Isaca CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Exam Practice Test

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 The most effective way to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan would be to perform a root cause analysis. A root cause analysis is a method of identifying and addressing the underlying factors or causes that led to the occurrence of a problem or incident1. In this case, the problem or incident is the malware infection that affected the organization. By performing a root cause analysis, the organization can determine how and why the malware was able to infect the systems, what vulnerabilities or weaknesses were exploited, what controls or processes failed or were missing, and what actions or decisions contributed to the situation. A root cause analysis can help the organization to prevent or reduce the recurrence of similar incidents, as well as to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process. A root cause analysis can also help the organization to define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, which is a set of actions or measures that are taken to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk2. Based on the findings and recommendations of the root cause analysis, the organization can select and implement the most appropriate risk treatment option for the malware risk, as well as for any other related or emerging risks. The risk treatment plan should also include the roles and responsibilities, resources, timelines, and performance indicators for the risk treatment actions3. The other options are not the most effective ways to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as they are either less thorough or less relevant than a root cause analysis. A gap analysis is a method of comparing the current state and the desired state of a process, system, or organization, and identifying the gaps or differences between them4. A gap analysis can help the organization to identify the areas of improvement or enhancement, as well as the opportunities or challenges for achieving the desired state. However, a gap analysis is not the most effective way to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as it does not address the causes or consequences of the malware infection, or the actions or measures to mitigate the risk. An impact assessment is a method of estimating the potential effects or consequences of a change, decision, or action on a process, system, or organization5. An impact assessment can help the organization to evaluate the benefits and costs, as well as the risks and opportunities, of a proposed or implemented change, decision, or action. However, an impact assessment is not the most effective way to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as it does not investigate the origin or nature of the malware infection, or the solutions or alternatives to manage the risk. A vulnerability assessment is a method of identifying and analyzing the weaknesses or flaws in a process, system, or organization that can be exploited by threats to cause harm or loss6. A vulnerability assessment can help the organization to discover and prioritize the vulnerabilities, as well as to recommend and implement the controls or measures to reduce or eliminate them. However, a vulnerability assessment is not the most effective way to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as it does not consider the root causes or impacts of the malware infection, or the risk treatment options or plans to address the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 process owner 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 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 or less 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 how they should 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.

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

A risk heat map is a tool that shows the likelihood and impact of different risks on a matrix, using colors to indicate the level of risk. A risk heat map is most commonly used as part of an IT risk analysis to facilitate risk assessment, which is the process of estimating the probability and consequences of the risks, and comparing them against the risk criteria1. A risk heat map can help to visualize, communicate, and prioritize the risks, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of the risk response actions2. The other options are not the best choices for describing the purpose of a risk heat map, as they are either less specific or less relevant than risk assessment. Risk communication is the process of sharing and exchanging information about the risks among the stakeholders3. A risk heat map can support risk communication by providing a clear and concise representation of the risks, but it is not the main objective of the tool. Risk identification is the process of finding, recognizing, and describing the risks that may affect the organization4. A risk heat map can help to identify the risks by categorizing them into different domains or sources, but it is not the primary function of the tool. Risk treatment is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate measures to modify the risk5. A risk heat map can help to guide the risk treatment by showing the risk ratings and thresholds, but it is not the core purpose of the tool. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, Page 47.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 175

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), establishing an organizational code of conduct is an example of a directive control, which is a type of control that guides or steers the behavior of individuals or processes to achieve desired outcomes. A directive control aims to influence or encourage compliance with the organization’s policies, standards, procedures, and guidelines. A directive control can also communicate the organization’s values, ethics, and expectations to its stakeholders. A directive control can take various forms, such as:

Codes of conduct or ethics

Policies or manuals

Training or awareness programs

Job descriptions or roles and responsibilities

Performance appraisals or incentives

Supervision or oversight

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Scenarios, pp. 105-1061

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

Detailed Explanation:Real-time monitoring is a detective control, as it is designed to identify and report suspicious or unauthorized activities as they occur. Detective controls provide feedback to mitigate ongoing risks and serve as an integral part of incident response plans.

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the risks that may affect the organization, as well as the actions that are taken or planned to manage them1. A risk register provides the best evidence that the IT risk profile is up to date, because it reflects the current and potential IT risks that the organization faces, as well as their likelihood, impact, severity, owner, status, and response2. An IT risk profile is a document that describes the types, amounts, and priority of IT risk that the organization finds acceptable and unacceptable3. An IT risk profile is developed collaboratively with various stakeholders within the organization, including business leaders, data and process owners, enterprise risk management, internal and external audit, legal, compliance, privacy, and IT risk management and security4. By maintaining and updating the risk register regularly, the organization can ensure that the IT risk profile is aligned with the changing IT risk environment, and that the IT risk management activities and performance are consistent and effective. The other options are not the best evidence that the IT risk profile is up to date, as they are either less comprehensive or less relevant than the risk register. A risk questionnaire is a tool that collects and analyzes the opinions and perceptions of the stakeholders about the risks that may affect the organization5. A risk questionnaire can help to identify and assess the risks, as well as to communicate and report on the risk status and issues. However, a risk questionnaire is not the best evidence that the IT risk profile is up to date, as it may not capture all the IT risks that the organization faces, or reflect the actual or objective level and nature of the IT risks. A management assertion is a statement or declaration made by the management about the accuracy and completeness of the information or data that they provide or report. A management assertion can help to increase the confidence and trust of the stakeholders and auditors in the information or data, as well as to demonstrate the accountability and responsibility of the management. However, a management assertion is not the best evidence that the IT risk profile is up to date, as it does not provide the details or outcomes of the IT risk management activities or performance, or verify the validity and reliability of the IT risk information or data. A compliance manual is a document that contains the policies, procedures, and standards that the organization must follow to meet the legal, regulatory, or contractual requirements that apply to its activities or operations. A compliance manual can help to ensure the quality and consistency of the organization’s compliance activities or performance, as well as to avoid or reduce the penalties or sanctions for non-compliance. However, a compliance manual is not the best evidence that the IT risk profile is up to date, as it does not address the IT risks that the organization faces, or the IT risk management activities or performance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.5, Page 55.

