectations of the end users and the business owners. Including key stakeholders in the review of user requirements also helps to avoid scope creep, requirement changes, or miscommunication that may affect the quality, functionality, or usability of the application. The other options are not the most helpful ways to mitigate the risk, although they may also be useful in reducing the likelihood or impact of the risk. Identifying threats that may compromise enterprise architecture (EA), including diverse business scenarios in user acceptance testing (UAT), and performing risk assessments during the business case development stage are examples of preventive or detective controls that aim to identify and address the potential issues or problems that may arise during the application development process, but they do not address the alignment of the application with the business objectives. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual, activity logging and monitoring is the best way to manage the risk associated with malicious activities performed by database administrators (DBAs), because it enables the detection and prevention of unauthorized or inappropriate actions on the database. Activity logging and monitoring involves capturing and reviewing the activities of the DBAs, such as the commands executed, the data accessed or modified, the privileges used, and the time and duration of the sessions. Activity logging and monitoring can also provide an audit trail for accountability and forensic purposes. The other options are not the best ways to manage the risk, because they do not directly address the malicious activities of the DBAs. Periodic access review is a control that verifies the appropriateness of the access rights granted to the DBAs, but it does not monitor their actual activities. Two-factor authentication is a control that enhances the security of the authentication process, but it does not prevent the DBAs from performing malicious activities once they are authenticated. Awareness training and background checks are controls that aim to reduce the likelihood of the DBAs engaging in malicious activities, but they do not guarantee their compliance or behavior. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.3, page 166.

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.

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

User recertification is the most effective control to ensure user access is maintained on a least-privilege basis, as it involves a periodic review and validation of user access rights and privileges by the appropriate authority. User recertification helps to identify and remove any unnecessary, excessive, or obsolete access rights and privileges that may pose a security risk or violate the principle of least privilege. User recertification also helps to ensure that user access rights and privileges are aligned with the current business needs, roles, and responsibilities of the users.

The other options are not the most effective controls to ensure user access is maintained on a least-privilege basis. User authorization is the process of granting or denying access rights and privileges to users based on their identity, role, and credentials, but it does not verify or update the existing access rights and privileges of the users. Change log review is the process of examining and analyzing the records of changes made to the system, configuration, or data, but it does not directly address the user access rights and privileges. Access log monitoring is the process of tracking and auditing the user activities and actions on the system or network, but it does not validate or modify the user access rights and privileges. References = What Is the Principle of Least Privilege and Why is it Important?, Principle of Least Privilege: Definition, Methods & Examples, IT Risk Resources | ISACA

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]

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 way to identify changes in the risk profile of an organization is to monitor key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given operational risk1. KRIs can help to monitor the changes in risk levels over time, identify emerging risks, and trigger risk response actions when the risk exceeds the acceptable thresholds2. KRIs can also help to align the risk management strategy with the business objectives and context. The other options are not the best ways to identify changes in the risk profile of an organization, as they do not provide the same level of insight and guidance as KRIs. Monitoring key performance indicators (KPIs) may show the results or outcomes of the business processes, but not the risks or uncertainties that affect them. Interviewing the risk owner may provide some subjective or qualitative information on the risk perception or attitude, but not the objective or quantitative data on the risk exposure or impact. Conducting a gap analysis may show the difference between the current and desired state of the organization, but not the causes or sources of the risk. References = Key Risk Indicators; Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide

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.

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

 The primary reason for establishing various threshold levels for a set of key risk indicators (KRIs) is to take appropriate actions in a timely manner. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk or the effectiveness of the controls in place. Threshold levels are predefined values that indicate when the risk level is acceptable, tolerable, or unacceptable. By establishing various threshold levels for a set of KRIs, the enterprise can monitor the risk situation and trigger the necessary responses before the risk becomes too severe or costly to mitigate. The other options are not the primary reasons for establishing various threshold levels, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of doing so. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 189.

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

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.

 The best way to measure the effectiveness of the subsidiary’s IT systems controls is to review metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs), as they provide quantitative and qualitative measures of the performance and outcomes of the IT systems and processes, and how well they meet the predefined standards and expectations. Metrics and KPIs can help to evaluate the efficiency, reliability, security, and quality of the IT systems and controls, and to identify any gaps, weaknesses, or issues that need to be addressed. Metrics and KPIs can also help to compare and benchmark the subsidiary’s IT systems and controls with those of the parent organization or other similar entities. The other options are not the best ways to measure the effectiveness of the subsidiary’s IT systems controls, although they may be useful or complementary methods. Implementing IT systems in alignment with business objectives is a good practice, but it does not measure the effectiveness of the IT systems controls, as it focuses on the alignment and integration of the IT systems with the business strategy and goals. Reviewing design documentation of IT systems can provide some information on the specifications and requirements of the IT systems, but it does not measure the effectiveness of the IT systems controls, as it does not reflect the actual implementation and operation of the IT systems. Evaluating compliance with legal and regulatory requirements can ensure that the subsidiary’s IT systems and controls meet the minimum standards and obligations of the foreign country, but it does not measure the effectiveness of the IT systems controls, as it does not consider the performance and outcomes of the IT systems and processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 187.

According to the ERM - Step 3 - Risk Treatment article, risk transfer is a risk treatment option that involves passing ownership and/or liability of a risk to a third party, such as an insurance company, a contractor, or a supplier. Risk transfer is usually adopted when the organization does not have the capability or the resources to manage the risk internally, or when the cost of transferring the risk is lower than the cost of retaining the risk. In this case, the organization has outsourced its lease payment process to a service provider who lacks evidence of compliance with a necessary regulatory standard. This means that the organization has transferred the risk of non-compliance to the service provider, who is now responsible for ensuring that the lease payment process meets the regulatory requirements. Therefore, the answer is B. Transfer. References = ERM - Step 3 - Risk Treatment

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]

Mitigating technology risk to acceptable levels means that the organization implements and maintains appropriate controls to reduce the likelihood and impact of potential threats or losses that may arise from the use of technology, such as IT systems, applications, networks, devices, etc.

The primary factor that should guide the mitigation of technology risk is the organizational risk appetite. This means that the organization defines and communicates the amount and type of risk that it is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives and strategy.

The organizational risk appetite helps to determine the risk tolerance and thresholds for different risk categories and scenarios, prioritize the risks, select the most suitable risk responses, allocate the resources and budget for risk management, and monitor and report the risk performance and outcomes.

The other options are not the primary factors that should guide the mitigation of technology risk. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 25

Information Technology & Security, page 19

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 17

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

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

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

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

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

 Following a significant change to a business process, the risk practitioner should advise the risk owner to first conduct a risk analysis to evaluate the current level of risk exposure and compare it with the previous level. This will help to verify whether the change has indeed reduced the risk, and by how much. The risk analysis will also help to identify any new or residual risks that may have emerged as a result of the change. The other options are not the first actions to take, but rather the subsequent steps after conducting a risk analysis. Reviewing the key risk indicators, updating the risk register, and reallocating risk response resources are all important activities, but they depend on the outcome of the risk analysis. References = CRISC EXAM TOPIC 2 LONG; CRISC Q&A Domain 1; Managing Change Risk - Oliver Wyman

The best course of action when a risk practitioner finds that the risk level of an emerging IT risk has increased, despite having an action plan to mitigate it, is to evaluate whether the selected controls are still appropriate. This is because the increase in the risk level may indicate that the current controls are not effective or sufficient to reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk, or that the risk environment has changed and new threats or vulnerabilities have emerged. By evaluating the appropriateness of the selected controls, the risk practitioner can identify the gaps or weaknesses in the control design or implementation, and determine the need for corrective actions or improvements. The other options are not the best course of action, because they do not address the root cause of the problem, but rather assume or ignore the effectiveness of the controls, as explained below:

A. Implement the planned controls and accept the remaining risk is not the best course of action, because it assumes that the planned controls are adequate and aligned with the organization’s risk appetite, which may not be the case if the risk level has increased. Implementing the planned controls without evaluating their appropriateness may result in wasting resources, exposing the organization to more risk, or missing opportunities to enhance the risk mitigation effectiveness.

B. Suspend the current action plan in order to reassess the risk is not the best course of action, because it ignores the effectiveness of the current controls, which may still provide some level of risk mitigation, even if they are not optimal. Suspending the current action plan may also delay the risk response and increase the risk exposure, especially if the risk is time-sensitive or dynamic. Reassessing the risk without evaluating the appropriateness of the current controls may also lead to inaccurate or incomplete risk information and analysis.

