CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Questions and Answers

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Automated code reviews are most effective when integrated throughout the development lifecycle. Continuous reviews allow early detection and remediation of vulnerabilities, preventing security issues from propagating into later stages such as testing or production. Performing code reviews only at the end or once in production is less effective as vulnerabilities may already be embedded. The proactive approach in development reduces risk significantly

 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

Legal and regulatory requirements are paramount when determining data retention periods. Compliance with laws such as GDPR, HIPAA, or industry-specific regulations ensures that data is retained appropriately and disposed of when no longer necessary, thereby mitigating legal risks.

 Understanding Risk Analysis:

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

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

 Steps in Conducting a Risk Analysis:

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

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

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

 Importance of Risk Analysis:

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

Helps in developing mitigation strategies to address the identified risks.

 Comparing Other Options:

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

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

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

 References:

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

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

The most important data attribute of KRIs is that the data is relevant. This means that the data reflects the current state of the risk, the potential impact of the risk, and the effectiveness of the risk response. Relevant data helps to monitor and measure the risk performance and to make informed decisions about risk management.

The other options are not the most important data attributes of KRIs. They are either secondary or not essential for KRIs.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

6: Security Incident Reporting and Response, ISACA, 2019

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

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

System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, University of Toronto, 2017

System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, ISACA, 2019

User Access Management and Control, University of Toronto, 2017

User Access Management and Control, ISACA, 2019

The best way is toassess the loss impactif information is compromised. This aligns with ISACA’s risk management approach, which prioritizes the potential impact on business objectives and regulatory compliance when valuing information assets.

===========

 Zero Trust Model:

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

 Preventing Control Gaps:

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

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

 Other Options:

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

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

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

 References:

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

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

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk. Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure the performance or effectiveness of a control in mitigating a risk. KCIs provide input for KRIs, because they help to assess the residual risk after applying the control. For example, if the KRI is the number of security incidents, and the KCI is the percentage of incidents detected by the intrusion prevention system (IPS), then the KCI provides input for the KRI by showing how well the IPS is reducing the risk of security breaches. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

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.

Root cause analysis helps identify the fundamental reason for an incident, allowing the enterprise to implement controls that reduce the probability of recurrence.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 A risk register is a document that is used as a risk management tool to identify and track risks that may affect a project or an organization1. A risk register also includes information about the risk responses,which are the actions taken or planned to mitigate or eliminate the risks2. Therefore, a risk register provides the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it shows the status and progress of the riskresponses, the results and outcomes of the risk responses, and the feedback and lessons learned from the risk responses3. A risk policy review is not the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it does not provide specific information on the risk responses. A risk policy review is a process that involves checking and verifying that the organization’s risk management policies are up to date, relevant, and effective4. A risk policy review can help to identify and address any gaps or issues in the risk management policies, but it does not show the details and performance of the risk responses. A business impact analysis (BIA) is not the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it does not provide specific information on the riskresponses. A BIA is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects of a disruption on the critical functions and processes of an organization5. A BIA can help to forecast the impacts of a risk event, but it does not show the actions and outcomes of the risk responses. A control catalog is not the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it does not provide specific information on the risk responses. A control catalog is adocument that lists and describes the controls that are implemented or planned to manage the risks within an organization6. A control catalog can help to document and communicate the controls, but it does not show the status and results of the risk responses. References = 1: Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana2: Risk Response Strategy and Contingency Plans - ProjectManagement.com3: Risk Register: Examples, Benefits, and Best Practices4: A brief guide to assessing risks and controls | ACCA Global5: Using Business Impact Analysis to Inform Risk Prioritization and Response6: [Control Catalogue - ISACA]

The risk practitioner shouldfirst review the methodology of the BIAbecause the BIA identifies critical processes and the impacts of disruptions. This ensures that any identified risks are grounded in reliable, updated business impact data.

===========

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

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

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, designingcorrective actions to improve risk response capabilities, and conducting regular self-assessments to verify compliance are not ways to integrate risk and compliance management, but rather components or outcomes of the risk and compliance management process. References = CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 202.

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

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 balancedscorecard, 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.

The most comprehensive input to the risk assessment process specific to the effects of system downtime is the business impact analysis (BIA). The BIA is a process of analyzing the potential impacts of disruptive events on the business processes, functions, and resources. The BIA identifies the criticality, dependencies, recovery priorities, and recovery objectives of the business processes, and quantifies the financial and non-financial impacts of system downtime. The BIA provides valuable information for the risk assessment process, as it helps to evaluate the likelihood and impact of the risks, and to determine the appropriate risk responses. Business continuity plan (BCP) testing results, recovery time objective (RTO), and recovery point objective (RPO) are not as comprehensive as the BIA, as they are derived from the BIA and focus on specific aspects of the business continuity and recovery strategies. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 130.

 A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the information about the identified risks, such as the risk description, category, owner, probability, impact, response strategy, status, and action plan. Reviewing the risk register is the best way to help an organization gain insight into its overall risk profile, which is the summary of the nature and level of risk that the organization faces. By reviewing the risk register, the organization can obtain a comprehensive and holistic view of the sources, causes, and consequences of the risks, their likelihood and impact, their interrelationships and dependencies, and their alignment with therisk appetite and tolerance. The risk register can also help the organization to prioritize the risks, allocate the resources, select the risk responses, monitor the risk performance, and evaluate the risk outcomes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

 The most concerning issue for a risk practitioner reviewing an organization risk register is that several risk action plans have missed target completion dates. This indicates that the risk responses are not being implemented effectively or timely, and that the risk exposure may not be reduced as expected. Senior management accepting more risk than usual, risk associated with many assets being expressed in qualitative terms, and many risk scenarios being owned by the same senior manager are not as concerning as the missed deadlines, as they may reflect the risk appetite, tolerance, and culture of the organization. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 10; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 140.

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

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 responseactivities, the level of the regulatory fines, and the duration of the incident containment and recovery. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 159.

 Anonymizing personal data in non-production environments means replacing the real data with fictitious but realistic data that does not allow identification of the individuals. This is a good way to mitigate the risk of sensitive personal data leakage from a software development environment, as it reduces the exposure of the data to unauthorized access or misuse. Tokenizing personal data only in test environments is not sufficient, as the data may still be exposed in other non-production environments, such as development or staging. Data loss prevention tools (DLP) installed in passive mode may detect and report data leakage incidents, but they do not prevent them from happening. Multi-factor authentication for access to non-production environments may enhance the security of the access, but it does not protect the data from being leaked by authorized users or compromised by other means. References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), page 226; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, question 195.

The most important information to cover in a business continuity awareness training program for all employees of the organization is the communication plan. A communication plan is a document that defines the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for communicating with the internal and external stakeholders before, during, and after a business continuity event. A communication plan helps to ensure that the relevant and accurate information is delivered to the appropriate parties in a timely and consistent manner, and that the feedback and responses are received and addressed accordingly. A communication plan also helps to maintain the trust, confidence, and reputation of the organization, and to comply with the legal or regulatory requirements. A communication plan is the most important information to cover in a business continuity awareness training program, because it helps to prepare and educate the employees on how to communicate effectively and efficiently in a business continuity event, and how to avoid or minimize the communication errors, gaps, or conflicts that could affect the business continuity performance and recovery. The other options are not as important as the communication plan, although they may also be covered in a business continuity awareness training program. Recovery time objectives (RTOs), segregation of duties, and critical asset inventory are all factors that could affect the business continuity planning and implementation, but they are notthe most important information to cover in a business continuity awareness training program. References = 6

Senior management interviews would offer the MOST insight with regard to an organization’s risk culture, because they can reveal the attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors of the seniormanagement towards risk management, and how they influence and support the risk management process and activities in the organization. Senior management interviews can also provide information on the risk appetite, tolerance, and objectives of the organization, and how they are communicated and implemented across the organization. The other options are not as insightful as senior management interviews, because:

Option A: Risk management procedures are the steps and methods that define how the risk management process and activities are performed in the organization, but they do not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the human and behavioral aspects of risk management.

Option C: Benchmark analyses are the comparisons of the performance and practices of the organization with those of similar or successful organizations, but they do not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the internal and unique aspects of risk management.

Option D: Risk management framework is the set of rules and standards that guide and support the risk management process and activities in the organization, but it does not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the leadership and commitment aspects of risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 82.

According to the Section 4: Quiz 40 - Business Continuity Plan Flashcards, the best indication of the effectiveness of a business continuity program is the successful performance of business continuity tests and the resolution of any issues that arise. Business continuity tests are exercises that simulate various scenarios of disruption or disaster and evaluate the organization’s ability to recover and resume its critical functions. Business continuity tests can help to validate the assumptions, objectives, and strategies of the business continuity program, as well as to identify and address any gaps, weaknesses, or errors in the business continuity and disaster recovery plans. By performing business continuity tests regularly and effectively, the organization can ensure that its business continuity program is aligned with its needs andexpectations, and that it can cope with any potential crisis. References = Section 4: Quiz 40 - Business Continuity Plan Flashcards

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

References

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

•KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva

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

The effective implementation of a risk treatment plan is best indicated by managing residual risk within the organization’s appetite and tolerance levels. Residual risk is the remaining risk aftercontrols have been applied, and ensuring it is within acceptable levels demonstrates that the risk treatment plan is effective.