IT control self-assessments are techniques that involve identifying and evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of the IT controls that are designed and implemented to mitigate the IT risks, by the managers and staff within the organization12.

An ineffective control is a control that does not achieve its intended objective or purpose, or does not operate as designed or expected34.

A low residual risk scenario is a situation or occurrence that has a low likelihood and impact of affecting the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation, after considering the existing controls and their effectiveness56.

The next course of action when reviewing management’s IT control self-assessments and noting an ineffective control that links to several low residual risk scenarios is to recommend management accept the low-risk scenarios, which is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging and tolerating the level of risk exposure, and not taking any further action to reduce or eliminate it78.

Recommending management accept the low-risk scenarios is the next course of action because it is the most cost-effective and reasonable option, given that the level of risk exposure is low and acceptable, and the cost and effort of implementing or improving the control may outweigh the potential benefits or value78.

Recommending management accept the low-risk scenarios is also the next course of action because it is consistent with the risk management process and objectives, which are to identify and address the risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s goals and the delivery of value to the stakeholders, and to optimize the balance between risk and reward78.

The other options are not the next course of action, but rather possible alternatives or steps that may be considered or followed in different circumstances or scenarios. For example:

Assessing management’s risk tolerance is a step that involves determining and communicating the acceptable or tolerable level of risk exposure for the organization or its business units, based on the organization’s risk appetite, criteria, and objectives78. However, this step is not the next course of action because it is usually done before or during the risk assessment process, and not after noting an ineffective control that links to several low residual risk scenarios78.

Proposing mitigating controls is a course of action that involves suggesting or recommending additional or alternative controls that can reduce or eliminate the level of risk exposure, and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process78. However, this course of action is not the next course of action because it is not necessary or appropriate for low residual risk scenarios, as the cost and effort of implementing or improving the controls may outweigh the potential benefits or value78.

Re-evaluating the risk scenarios associated with the control is a course of action that involves revising and updating the likelihood and impact of the risk scenarios, and the level of risk exposure or tolerance for the organization, based on the current or changed conditions or factors that influence the risk landscape78. However, this course of action is not the next course of action because it is not required or relevant for low residual risk scenarios, as the level of risk exposure is already low and acceptable, and the ineffective control does not significantly affect the risk assessment78. References =

1: Control Self Assessments - PwC1

2: Control self-assessment - Wikipedia2

3: Ineffective Controls: What They Are and How to Identify Them3

4: Ineffective Controls: What They Are and How to Identify Them4

5: Residual Risk - Definition and Examples5

6: Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management6

7: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

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

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

Prioritize the compliance gaps based on their urgency and importance

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

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

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

 A risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the risks that an organization faces in relation to its objectives, assets, and operations. A risk assessment helps to determine the likelihood and impact of potential threats, as well as the adequacy and effectiveness of existing controls. A risk assessment also provides the basis for risk treatment, which involves selecting and implementing the appropriate risk responses, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risk. The client’s best course of action in this scenario is to perform their own risk assessment, rather than relying on the third-party service provider’s risk assessment. This is because the third-party service provider may have different risk criteria, assumptions, methods, or perspectives than the client, and may not fully understand or address the client’s specific risk context, needs, and expectations. The third-party service provider’s risk assessment may also be biased, outdated, or inaccurate, and may not reflect the current or future risk environment. By performing their own risk assessment, the client can ensure that the risk of their systems being hacked is properly identified, measured, and managed, and that the risk level is acceptable and aligned with their risk appetite and tolerance. The other options are not the best courses of action for the client, as they may expose the client to unnecessary or unacceptable risk. Implementing additional controls to address the risk may be costly, ineffective, or redundant, and may not be justified by the actual risk level. Accepting the risk based on the third-party service provider’s risk assessment may be risky, as the client may not have a clear or accurate understanding of the risk exposure or consequences. Performing an independent audit of the third party may be useful, but it may not be sufficient or timely to assess and address the risk of the client’s systems being hacked. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 792

Detailed Explanation: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.