C. Revise the action plan to include additional mitigating controls is not the best course of action, because it assumes that the current controls are ineffective or insufficient, which may not be the case if the risk level has increased due to other factors, such as changes in the risk environment or the organization’s objectives. Revising the action plan without evaluating the appropriateness of the current controls may result in overcompensating, duplicating, or conflicting the controls, which may affect the risk mitigation efficiency and performance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, page 130. How to Mitigate Emerging Technology Risk - ISACA, Risk Mitigation Strategies: Types & Examples (+ Free Template), 5 Key Risk Mitigation Strategies (With Examples) | Indeed.com

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

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

The effectiveness of an IT risk management function depends on how well it can identify, analyze, evaluate, and treat the IT-related risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance. To achieve this, the IT risk management function needs to have processes that are updated and monitored on a continuous basis, so that they can capture the changes in the IT environment, the business context, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the regulatory requirements. Updating and monitoring the IT risk management processes also helps to ensure that they are consistent, reliable, and efficient, and that they provide timely and accurate information for decision making and reporting12. Aligning the IT risk management processes to an industry-accepted framework is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. A framework provides a common language, structure, and methodology for IT risk management, but it does not guarantee that the processes are updated and monitored on a continuous basis. A framework also needs to be customized and adapted to the specific needs and context of the organization3. Reviewing and approving the IT risk management processes by senior management is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. Senior management support and endorsement are essential for establishing the tone and culture of IT risk management, as well as for allocating the necessary resources and authority for the function. However, senior management review and approval alone do not ensure that the processes are updated and monitored on a continuous basis. Senior management also need to oversee and evaluate the performance and outcomes of the IT risk management function4. Periodically assessing the IT risk management processes against regulatory requirements is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. Regulatory compliance is one of the objectives and drivers of IT risk management, and it requires the function to adhere to the applicable laws, rules, and standards. However, regulatory requirements are not the only source of IT risk, and they may not cover all the aspects and dimensions of IT risk management. Moreover, periodic assessment may not be sufficient to capture the dynamic and evolving nature of IT risk. Therefore, the IT risk management processes need to be updated and monitored on a continuous basis, not only to meet the regulatory requirements, but also to address the other sources and impacts of IT risk5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Process, pp. 121-123.

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the risk register is a tool that records the results of risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment. The risk register should be populated as soon as possible in the risk management process, to capture and document the risks and their attributes. The best time for the risk practitioner to start populating the risk register is when identifying risk scenarios, as this is the first step in the risk identification process. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the potential causes, impacts, and responses of a risk event. Identifying risk scenarios helps to generate a comprehensive and relevant list of risks that can be recorded in the risk register. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 191, 206.

 According to the Risk Assessment and Management: A Complete Guide, risk magnitude is the product of the likelihood and impact of a risk scenario. Risk magnitude is an important factor to consider before choosing risk treatment options, as it indicates the level of exposure and potential harm that the organization faces from the risk scenario. Risk treatment options should be selected based on the risk magnitude, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. For a scenario with significant impact, the risk magnitude is likely to be high, and therefore the risk treatment options should aim to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk scenario as much as possible, or to transfer or avoid the risk altogether. References = Risk Assessment and Management: A Complete Guide, ISO 27001 Risk Assessment & Risk Treatment: The Complete Guide

 An exception to the information security policy is a permission to continue operating a system, service, or product that cannot comply with the established information security standards and requirements1. A risk owner is a person or entity that has the authority and accountability for a risk and its management2. A risk practitioner is a person or entity that has the knowledge and skills to perform risk management activities3. A high number of exceptions to the information security policy indicates that there are many systems, services, or products that do not meet the expected level of security and pose potential risks to the organization. The risk practitioner’s greatest concern should be that the aggregate risk, which is the total amount of risk that the organization faces from all sources, is approaching the tolerance threshold, which is the limit beyond which the organization does not want to tolerate the risk4. If the aggregate risk is approaching the tolerance threshold, it means that the organization is exposed to a high level of risk that may exceed its risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives5. This may result in negative consequences for the organization, such as breaches, losses, damages, or reputational harm. Therefore, the risk practitioner should monitor and report the aggregate risk level and the tolerance threshold, and advise the risk owners and the management on the appropriate risk responses and actions to reduce the aggregate risk to an acceptable level. Security policies are being reviewed infrequently, controls are not operating efficiently, and vulnerabilities are not being mitigated are not the risk practitioner’s greatest concern, as they are not directly related to the aggregate risk level and the tolerance threshold. Security policies are being reviewed infrequently is a condition that indicates that the organization’s security policies are not updated or revised regularly to reflect the changes and updates in the security environment and the security requirements6. This may affect the relevance and effectiveness of the security policies, but it does not necessarily increase the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. Controls are not operating efficiently is a condition that indicates that the organization’s controls, which are the measures or actions taken to manage or mitigate the risks, are not performing well or optimally7. This may affect the quality and performance of the controls, but it does not necessarily increase the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. Vulnerabilities are not being mitigated is a condition that indicates that the organization’s vulnerabilities, which are the weaknesses or gaps that may be exploited by the threats, are not being addressed or reduced8. This may increase the likelihood or impact of the risks, but it does not necessarily increase the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. References = 1: IT/Information Security Exception Request Process2: [Risk Ownership - Risk Management] 3: [Risk Practitioner - ISACA] 4: Risk Threshold: Definition, Meaning & Example - PM Study Circle5: Risk Appetite vs Risk Tolerance vs Risk Threshold - projectcubicle6: [Security Policy Review and Update - SANS Institute] 7: [Control Effectiveness and Efficiency - ISACA] 8: [Vulnerability Management - ISACA] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Concepts, pp. 17-19.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

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

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk mitigation plans have been implemented. Residual risk reflects the effectiveness of the risk response in reducing the likelihood or impact of the risk. The best evidence that risk mitigation plans have been implemented effectively is the change in the level of residual risk. A change in the level of residual risk can be measured by comparing the risk level before and after the risk mitigation plans have been executed. A change in the level of residual risk can also be evaluated by comparing the actual residual risk with the target or acceptable residual risk. A change in the level of residual risk can demonstrate how well the risk mitigation plans have achieved the risk objectives and met the risk criteria. A change in the level of residual risk can also provide feedback and lessons learned for future risk management activities. References = Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management, Residual Risk: What It Is and How to Manage It, Residual Risk: How to Calculate and Manage It.

 According to the How Important Is Source Code Escrow - ISACA article, the purpose of requiring source code escrow in a contractual agreement is to ensure that the source code is available if the vendor ceases to exist. Source code escrow is the deposit of the source code of software with a third-party escrow agent, who releases it to the licensee only if certain conditions are met, such as the bankruptcy, merger, or acquisition of the licensor. This arrangement protects the licensee from losing access to the software support and maintenance, and allows them to continue using and modifying the software as needed. Therefore, the answer is B. ensure that the source code is available if the vendor ceases to exist. References = How Important Is Source Code Escrow - ISACA

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 21

Information Technology & Security, page 15

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 13

 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

 The chief information officer (CIO) is the most likely person to be responsible for the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, because the CIO is the senior executive who oversees the information technology (IT) function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy, objectives, and operations. The CIO is also responsible for ensuring that the IT function delivers value, supports innovation, and manages IT risks effectively and efficiently. The CIO can coordinate the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy by communicating and collaborating with other business leaders, establishing and implementing IT governance frameworks and policies, and monitoring and reporting on IT performance and risk indicators. The other options are not as likely as the CIO to be responsible for the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, because they have different or limited roles and responsibilities in relation to IT and business risk management, as explained below:

A. Chief financial officer (CFO) is the senior executive who oversees the financial function and manages the financial risks of the organization. The CFO may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to budgeting, funding, or reporting on IT-related projects and initiatives, but the CFO is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives.

B. Information security director is the senior manager who oversees the information security function and manages the information security risks of the organization. The information security director may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information assets and systems, but the information security director is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives.

C. Internal audit director is the senior manager who oversees the internal audit function and provides independent assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes. The internal audit director may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to auditing, reviewing, or testing the IT-related processes and controls, but the internal audit director is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.1, page 7. The Strategic CIO: Balancing Business and IT Priorities, Technology’s Role in Enterprise Risk Management, Aligning Enterprise Cyber Risk and Business Strategy

 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 information to support risk decisions, such as selecting and implementing the appropriate risk response strategies. The best way to provide executive management with the best information to make risk decisions as a result of a risk assessment is to present a comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state. The desired state is the optimal level of risk exposure that the organization wants to achieve, based on its risk objectives, goals, and strategy. A comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state can help executive management understand the current and potential gap between the actual and target risk levels, and prioritize the most critical and relevant risks that need attention and action. A comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state can also help executive management evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing risk response, and identify the opportunities and challenges for improvement. A comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state can also help communicate and justify the risk decisions to other stakeholders, and obtain their feedback and approval. References = Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA, Risk Management Essentials: How to Develop a Risk Profile (TRN2-J07), Risk Response Strategies: Avoid, Transfer, Mitigate, Accept.