Managing Residual Risk within Appetite and Tolerance (Answer B):

Definition: Residual risk is the risk remaining after risk treatment measures have been implemented.

Significance: Managing residual risk within the set appetite and tolerance levels shows that the implemented controls are effective and aligned with the organization’s risk management objectives.

Outcome: It ensures that the organization's risk exposure is kept within acceptable boundaries, thereby protecting its assets and operations.

Comparison with Other Options:

A. Inherent risk is managed within an acceptable level:

Definition: Inherent risk is the risk before any controls are applied.

Limitation: The focus should be on residual risk post-treatment.

C. Risk treatments are aligned with industry peers:

Purpose: While benchmarking is useful, it does not directly indicate the effectiveness of risk treatment.

D. Key controls are identified and documented:

Purpose: Identifying and documenting controls is necessary, but effectiveness is shown by managing residual risk.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, authorizing user access requests is the process of granting or denying access to IT resources based on the user’s role, responsibilities, and business needs. Authorizing user access requests is a key control accountability that should be retained within the organization, as it helps to ensure that the principle of least privilege is applied, and that the access rights are aligned with the organization’s policies, standards, and risk appetite. Authorizing user access requests also helps to prevent unauthorized access, data leakage, fraud, and other potential risks associated with user access provisioning and termination. Therefore, the best control accountability to retain within the organizationwhen a third-party vendor offers to perform user access provisioning and termination is authorizing user access requests. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 240.

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

An internal data access policy is a set of rules and guidelines that define who, how, when, and why the users can access, use, share, or modify the data stored in a business application system, based on the data classification, sensitivity, and ownership.

Enforcing an internal data access policy is the most appropriate way to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system. This means that the organization implements and maintains effective controls to ensure that only the authorized users can access the confidential information, and that the access is logged and monitored for compliance and security purposes.

The other options are not the most appropriate ways to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system. They are either secondary or not essential for data access control.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 28

Information Technology & Security, page 22

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 20

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

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

 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 theresources, 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.

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

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 implementthe 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 andresolve any issues or gaps in the vendor risk management process, and to improve the vendor relationship and communication. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 230.

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 thesoftware 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.

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

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

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

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

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

The primary objective of risk management is to achieve business objectives, as risk management involves identifying, assessing, responding, and monitoring the risks that may affect the desired outcomes and performance of the organization, and aligning them with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. Identifying and analyzing risk, minimizing business disruptions, andidentifying threats and vulnerabilities are not the primary objectives, as they are more related to the process, outcome, or source of risk management, respectively, rather than the purpose or value of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

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

Determining the business purpose of the application is the first thing that a risk practitioner should do when a shadow IT application is identified in a business owner’s business impactanalysis (BIA), because it helps to understand the rationale and value of the application, and the potential risks and issues that it may introduce or affect. A shadow IT application is an IT system or application that is used by the business units or employees without the knowledge or approval of the IT department or management. A shadow IT application may offer benefits such as convenience, efficiency, or innovation, but it may also pose risks such as security breaches, data loss, compatibility issues, or regulatory non-compliance. A BIA is a process of analyzing the potential impact of disruption to the critical business functions or processes, and identifying the recovery priorities and requirements. A BIA may reveal the existence of ashadow IT application, as it may be used to support or enable a critical business function or process. Determining the business purpose of the application is the first thing to do, as it helps to evaluate the necessity and suitability of the application, and to plan the appropriate actions to address the shadow IT application. Including the application in the business continuity plan (BCP), segregating the application from the network, and reporting the finding to management are all possible things to do after determining the business purpose of the application, but they are not the first thing to do, as they depend on the results of the evaluation of the application. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 143

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

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a control owner is the person who is accountable for ensuring that specific control activities are performed. The control owner is responsible for defining, implementing, monitoring, and improving the control. Therefore, the control ownershould authorize changing the control threshold value, as it is part of their role to ensure that the control is effective and efficient. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not directly involved in the control activities. The risk owner is the person who is accountable for the risk and its associated mitigation actions. The IT security manager is the person who is responsible for overseeing the IT security function and ensuring that the IT security policy is enforced. The IT system owner is the person who is responsible for the operation andmaintenance of the IT system and its associated data. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.2, page 108.

 The best way to validate whether controls to reduce user device vulnerabilities have been implemented according to management’s action plan is to rescan the user environment, as it provides an objective and reliable way to measure and verify the effectiveness and adequacy of the controls, and to detect any remaining or new vulnerabilities. Surveying device owners, requiring annual end user policy acceptance, and reviewing awareness training assessment results are not the best ways, as they may not provide sufficient assurance, evidence, or timeliness of the control validation, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

For a KRI to be actionable and effective, it must haveobjective thresholds. These thresholds act as triggers for decision-making and allow for timely response before risk materializes.

 The effectiveness of a control monitoring program can be measured by how quickly it can detect and correct any control failures that may compromise the achievement of the organization’s objectives. A shorter time between control failure and failure detection means that the control monitoring program is able to identify and report the issues promptly, and initiate the remediation actions accordingly. This can reduce the impact and likelihood of the risks associated with the control failures, and enhance the performance and reliability of the controls. The other options are not as good indicators of the effectiveness of a control monitoring program, because they do not reflect the timeliness and responsiveness of the program, but rather the scope, effort, or frequency of the program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, page 130.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, a risk action plan is a document that defines the specific actions, resources, responsibilities, and timelines for implementing the risk responses. A risk action plan should be developed after the results of a vulnerability assessment are shared with the relevant stakeholders, such as the business manager, to address the identified vulnerabilities and mitigate the associated risks. Developing a risk action plan is the next step in the risk management process, as it helps to ensure that the risk responses are executed effectively and efficiently, and that the residual risks are within the acceptable levels. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 201.

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

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 appetitedoes 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 3-minute threshold is a KRI designed to act as an early warning before a more critical limit (5 minutes) is breached, helping prevent risk realization.

The primary reason to have risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register is to ensure that risk is treated appropriately, as risk owners are responsible for implementing the risk response strategies and monitoring the risk status and outcomes. Risk owners are also accountable for the risk and its impact on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. Having risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register helps to clarify the roles and responsibilities, improve the communication and coordination, and enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process. Mitigating actions are prioritized, risk entries are regularly updated, and risk exposure is minimized are not the primary reasons to have risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register, but rather the results or benefits of having risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 206; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 206.

 The risk owner should be assigned accountability for monitoring risk levels, as they have the authority and responsibility to manage the risk and its associated controls, and to report on the risk status and performance. The risk practitioner, the business manager, and the control owner are not the best choices, as they have different roles and responsibilities related to risk identification, assessment, response, and reporting, but they are not accountable for the risk and its monitoring. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

According to the Hierarchy of Controls, the most effective way to prevent and control hazards is to eliminate them or substitute them with safer alternatives. In this case, the hazard is the potential leakage of customer data by the vendor. Therefore, the most effective control would be to eliminate or substitute the customer data with masked or anonymized data fields. This would prevent the vendor from accessing or disclosing any sensitive or identifiable information about the customers. Masking customer data fields is an example of an engineering control, which reduces or prevents hazards from coming into contact with workers or third parties. References = Hierarchy of Controls, 5 Risk Control Measures In The Workplace

The most important factor for successful incident response is the timeliness of attack recognition. Incident response is the process of detecting, analyzing, containing, eradicating, recovering, and reporting on security incidents that could affect the organization’s IT systems or data. The timeliness of attack recognition is the speed and accuracy with which the organization can identify and confirm that an attack has occurred or is in progress. The timeliness of attack recognition is crucial for successful incident response, as it affects the ability and effectiveness of the organization to respond to and mitigate the attack, and to minimize the damage and impact of the attack. The other options are not as important as the timeliness of attack recognition, although they may also contribute to or influence the incident response. The quantity of data logged by the attack control tools, the ability to trace the source of the attack, and the blocking of the attack route immediately are all factors that could help or hinder the incident response, but they are not the most important factor for successful incident response. References = CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 5-32.