A systems interruption caused by a personal USB device plugged into the corporate network by an IT employee who bypassed internal control procedures is a serious breach of information security and IT risk management. The person who should be accountable for this incident is the chief information officer (CIO), who is responsible for overseeing the IT function and ensuring compliance with IT policies and standards. The CIO should also ensure that appropriate corrective and preventive actions are taken to prevent such incidents from recurring and to mitigate the impact of the systems interruption on the business operations and objectives. The CIO should also report the incident to the senior management and the board of directors, and communicate with the relevant stakeholders about the incident and the actions taken. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 181

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture1

2: Key risk indicator - Wikipedia2

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia3

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva4

5: Regulatory Compliance - Wikipedia5

: Regulatory Compliance Management Software | MetricStream

: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

: Trend Analysis - Investopedia

: Trend Analysis: A Definition and Examples

A cyber intrusion is an unauthorized or malicious access to a computer system or network by an attacker. A cyber intrusion can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the system or network, as well as the data and services that it hosts. A cyber intrusion can also cause damage, disruption, or theft to the organization or its stakeholders. One of the best ways to prevent cyber intrusion is to strengthen vulnerability remediation efforts, which means to identify and fix the weaknesses or flaws in the system or network that can be exploited by the attackers. Vulnerability remediation efforts can include conducting regular vulnerability assessments, applying security patches and updates, configuring security settings and policies, and implementing security controls and measures. By strengthening vulnerability remediation efforts, the organization can reduce the attack surface and the likelihood of cyber intrusion, as well as enhance the resilience and protection of the system or network. The other options are not the best recommendations for preventing cyber intrusion, although they may be helpful and complementary. Establishing a cyber response plan is a technique to prepare for and respond to a cyber incident, such as a cyber intrusion, by defining the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources that are needed to manage and recover from the incident. However, a cyber response plan is a reactive and contingency measure, while strengthening vulnerability remediation efforts is a proactive and preventive measure. Implementing data loss prevention (DLP) tools is a technology that tries to detect and stop sensitive data breaches, or data leakage incidents, in an organization. DLP tools can help to protect the data from being disclosed to an unauthorized person, whether it is deliberate or accidental. However, DLP tools do not prevent cyber intrusion itself, as they only focus on the data, not the system or network. Implementing network segregation is a method to divide a network into smaller segments or subnetworks, each with its own security policies and controls. Network segregation can help to isolate and contain the impact of a cyber intrusion, as well as to limit the access and movement of the attackers within the network. However, network segregation does not prevent cyber intrusion from occurring, as it does not address the vulnerabilities or flaws in the system or network. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 164-1651; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 902; What Are Security Controls? - F53; Assessing Security Controls: Keystone of the Risk Management … - ISACA4

 The next step after determining that a key control does not meet design expectations is to document the finding in the risk register, because this helps to record and track the information about the identified risk, such as its description, likelihood, impact, response, and status. A key control is a control that addresses a significant risk or supports a critical business process or objective. A control design expectation is a criterion or requirement that defines how the control should operate or perform to achieve its objective. If a key control does not meet its design expectation, it means that there is a gap, weakness, or deficiency in the control that may compromise its effectiveness or efficiency, and increase the risk exposure or impact. By documenting the finding in the risk register, the risk practitioner can communicate and report the risk issue to the relevant stakeholders, such as the risk owner, the management, or the auditor, and initiate the appropriate risk response actions, such as modifying the design of the control, implementing a compensating control, or accepting the risk. The other options are not the best next steps after determining that a key control does not meet design expectations. Invoking the incident response plan is a reactive measure that is triggered when a risk event occurs or is imminent, and requires immediate action to contain, mitigate, or recover from the incident. However, in this case, the risk event has not occurred yet, and there may be time to prevent or reduce it by improving the control design. Re-evaluating key risk indicators is a monitoring activity that measures and evaluates the level and impact of risks, and provides timely signals that something may be going wrong or needs urgent attention. However, in this case, the risk practitioner has already identified the risk issue, and needs to document and address it, rather than re-evaluate it. Modifying the design of the control is a possible risk response action that may be taken to improve the control and reduce the risk, but it is not the next step after determining that the key control does not meet design expectations. The next step is to document the finding in the risk register, and then decide on the best risk response action, which may or may not be modifying the design of the control, depending on the cost-benefit analysis, the risk assessment, and the risk response strategy. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 13

Detailed Explanation:The latest security assessment provides a detailed evaluation of the control’s performance and identifies gaps or weaknesses. This is critical for determining the effectiveness of a system security control in mitigating threats.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Detailed Explanation:A cost-benefit analysis evaluates the financial implications of acquiring cyber insurance versus the potential loss exposure. This approach enables informed decision-making by comparing the insurance cost with the potential savings from covered risks.

 A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the risks that may affect a project, as well as the actions that are taken or planned to manage them1. A risk register should include information such as the risk description, category, source, impact, likelihood, severity, owner, status, and response2. Among these, the most important information to capture in the risk register is the action plans to address risk scenarios requiring treatment. This is because the action plans are the specific steps that are taken to reduce, avoid, transfer, or accept the risks, depending on the chosen risk treatment option3. The action plans should be clear, realistic, measurable, and aligned with the project objectives and constraints4. The action plans should also be monitored and updated regularly to ensure that they are effective and appropriate for the changing risk environment5. The action plans are essential for managing the risks and ensuring the successful delivery of the project. The other options are not the most important information to capture in the risk register, as they are either less relevant or less actionable than the action plans. The team that performed the risk assessment is the group of people who identified, analyzed, and evaluated the risks, using various tools and techniques6. While this information may be useful for accountability and communication purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not indicate how the risks are treated or resolved. The assigned risk manager to provide oversight is the person who has the responsibility and authority to oversee the risk management process and ensure that the risks are properly identified, assessed, treated, and reported. While this information may be useful for governance and coordination purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not specify what actions are taken or planned to manage the risks. The methodology used to perform the risk assessment is the approach or framework that is used to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks, based on the project context, scope, and objectives. While this information may be useful for consistency and transparency purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not describe how the risks are addressed or mitigated. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.5, Page 55.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: ISO - ISO 31000 — Risk management1