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

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

Prioritizing risk responses helps to balance the costs and benefits of managing IT risk by ensuring that the most significant risks are addressed first and that the resources allocated to risk management are used efficiently and effectively. Evaluating risk based on frequency and probability is a part of risk analysis, not risk response. Considering risk factors that can be quantified is also a part of risk analysis, and it does not necessarily capture all the relevant aspects of risk. Managing the risk by using controls is a possible risk response, but it does not guarantee that the costs and benefits of risk management are balanced, as some controls may be too expensive or ineffective for the level of risk they mitigate. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 145.

 A control is an action or measure that reduces the likelihood or impact of a risk to an acceptable level. A control issue is a problem or weakness that affects the effectiveness or efficiency of a control, such as a gap, deficiency, or failure. A control enhancement is an improvement or modification that increases the effectiveness or efficiency of a control, such as by adding, replacing, or updating the control. An external audit is an independent and objective examination of the enterprise’s activities, processes, or systems, such as the risk management program or the control environment, by an external party, such as a regulator or a third-party auditor. The best way for a risk practitioner to verify that management has addressed control issues identified during a previous external audit is to observe the control enhancements in operation. This will enable the risk practitioner to evaluate the actual performance and outcome of the control enhancements, and to determine whether they have resolved or mitigated the control issues. The other options are not the best way to verify that management has addressed control issues, as they involve different methods or sources of verification:

Interview control owners means that the risk practitioner asks questions or collects feedback from the persons or groups who have the authority and accountability to manage the controls and their issues, such as the business process owners or the IT controls managers. This may provide some information or evidence on the control enhancements, but it may not be as reliable or objective as observing the control enhancements in operation, as the control owners may have biases, conflicts, or gaps in their knowledge or perception of the control enhancements.

Inspect external audit documentation means that the risk practitioner reviews the reports or records of the external audit, such as the audit findings, recommendations, or opinions. This may provide some information or evidence on the control issues, but it may not be as current or relevant as observing the control enhancements in operation, as the external audit documentation may not reflect the latest or updated status or results of the control enhancements, or may not cover all the aspects or components of the control enhancements.

Review management’s detailed action plans means that the risk practitioner examines the documents that specify the actions to be taken by the management to address the control issues, such as the resources required, the timelines, the owners, and the expected outcomes. This may provide some information or evidence on the control enhancements, but it may not be as accurate or sufficient as observing the control enhancements in operation, as the management’s detailed action plans may not match the actual implementation or execution of the control enhancements, or may not account for the uncertainties or complexities of the control enhancements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3.1, pp. 62-63.

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 19

Information Technology & Security, page 13

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 11

A new risk scenario without controls means that there is a potential threat or event that could adversely affect the organization’s objectives, and there are no existing measures to prevent or reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk. Therefore, the most appropriate action is to include the new risk scenario in the current risk assessment, so that the risk practitioner can analyze the risk, evaluate its severity and priority, and recommend suitable controls to mitigate the risk. By including the new risk scenario in the current risk assessment, the risk practitioner can ensure that the risk register is updated and reflects the current risk profile of the organization. The other options are not appropriate because they either ignore the new risk scenario, delay the risk assessment process, or remove valuable information from the risk register. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 95.

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 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.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, stakeholders are the individuals or groups that have an interest or stake in the outcome of the IT system and its risks. Stakeholders include the system owners, users, operators, developers, managers, auditors, regulators, and customers. It is most important to ensure that agreement is obtained from stakeholders when testing the security of an IT system, as this helps to define the scope, objectives, and expectations of the test, and to obtain the necessary authorization, support, and resources for the test. Agreement from stakeholders also helps to avoid any conflicts, disruptions, or misunderstandings that may arise during or after the test, and to ensure the validity and acceptance of the test results and recommendations. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 198, 224.

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

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

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

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

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.]

 The greatest risk associated with the transition of a sensitive data backup solution from on-premise to a cloud service provider is inadequate data encryption. Data encryption is a key security measure that protects the confidentiality and integrity of data, especially when it is stored or transmitted over a network. If the data encryption is inadequate, the data backup solution may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, modification, or disclosure by malicious actors or third parties. This could result in data breaches, regulatory fines, reputational damage, or legal liabilities for the enterprise. More complex test restores, inadequate service level agreement (SLA) with the provider, and more complex incident response procedures are also potential risks associated with the transition, but they are not as great as inadequate data encryption. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.1, page 245.

The best action for the risk practitioner to take when business areas within an organization have engaged various cloud service providers directly without assistance from the IT department is to recommend a risk assessment be conducted. A risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks associated with the use of cloud services, such as financial, privacy, compliance, security, performance, quality, and technical risks12. A risk assessment can help to determine the current and potential risk exposure and impact of the cloud services, as well as the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing or proposed controls. A risk assessment can also help to prioritize the risks and to develop and implement appropriate risk response strategies and plans, such as risk avoidance, reduction, sharing, or acceptance. Recommending a risk assessment is the best action, because it can provide valuable information and guidance to the business areas and the IT department for managing the cloud services in a consistent, effective, and efficient manner, and for aligning the cloud services with the organizational objectives, strategy, and risk appetite. The other options are not the best action, although they may be related or subsequent steps in the risk management process. Recommending the IT department remove access to the cloud services is a drastic and impractical action, as it may disrupt the business operations and services, and it may not address the underlying causes or drivers of the cloud service adoption. Engaging with the business area managers to review controls applied is a useful and collaborative action, as it can help to understand and evaluate the current state and practices of the cloud service usage, and to identify and address any gaps or issues in the control environment. However, this action should be based on or supported by a risk assessment, rather than preceding or replacing it. Escalating to the risk committee is a reporting and communication action, as it can help to inform and involve the senior management and other stakeholders in the risk management process, and to obtain their support and approval for the risk response actions. However, this action should be done after or along with a risk assessment, rather than before or instead of it. References = Best Practices to Manage Risks in the Cloud - ISACA, Cloud Risk Management - PwC UK

 The PRIMARY objective of the board of directors periodically reviewing the risk profile is to help ensure that the risk strategy is appropriate, because the risk strategy defines the enterprise’s risk appetite, tolerance, and objectives, and guides the risk management process and activities. The board of directors should review the risk profile to ensure that it reflects the current internal and external environment, and that it aligns with the enterprise’s strategy and goals. The other options are not the primary objective, because:

Option B: KRIs and KPIs are aligned is a desirable outcome of the risk strategy, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. KRIs and KPIs are indicators that measure and monitor the risk exposure and performance of the enterprise, respectively, and they should be consistent with the risk strategy and objectives.

Option C: Performance of controls is adequate is a result of the risk response, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. Performance of controls is the degree to which the controls are effective and efficient in mitigating the risks, and it should be evaluated and reported by the risk management function and the internal audit function.

Option D: The risk monitoring process has been established is a prerequisite for the risk profile, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. The risk monitoring process is the process of tracking and reporting the risk status and performance, and it should be implemented and executed by the risk management function and the business process owners. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 119.

The best risk response for an identified high probability risk scenario involving a critical, proprietary business function with an annualized cost of control higher than the annual loss expectancy is to accept the risk. Accepting the risk means acknowledging the risk but choosing not to take any specific action to address it. This strategy is suitable when the cost of implementing controls exceeds the potential loss, as in this scenario. The organization recognizes the risk, but the cost-benefit analysis suggests that the potential loss is acceptable given the higher cost of control. The other options are not the best risk responses, as they may not be feasible, practical, or cost-effective in this scenario. Mitigating the risk means reducing the risk by implementing controls or measures to minimize its potential impact, but this would increase the cost of control, which is already higher than the annual loss expectancy. Transferring the risk means shifting the risk to another party, typically through insurance or contracts, but this may not be possible or advisable for a critical, proprietary business function, and it may also increase the overall cost burden. Avoiding the risk means eliminating the risk entirely by not engaging in the activity that poses the risk, but this may disrupt essential business operations and potentially result in other adverse consequences. References = CRISC Exam: Best Risk Response for High Probability Risk Scenario; Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips; Chapter 19: Summarizing Risk Management Concepts

The main purpose of a risk register is to enable well-informed risk management decisions by providing a comprehensive and up-to-date record of all the identified risks, their analysis, and their responses. A risk register is a tool that helps to document, monitor, and communicate the status and outcome of risk management activities. A risk register also facilitates the review and evaluation of the effectiveness of risk management processes and controls. Documenting the risk universe, promoting an understanding of risk, and identifying stakeholders are possible benefits of a risk register, but they are not the main purpose. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.3, page 531

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 640.