Evaluating risk scenarios and assessing current controls is the most helpful in identifying gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment, because it allows the risk practitioner to compare the actual and expected outcomes of the IT processes and activities under different situations. A risk scenario is a hypothetical situation that describes a possible event or sequence of events that may affect the IT objectives and performance. A risk scenario can be based on various factors, such as the sources of risk, the risk drivers, the risk events, the risk impacts, and the risk responses. A risk scenario can also include the likelihood and severity of the risk, as well as the assumptions and uncertainties involved. Evaluating risk scenarios helps the risk practitioner to understand the nature and extent of the IT risks, as well as the potential consequences and opportunities that may arise from them. Assessing current controls is the process of examining and testing the existing controls that are implemented to manage the IT risks. A control is a measure or action that reduces the likelihood or impact of a risk, or enhances the benefits or opportunities of a risk. Assessing current controls helps the risk practitioner to determine the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, as well as their alignment with the IT objectives and requirements. By evaluating risk scenarios and assessing current controls, the risk practitioner can identify the gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment. The gaps can be related to the following aspects: - The IT objectives and performance: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and expected results of theIT processes and activities, as well as the deviation from the IT goals and targets. - The IT risk exposure and appetite: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actualand acceptable level of risk that the organization faces or is willing to take in pursuit of the IT objectives. - The IT risk management process and practices: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and expected performance of the IT risk management process, as well as the compliance with the IT risk management policies and standards. - The IT risk culture and awareness: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and desired level of risk awareness,understanding, and communication among the IT stakeholders, as well as the alignment with the organizational values and culture. Identifying the gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment is important for the risk practitioner, as it can help to prioritize and address the IT risks, as well as to improve and optimize the IT risk management process and practices. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Risk Scenarios, pp. 63-681

The most important factor to have in place to ensure the effectiveness of risk and security metrics reporting is an organizational reporting process. An organizational reporting process is a set of procedures that defines the roles, responsibilities, frequency, format, and distribution of the risk and security metrics reports. An organizational reporting process helps to ensure that the risk and security metrics are relevant, accurate, consistent, and timely, and that they provide useful information for decision making and performance improvement. An organizational reporting process also helps to align the risk and security metrics reporting with the enterprise’s objectives, strategies, and policies, and to communicate the risk and security status and issues to the appropriate stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 2421

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, a cable lock is a physical security device that attaches a laptop to a fixed object, such as a desk or a wall, to prevent unauthorized removal or theft. A cable lock is the best option to reduce the probability of laptop theft, as it acts as a deterrent and a barrier for potential thieves. A cable lock also helps to protect the confidentiality, integrity, andavailability of the data stored on the laptop, as well as the laptop itself. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 253.

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

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

Preparing a risk response that is aligned to the organization’s risk tolerance is the next step after completing a risk assessment and reporting the validated vulnerability findings that require mitigation to the application owner, because it helps to define and implement the appropriate actions to reduce or eliminate the risk, or to prepare for and recover from the potentialconsequences. A risk response is a strategy or tactic for managing the identified risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risk. A risk response should be aligned to the organization’s risk tolerance, which is the acceptable level of variation from the organization’s objectives or expectations. A vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in an IT system or application that can be exploited by a threat or attack to cause harm or damage. A vulnerability finding is a result of a vulnerability assessment, which is a process of identifying and evaluating the vulnerabilities in an IT system or application. A vulnerability finding requires mitigation, which is a type of risk response that involves applying controls or countermeasures to reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk. Therefore, preparing a risk response that is aligned to the organization’s risk tolerance is the next step, as it helps to address the vulnerability findings and to achieve the desired level of risk. Reporting the findings to executive management, reassessing each vulnerability, and conducting a penetration test are all possible steps to perform afterpreparing a risk response, but they are not the next step, as they depend on the results and approval of the risk response. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2, page 103

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

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

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

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

•A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions and resources needed to implement the chosen risk response strategy for each identified risk1. A risk response strategy is the way an organization decides to address a risk, such as avoiding, accepting, mitigating, or transferring it2.

•Sometimes, a risk treatment plan may not be completed on time due to various reasons, such as delays, resource constraints, technical issues, or changes in the risk environment. In such cases, the best approach is to implement compensating controls until the preferred action can be completed3.

•Compensating controls are alternative or additional controls that provide a similar level of assurance or protection as the original controls, when the latter are not feasible or sufficient3. Compensating controls can help to reduce the residual risk or maintain the risk within the acceptable level until the risk treatment plan is fully executed3.

•For example, if the risk treatment plan involves installing a firewall to protect the network from external threats, but the firewall is not available or compatible with the current system, a compensating control could be to use encryption, authentication, or monitoring tools to secure the network traffic until the firewall is installed3.

•Implementing compensating controls is better than the other options because it allows the organization to continue with the risk treatment plan while maintaining an adequate level of security and compliance. The other options are not advisable for the following reasons:

oReplacing the action owner with a more experienced individual (option A) may not solve the problem if the issue is not related to the action owner’s competence or performance. Moreover, replacing the action owner may cause disruption, confusion, or conflict in the risk management process.

oChanging the risk response strategy of the relevant risk to risk avoidance (option C) may not be possible or desirable if the risk is associated with a critical or beneficial activity or process. Risk avoidance means eliminating the source of the risk or discontinuing the activity that causes the risk2. This may result in losing opportunities, benefits, or value for the organization.

oDeveloping additional key risk indicators (KRIs) until the preferred action can be completed (option D) may not be effective or efficient if the existing KRIs are already sufficient to monitor and measure the risk. KRIs are metrics or data points that provide early warning signals or information about the level or trend of a risk456. Developing additional KRIs may not reduce therisk or improve the risk treatment plan, but may increase the complexity and cost of the risk management process.

References =

•Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions - SolveXia

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•Complete Guide to Key Risk Indicators — RiskOptics

•Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips

•Risk response strategies: mitigation, transfer, avoidance, acceptance - Twproject: project management software,resource management, time tracking, planning, Gantt, kanban

•Risk Response Strategies: A Guide to Navigating Uncertainty - Teamly

•Compensating Controls | Audit and Compliance | Pathlock

The best way to prevent technical vulnerabilities from being exploited is to update the software with the latest patches and updates. Patches and updates are software modifications that fix the known bugs, errors, or flaws in the software. They also improve the performance, functionality, and security of the software. By updating the software with the latest patches and updates, the company can reduce the exposure and likelihood of the technical vulnerabilities, and protect the software from potential attacks or exploits. The other options are not as effective as updating the software with the latest patches and updates, as they are related to the quality assurance, legal protection, or error handling of the software, not the prevention or mitigation of the technical vulnerabilities. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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 appetiteis 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 riskthat 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 torisk 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]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Identifying and assessing the risk scenarios associated with IT strategic initiatives is the best risk management approach for the strategic IT planning process, because it helps to understand and evaluate the potential or actual threats or opportunities that may affect the achievement or implementation of the IT strategic initiatives, and to determine the appropriate risk responses and controls. A risk scenario is a hypothetical situation or event that describes the source, cause, consequence, and impact of a risk. A risk scenario can be positive or negative, depending on whether it represents an opportunity or a threat. An IT strategic initiative is a project or program that supports or enables the IT strategy, which is a plan that defines how IT supports and aligns with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy. The strategic IT planning process is a process of developing, implementing, and monitoring the IT strategy and its associated IT strategic initiatives. Identifying and assessing the risk scenarios is the best risk management approach, as it helps to anticipate and prepare for the potential or actual outcomes of the IT strategic initiatives, and to optimize the risk-reward balance and the value delivery of IT. Establishing key performance indicators (KPIs) to track IT strategic initiatives, reviewing the IT strategic plan by the chief information security officer (CISO) and enterprise risk management (ERM), and developing the IT strategic plan from the organization-wide risk management plan are all possible risk management approaches for the strategic IT planning process, but they are not the best approach, as they do not directly address the identification and assessment of the risk scenarios associated with IT strategic initiatives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 37

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

The risk practitioner should update the risk scenarios in the risk register to reflect the new international regulations and their potential impact on the organization. The risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their likelihood, impact, mitigation strategies, and status. Updating the risk register will help the risk practitioner to prioritize and manage the risks effectively, and communicate them to the relevant stakeholders.