2: Risk Management Standards2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the first course of action when a risk practitioner discovers several key documents detailing the design of a product currently in development have been posted on the Internet is to invoke the established incident response plan, which is a set of policies, procedures, and resources that enable the organization to respond to and recover from an incident that affects the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of its IT assets and processes. Invoking the incident response plan helps to:

Contain and isolate the incident and prevent further damage or loss

Identify and analyze the source, cause, and impact of the incident

Eradicate and eliminate the incident and restore normal operations

Communicate and coordinate the incident response activities and roles with the relevant stakeholders, such as the business owner, the risk owner, the senior management, and the external parties

Learn and improve from the incident and update the incident response plan and the risk register

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 219-2201

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 also helps 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 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.

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the percentage of systems with long recovery target times has decreased is the information that would have the most impact on the overall recovery profile, as it indicates that the organization has improved its ability to restore its critical systems and processes within the acceptable time frames after a disaster. The recovery target time, also known as the recovery time objective (RTO), is the maximum acceptable time that an application, computer, network, or system can be down after an unexpected disaster, failure, or comparable event takes place. The recovery profile, also known as the recovery point objective (RPO), is the maximum acceptable amount of data loss measured in time. A lower percentage of systems with long recovery target times means that the organization has:

Reduced the gap between the business requirements and the IT capabilities for disaster recovery

Enhanced the resilience and availability of its critical systems and processes

Minimized the potential losses and damages caused by prolonged downtime

Increased the confidence and satisfaction of its stakeholders and customers

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

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that helps organizations monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their operations, objectives, or performance. A good KRI should have certain characteristics that make it effective for risk management. One of these characteristics is repeatability, which means that the KRI can be measured consistently over time and across different situations. A repeatable KRI ensures that the risk data is reliable, comparable, and meaningful, and that the risk trends and patterns can be identified and analyzed. A repeatable KRI also supports the decision-making process by providing timely and accurate information on the risk level and status. Therefore, repeatability is the most important attribute of a KRI. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 441

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

Detailed Explanation:A review of business processes is crucial for identifying risk owners, as risk ownership is tied to specific processes within the organization. Risk owners are accountable for managing and mitigating risks within their respective areas. This ensures that risks are effectively addressed where they arise and aligns mitigation efforts with business objectives. Properly identifying risk owners supports better governance, accountability, and alignment with the organization's risk management strategy.

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

IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations or occurrences that illustrate the potential impact of IT-related threats or opportunities on the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation12.

Business risk scenarios are hypothetical situations or occurrences that illustrate the potential impact of business-related threats or opportunities on the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation34.

The best way for the risk practitioner to address the concerns of the business executives who question why they have been assigned ownership of IT-related risk scenarios is to describe IT risk scenarios in terms of business risk, which is a technique that involves translating and communicating the IT risk scenarios into the language and context of the business risk scenarios, and highlighting the linkages and dependencies between them56.

Describing IT risk scenarios in terms of business risk is the best way because it helps the business executives to understand and appreciate the relevance and importance of IT risk scenarios, and how they affect the achievement of the organization’s goals and the delivery of value to the stakeholders56.

Describing IT risk scenarios in terms of business risk is also the best way because it helps the business executives to accept and fulfill their roles and responsibilities as the owners of IT risk scenarios, and to collaborate and coordinate with the IT team and other stakeholders in the risk management process56.

The other options are not the best ways, but rather possible alternatives or supplements that may support or enhance the description of IT risk scenarios in terms of business risk. For example:

Recommending the formation of an executive risk council to oversee IT risk is a way that involves establishing and empowering a group of senior leaders from different business units and functions to provide the strategic direction, guidance, and oversight for the IT risk management process78. However, this way is not the best way because it does not directly address the concerns of the business executives who question why they have been assigned ownership of IT risk scenarios, and it may not be feasible or effective without a clear and common understanding of IT risk scenarios among the council members78.

Providing an estimate of IT system downtime if IT risk materializes is a way that involves quantifying and communicating the potential loss or disruption of the IT systems or services that support the organization’s operations, if the IT risk scenarios occur9 . However, this way is not the best way because it does not fully capture or convey the impact of IT risk scenarios on the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation, and it may not be relevant or meaningful for some IT risk scenarios that are not related to IT system downtime9 .