 According to the Key Performance Indicators for Vulnerability Management article, the number of vulnerabilities remediated is a key performance indicator that measures the effectiveness of a vulnerability remediation program. This KPI indicates how many vulnerabilities have been successfully mitigated or fixed within a given time frame. A higher number can imply that the organization is effectively managing its exposures and reducing its risk level. The number of vulnerabilities remediated can also be compared with the number of new vulnerabilities identified to evaluate the progress and performance of the vulnerability remediation program. References = Key Performance Indicators for Vulnerability Management

A risk treatment plan is a document that outlines the actions and resources required to implement the chosen risk response for a specific risk1. A risk response is a strategy or action that is taken or planned to mitigate or eliminate the risk, such as avoiding, transferring, reducing, or accepting the risk2. A risk owner is a person or entity that has the authority and accountability for a risk and its management3. If the implementation of a risk treatment plan will exceed the resources originally allocated for the risk response, the risk owner’s next action should be to escalate to senior management, which is the group of senior leaders who have the authority and accountability for the organization’s performance and governance4. By escalating to senior management, the risk owner can inform and consult them about the situation and the implications, and seek their guidance and approval for the necessary adjustments or alternatives. Escalating to senior management can also help to ensure that the risk treatment plan is aligned with the organization’s strategy, vision, and mission, and that the risk response is consistent with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance5. Performing a risk assessment, accepting the risk of not implementing, and updating the implementation plan are not the best choices for the risk owner’s next action, as they do not provide the same level of communication and consultation as escalating to senior management. Performing a risk assessment is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts on the organization’s objectives and performance6. Performing a risk assessment can help to update and validate the risk information and the risk treatment plan, but it does not address the issue of the resource shortfall or the stakeholder expectations. Accepting the risk of not implementing is a decision that involves acknowledging and tolerating the risk or its impact without taking any action to reduce or eliminate it7. Accepting the risk of not implementing can help to avoid the additional cost and effort of the risk treatment plan, but it does not consider the potential consequences or the stakeholder interests. Updating the implementation plan is a process that involves revising and modifying the plan for executing the risk treatment plan, such as the scope, schedule, budget, or quality8. Updating the implementation plan can help to reflect the changes and updates in the risk treatment plan, but it does not resolve the problem of the resource gap or the stakeholder approval. References = 1: Risk Treatment and Response Plans - UNECE2: Risk Response Strategy and Contingency Plans - ProjectManagement.com3: [Risk Ownership - Risk Management] 4: [Senior Management - Definition, Roles and Responsibilities] 5: [Risk Appetite and Tolerance - ISACA] 6: [Risk Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] 7: [Risk Acceptance - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] 8: [Implementation Plan - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Options, pp. 113-115.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

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

A digital certificate is a document that contains the public key and the identity of the owner of the public key, and is signed by a trusted third party called a certificate authority (CA)1. A digital certificate can be used to ensure the message reaches the intended recipient without alteration, by using the following steps2:

The sender encrypts the message with the recipient’s public key, which can only be decrypted by the recipient’s private key. This ensures the confidentiality of the message, as only the intended recipient can read it.

The sender signs the message with their own private key, which can be verified by anyone who has their public key. This ensures the integrity and authenticity of the message, as it proves that the message has not been tampered with and that it comes from the sender.

The sender attaches their digital certificate to the message, which contains their public key and their identity, and is signed by a CA. This ensures the validity and trustworthiness of the sender’s public key and identity, as it confirms that they have been verified by a CA.

The recipient receives the message and the digital certificate, and verifies the signature of the CA on the digital certificate. This ensures that the digital certificate is genuine and has not been forged or revoked.

The recipient uses the public key from the digital certificate to verify the signature of the sender on the message. This ensures that the message has not been altered and that it comes from the sender.

The recipient uses their own private key to decrypt the message. This ensures that they can read the message.

Therefore, adding a digital certificate is the best way to ensure the message reaches the intended recipient without alteration, as it provides encryption, digital signature, and certificate verification, which are the three main components of secure email communication3. Applying multi-factor authentication, adding a hash to the message, and adding a secret key are not the best ways to ensure the message reaches the intended recipient without alteration, as they do not provide all the components of secure email communication. Applying multi-factor authentication is a technique that requires the user to provide two or more pieces of evidence to prove their identity, such as a password, a code, or a biometric factor4. Multi-factor authentication can enhance the security of the email account, but it does not protect the message itself from being intercepted, modified, or impersonated. Adding a hash to the message is a technique that involves applying a mathematical function to the message to generate a fixed-length value, called a hash or a digest, that uniquely represents the message5. A hash can be used to verify the integrity of the message, as any change in the message will result in a different hash. However, a hash does not provide confidentiality or authenticity of the message, as it does not encrypt the message or identify the sender. Adding a secret key is a technique that involves using a single key, known only to the sender and the recipient, to encrypt and decrypt the message6. A secret key can provide confidentiality of the message, as only the sender and the recipient can read it. However, a secret key does not provide integrity or authenticity of the message, as it does not prevent the message from being altered or spoofed. Moreover, a secret key requires a secure way of exchanging the key between the sender and the recipient, which may not be feasible or reliable over email. References = 1: What is a digital certificate? | Norton2: How to Send Secure Emails in 2023 | A Guide to Secure Email - ProPrivacy3: Secure Email: A Complete Guide for 2023 - StartMail4: What is Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA)? | Duo Security5: What is a Hash Function? | Definition and FAQs6: [What is Symmetric Encryption? | Definition and FAQs]

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

The best time to conduct a risk analysis in a software development project is at each stage of the development life cycle. This is because risks can emerge or change at any point of the project, and they need to be identified, assessed, and managed as soon as possible. By conducting a risk analysis at each stage, the project team can ensure that the risks are aligned with the project objectives, scope, and deliverables, and that the appropriate risk responses are implemented and monitored. Conducting a risk analysis at each stage can also help to avoid or reduce the impact of potential issues, such as schedule delays, cost overruns, quality defects, and customer dissatisfaction. The other options are not the best time to conduct a risk analysis, although they may be useful or necessary depending on the project context and nature. Conducting a risk analysis during the business requirement definitions phase is important, but it is not sufficient, as the risks may change or evolve as the project progresses. Conducting a risk analysis before periodic steering committee meetings is a good practice, but it is not the only time to do so, as the risks may arise or escalate between the meetings. Conducting a risk analysis during the business case development is a part of the project initiation process, but it is not the most effective time, as the risks may not be fully known or understood at that stage. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2: Risk Identification, Section 2.1: Risk Identification Process, p. 79-80.

The three lines of defense model is a framework that describes the roles and responsibilities of different functions in an organization for managing risks and controls.

The first line of defense is the operational management, which is responsible for implementing and maintaining effective controls, identifying and assessing risks, and reporting on risk and control performance.

The second line of defense is the risk management and compliance functions, which are responsible for establishing and overseeing the risk management framework, providing guidance and support to the operational management, and monitoring and reporting on risk and compliance issues.

The third line of defense is the internal audit function, which is responsible for providing independent and objective assurance on the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk management and control system, and recommending improvements.

Within the three lines of defense model, the accountability for the system of internal control resides with the chief information officer (CIO). The CIO is the senior executive who oversees the IT function of the organization, and is responsible for ensuring that the IT risks and controls are aligned with the business objectives and strategies, and are integrated with the enterprise risk management and governance processes.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 20

Information Technology & Security, page 14

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 12

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

 Scenario analysis is a technique that helps to identify significant events that could impact an organization by creating and exploring plausible alternative futures. Scenario analysis can help anticipate and prepare for potential changes, opportunities, or threats in the internal or external environment, such as technological, economic, social, political, legal, or environmental factors. Scenario analysis can also help evaluate the impact and likelihood of different risk scenarios, and test the effectiveness and robustness of various risk response strategies. Scenario analysis can provide a comprehensive and holistic view of risks and their interrelationships, and support the decision making and planning process for risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Scenarios, p. 49-50.

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]

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.

 Controls are the mechanisms or procedures that ensure the security, reliability, and quality of an IT system or process. Controls can be preventive, detective, or corrective, and can be implemented at various levels, such as physical, logical, administrative, or technical. Controls should be defined during the design phase of system development because it is more cost-effective to determine controls in the early design phase. The design phase is the stage where the system requirements are translated into a detailed technical plan, which includes the system architecture, database structure, user interface, and system components. The design phase also defines the system objectives, goals, and performance criteria. Defining controls during the design phase can help ensure that the controls are aligned with the system requirements and objectives, and that they are integrated into the system design from the start. Defining controls during the design phase can also help avoid or reduce the costs and risks associated with implementing controls later in the development or operation phases, such as rework, delays, errors, failures, or breaches. References = THE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE (SDLC), p. 2-3, System Development Life Cycle - GeeksforGeeks, 7.3: Systems Development Life Cycle - Engineering LibreTexts, What Is SDLC? 7 Phases of System Development Life Cycle - Intetics.