References

•ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Domain 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2.2: Risk Register

•Risk Register - ISACA

•How to Create a Risk Register: A Step-by-Step Guide | The Blueprint

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

The most likely factor to change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability being discovered in a globally used brand of hardware server that allows hackers to gain access to affected IT systems is the risk likelihood. Risk likelihood is the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring, or the possibility of a risk event occurring within a given time period. Risk likelihood is one of the key dimensions of risk analysis, along with the risk impact. Risk likelihood helps to determine the severity and priority of the risk, and to select the most appropriate and effective risk response. Risk likelihood 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 risk likelihood is likely to change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability, because a zero-day vulnerability is a security flaw that has been discovered but not yet patched by the vendor, which means that it can be exploited by hackers before the affected systems can be updated or protected. A zero-day vulnerability increases the risk likelihood, because it creates a window of opportunity for hackers to launch attacks that could compromise the affected systems, and because it may not be detected or prevented by the existing security controls or measures. The other options are not as likely to change as the risk likelihood, although they may also be affected or influenced by the zero-day vulnerability. Control effectiveness, risk appetite, and key risk indicator (KRI) are all factors that could change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability, but they are not the most likely factor to change. Control effectiveness is the extent to which the risk controls or responses achieve the intended risk objectives or outcomes. Control effectiveness could change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability, because the existing controls may not be able to detect or prevent the exploitation of the vulnerability, or because new or additional controls may be needed to address the vulnerability. However, control effectiveness is not the most likely factor to change, because it depends on the type and level of the controls that are already in place or that can be implemented, and because it may not change until the vulnerability is actually exploited or the risk response is executed. 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 could change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability, because the vulnerability could affect the organization’s objectives or operations, and because the organization may need to adjust its risk tolerance or threshold to cope with the vulnerability. However, risk appetite is not the most likely factor to change, because it is a strategic and long-term decision that is driven by the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and because it may not change until the vulnerability is resolved or the risk impact is realized. Key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures thelikelihood and impact of risks, and helps monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. KRI could change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability, because the vulnerability could increase the likelihood and impact of the risks, and because the organization may need to update or revise its KRI to reflect the current risk situation. However, KRI is not the most likely factor to change,because it is a monitoring and reporting tool that is derived from the risk analysis and response, and because it may not change until the vulnerability is exploited or the risk response is implemented. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-25.

The status of identified risk scenarios, because it helps to monitor and track the current level and direction of the IT risks, and to determine whether the risk responses and controls are adequate and effective. An IT riskregister is a document that records and tracks the key IT risks that an organization faces, along with their likelihood, impact, and response strategies. An IT risk scenario is a hypothetical situation or event that describes the source, cause, consequence, and impact of an IT risk. The status of identified risk scenarios is the most important factor, as it reflects the actual and potential outcomes of the IT risks, and the performance and progress of the risk management process. The costs associated with mitigation options, the cost-benefit analysis of each risk response, and the timeframes for risk response actions are all possible factors to review when evaluating the ongoing effectiveness of the IT risk register, but they are not the most important factor, as they do not directly measure and report the status of the IT risk scenarios.

 According to the CRISC Review Manual1, single sign-on (SSO) is a method of authentication that allows a user to access multiple systems or applications with a single set of credentials. SSO can improve user convenience and productivity, but it also introduces some security risks. The greatest concern as a result of a single sign-on implementation is that unauthorized access may be gained to multiple systems, as this can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data and resources stored on those systems. If an attacker obtains the SSO credentials of a user, either by phishing, malware, or other means, they can Laccess all the systems or applications that the user is authorized for, without any additional authentication or verification. This can expose the organization to various threats, such as data leakage, theft, loss, corruption, manipulation, or misuse2345. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 240, 253.

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

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 = CRISCPractice Quiz and Exam Prep; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 209.

Appropriate resources contribute most to the effective implementation of risk responses. Resources include people, time, money, equipment, and materials that are needed to execute the risk responses. Without appropriate resources, the risk responses may not be implemented properly, timely, or efficiently, and may not achieve the desired outcomes. The other options are not as important as appropriate resources, as they are related to the understanding, comparison, or documentation of the risk responses, which are less critical than the execution of the riskresponses. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

 The greatest concern for the risk practitioner when the potential vendor has offered to perform quarterly self-audits of its controls instead of having annual independent audits is that the controls may not be properly tested. Self-audits are audits that are performed by the vendor itself, without the involvement of an external or independent party. Self-audits may not be reliable, objective, or consistent, as the vendor may have biases, conflicts of interest, or lack of expertise in auditing its own controls. Self-audits may also not follow the same standards, criteria, or methodologies as independent audits, and may not provide sufficient assurance or evidence of the effectiveness of the controls. The other options are not as concerning as the possibility of improper testing of the controls, as they are related to the outcomes, expectations, or approaches of the controls, not the quality or validity of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 6

The principle of least privilege is a key concept in information security that aims to provide users with the minimum level of access—or permissions—necessary to perform their job functions. Byensuring that users only have the access they need, organizations can significantly reduce the risk associated with excessive access by authorized users.

Understanding Least Privilege

The principle of least privilege restricts access rights for users to the bare minimum permissions they need to perform their work. This minimizes the potential damage from accidents or malicious activities.

Least privilege should be applied to all user accounts, including administrative and service accounts.

Implementation

Implementing least privilege involves a detailed analysis of job functions and the necessary access required for each role.

Regularly review and update access permissions to ensure they remain aligned with current job responsibilities and organizational needs.

Mitigating Risk

By limiting access to only what is necessary, organizations can prevent users from having permissions that could be exploited, intentionally or unintentionally, to cause harm.

This also includes revoking unnecessary privileges when users change roles or no longer need access.

Comparison with Other Options

A. Monitoring user activity using security logs: While monitoring can detect inappropriate activity, it does not prevent it.

B. Revoking access for users changing roles: This is a necessary practice but does not address the initial allocation of excessive privileges.

D. Conducting periodic reviews of authorizations granted: Periodic reviews are important but are reactive rather than proactive.

References

Sybex-CISSP-Official-Study-Guide-9-Edition.pdf, p. 641, discussing the principle of least privilege and its implementation​​.

 Data Protection Controls:

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

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

 Steps in Evaluation:

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

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

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

 Importance of Evaluation:

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

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

 Comparing Other Actions:

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

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

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

 References:

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

 Discussing and managing risk as a team is the greatest benefit for an organization with a strong risk awareness culture, as it enables the organization to share and communicate the risk information and knowledge among all the stakeholders, and to collaborate and coordinate the risk management activities and responsibilities. Discussing and managing risk as a team can also help to foster a positive and proactive attitude toward risk, and to align the risk management process with the organization’s strategy and objectives. Discussing and managing risk as a team can also enhance the risk governance and accountability, and support the risk learning and improvement. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 252. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 252. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4: Risk Register Examples for Cybersecurity Leaders4

5: Risk Scenarios Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

6: Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, ISACA, 2019

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

8: Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) Calculator6

Project Budgeting: How to Estimate Costs and Manage Budgets7

Project Budget Template - Download Free Excel Template8

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

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

Identifying and Mitigating Risks:

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

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

Ensuring Program Continuity:

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

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

Aligning with Strategic Goals:

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

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

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

When using a third party to perform penetration testing, the most important control to minimize operational impact is to clearly define the project scope. This means specifying the objectives,boundaries, methods, and deliverables of the testing, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved. A clear project scope helps to avoid misunderstandings, conflicts, and disruptions that could compromise the security, availability, or integrity of the systems undertest. It also helps to ensure that the testing is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and compliance requirements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3.2, Page 137.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, peer reviews are the process of evaluating the quality and validity of risk analysis by independent experts or colleagues. Peer reviews are conducted to ensure that the risk analysis is consistent, objective, and reliable, and that it follows the established standards and methods. The primary reason for conducting peer reviews of risk analysis is to minimize subjectivity of assessments, as peer reviews can help to reduce personal biases, preferences, and assumptions that may affect the risk analysis outcomes. Peer reviews can also help to identify and correct any errors, gaps, or inconsistencies in the risk analysis, and to improve the risk analysis skills and knowledge of the reviewers and the reviewees. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 209.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Interviewing managementis key because risk tolerance reflects leadership’s perspective on acceptable risk levels. ISACA stresses that understanding risk tolerance requires direct input from those responsible for risk decisions and strategic direction.

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

Validation of risk analysis results ensures the data is accurate, reliable, and can be trusted for making informed decisions. It minimizes the risk of acting on flawed insights.

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

Risk assessments are most effective when performed at each stage of the system development life cycle (SDLC). The SDLC is a framework that defines the phases and activities of developing, implementing, and maintaining a system. The SDLC typically consists of the following stages: initiation, planning, analysis, design, development, testing, implementation, and maintenance. Performing risk assessments at each stage of the SDLC helps to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks that could affect the system objectives, requirements, functionality, quality, or performance. Performing risk assessments at each stage of the SDLC also helps to select and implement the appropriate risk responses, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risks. Performing risk assessments at each stage of the SDLC also helps to monitor and report the risk status and performance, and to update and adjust the risk assessment and response as the system changes or evolves. Performing risk assessments before system development begins, at system development, or during the development of the business case are not as effective as performing risk assessments at each stage of the SDLC, as they are either too early or too late, and they do not capture the full scope and complexity of the system risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

Identifying risk events is essential for developing realistic and relevant risk scenarios. This step enables the creation of scenarios that reflect actual vulnerabilities and potential disruptions, adhering to the CRISC's focus onRisk Identification.

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.