Educating business executives on IT risk concepts is a way that involves providing and delivering the knowledge and skills on the principles, frameworks, and techniques of IT risk management, and the roles and responsibilities of the IT risk owners and stakeholders . However, this way is not the best way because it does not specifically address the concerns of the business executives who question why they have been assigned ownership of IT risk scenarios, and it may not be sufficient or effective without a practical and contextual application of IT risk concepts to the organization’s situation and goals . References =

1: IT Scenario Analysis in Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA2

2: New Toolkit and Course From ISACA Help Practitioners Develop Risk Scenarios - ISACA1

3: Business Risk - Investopedia3

4: Business Risk: Definition, Types, Examples & How to Manage4

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

7: Executive Risk Council - ISACA5

8: Executive Risk Council: A Guide to Success6

9: IT System Downtime - ISACA7

: IT System Downtime: Causes, Costs, and How to Prevent It8

: IT Risk Education - ISACA9

: IT Risk Education: A Guide to Success

 The most important element of a successful risk awareness training program is customizing content for the audience, because this ensures that the training is relevant, engaging, and effective for the learners. Customizing content for the audience means tailoring the training materials and methods to suit the specific needs, preferences, and characteristics of the target group, such as their roles, responsibilities, knowledge, skills, attitudes, and learning styles. Customizing content for the audience can help to achieve the following benefits:

Increase the motivation and interest of the learners, as they can see the value and applicability of the training to their work and goals.

Enhance the comprehension and retention of the learners, as they can relate the training content to their prior knowledge and experience, and use examples and scenarios that are familiar and realistic to them.

Improve the transfer and application of the learners, as they can practice and apply the training content to their actual work situations and challenges, and receive feedback and support that are relevant and useful to them. References = Implementing risk management training and awareness (part 1) 1

Cyber risk insurance is a type of insurance policy that provides coverage against losses and damages caused by cyber incidents such as data breaches, hacking, and other cyber attacks. When an organization decides to purchase cyber risk insurance, it transfers the risk of financial loss due to a cyber incident to the insurance company. In the scenario described in the question, the organization allowed its cyber risk insurance to lapse while seeking a new insurance provider. This means that the organization is currently not covered by any cyber risk insurance policy and is therefore exposed to financial losses due to cyber incidents. The risk practitioner should report to management that the risk has been accepted. Accepting risk means that the organization is aware of the potential consequences of the risk and has decided not to take any action to mitigate, transfer, or avoid it. The other options are not correct because they do not reflect the current situation of the organization. The organization has not transferred the risk to another party, as it has no cyber risk insurance policy in place. The organization has not mitigated the risk, as it has not implemented any controls or measures to reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk. The organization has not avoided the risk, as it has not eliminated the source or cause of the risk or changed its activities to prevent the risk from occurring. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 752

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 161

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Detailed Explanation:A data classification program helps identify appropriate controls by categorizing data based on sensitivity and criticality. This ensures that data protection measures are aligned with its value and risk level, improving overall security posture.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the primary goal of a risk awareness program is to reduce the risk to an acceptable level by increasing the knowledge and understanding of the risk among the stakeholders. A risk awareness program should:

Educate the stakeholders about the sources, types and impacts of IT-related risks

Explain the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders in the risk management process

Promote a risk-aware culture that supports the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the organization

Provide guidance and tools for identifying, assessing, responding and monitoring IT-related risks

Encourage the reporting and escalation of risk issues and incidents

Reinforce the benefits and value of effective risk management

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: IT Risk Reporting, pp. 224-2251

A control deficiency is a weakness or flaw in the design or implementation of a control that reduces its effectiveness or efficiency in achieving its intended objective or mitigating the risk that it is designed to address. A control deficiency may be caused by various factors, such as human error, system failure, process inefficiency, resource limitation, etc.

When determining which control deficiencies are most significant, the most useful information would be the risk analysis results, which are the outcomes or outputs of the risk analysis process that measures and compares the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizes them based on their significance and urgency. The risk analysis results can help to determine which control deficiencies are most significant by providing the following information:

The level and priority of the risks that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization if they materialize.

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

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

The other options are not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that the risk analysis results provide, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the organization.

An exception handling policy is a policy that defines and describes the procedures and guidelines for dealing with the situations or circumstances that deviate from the normal or expected operation or functionality of a control, and that may require special or alternative actions or measures to address or resolve them. An exception handling policy can provide useful information on how to handle or manage the control deficiencies, but it is not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the level and priority of the risks that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization.

A vulnerability assessment is an assessment that identifies and evaluates the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A vulnerability assessment can provide useful information on the existence and severity of the control deficiencies, but it is not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the likelihood and impact of the risk scenarios that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization.

A benchmarking assessment is an assessment that compares and contrasts the organization’s performance, practices, or processes with those of other organizations or industry standards, and identifies the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A benchmarking assessment can provide useful information on the best practices or improvement areas for the organization, but it is not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the level and priority of the risks that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 176

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The best way to justify the risk mitigation actions recommended in a risk assessment would be to focus on the business drivers, which are the factors that influence the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

Focusing on the business drivers means aligning the risk mitigation actions with the organization’s strategic goals, priorities, and values, and demonstrating how the actions will support or enhance the organization’s capabilities, opportunities, and competitive advantage12.

Focusing on the business drivers also means communicating the benefits, costs, and trade-offs of the risk mitigation actions to the relevant stakeholders, and showing how the actions will address the organization’s risk appetite, tolerance, and exposure12.

The other options are not the best way to justify the risk mitigation actions, but rather possible sources of information or guidance that may support the justification. For example:

Aligning with audit results is a way to validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk mitigation actions, and to identify any gaps or weaknesses that need improvement34. However, audit results may not reflect the organization’s current or future business drivers, and may not capture the full scope or impact of the risk mitigation actions34.