 The best answer is D. Organizational policy. An organizational policy is a set of rules and guidelines that defines how the organization operates and conducts its activities. An organizational policy should direct how the employee monitoring system is used, because it can specify the purpose, scope, methods, and limitations of the monitoring, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved, the data protection and privacy measures, and the consequences of non-compliance. An organizational policy can also help to ensure that the employee monitoring system is aligned with the organization’s objectives, values, and culture, and that it complies with the relevant laws and regulations. The other options are not the best answer, although they may be related or influential to the organizational policy. Organizational strategy is a plan of action that outlines the organization’s vision, mission, goals, and initiatives, but it does not provide the details or the rules of how the employee monitoring system is used. Employee code of conduct is a document that describes the expected behavior and ethics of the employees, but it does not address the specific aspects or the procedures of the employee monitoring system. Industry best practices are the proven methods and standards that are adopted by the leading organizations in a specific field or sector, but they may not be applicable or suitable for every organization or situation. References = Workplace Monitoring Policy Template - CurrentWare, The All-In-One Guide to Employee Monitoring - G2

The most important factor when assessing the risk of allowing users to access company data from their personal devices is the classification of the data, as it indicates the level of sensitivity, confidentiality, and criticality of the data. Data classification helps to determine the appropriate level of protection and controls that are needed to prevent unauthorized access, disclosure, modification, or loss of the data. Data classification also helps to define the roles and responsibilities of the data owners, custodians, and users, and the acceptable use of the data. The other options are not the most important factors, although they may be relevant or influential in the risk assessment. The type of device may affect the security features and vulnerabilities of the device, but it does not determine the value or impact of the data. The remote management capabilities may affect the ability to monitor, control, or wipe the device in case of theft or loss, but they do not reflect the nature or purpose of the data. The volume of data may affect the storage capacity or performance of the device, but it does not indicate the importance or significance of the data. References = What is BYOD (Bring-Your-Own-Device) - CrowdStrike; Understanding BYOD Policy - Get Certified Get Ahead; Addressing cyber security concerns on employees’ personal devices; Personal Devices at Work – Nonprofit Risk Management Center; 10 Keys to an Effective BYOD and Remote Access Policy

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

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

A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses or gaps in an application that may expose it to potential threats or attacks.

When vulnerability assessment results identify a weakness in an application, the first thing that a risk practitioner should do is to assess the risk to determine mitigation needed. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the likelihood and impact of the weakness being exploited, the existing controls that are in place to prevent or reduce the exploitation, and the residual risk that remains after applying the controls.

Assessing the risk to determine mitigation needed helps to prioritize the actions that are required to address the weakness, such as implementing new or additional controls, accepting the risk, transferring the risk, or avoiding the risk.

The other options are not the first things that a risk practitioner should do when vulnerability assessment results identify a weakness in an application. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 18

Information Technology & Security, page 12

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 10

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and owners. A decentralized risk register is maintained by each business unit or function, while a consolidated risk register is maintained at the enterprise level. The greatest concern with maintaining decentralized risk registers instead of a consolidated risk register is that the aggregated risk may exceed the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, while risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation around the objectives. If the risk registers are not consolidated, the enterprise may not have a holistic view of its risk profile and may not be able to prioritize and allocate resources effectively. The other options are also concerns, but they are not as significant as the potential misalignment between the aggregated risk and the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2.2, pp. 21-22.

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

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

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

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

Robotics process automation (RPA) is the use of software robots to perform repetitive, rules-based tasks that interact with multiple applications. RPA can help internal audit departments automate certain continuous auditing tasks, such as data extraction, validation, analysis, and reporting. RPA can improve the efficiency, quality, and coverage of internal audit activities, and provide greater insight and value to the business. However, RPA also involves certain risks, such as errors, failures, security breaches, or compliance issues, that need to be identified, assessed, and managed. The risk associated with ineffective design of the software bots is the possibility and impact of the bots not functioning as intended, or producing inaccurate or unreliable results. The risk owner of this risk is the person or entity who has the authority and responsibility for managing the risk. The risk owner should be able to define the risk appetite, assess the risk level, select and implement the risk response, monitor and report the risk status, and ensure the risk alignment with the project objectives and strategy. The risk owner of the risk associated with ineffective design of the software bots is the project manager, who is the person in charge of planning, executing, monitoring, and closing the RPA project. The project manager understands the project scope, requirements, budget, timeline, and deliverables, and the potential consequences of ineffective design of the software bots. The project manager also has the resources and incentives to address the risk effectively and efficiently. Therefore, the project manager is the most appropriate risk owner of the risk associated with ineffective design of the software bots. References = Robotic Process Automation for Internal Audit, p. 3-4, Adopting robotic process automation in Internal Audit, Robotic Process Automation (RPA) – Internal Audit Use and Risks.

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

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

The first step in assessing the current risk level of data loss is to identify where the sensitive data is stored, such as servers, databases, laptops, mobile devices, etc. This will help to determine the scope and boundaries of the risk assessment, as well as the potential exposure and impact of data loss. Identifying staff members who have access to the data, risk scenarios and owners, and existing controls are important steps, but they should be done after identifying the data locations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.1, page 51.

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]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The PRIMARY reason for an organization to ensure the risk register is updated regularly is to make sure that risk information is available to enable risk-based decisions, because the risk register is a tool that documents and tracks the identified risks, their characteristics, their status, and their responses. The risk register provides a comprehensive and current view of the risk profile and exposure of the organization, and it supports the decision-making process and the risk management activities. The other options are not the primary reason, because:

Option A: Risk assessment results are accessible to senior management and stakeholders is a benefit of updating the risk register regularly, but not the primary reason. Risk assessment results are the outputs of the risk analysis process, and they should be recorded and communicated to the relevant parties, but they are not the only or the most important information in the risk register.

Option B: Risk mitigation activities are managed and coordinated is a result of updating the risk register regularly, but not the primary reason. Risk mitigation activities are the actions taken to address the identified risks, and they should be monitored and reported in the risk register, but they are not the only or the most important information in the risk register.

Option C: Key risk indicators (KRIs) are evaluated to validate they are still within the risk threshold is a process that involves updating the risk register regularly, but not the primary reason. KRIs are indicators that measure and monitor the risk exposure and performance of the organization, and they should be compared with the risk threshold to determine if the risk level is acceptable or not, and if any action is required, but they are not the only or the most important information in the risk register. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 108.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

The best answer is D. Escalation triggers. Escalation triggers are predefined thresholds or conditions that indicate when a key risk indicator (KRI) has reached a critical level that requires immediate attention or action. Escalation triggers can be based on quantitative or qualitative measures, such as percentages, scores, ratings, or colors. Escalation triggers can help to ensure appropriate action is taken to mitigate risk, because they provide clear and timely signals that alert the risk owners, managers, and other stakeholders of the need to review and revise the risk response plan, or to implement additional or alternative controls. Escalation triggers can also help to communicate and report the risk status and the risk response actions to the senior management and the board, and to obtain their support and approval, if needed. The other options are not the best answer, although they may be related or influential to the KRI and the risk mitigation. Management intervention is a part of the risk response process, which involves the actions and decisions taken by the management to address the risk, such as approving, implementing, or monitoring the controls. Management intervention can help to mitigate risk, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a consequence or a result of the escalation triggers. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite can help to define and align the KRI and the escalation triggers with the organizational strategy and culture, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a factor or a driver of the KRI. Board commentary is a part of the risk reporting process, which involves the feedback and guidance provided by the board on the risk management process and performance. Board commentary can help to improve and enhance the KRI and the risk mitigation, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a source or a resource of the KRI. References = Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture, KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva

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.

IT disaster recovery point objectives (RPOs) should be based on the:

B. maximum tolerable loss of data.

RPOs are determined by how much data loss an organization can withstand in the event of a disaster. It’s a measure of the maximum age of files that an organization must recover from backup storage for normal operations to resume after a disaster. Therefore, RPOs are directly related to the maximum tolerable loss of data.