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

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

Identify the most critical risks that need immediate attention or action

Compare and prioritize risks based on their severity and probability

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

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

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

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 information when determining whether to accept residual risk of a critical system to be implemented is the potential business impacts are within acceptable levels, because it indicates that the residual risk, which is the risk that remains after the risk response actions, does not exceed the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization, and that it does not pose a significant threat or disruption to the business objectives and processes. The potential business impacts are the consequences or outcomes of the residual risk on the organization’s performance, reputation, and value. The other options are not as informative as the potential business impacts, because:

Option A: Single loss expectancy (SLE) is a measure of the monetary loss that is expected from a single occurrence of a risk event, but it does not provide the best information when determining whether to accept residual risk, because it does not consider the frequency or probability of the risk event, or the qualitative aspects of the risk impact, such as customer satisfaction, employee morale, or regulatory compliance.

Option B: Cost of the information system is a measure of the total expenditure that is required to acquire, develop, operate, and maintain the information system, but it does not provide the best information when determining whether to accept residual risk, because it does not reflect the value or benefit of the information system, or the risk exposure or variation that the information system may introduce or encounter.

Option C: Availability of additional compensating controls is a measure of the alternative or supplementary controls that can be implemented to reduce the residual risk, but it does not provide the best information when determining whether to accept residual risk, because it does not indicate the effectiveness or efficiency of the compensating controls, or the cost-benefitanalysis of implementing them. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 122.

 A primary function of the risk register is to provide supporting information for the development of an organization’s risk profile, which is a comprehensive and structured representation of therisks that the organization faces. The risk profile helps the organization to understand its risk exposure, appetite, and tolerance, and to align its risk management strategy with its business objectives and context. The risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, owners, and status. The risk register is anessential input for creating and updating the risk profile, as it provides the data and analysis of the risks that need to be prioritized and addressed. The other options are not the primary function of the risk register, although they may be related to it. The risk strategy is the plan and approach for managing the risks, and it is based on the risk profile. The risk process is the set of activities and tasks for identifying, assessing, responding, and monitoring the risks, and it is facilitated by the risk register. The risk map is a graphical tool for displaying the risks based on their impact and likelihood, and it is derived from the risk register. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Purpose of a risk register: Here’s what a risk register is used for; Risk Register: Definition, Importance, and Elements! - Bit Blog; What is a Risk Register? A Complete Guide | Capterra; Risk Registers: What Are They, When Should You Use Them, and Why?

KRIs provide predictive metrics to monitor changes in risk levels, enabling timely interventions to maintain risks within the organization's appetite. This aligns with theRisk Monitoring and Reportingframework, which emphasizes proactive identification of risk thresholds.

 The most likely cause for a risk practitioner to reassess risk scenarios is a change in the regulatory environment. A regulatory environment is the set of laws, rules, and standards that apply to an organization and its activities, such as data privacy, security, compliance, or governance. A change in the regulatory environment can occur due to various factors, such as new legislation, court rulings, enforcement actions, or industry trends. A change in the regulatory environment can affect the risk scenarios that the organization faces, as it may introduce new or modified risks, or alter the probability or impact of existing risks. For example, a new regulation may require the organization to implement additional or different controls, or to report or disclose more information, which may increase the cost, complexity, or vulnerability of the organization’s processes and systems. A change in the regulatory environment may also affect the risk appetite, tolerance, and capacity of the organization, as it may impose different requirements or expectations for the organization’s risk management performance and outcomes. Therefore, a risk practitioner should reassess the risk scenarios when there is a change in the regulatory environment, to ensure that the risk scenarios are accurate, complete, and relevant, and that the risk response strategies and plans are appropriate, effective, and compliant. The other options are not the most likely cause, although they may be related or influential to the riskscenarios. A change in the risk management policy is a change in the rules and guidelines that define how the organization manages its risks, such as the roles and responsibilities, the processes and procedures, the tools and techniques, or the reporting and communication. A change in the risk management policy can affect the risk scenarios, as it may change the way the organization identifies, analyzes, evaluates, and responds to the risks, but it does not directly create or modify the risks themselves. A major security incident is an event or situation that compromises the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the organization’s information or systems, such as a data breach, a denial-of-service attack, or a ransomware infection. A major security incident can affect the risk scenarios, as it may indicate or reveal the existence or severity of the risks, or trigger or escalate the consequences of the risks, but it is not a cause, rather it is an effect of the risks. An increase in intrusion attempts is an increase in the frequency or intensity of the unauthorized or malicious attempts to access or exploit the organization’s information or systems, such as phishing, malware, or brute-force attacks. An increase in intrusion attempts can affect the risk scenarios, as it may increase the likelihood or impact of the risks, or expose or exacerbate the vulnerabilities of the organization’s processes and systems, but it is not a cause, rather it is a manifestation of the risks. References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit -ISACA, How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA, The Impact of Regulatory Change on Business - Deloitte

 Role of the System Owner:

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

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

 Effectiveness of Technical Controls:

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

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

 Comparing Other Roles:

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

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

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

 Supporting Information:

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

The most important factor for an organization to consider when developing its IT strategy is the organizational goals and objectives. The organizational goals and objectives are the statements that define the purpose, direction, and desired outcomes of the organization. The organizational goals and objectives help to align the IT strategy with the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and to ensure that the IT strategy supports and enables the organization’s performance and improvement. The organizational goals and objectives also help to communicate and coordinate the IT strategy with the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions, and to facilitate the IT decision-making and reporting processes. The other options are not as important as the organizational goals and objectives, although they may be related to the IT strategy. IT goals and objectives, the organization’s risk appetite statement, and legal and regulatory requirements are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the IT strategy, but they do not necessarily reflect or influence the organization’s purpose, direction, and desired outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-9.

A consistent approach to reporting risk impact and likelihood is crucial for integrating IT risk scenarios into the broader enterprise risk management framework. Standardizing these metrics ensures that risks are assessed and compared uniformly across the organization, facilitating informed decision-making and prioritization of risk responses.

Role-based access controls (RBAC) are a type of preventive control that limit the access and actions of users based on their roles and responsibilities within the organization. RBAC can help to address the risk of malicious outsiders modifying application data by restricting their access to the data and the functions they can perform on it. RBAC can also enforce the principle of least privilege, which means that users only have the minimum level of access required to perform their tasks. RBAC can be implemented through policies, procedures, and technical mechanisms such as access control lists, encryption, and authentication. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.1, p. 178-179

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), an effective control environment is best indicated by controls that manage risk within the organization’s risk appetite, as this reflects the alignment of thecontrol objectives and activities with the organization’s strategic goals and risk preferences. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Managing risk within the organization’s risk appetite helps to:

Balance the potential benefits and costs of risk-taking and risk response

Optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities

Enhance the value and performance of the organization

Foster a risk-aware culture that supports the organization’s vision and mission

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Risk Assessment Process, pp. 93-941

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

Risk owner approval ensures accountability and alignment of the changes with the enterprise’s risk management strategy. It reflects adherence to the principles ofRisk Ownership and Governance, critical for maintaining control over mitigation activities.

Customizing the risk profile presentation ensures that stakeholders receive information in a format and context relevant to their roles. Tailored communication improves understanding, aligns risk discussions with decision-making needs, and ensures the stakeholders are equipped to act on the information effectively.

Business Impact Analysis (BIA):

Purpose: A BIA is a systematic process to evaluate the potential effects of an interruption to critical business operations as a result of a disaster, accident, or emergency.

Identification of Consequences: It identifies critical resources and the consequences of their loss, allowing an organization to determine the operational and financial impacts of such losses.

Steps Involved in BIA:

Identify Critical Functions: Determine which business functions and processes are essential to the organization's operations.

Assess Impact: Evaluate the impact of losing these functions on the organization’s ability to operate.

Estimate Downtime Tolerance: Determine the maximum allowable downtime for critical functions before significant harm occurs.

Identify Dependencies: Document dependencies between systems, processes, and resources to understand how disruptions to one part affect the whole.

Comparison with Other Options:

Risk Management Action Plans: These are detailed plans developed to address identified risks but do not specifically focus on the impact of losing critical resources.

What-if Technique: This is a brainstorming technique used to explore potential risks and their impacts but is not as structured as a BIA.

Tabletop Exercise Results: These exercises simulate disaster scenarios to test response plans but do not provide the comprehensive impact analysis that a BIA does.

Best Practices:

Regular Updates: Regularly update the BIA to reflect changes in the business environment and operational dependencies.

Integration with DR/BC Plans: Ensure that findings from the BIA are integrated into disaster recovery (DR) and business continuity (BC) plans to enhance overall preparedness.

Conducting independent audits to verify that appropriate security controls are in place is the most effective way to mitigate the risk of data loss at a third-party provider. These audits provide assurance that the provider adheres to security best practices and complies with relevant standards and regulations. While contractual clauses and insurance can provide financial remedies post-incident, proactive verification of security controls helps prevent breaches from occurring in the first place.