Benchmarking with competitor’s actions is a way to compare the organization’s risk mitigation actions with the best practices or standards of the industry or market, and to identify any areas of improvement or differentiation56. However, competitor’s actions may not be suitable or applicable for the organization’s specific context, needs, or challenges, and may not align with the organization’s business drivers56.

Referencing best practice is a way to adopt the proven or accepted methods or techniques for risk mitigation, and to ensure the quality and consistency of the risk mitigation actions78. However, best practice may not be the most optimal or innovative solution for the organization’s unique situation, and may not address the organization’s business drivers78. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

4: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

5: Benchmarking IT Risk Management Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 4, 2017

6: Benchmarking: A Tool for Improving IT Risk Management, ISACA Now Blog, March 27, 2017

7: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2018

8: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Now Blog, January 9, 2018

Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying controls to mitigate the inherent risk. Inherent risk is the risk that exists before considering the controls. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the level and impact of risks. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. The failure of the data loss prevention (DLP) system to detect outgoing emails containing credit card data would most impact the residual risk, because it would increase the likelihood and impact of data leakage, data loss, and data exfiltration incidents. These incidents could cause financial, reputational, legal, and regulatory damages to the organization. The failure of the DLP system would also affect the KRIs, as they would show a higher level of risk exposure and a lower level of control effectiveness. However, the KRIs are not the risk itself, but rather the indicators of the risk. The failure of the DLP system would not directly impact the inherent risk or the risk appetite, as they are independent of the controls. The inherent risk would remain the same, as it is based on the nature and value of the data and the threats and vulnerabilities that exist. The risk appetite would also remain the same, as it is based on the organization’s culture, strategy, and stakeholder expectations. Therefore, the most impacted factor would be the residual risk, as it reflects the actual risk level that the organization faces after applying the controls. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

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

The primary reason to perform ongoing risk assessments is that the risk environment is subject to change. The risk environment is the external and internal factors that influence the level and nature of the risks that the organization faces1. These factors include economic, political, social, technological, legal, and environmental aspects, as well as the organization’s objectives, strategies, culture, and resources2. The risk environment is dynamic and unpredictable, and may change due to various events, trends, or developments that create new or modify existing risks3. Therefore, it is important to perform ongoing risk assessments to identify, analyze, and evaluate the changes in the risk environment, and to adjust the risk response and management accordingly. Ongoing risk assessments help to ensure that the organization’s risk profile is up to date and reflects the current reality, and that the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance are aligned with the changing risk environment4. The other options are not the primary reason to perform ongoing risk assessments, as they are either less comprehensive or less relevant than the changing risk environment. Emerging risk must be continuously reported to management. This option is a consequence or outcome of performing ongoing risk assessments, not a reason for doing so. Emerging risk is a new or evolving risk that has the potential to affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance5. Ongoing risk assessments can help to identify and monitor emerging risks, and to report them to management for decision making and action. However, this is not the main reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not cover the existing or modified risks that may also change due to the risk environment. New system vulnerabilities emerge at frequent intervals. This option is a specific or narrow example of a changing risk environment, not a general or broad reason for performing ongoing risk assessments. System vulnerabilities are weaknesses or flaws in the design, implementation, or operation of information systems that can be exploited by threats to cause harm or loss6. Ongoing risk assessments can help to discover and assess new system vulnerabilities that may emerge due to technological changes, cyberattacks, or human errors. However, this is not the primary reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not encompass the other types or sources of risks that may also change due to the risk environment. The information security budget must be justified. This option is a secondary or incidental benefit of performing ongoing risk assessments, not a primary or essential reason for doing so. The information security budget is the amount of money that the organization allocates for implementing and maintaining information security measures and controls7. Ongoing risk assessments can help to justify the information security budget by demonstrating the value and effectiveness of the security measures and controls in reducing the risks, and by identifying the gaps or needs for additional or improved security measures and controls. However, this is not the main reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not address the purpose or objective of risk assessment, which is to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks and their impact on the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, Page 47.

An intrusion detection system (IDS) is a network security tool that monitors and analyzes network traffic for signs of malicious or suspicious activity, such as unauthorized access, data exfiltration, malware infection, or denial-of-service attack. An IDS can detect and alert the organization to potential threats based on predefined rules or signatures, or based on anomalies or deviations from normal network behavior. An IDS can also generate logs that record the details of the network events and incidents, such as the source, destination, content, and context of the network traffic. By analyzing the IDS logs, the organization can identify and validate the suspicious network activity, and determine its scope, impact, and root cause. The organization can also use the IDS logs to support the incident response and remediation process, and to improve the network security and resilience. The other options are less effective ways to ensure that suspicious network activity is identified. Analyzing server logs can provide some information about the network activity, but it may not be sufficient or timely to detect and validate the suspicious or malicious activity, as server logs only capture the events or activities that occur on the server, and not on the entire network. Using a third-party monitoring provider can help to outsource the network monitoring and analysis function, but it may not be the best option, as it may introduce additional risks, such as data privacy, vendor reliability, or service quality issues. Coordinating events with appropriate agencies can help to share information and resources with other organizations or authorities, such as law enforcement, regulators, or industry peers, but it may not be the best option, as it may depend on the availability and cooperation of the agencies, and it may not be feasible or desirable to disclose the network activity to external parties. References = Monitoring for Suspicious Network Activity: Key Tips to Secure Your Network 1