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

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

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

The best way to test the operational effectiveness of a data backup procedure is to perform a complete restoration of every file to a clean system and verify that there has not been any data corruption or loss. This will ensure that the backup procedure can successfully recover the data in the event of a disaster or incident. The other options are not sufficient to test the operational effectiveness of a data backup procedure, as they do not involve actually restoring the data and verifying its integrity and usability. References = How to review and test backup procedures to ensure data restoration; HOW TO TEST DATA BACKUPS: A BRIEF GUIDE; How to Test a Database Backup

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

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

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

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

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

The risk associated with the loss of company data stored on personal devices is that the data may be accessed, disclosed, or modified by unauthorized parties, resulting in confidentiality, integrity, or availability breaches1. The most effective way to mitigate this risk is to enforce authentication and data encryption on the personal devices that store company data. Authentication is a process that verifies the identity of the user or device that is accessing the data, and prevents unauthorized access by requiring a password, a code, a biometric factor, or a combination of these2. Data encryption is a technique that transforms the data into an unreadable format, and requires a key to decrypt and restore the data to its original format3. By enforcing authentication and data encryption on the personal devices, the organization can ensure that only authorized users or devices can access the company data, and that the data is protected from unauthorized disclosure or modification even if the device is lost or stolen4. An acceptable use policy for personal devices, required user log-on before synchronizing data, and security awareness training and testing are not the most effective ways to mitigate the risk associated with the loss of company data stored on personal devices, as they do not provide the same level of protection as authentication and data encryption. An acceptable use policy for personal devices is a document that defines the rules and guidelines for using personal devices for work purposes, such as the types of devices, data, and applications that are allowed, the security measures that are required, and the responsibilities and liabilities of the users and the organization5. An acceptable use policy for personal devices can help to establish a common understanding and expectation for the use of personal devices, but it does not enforce or guarantee the compliance or effectiveness of the security measures. Required user log-on before synchronizing data is a technique that requires the user to enter their credentials before they can transfer or update the data between their personal device and the company network or system6. Required user log-on before synchronizing data can help to prevent unauthorized synchronization of data, but it does not protect the data that is already stored on the personal device. Security awareness training and testing is a process that educates and evaluates the users on the security risks and best practices for using personal devices for work purposes, such as the importance of using strong passwords, updating software, avoiding phishing emails, and reporting incidents7. Security awareness training and testing can help to increase the knowledge and behavior of the users, but it does not ensure or monitor the implementation or performance of the security measures. References = 1: BYOD security: What are the risks and how can they be mitigated?2: What is Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA)? | Duo Security3: [What is Data Encryption? | Definition and FAQs] 4: How to mitigate the risks of using personal devices in the workplace5: BYOD Policy Template - Get Free Sample6: How to Sync Your Phone With Windows 10 | PCMag7: Security Awareness Training: What Is It and Why Is It Important?

Deviation from a mitigation action plan’s completion date should be determined by the risk owner as determined by risk management processes, because the risk owner is the person or entity who has the accountability and authority to manage the risk and its associated mitigation actions. The risk owner should monitor and report the progress and status of the mitigation action plan, and determine if there is any deviation from the expected completion date, based on the risk management processes and criteria. The other options are not the ones who should determine the deviation, because:

Option A: Change management as determined by a change control board is a process that ensures that any changes to the project scope, schedule, cost, or quality are controlled and approved, but it does not determine the deviation from the mitigation action plan’s completion date, which is a risk management activity.

Option B: Benchmarking analysis with similar completed projects is a technique that compares the performance and practices of the current project with those of similar or successful projects, but it does not determine the deviation from the mitigation action plan’s completion date, which is a risk management activity.

Option C: Project governance criteria as determined by the project office is a set of rules and standards that define the roles, responsibilities, and authority of the project stakeholders, but it does not determine the deviation from the mitigation action plan’s completion date, which is a risk management activity. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 122.

Unauthorized data disclosure: The exposure of sensitive or confidential information to unauthorized parties, either intentionally or unintentionally1.

Proactive approach: An approach that anticipates and prevents potential problems or threats before they occur, rather than reacting to them after they happen2.

Incident response plan: A set of policies, procedures, and tools that guide an organization’s actions in the event of a data breach or security incident3.

A proactive approach to minimizing the potential impact of unauthorized data disclosure is to have an incident response plan. An incident response plan helps an organization to:

Detect and contain the incident as quickly as possible

Analyze the scope, cause, and impact of the incident

Eradicate the threat and restore normal operations

Communicate with internal and external stakeholders

Learn from the incident and improve security measures

An incident response plan enables an organization to reduce the damage and disruption caused by unauthorized data disclosure, as well as to comply with relevant laws and regulations that require timely notification and remediation of data breaches3.

The other options are not as effective as an incident response plan in minimizing the potential impact of unauthorized data disclosure, because they do not address the root cause or the response of the incident. Key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure or the likelihood of a risk event, may help to monitor and manage the risk of unauthorized data disclosure, but they do not prevent or respond to the incident. Data backups, which are copies of data stored in a separate location or medium, may help to recover the data that was lost or corrupted due to unauthorized data disclosure, but they do not protect the data that was exposed or stolen. Cyber insurance, which is a type of insurance that covers the financial losses and liabilities arising from cyberattacks or data breaches, may help to mitigate some of the costs and risks associated with unauthorized data disclosure, but it does not prevent or resolve the incident.

References = What is Unauthorized Data Disclosure? | Egnyte, Proactive vs. Reactive: What’s the Difference?, Incident Response Planning: Best Practices for Businesses

The primary purpose of creating and documenting control procedures is to help manage risk to acceptable tolerance levels. Control procedures are the specific actions or steps that are performed to achieve the control objectives and mitigate the risks. Control procedures should be documented to provide clear guidance, consistency, and accountability for the control activities. Documenting control procedures also helps to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, and to identify and address any gaps or weaknesses. The other options are not the primary purpose of creating and documenting control procedures, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 1-15.

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

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

The primary reason for sharing risk assessment reports with senior stakeholders is to support decision-making for risk response. Risk assessment reports are documents that summarize the results of the risk assessment process, such as the risk sources, causes, impacts, likelihood, and levels. Risk assessment reports also provide recommendations for risk response options, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Sharing risk assessment reports with senior stakeholders helps to inform them of the current risk situation, and to solicit their input, feedback, or approval for the risk response actions. The other options are not the primary reason for sharing risk assessment reports, although they may be secondary reasons or outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

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

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

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

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

The organization control environment is most effective when the controls perform as intended. The controls are the mechanisms or measures that are designed and implemented to prevent, detect, or correct the risks that may affect the achievement of the objectives. The controls perform as intended when they provide reasonable assurance that the risks are mitigated or managed to an acceptable level, and that the objectives are met or exceeded. The performance of the controls can be measured and evaluated by using key performance indicators (KPIs) and key risk indicators (KRIs). The other options are not as indicative of the effectiveness of the control environment, as they are related to the review, implementation, or efficiency of the controls, not the performance or assurance of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 69.

The three lines of defense model is a framework that describes the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders in the risk management and internal control processes of an organization. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense: the operational management and staff who are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks, as well as implementing and maintaining the controls within their areas of activity.

The second line of defense: the risk management, compliance, and security functions who are responsible for establishing the risk policies and standards, providing guidance and support, monitoring and reporting on the risk performance and compliance, and facilitating the risk management and internal control processes across the organization.

The third line of defense: the internal audit function who is responsible for providing independent and objective assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and internal control processes, as well as recommending improvements and best practices. The stakeholders who are typically included as part of a line of defense within the three lines of defense model are the legal team, who belong to the second line of defense. The legal team is responsible for ensuring that the organization complies with the relevant laws and regulations, as well as for advising and assisting the organization on the legal aspects and implications of the risk management and internal control processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.1, p. 32-33

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

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

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

Before assigning sensitivity levels to information, it is most important to define the information classification policy. The information classification policy is a document that establishes the criteria, categories, roles, responsibilities, and procedures for classifying information according to its sensitivity, value, and criticality. The information classification policy provides the basis, guidance, and consistency for assigning sensitivity levels to information, and ensures that the information is protected and handled appropriately. The other options are not as important as defining the information classification policy, as they are related to the specific steps, activities, or outputs of the information classification process, not the overall structure and quality of the information classification process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

Risk strategies are the plans and actions that an organization adopts to manage its risks and to achieve its objectives. Risk strategies should be aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, values, and culture, as well as its internal and external environment. The most important consideration when developing risk strategies is the long-term organizational goals, meaning that the risk strategies should support and enable the organization to pursue and attain its desired future state and outcomes. The long-term organizational goals should guide the risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring processes, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance levels. The long-term organizational goals should also be communicated and cascaded throughout the organization to ensure the risk awareness and engagement of all stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, p. 27-28

The most important activity when conducting a post-implementation review as part of the system development life cycle (SDLC) is to verify that the project objectives are met. The project objectives are the specific and measurable outcomes that the project aims to achieve. By verifying that the project objectives are met, the post-implementation review can evaluate the success and value of the project, and identify the lessons learned and best practices for future projects. Identifying project cost overruns, leveraging an independent review team, and reviewing the project initiation risk matrix are other possible activities, but they are not as important as verifying that the project objectives are met. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

The best course of action when an organization wants to reduce likelihood in order to reduce a risk level is to implement preventive measures. Likelihood is the probability or chance of a risk occurring, and risk level is the combination of likelihood and impact of a risk. Preventive measures are controls that are designed to prevent or deter the occurrence of a risk, such as policies, standards, procedures, guidelines, etc. Implementing preventive measures is the best course of action, because it helps to reduce the likelihood of a risk, and consequently, the risk level. Implementing preventive measures also helps to protect and enhance the organization’s objectives, performance, and improvement. The other options are not the best course of action, although they may be related to the risk management process. Monitoring risk controls, implementing detective controls, and transferring the risk are all activities that can help to manage or mitigate the risks, but they do not necessarily reduce the likelihood or the risk level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-21.