Business impact analysis (BIA) is the most helpful tool in identifying loss magnitude during risk analysis of a new system, as it involves estimating the potential financial and operational losses resulting from the disruption or degradation of the system. Recovery time objective (RTO), cost-benefit analysis, and cyber insurance coverage are not the most helpful tools, as they are more related to the recovery, evaluation, andtransfer of the risk, respectively, rather than the identification of the loss magnitude. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 108.

The risk practitioner should verify the cost-benefit of the new controls being implemented to ensure that they are aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and strategy, and that they provide value to the business. The other options are not as important as verifying the cost-benefit of the new controls, because:

Option A: Updating the risk register is a good practice, but it does not provide assurance that the new controls are effective and efficient.

Option B: Ensuring risk monitoring for the project is initiated is also a good practice, but it is not as urgent as verifying the cost-benefit of the new controls, which should be done before the project is closed.

Option C: Conducting and documenting a BIA is not relevant to the scenario, as the project is already completed and the new controls are implemented. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 184.

Data processing is the activity of collecting, organizing, transforming, and analyzing data to produce useful information for decision making or other purposes12.

The role of the internal IT team in this situation is data processors, which are the people or entities that process data on behalf of the data controllers, who are the people or entities that determine the purposes and means of the data processing34.

Data processors are the role of the internal IT team because they are responsible for managing information through the applications that are used by the organization, and they act under the instructions and authority of the organization, which is the data controller34.

Data processors are also the role of the internal IT team because they have to comply with the data protection laws and regulations that apply to the data processing, and they have to ensure the security and confidentiality of the data34.

The other options are not the role of the internal IT team, but rather possible roles or terms that are related to data processing. For example:

Data custodians are the people or entities that have physical or logical control over the data, and they are responsible for implementing and maintaining the technical and administrative safeguards to protect the data56. However, this role is not the role of theinternal IT team because it is a subset or function of the data processor role, and it does not reflect the full scope of the data processing activities that the internal IT team performs56.

Data owners are the people or entities that have legal rights or authority over the data, and they are responsible for defining and enforcing the policies and rules for the data access, use, and quality . However, this role is not the role of the internal IT team because it is a different or separate role from the data processor role, and it does not reflect the relationship or agreement between the organization and the internal IT team . References =

1: Data Processing - Wikipedia1

2: Data Processing: Definition, Steps, and Types2

3: Data Controller vs Data Processor: What’s the Difference?3

4: Data controller vs data processor: What are the differences and responsibilities?4

5: Data Custodian - Wikipedia5

6: Data Custodian: Definition, Role & Responsibilities6

Data Owner - Wikipedia

Data Owner: Definition, Role & Responsibilities

Unapproved changes to firewall rules can lead tocritical security vulnerabilitiesordisruptions to business services, representing adirect impact on the business. This is more critical than documentation or governance concerns.

The most effective way to help ensure accountability for managing risk is to assign process owners to key risk areas. Process owners are the persons or entities that have the authority andresponsibility to manage a specific process or a group of related processes. Process owners help to identify, assess, and respond to the risks associated with the process, and to monitor and report on the process performance and improvement. Process owners also help to communicate and coordinate the process management activities with the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Assigning process owners to key risk areas helps to ensure accountability for managing risk, because it helps to define and clarify the roles and responsibilities of the process owners, and to establish and enforce the expectations and standards for the process owners. Assigning process owners to key risk areas also helps to measure and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the process owners, and to identify and address any issues or gaps in the process management activities. The other options are not as effective as assigning process owners to key risk areas, although they may be related to the risk management process. Obtaining independent risk assessments, assigning incident response action plan responsibilities, and creating accurate process narratives are all activities that can help to support or improve the risk management process, but they do not necessarily ensure accountability for managing risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 2-11.

IT and business misalignment is the risk that the IT objectives, plans, and activities are not aligned with the business goals, needs, and expectations. This can result in wasted resources, missed opportunities, poor performance, and customer dissatisfaction. One of the best ways to mitigate this risk is to involve the business process owner in IT strategy. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for a specific business process and its outcomes. By involving the business process owner in IT strategy, the organization can ensure that the IT initiatives and solutions are relevant, effective, and beneficial for the business process and its stakeholders. The business process owner can also provide valuable input, feedback, and support for the IT strategy and its implementation. The other options are not the best ways to mitigate the risk associated with IT and business misalignment, although they may be helpful and complementary. Establishing business key performance indicators (KPIs) is a technique to measure and monitor the achievement of business objectives and outcomes. However, KPIs do not necessarily ensure that the IT strategy is aligned with the business strategy or that the IT activities support the business activities. Introducing an established framework for IT architecture is a method to design and implement the IT infrastructure, systems, and services in a consistent and coherent manner. However, an IT architecture framework does not guarantee that the IT architecture is aligned with the business architecture or that the IT capabilities meet the business requirements. Establishing key risk indicators (KRIs) is a tool to monitor and communicate the level of exposure to a given risk or the potential impact of a risk. However, KRIs do not directly address the risk of IT and business misalignment or the actions needed to align them. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 76

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

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

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

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

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

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

The primary driver for an organization on a multi-year cloud implementation to publish a cloud security policy is to establish minimum cloud security requirements, as they specify the standards and expectations for the protection of the data and systems in the cloud environment, and ensure the alignment and compliance of the cloud security strategy with the organizational objectives and regulations. The other options are not the primary drivers, as they are more related to the evaluation, enforcement, or education of the cloud securitypolicy, respectively, rather than the establishment of the cloud security policy. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

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

Post-implementation verification ensures that changes achieve the desired outcomes without causing unintended issues. It validates the success of change deployment and minimizes operational disruption, making it the most direct indicator of change management effectiveness.

The annualized loss expectancy (ALE) method of risk analysis is a quantitative method that estimates the expected monetary loss that can result from a risk over a one year period. The ALE is calculated by multiplying the single loss expectancy (SLE), which is the monetary loss from a single occurrence of a risk, by the annualized rate of occurrence (ARO), which is the frequency of the risk occurring in a year. The ALE can be used in a cost-benefit analysis to compare the cost of implementing a control or a risk response with the expected benefit of reducing the loss. The ALE can help to justify the investment in risk management and to prioritize the risks based on their financial impact. The other options are not accurate descriptions of the ALE method of risk analysis, as they involve different aspects or methods of risk analysis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2.1, pp. 60-61.

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

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

After entering a large number of low-risk scenarios into the risk register, it is most important for the risk practitioner to analyze changes to aggregate risk. Aggregate risk is the total amount and type of risk that the organization faces or accepts, considering all the individual and interrelated risk scenarios. Aggregate risk helps to measure and monitor the organization’s risk profile, riskappetite, and risk performance, and to support the risk decision-making and reporting processes. Analyzing changes to aggregate risk is important after entering a large number of low-risk scenarios, because even though the individual risk scenarios may have low likelihood or impact, they may still have a significant cumulative or combined effect on the organization’s objectives or operations. Analyzing changes to aggregate risk also helps to identify and prioritize the most critical or relevant risk scenarios, and to select the most appropriate and effective risk responses and strategies. The other options are not as important as analyzing changes to aggregate risk, although they may be part of or derived from the risk analysis process. Preparing a follow-up risk assessment, recommending acceptance of the risk scenarios, and reconfirming risk tolerance levels are all activities that can help to implement or update the risk management process, but they are not the most important after entering a large number of low-risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-25.

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

A risk awareness program is a set of activities that aim to educate and inform employees about the organization’s risk culture, policies, and procedures. A risk awareness program can help improve an organization’s risk culture by enhancing the employees’ understanding of risk, their roles and responsibilities in risk management, and the benefits of risk mitigation. A risk awareness program can also foster a culture of openness, trust, and collaboration among employees, managers, and stakeholders, which can improve the organization’s risk performance and resilience.

Maintaining a documented risk register, rewarding employees for reporting security incidents, and allocating resources for risk remediation are also important aspects of risk management, but they do not directly address the organization’s risk culture, which is the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes that influence how risk is perceived and handled within the organization.

SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) is used in the riskidentification phase to comprehensively analyze the organization's internal and externalenvironments. By understanding strengths and weaknesses, internal risks can be identified, while opportunities and threats help to identify external risks. This method provides a foundation for proactive risk management.