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a measurable value that demonstrates how effectively an organization is achieving its objectives. In the context of disaster recovery planning (DRP), a KPI should reflect the ability of the organization to recover its critical business processes and applications within the predefined time frames and service levels. One of the most important KPIs for DRP is the percentage of applications that met the recovery time objective (RTO) during DRP testing. The RTO is the maximum acceptable length of time that a business process or application can be down after a disaster. By measuring the percentage of applications that met the RTO during DRP testing, the organization can evaluate the performance and reliability of its DRP, identify any gaps or weaknesses, and implement corrective actions to improve its readiness and resilience. The other options are not the best KPIs for DRP, as they do not directly measure the effectiveness of the recovery process. The number of users that participated in the DRP testing is a measure of the involvement and awareness of the staff, but not of the outcome of the testing. The number of issues identified during DRP testing is a measure of the quality and completeness of the DRP, but not of the actual recovery time. The percentage of issues resolved as a result of DRP testing is a measure of the improvement and maturity of the DRP, but not of the current recovery capability. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3.3, Page 138.

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

The risk practitioner’s primary focus when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk should be the level of residual risk, because this indicates the amount and type of risk that remains after applying the controls, and whether it is acceptable or not. Residual risk is the risk that is left over after the risk response actions have been taken, such as implementing or improving controls. Controls are the measures or actions that are designed and performed to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of a risk event, or to exploit the opportunities that a risk event may create. The adequacy of controls to mitigate risk depends on how well they address the root causes or sources of the risk, and how effectively and efficiently they reduce the risk exposure and value. The level of residual risk reflects the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it shows the gap between the inherent risk and the actual risk, and whether it is within the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. The risk practitioner should focus on the level of residual risk when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk, as it helps to evaluate and compare the benefits and costs of the controls, and to decide on the best risk response strategy, such as accepting, avoiding, transferring, or further reducing the risk. The other options are less important or relevant to focus on when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk. Sensitivity analysis is a technique that measures how the risk value changes when one or more input variables are changed, such as the probability, impact, or control effectiveness. Sensitivity analysis can help to identify and prioritize the most influential or critical variables that affect the risk value, and to test the robustness or reliability of the risk assessment. However, sensitivity analysis does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the risk acceptance criteria. Cost-benefit analysis is a technique that compares the expected benefits and costs of a control or a risk response action, and determines whether it is worthwhile or not. Cost-benefit analysis can help to justify and optimize the investment or resource allocation for the control or the risk response action, and to ensure that it is aligned with the organization’s objectives and value. However, cost-benefit analysis does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the risk acceptance criteria. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite can help to define and communicate the organization’s risk preferences and boundaries, and to guide the risk decision-making and behavior. However, risk appetite does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the actual risk performance. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

The primary input when designing IT controls should be internal and external risk reports. IT controls are specific activities performed by persons or systems to ensure that business objectives are met, and that the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data and the overall management of the IT function are ensured1. Designing IT controls means creating and implementing the appropriate measures or actions to reduce the likelihood or impact of the IT risks that may affect the organization2. Internal and external risk reports are documents that provide information and analysis on the current and potential IT risks that the organization faces, as well as their sources, drivers, consequences, and responses3. Internal risk reports are generated by the organization itself, such as by the IT risk management function, the internal audit function, or the business units. External risk reports are obtained from external sources, such as regulators, industry associations, or third-party service providers. Internal and external risk reports are the primary input when designing IT controls, because they help to:

Identify and prioritize the IT risks that need to be addressed by the IT controls;

Evaluate the likelihood and impact of the IT risks, and compare them against the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance;

Determine the most suitable and effective IT control objectives and activities to mitigate the IT risks;

Align the IT control design and implementation with the organization’s objectives, strategies, and values;

Monitor and measure the performance and effectiveness of the IT controls in reducing the IT risks. The other options are not the primary input when designing IT controls, as they are either less relevant or less specific than internal and external risk reports. Benchmark of industry standards is a comparison of the organization’s IT control practices and performance with those of other organizations in the same industry or sector4. Benchmark of industry standards can help to improve the quality and consistency of the IT control design and implementation, as well as to identify the best practices and gaps. However, benchmark of industry standards is not the primary input when designing IT controls, as it does not address the specific IT risks that the organization faces, or the IT control objectives and activities that are appropriate and effective for the organization. Recommendations from IT risk experts are the suggestions or advice from the professionals or specialists who have the knowledge and experience in IT risk management and IT control design and implementation5. Recommendations from IT risk experts can help to enhance the IT control design and implementation, as well as to provide guidance and support to the organization. However, recommendations from IT risk experts are not the primary input when designing IT controls, as they are based on the opinions and perceptions of the experts, and may not reflect the actual or objective level and nature of the IT risks, or the IT control objectives and activities that are suitable and efficient for the organization. Outcome of control self-assessments is the result or conclusion of the evaluation and testing of the design and operation of the existing IT controls by the organization itself, such as by the IT control owners, the IT risk management function, or the business units6. Outcome of control self-assessments can help to improve the IT control design and implementation, as well as to detect and correct any issues or deficiencies. However, outcome of control self-assessments is not the primary input when designing IT controls, as it does not cover the new or emerging IT risks that the organization may face, or the IT control objectives and activities that are relevant and necessary for the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, Page 189.