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

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

 Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. They help to monitor changes in the level of risk and enable timely actions to mitigate the risk. The major advantage of using KRIs is that they identify when risk exceeds defined thresholds, which are the acceptable or tolerable levels of risk that the organization has established. By identifying when risk exceeds defined thresholds, the KRIs can alert the management and stakeholders of the need to take corrective or preventive measures, and avoid or reduce the potential losses or damages. References = 3

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

Risk appetite should be primarily driven by stakeholder requirements. Stakeholder requirements are the needs and expectations of the internal and external parties that have an interest or influence in the organization’s objectives or operations, such as the board, management, employees, customers, regulators, investors, etc. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite should be driven by stakeholder requirements, because they reflect the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and they provide the basis and direction for the organization’s risk management activities. Risk appetite should also be aligned and communicated with stakeholder requirements, because they affect the organization’s performance and reputation, and they require the organization’s accountability and transparency. The other options are not the primary drivers of risk appetite, although they may be considered or influenced by risk appetite. Enterprise security architecture roadmap, legal and regulatory requirements, and business impact analysis (BIA) are all factors that could affect the organization’s risk profile, risk assessment, or risk response, but they do not necessarily determine or reflect the organization’s risk appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 2-23.

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

The primary objective of collecting information and reviewing documentation when performing periodic risk analysis is to identify new or emerging risk issues that may affect the enterprise’s objectives, processes, or resources. This helps to update the risk profile and prioritize the risk responses accordingly. Satisfying audit requirements, surveying and analyzing historical risk data, and understanding internal and external threat agents are secondary objectives that support the primary objective of risk identification. References = Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, page 22; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 64.

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

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

When assessing the potential risk exposure of a loss event involving personal data, the most important factor to determine is the composition and number of records in the information asset. The composition refers to the type and sensitivity of the personal data, such as name, address, phone number, email, social security number, health information, financial information, etc. The number of records refers to the quantity and scope of the personal data that is affected by the loss event. The composition and number of records in the information asset determine the severity and impact of the loss event, as they indicate the extent of the harm and damage that can be caused to the data subjects, the organization, and other stakeholders. The composition and number of records in the information asset also influence the cost of the incident response activities, the level of the regulatory fines, and the duration of the incident containment and recovery. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 159.

The most helpful factor to align when defining thresholds for control key performance indicators (KPIs) is the control performance with the risk tolerance of business owners. Control KPIs are metrics that measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks. By aligning the control performance with the risk tolerance of business owners, the thresholds for control KPIs can reflect the acceptable level of risk and the desired level of control for the business processes and objectives. Information risk assessments with enterprise risk assessments, key risk indicators (KRIs) with risk appetite of the business, and control KPIs with audit findings are other possible factors to align, but they are not as helpful as control performance with risk tolerance of business owners. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

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

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

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

 The most important consideration when communicating the risk associated with technology end-of-life to business owners is the cost and benefit of the risk response options. Technology end-of-life is the situation when a technology product or service is no longer supported by the vendor or manufacturer, and may pose security, compatibility, or performance issues. The risk practitioner should communicate the cost and benefit of the possible risk responses, such as replacing, upgrading, or maintaining the technology, to the business owners, and help them to make informed and rational decisions. Security and availability, maintainability and reliability, and performance and productivity are other possible considerations, but they are not as important as the cost and benefit. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

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

The greatest concern when establishing key risk indicators (KRIs) is using ineffective methods to assess risk. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. To establish effective KRIs, the risk assessment methods should be reliable, valid, consistent, and timely. Ineffective methods to assess risk could lead to inaccurate or misleading KRIs, which could result in poor risk management decisions and outcomes. The other options are not as significant as using ineffective methods to assess risk, although they may also affect the quality and usefulness of KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

 A source code review is the process of examining and analyzing the source code of an application to identify any vulnerabilities, errors, or flaws that may compromise the security, functionality, or performance of the application. A source code review is the most effective way to identify an application backdoor prior to implementation, as it can detect any hidden or unauthorized code that may allow unauthorized access, bypass security controls, or execute malicious commands. A source code review can also help to improve the quality and reliability of the application, and ensure compliance with the coding standards and best practices. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 181.

A risk practitioner is a person who is responsible for performing risk management activities, such as identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and communicating risks. When an organization is implementing a project to automate the purchasing process, including the modification of approval controls, the task that is the responsibility of the risk practitioner is to verify that the existing controls continue to properly mitigate the defined risk. This means that the risk practitioner should ensure that the automation and modification of the approval controls do not introduce new risks or change the existing risk profile, and that the controls are still effective and adequate for the purchasing process. The risk practitioner should also monitor the performance and compliance of the controls, and recommend any improvements or adjustments as needed. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 177.

The main purpose of monitoring risk is to provide decision support for the organization. Risk monitoring is the process of tracking and reviewing the risk management activities, the risk profile, and the risk performance of the organization. By monitoring risk, the organization can obtain timely and relevant information and feedback on the risk situation, and use it to make informed and effective decisions on risk management and business objectives. Communication, risk analysis, and benchmarking are other possible purposes of risk monitoring, but they are not as important as decision support. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

Open communication of risk reporting is the most important factor for promoting a risk-aware culture, because it fosters trust, transparency, and accountability among all stakeholders. It also enables timely and informed decision-making, feedback, and learning from risk events. Regular testing of risk controls, communication of audit findings, and procedures for security monitoring are all important aspects of risk management, but they do not necessarily create a risk-aware culture, which requires a shared understanding and commitment to risk management across the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2, page 1-9.

The best way to mitigate the high cost of retrieving electronic evidence associated with potential litigation is to implement policies and procedures for data retention and destruction. Data retention and destruction policies and procedures define the criteria, methods, and schedules for retaining and disposing of electronic data. They help to ensure that the electronic data is stored, managed, and deleted in a consistent, secure, and compliant manner. They also help to reduce the volume, complexity, and cost of retrieving electronic evidence, as they limit the scope, duration, and frequency of the data preservation and discovery process. The other options are not as effective as data retention and destruction policies and procedures, as they are related to the collection, analysis, or classification of electronic data, not the retention or destruction of electronic data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The primary risk management responsibility of the first line of defense is to implement risk treatment plans. The first line of defense is the operational management and staff who are directly involved in the execution of the business activities and processes. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks that affect their objectives and performance. Implementing risk treatment plans means applying the appropriate risk response strategies and actions to address the identified risks, and monitoring and reporting the results and outcomes of the risk treatment. The other options are not as primary as implementing risk treatment plans, as they are related to the validation, establishment, or review of the risk management process, not the execution of the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Process, page 15.