 A risk profile is a summary of the key risks that affect an organization, a business unit, a process, or a project. A risk profile can help stakeholders understand the current and potential exposure to various sources of uncertainty, and prioritize the risk response accordingly. Classification of risk profiles is the process of grouping and categorizing risks based on common characteristics, such as source, impact, likelihood, or response strategy. Classification of risk profiles can help communicate risk assessment results to stakeholders by providing a clear and consistent way of presenting and comparing risks across different domains, levels, or perspectives. Classification of risk profiles can also help identify patterns, trends, and interrelationships among risks, and facilitate the allocation of resources and responsibilities for risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Risk Profile, p. 193-195.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: ISO - ISO 31000 — Risk management1

2: Risk Management Standards2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

A risk register is a document that is used as a risk management tool to identify and track risks that may affect a project or an organization1. A risk register should be updated regularly to reflect the current status and changes of the risks, as well as the actions taken to mitigate or resolve them2. The most comprehensive information for updating a risk register would come from the results of the latest risk assessment, which is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts3. A risk assessment provides a detailed and systematic overview of the risks, theirsources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences, as well as the existing and planned controls andresponses4. A risk assessment also helps to prioritize the risks based on their level of exposure and urgency, and to align them with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance5. Therefore, the results of the latest risk assessment would provide the most relevant and complete information for updating a risk register and ensuring that it reflects the current risk profile and situation of the project or the organization. Results of a risk forecasting analysis are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a complete picture of the risks and their impacts. A risk forecasting analysis is a technique that uses historical data, trends, and scenarios to estimate the potential outcomes and impacts of future events that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance6. A risk forecasting analysis can help to anticipate and prepare for the risks, but it does not provide specific information on the sources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. A review ofcompliance regulations is not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as it does not cover all the aspects and dimensions of risk management. A review of compliance regulations is a process that involves checking and verifying that the organization’s activities, processes, and systems are in accordance with the applicable laws, rules, and standards7. A review of compliance regulations can help to identify and mitigate the risks related to legal or regulatory violations, but it does not provide specific information on the other types and sources of risks, such as operational, strategic, financial, or reputational risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. Findings of the most recent audit are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a current and holistic view of the risks and their impacts. An audit is an independent examination and evaluation of the organization’s activities, processes, and systems, to provide assurance and advice on their adequacy and effectiveness. An audit can help to identify and report the issues or gaps in the organization’s risk management, but it does not provide specific information on the current status and changes of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

Annual loss expectancy (ALE) is a method to assign a monetary value to risk by multiplying the probability of a risk event by the potential loss associated with that event1. ALE can be used to compare the costs and benefits of different risk mitigation options and to determine the optimallevel of investment in riskmanagement2. Business impact analysis (BIA) is a process to identify and evaluate the potential effects of a disruption on the critical functions and processes of an organization3. BIA can help to forecast the impacts of a risk event, but it does not assign a monetary value to the risk itself. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is a technique to compare the costs and benefits of a project, decision, or action4. CBA can help to evaluate the feasibility and profitability of a risk mitigation option, but it does not assign a monetary value to the risk itself. Inherent vulnerabilities are the weaknesses or flaws in a system, process, or asset that expose it to potential threats5. Inherent vulnerabilities can increase the likelihood or impact of a risk event, but they do not assign a monetary value to the risk itself. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2: Risk Analysis, pp. 77-81.

 Digital Signature Software:

Digital signatures are used to verify the authenticity and integrity of a message, document, or software. They provide cryptographic proof that the information has not been altered and that it comes from a verified source.

 Importance of Nonrepudiation:

Nonrepudiation ensures that the sender of the message cannot deny having sent the message and the recipient cannot deny having received it. This is critical for legal and security purposes, as it provides undeniable proof of the origin and integrity of the information.

 Selecting Digital Signature Software:

When selecting digital signature software, the most important consideration is that it provides strong nonrepudiation capabilities. This ensures that all parties involved can trust the authenticity and integrity of the signed data.

 Comparing Other Considerations:

Availability:Ensures the software is accessible when needed but does not directly impact the trustworthiness of the signatures.

Accuracy:Important but generally inherent in properly functioning digital signature software.

Completeness:Ensures all required information is included but nonrepudiation is the critical factor for security and legal purposes.

 References:

The CISSP Study Guide emphasizes the importance of nonrepudiation in digital signature technology to ensure authenticity and accountability (Sybex CISSP Study Guide, Chapter 7: PKI and Cryptographic Applications)​​.

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. Scanningend 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.

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.

The primary objective of aggregating the impact of IT risk scenarios and reflecting the results in the enterprise risk register is to ensure IT risk impact can be compared to the IT risk appetite, as it enables the organization to measure and evaluate the overall level and exposure of the IT risk, and to align and prioritize the IT risk response and strategy with the organizational objectives and regulations. The other options are not the primary objectives, as they are more related to the communication, assignment, or assessment of the IT risk scenarios, respectively, rather than the aggregation or reflection of the IT risk scenarios. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

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 themost 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.

By aligning risk scenarios with business objectives, risk practitioners can accurately measure the potential loss (materiality) based on business value. This enhances prioritization and allows for risk treatment to be directed toward what impacts the organization’s mission and goals the most.

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the main reason to continuously monitor IT-related risk is to ensure risk levels are within acceptable limits of the organization’srisk appetite and risk tolerance. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, while the risk tolerance is the acceptable variation in outcomes related to specific performance measures linked to objectives. Continuous monitoring is a process that tracks the security state of an information system on an ongoing basis and maintains the security authorization for the system over time. Continuous monitoring helps to:

Provide ongoing assurance that the implemented security controls are operating effectively and efficiently

Detect changes in the risk profile of the information system and the environment of operation

Identify new or emerging threats and vulnerabilities that may affect the information system

Support risk-based decisions by providing timely and relevant risk information to stakeholders

Facilitate the implementation of corrective actions and risk mitigation strategies

Promote accountability and transparency in the risk management process

Enhance the security awareness and culture within the organization

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 213-2141

The risk associated with an asset after controls are applied can be expressed as a function of the likelihood and impact, as it helps to measure and quantify the residual risk level and exposure. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls or risk treatments. Residual risk can be calculated by multiplying the likelihood and impact of a risk event, where likelihood is the probability or frequency of the risk event occurring, and impact is the consequence or severity of the risk event on the asset or objective. Residual risk can be expressed as:

ResidualRisk=Likelihood×Impact

Expressing the risk associated with an asset after controls are applied as a function of the likelihood and impact helps to provide the following benefits:

It enables a data-driven and evidence-based approach to risk assessment and reporting, rather than relying on subjective or qualitative judgments.

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating risk levels and exposure across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the alignment of risk management and control activities with the organizational strategy and objectives, and helps to evaluate the achievement of the desired outcomes.

It helps 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.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the risk management and control processes, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best ways to express the risk associated with an asset after controls are applied. A function of the cost and effectiveness of controls is a measure of the inputs or outputs of therisk management and control processes, but it does not indicate the risk level or exposure. The likelihood of a given threat is a component of the risk calculation, but it does not reflect the impact or consequence of the threat. The magnitude of an impact is a component of the risk calculation, but it does not reflect the likelihood or probability of the risk event.References=Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative,IT Risk Resources | ISACA,Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management - Video & Lesson …

The first consideration when establishing a new risk governance program is embedding risk management into the organization. Embedding risk management means integrating risk management principles and practices into the organization’s culture, values, processes, and decision-making. Embedding risk management helps to ensure that risk management is not seen as a separate or isolated activity, but as a part of the organization’s normal operations and strategic objectives. Embedding risk management also helps to create a risk-aware and risk-responsive organization, where risk management is shared and supported by all stakeholders. The other options are not the first consideration, although they may be important steps or components of the risk governance program. Developing an ongoing awareness and training program, creating policies and standards that are easy to comprehend, and completing annual risk assessments on critical resources are all activities that can help to embed risk management into the organization, but they are not the initial or primary consideration. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

Anonymous reporting mechanisms (e.g., hotlines, web portals) encourage employees to report unethical behavior without fear of retaliation. This increases visibility into otherwise hidden risks and supports early intervention.

A cost-benefit analysis is a tool that compares the costs and benefits of different alternatives, such as implementing or not implementing a specific control. A cost-benefit analysis provides the most useful information when determining if a specific control should be implemented, as it can show the potential savings, benefits, and risks of each option, and help the decision-makers choose the best course of action. A cost-benefit analysis can also include qualitative factors, such as security, compliance, performance, and customer satisfaction, that may be affected by thecontrol implementation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 256. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 256. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) are metrics used by organizations to provide early warning signs of potential risks, including unauthorized data disclosure. By monitoring KRIs, organizations can proactively identify vulnerabilities and take corrective actions before a risk materializes. This proactive approach is essential in minimizing the potential impact of data breaches.​

According to ISACA's CRISC Review Manual, KRIs are defined as "metrics capable of showing that the enterprise is, or has a high probability of being, subject to a risk that exceeds the defined risk appetite." They are critical to the measurement and monitoring of risk and performance optimization. ​ISACA

While data backups (Option B) are vital for data recovery post-incident, they do not prevent unauthorized disclosures. An incident response plan (Option C) is reactive, focusing on responding after an incident has occurred. Cyber insurance (Option D) provides financial compensation post-incident but does not prevent the occurrence of data breaches.​

Therefore, implementing and monitoring KRIs is the most proactive approach to minimizing the potential impact of unauthorized data disclosure.