 The best recommendation to address the situation where personal information from the production environment is required for testing purposes in non-production environments is to de-identify data before being transferred to the test environment. De-identification is the process of removing or modifying any personally identifiable information (PII) or other sensitive data from the data sets, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc., so that the data cannot be traced back to specific individuals. De-identification protects the privacy and confidentiality of the data, while still allowing for testing, analysis, or training purposes. Enabling data encryption, preventing the use of production data, and enforcing multi-factor authentication are also useful measures, but they do not eliminate the risk of data breaches or unauthorized access to PII. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

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

 Risk appetite is the broad-based amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the level of risk that the organization is prepared to take to achieve its strategic goals, and provides guidance and boundaries for the risk management activities and decisions. To define the risk management strategy, which is the plan and approach for managing the risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives, the factor that must be set by the board of directors is the risk appetite. The board of directors is the highest governing body of the organization, and has the ultimate responsibility and authority for setting the direction and oversight of the organization. By setting the risk appetite, the board of directors can communicate its expectations and preferences for the risk exposure and performance of the organization, and ensure alignment with the business objectives and strategies. References = 3

The best indication that key risk indicators (KRIs) should be revised is a decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk. Risk thresholds are the predefined values or ranges that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable level of risk exposure. Critical assets are the assets that are essential or vital for the achievement of the objectives or the continuity of the operations. A decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds means that the KRIs are not capturing or reflecting the current and relevant risk exposure of the organization, and that they may not provide sufficient or accurate information for risk management decisions. Therefore, the KRIs should be revised to ensure that they cover all the critical assets and their risk thresholds. The other options are not as indicative as a decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds, as they are related to the outcomes, impacts, or activities of the KRIs, not the scope or quality of the KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

Accepting risk is the only risk response strategy that could be applied to both positive and negative risk that has been identified. Accepting risk means taking no action to change the likelihood or impact of the risk, but being prepared to deal with the consequences if the risk occurs. Accepting risk is usually chosen when the risk is low, unavoidable, or outweighed by the benefits. For positive risks, accepting risk means taking advantage of the opportunities if they arise. For negative risks, accepting risk means setting aside contingency reserves or plans to cope with the threats. The other risk response strategies are specific to either positive or negative risks. Transfer, exploit, and mitigate are strategies for negative risks, while share, enhance, and avoid are strategies for positive risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

 Scenario analysis is the best method to identify significant events that could impact an organization. Scenario analysis is the process of creating and evaluating hypothetical situations or scenarios that represent plausible outcomes of various events or actions. Scenario analysis helps to anticipate and prepare for potential risks and opportunities, as well as to test the robustness and resilience of the organization’s strategies and plans. Control analysis, vulnerability analysis, and heat map analysis are not as effective as scenario analysis, because they focus on the existing or current state of the organization, rather than the future or alternative states. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

Risk owners based on risk impact are the most important stakeholders to include in the cyber response team, as they are responsible for the business outcomes affected by the cyber attack and can decide on the appropriate response actions. The other options are not the most important stakeholders to include in the cyber response team, although they may be involved in the process.

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

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

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

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

The best way to provide assurance of the effectiveness of vendor security controls is to require independent control assessments. Independent control assessments are evaluations of the vendor’s security controls by a third-party auditor or assessor, such as an external auditor, a certification body, or a testing laboratory. Independent control assessments provide an objective and unbiased opinion on the adequacy and performance of the vendor’s security controls, as well as the compliance with relevant standards and regulations. Independent control assessments can also provide evidence and assurance to the customers of the vendor’s security posture and capabilities. Reviewing vendor control self-assessments (CSA), vendor service level agreement (SLA) metrics, or vendor references from existing customers are not as reliable or credible as independent control assessments, because they may be biased, incomplete, or outdated.

Risk tolerance and appetite are the expressions of the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that the organization is willing to allow for the outcome of its risk decisions. Risk appetite is the broad-based amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept in its activities. The primary objective of establishing an organization’s risk tolerance and appetite is to assist management in decision making, as they provide guidance and boundaries for the risk management activities and decisions. By establishing the risk tolerance and appetite, the organization can align its risk exposure with its strategic goals, optimize its risk-return trade-off, and enhance its risk culture and performance. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 61.

The best way to facilitate the identification of appropriate key performance indicators (KPIs) for a risk management program is to evaluate KPIs in accordance with risk appetite. KPIs are metrics that measure the performance and effectiveness of the risk management program, and help monitor and report on the achievement of the risk objectives and outcomes. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. Evaluating KPIs in accordance with risk appetite helps to identify the appropriate KPIs, because it helps to align the KPIs with the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and to ensure that the KPIs reflect the organization’s risk tolerance and threshold. Evaluating KPIs in accordance with risk appetite also helps to communicate and coordinate the KPIs with the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, and business units, and to facilitate the risk decision-making and reporting processes. The other options are not as effective as evaluating KPIs in accordance with risk appetite, although they may be part of or derived from the KPI identification process. Reviewing control objectives, aligning with industry best practices, and consulting risk owners are all activities that can help to define or refine the KPIs, but they are not the best way to facilitate the identification of appropriate KPIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.5.1, page 4-38.

The best approach for selecting controls to minimize risk is to perform a risk assessment. A risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the risks that could affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A risk assessment helps to determine the likelihood and impact of the risks, and to prioritize them based on their severity and relevance. A risk assessment also helps to select the most appropriate and effective controls to minimize the risks, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risks. A risk assessment is the best approach for selecting controls, because it helps to align the controls with the organization’s risk profile, risk appetite, and risk objectives, and to ensure that the controls are adequate, suitable, and cost-effective. The other options are not the best approach for selecting controls, although they may be part of or derived from the risk assessment. Industry best practice review, cost-benefit analysis, and control-effectiveness evaluation are all activities that can help to support or improve the control selection, but they are not the best approach for selecting controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

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

 Penetration test results are the most helpful resource to a risk practitioner when updating the likelihood rating in the risk register. Penetration testing is a method of simulating real-world attacks on an IT system or network to identify and exploit vulnerabilities and measure the potential impact. Penetration test results provide empirical evidence of the existence and severity of vulnerabilities, as well as the ease and probability of exploitation. These results can help the risk practitioner to update the likelihood rating of the risks associated with the vulnerabilities, and to prioritize the risk response actions. Risk control assessment, audit reports with risk ratings, and business impact analysis (BIA) are also useful resources for risk management, but they are not as directly related to the likelihood rating as penetration test results. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3, page 2-28.

The most important information to review from the acquired company to facilitate the task of updating the organization’s IT risk profile is the risk assessment and risk register. The risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT risks of the acquired company. The risk register is a document that records the details of the IT risks, such as their sources, causes, consequences, likelihood, impact, and responses. By reviewing the risk assessment and risk register, the risk practitioner can gain a comprehensive and accurate understanding of the IT risk profile of the acquired company, and integrate it with the IT risk profile of the acquiring organization. Internal and external audit reports, risk disclosures in financial statements, and business objectives and strategies are other possible sources of information, but they are not as important as the risk assessment and risk register. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

The best way to ensure the implementation of corrective action plans is to assign accountability to risk owners. Corrective action plans are the plans that describe the actions and resources that are needed to correct or improve the performance or compliance of the processes or controls. Risk owners are the persons who have the authority and responsibility for managing the risks and their responses. By assigning accountability to risk owners, the implementation of corrective action plans can be monitored, evaluated, and enforced, and the results and outcomes can be reported and communicated. The other options are not as effective as assigning accountability to risk owners, as they are related to the training, scheduling, or outsourcing of the corrective action plans, not the oversight or governance of the corrective action plans. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

 Asset management is the process of identifying, tracking, and maintaining the physical and information assets of an organization. Asset management helps to optimize the value, performance, and security of the assets, and support the business objectives and strategies. The factor that would be of greatest concern regarding an organization’s asset management is an incomplete asset inventory, which is a list of all the assets that the organization owns or uses. An incomplete asset inventory may indicate that the organization does not have a clear and accurate understanding of its assets, their location, ownership, value, dependencies, etc. This may lead to various risks, such as asset loss, theft, misuse, damage, underutilization, overutilization, etc. An incomplete asset inventory may also affect the asset classification, protection, recovery, and disposal processes. References = 6

 The greatest benefit of identifying appropriate risk owners is that accountability is established for risk treatment decisions. Risk owners are the individuals or groups who are responsible and accountable for managing a specific risk and its associated actions and outcomes. By identifying appropriate risk owners, the organization can ensure that the risk treatment decisions are made by the people who have the authority, knowledge, and interest in the risk. Stakeholders being consulted, risk owners being informed, and responsibility being established are other possible benefits, but they are not as great as accountability being established. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

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

The control owner is the person who is responsible for ensuring that the control is designed to effectively address risk. The control owner is also responsible for implementing, operating, monitoring, and maintaining the control. The control owner should ensure that the control is aligned with the risk owner’s risk appetite and tolerance, and that the control is periodically reviewed and updated to reflect changes in the risk environment. The risk manager, the control tester, and the risk owner are not directly responsible for the design of the control, although they may provide input, feedback, or approval. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 1-15.

Data privacy protection is the process of safeguarding the personal information of individuals from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction. Personal information is any information that can be used to identify, locate, or contact an individual, such as name, address, phone number, email, social security number, etc. When there are plans for a business initiative to make use of personal information, the primary consideration related to data privacy protection is to do not collect or retain data that is not needed. This means that the organization should only collect the minimum amount of personal information that is necessary for the purpose of the business initiative, and should only retain the data for as long as it is required by law or business needs. By doing so, the organization can reduce the risk of data breaches, comply with the data protection regulations, respect the data subjects’ rights, and enhance the trust and reputation of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 159.