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

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. Riskavoidance 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 therisk 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 shouldconsider 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]

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, an acceptable usage policy is a document that defines the rules and guidelines for the appropriate and secure use of IT resources within an organization. It helps to mitigate data leakage risk by establishing the roles and responsibilities of users, the types and purposes of data that can be shared or transmitted, the authorized methods and channels of communication, the security controls and measures to protect data, and the consequences of non-compliance. An acceptable usage policy also educates and raises awareness among users about the potential risks and threats associated with instant messaging and other forms of online communication. Therefore, before implementing instant messaging within an organization using a public solution, an acceptable usage policy should be in place to mitigate data leakage risk. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 237.

Inherent risk is the most likely to increase as a result of the new initiative, because it is the risk that exists before any controls or mitigating factors are applied. Inherent risk reflects the natural or raw level of exposure that the organization faces from a given risk source or scenario. Accepting credit card payments from customers via the corporate website introduces new sources and types of risk, such as fraud, theft, data breach, or non-compliance, that increase the inherent risk level of the organization. Risk tolerance, risk appetite, and residual risk are all related to the risk management process, but they are not the most likely to increase as a result of the new initiative, as they depend on the organization’s risk strategy, objectives, and controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 51

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack - ISACA

Line Manager - CIO Wiki

Engaging Line Managers in Risk Management - IRM

Risk Culture - CIO Wiki

Risk Ownership - CIO Wiki

Risk Leadership - CIO Wiki

Internal Audit - CIO Wiki

[System Documentation - CIO Wiki]

Escalating to senior management is the best course of action when an organization’s stakeholders are unable to agree on appropriate risk responses. This is because senior management has the authority and responsibility to make strategic decisions and resolve conflicts regarding risk management. Senior management can also provide guidance and direction on the risk appetite, tolerance, and criteria for the organization, as well as allocate resources and assign roles and responsibilities for risk response. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk response techniques is to escalate the risk to senior management when the risk exceeds the acceptable level or when there is a disagreement on the risk response1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, escalating to senior management is the correct answer to this question2.

Identifying a risk transfer option, reassessing risk scenarios, and benchmarking with similar industries are not the best courses of action when an organization’s stakeholders are unable to agree on appropriate risk responses. These are possible actions that can be taken as part of the risk response process, but they do not address the underlying issue of stakeholder disagreement. Identifying a risk transfer option can help reduce or share the risk with a third party, such as an insurance company or a vendor, but it may not be suitable or acceptable for all types of risks or stakeholders. Reassessing risk scenarios can help update the risk analysis and evaluation, but it may not change the risk level or the risk response options. Benchmarking with similar industries can help compare the risk performance and practices of the organization with its peers, but it may not reflect the organization’s specific needs or risks.

The risk practitioner’s next step after identifying risk owners and responses for newly identified risk scenarios in a recent risk workshop is to update the risk register with the results, as it involves documenting and communicating the risk information and decisions, and maintaining the accuracy and completeness of the risk register. Preparing a business case for the response options, identifying resources for implementing responses, and developing a mechanism for monitoring residual risk are possible steps, but they are not the next step, as they require the prior update of the risk register with the new risk information and decisions. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

An updatedrisk registerensures that decision-makers have accurate, timely information about current risks, enabling informed, risk-based decisions that align with organizational priorities and changes in the environment.

 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 therisk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

The product owner should own the associated risk when contracting with a cloud service provider to support the deployment of a new product. The product owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for defining the product vision, requirements, and priorities. The product owner also has the accountability for the business value and outcomes of the product. Therefore, the product owner should be the one who identifies, assesses, and manages the risks related to the cloud service provider, such as security, compliance, performance, and quality. The product owner should also collaborate with the other stakeholders, such as the head of EA, the IT risk manager, and the information security manager, to ensure that the cloud service provider meets the organization’s standards and expectations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: IT Risk Mitigation, Section 5.3: IT Risk Mitigation Strategies and Approaches, Page 254; Best Practices to Manage Risks in the Cloud - ISACA.

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner when an organization is adopting blockchain for a new financial system is the limited organizational knowledge of the underlying technology. Blockchain is a distributed ledger technology that enables secure and transparent transactions among multiple parties without the need for intermediaries or central authorities. Blockchain technology has many potential benefits for the financial sector, such as reducing costs, increasing efficiency, enhancing security, and improving trust. However, blockchain technology also poses many challenges and risks for the organization, such as technical complexity, interoperability issues, regulatory uncertainty, and cultural resistance. The limited organizational knowledge of the underlying technology is the greatest concern, because it affects the ability and readiness of the organization to adopt, implement, use, and maintain the blockchain system effectively and securely. The limited organizational knowledge could also result in poor decision-making, inadequate governance, insufficient training, and increased vulnerability to errors, fraud, or attacks. The other options are not as concerning as the limited organizational knowledge, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the blockchain adoption. Lack of commercial software support, varying costs related to implementation and maintenance, and slow adoption of the technology across the financial industry are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the blockchain system, but they do not directly affect the capability and maturity of the organization. References = 5

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.

Social engineering attacks are attempts to manipulate or deceive people into revealing confidential or personal information, such as passwords, account numbers, or security codes. Customer service representatives are often targeted by social engineering attacks, as they have access to sensitive customer data and may be pressured to provide quick and satisfactory service. Therefore, it is most important to include in a risk awareness training session for the customer service department how to identify and prevent social engineering attacks, such as phishing, vishing, baiting, or impersonation.

References

•The role of customer service in cybersecurity - Security Intelligence

•How to Improve Risk Awareness in the Workplace [+ Template] - AlertMedia

•Top 4 Risks For Customer Service Teams | Resolver

To ensure IT asset protection, having procedures for risk assessments on IT assets is the most important. These procedures enable an organization to systematically identify, evaluate, and mitigate risks associated with its IT assets. This process is crucial for understanding thevulnerabilities and threats that could potentially harm the assets and for implementing the necessary controls to protect them.

Procedures for Risk Assessments on IT Assets (Answer A):

Importance: Regular risk assessments help in identifying vulnerabilities and threats to IT assets, allowing the organization to prioritize and implement appropriate risk mitigation strategies.

Implementation: These procedures should be well-documented and regularly updated to reflect the changing threat landscape and the organization's evolving IT infrastructure.

Outcome: Effective risk assessments ensure that IT assets are protected from potential risks, thereby safeguarding the organization's data, systems, and overall IT environment.

Comparison with Other Options:

B. An IT asset management checklist:

Purpose: This helps in tracking and managing IT assets.

Limitation: It does not address risk assessment and mitigation directly.

C. An IT asset inventory populated by an automated scanning tool:

Purpose: Provides a detailed list of IT assets.

Limitation: While it helps in knowing what assets exist, it does not assess the risks associated with those assets.

D. A plan that includes processes for the recovery of IT assets:

Purpose: Focuses on recovery after an incident.

Limitation: It is reactive rather than proactive in protecting assets.

The level of risk in the IT risk profile is the aggregate measure of the likelihood and impact of IT-related risks that may affect the enterprise’s objectives and operations.

The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its goals. It is usually expressed as a range or a threshold, and it is aligned with the enterprise’s strategy and culture.

If the level of risk in the IT risk profile has decreased and is now below management’s risk appetite, it means that the enterprise has more capacity and opportunity to take on additional risks that may offer higher rewards or benefits.

The best recommendation in this situation is to optimize the control environment, which is the set of policies, procedures, standards, and practices that provide the foundation for managing IT risks and controls. Optimizing the control environment means enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of the controls, reducing the costs and complexity of compliance, and aligning the controls with the enterprise’s objectives and values.

Optimizing the control environment can help the enterprise to achieve the optimal balance between risk and return, and to leverage its risk management capabilities to create and protect value.

The other options are not the best recommendations, because they do not address the opportunity to improve the enterprise’s performance and resilience.

Realigning risk appetite to the current risk level may result in missing out on potential gains or advantages that could be obtained by taking more risks within the acceptable range.

Decreasing the number of related risk scenarios may reduce the scope and depth of risk analysis and reporting, and impair the enterprise’s ability to identify and respond to emerging or changing risks.

Reducing the risk management budget may compromise the quality and reliability of the risk management process and activities, and weaken the enterprise’s risk culture and governance. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 145

Emphasizing individual responsibility ensures that every employee understands their role in managing risk, which is fundamental to cultivating a risk-aware culture.

According to the What To Look For When Assessing Your Organization’s Security Risk Posture article, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite should be aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and values, and should reflect the organization’s risk culture and capabilities. When reviewing a risk response strategy, senior management’s primary focus should be placed on the alignment with risk appetite, as this indicates how well the risk response strategy supports the organization’s objectives and expectations, and how consistent it is with the organization’s risk tolerance and risk profile. By ensuring the alignment with risk appetite, senior managementcan evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response strategy, and determine if any adjustments or improvements are needed. References = What To Look For When Assessing Your Organization’s Security Risk Posture