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

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

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

Optimize the value and benefits of the risk response

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

Coordinate and communicate the risk response with the relevant stakeholders

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the organization’s culture is the most important factor affecting risk management in an organization, as it influences the risk awareness, risk attitude, risk behavior and risk communication of all stakeholders. The organization’s culture is defined as the shared values, beliefs, norms and expectations that guide the actions and interactions of the members of the organization. The organization’s culture affects how risk management is perceived, supported, implemented and integrated within the organization. A strong risk culture is one that:

Aligns with the organization’s vision, mission, strategy and objectives

Promotes a common understanding of risk and its implications for the organization

Encourages the identification, assessment, response and monitoring of risks at all levels

Fosters a proactive, collaborative and transparent approach to risk management

Empowers and rewards the stakeholders for taking ownership and accountability of risks

Enables continuous learning and improvement of risk management capabilities and maturity

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Culture, pp. 23-251

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

A risk assessment is a process of measuring and comparing the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their significance and urgency. A risk assessment can help the organization to understand and document the risks that may affect its objectives and operations, and to support the decision making and planning for the risk management.

Performing a risk assessment would be the most helpful to understand the impact of a new technology system on an organization’s current risk profile, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:

What are the potential benefits and challenges of implementing the new technology system, and how do they align with the organization’s objectives and needs?

What are the existing or emerging risks that may affect the new technology system, and how do they relate to the organization’s current risk profile?

How likely and severe are the risks that may affect the new technology system, and what are the possible consequences or impacts for the organization and its stakeholders?

How can the risks that may affect the new technology system be mitigated or prevented, and what are the available or feasible options or solutions?

Performing a risk assessment can help the organization to understand the impact of the new technology system on its current risk profile by providing the following benefits:

It can enable the comparison and evaluation of the current and desired state and performance of the organization’s risk management function, and to identify and quantify the gaps or opportunities for improvement.

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

It can support the implementation and monitoring of the new technology system, and for the allocation and optimization of the resources, time, and budget for the new technology system.

The other options are not the most helpful to understand the impact of a new technology system on an organization’s current risk profile, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that performing a risk assessment provides, and they may not be specific or applicable to the organization’s objectives and needs.

Hiring consultants specializing in the new technology means engaging or contracting external experts or professionals that have the skills and knowledge on the new technology system, and that can provide advice or guidance on the implementation and management of the new technology system. Hiring consultants specializing in the new technology can help the organization to enhance its competence and performance on the new technology system, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not measure and compare the likelihood and impact of the risks that may affect the new technology system, and it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization’s current risk profile.

Reviewing existing risk mitigation controls means examining and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls or countermeasures that are intended to reduce or eliminate the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Reviewing existing risk mitigation controls can help the organization to improve and optimize its risk management function, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not identify and prioritize the risks that may affect the new technology system, and it may not cover all the relevant or significant risks that may affect the new technology system.

Conducting a gap analysis means comparing and contrasting the current and desired state and performance of the organization’s objectives and operations, and identifying and quantifying the gaps or differences that need to be addressed or corrected. Conducting a gap analysis can help the organization to identify and document its improvement needs and opportunities, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not measure and compare the likelihood and impact of the risks that may affect the new technology system, and it may not be aligned or integrated with the organization’s current risk profile. 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 208

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

Detailed Explanation:When prioritizing risk treatment plans under budget constraints, the focus should be on residual risk relative to appetite and tolerance. This ensures that resources are allocated to risks that exceed the organization’s risk appetite, aligning treatment efforts with strategic objectives and minimizing critical exposure.

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control documents, the risk practitioner should conclude that no action is required as there was no impact. The fact that there have been no interruptions to business operations despite the increasing hardware failure incidents indicates that the built-in redundancy and fault-tolerant architecture are effective in ensuring continuity.

Options A and C are not necessary in this scenario. A root cause analysis (Option A) might be considered if there were actual interruptions or impact on business operations. However, since there were no interruptions, a root cause analysis may not be immediately required. Similarly, upgrading hardware (Option C) may not be necessary if the existing controls are effectively preventing business disruptions.

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: IT Risk Register Template, ISACA, 2019

4: IT Risk Register Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

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

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

7: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

8: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

: IT Project Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

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

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

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

A 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.

Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors primarily helps to provide a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions, which are the decisions that are made based on the consideration and evaluation of the risks and their responses. Providing a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions helps to ensure that the decisions are consistent, appropriate, and proportional to the level and nature of the risks, and that they support the organization’s objectives and values. It also helps to optimize the balance between risk and return, and to create and protect value for the organization and its stakeholders.

The other options are not the primary benefits of periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of a risk register, which is to provide a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions.

Minimizing the number of risk scenarios for risk assessment means reducing the scope and depth of risk analysis and reporting, and impairing the organization’s ability to identify and respond to emerging or changing risks. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors does not necessarily minimize the number of risk scenarios for risk assessment, and it may not be a desirable or beneficial outcome for the organization.

Aggregating risk scenarios identified across different business units means combining or consolidating the risks that are identified by different parts or functions of the organization, and creating a holistic or integrated view of the organization’s risk profile. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors does not necessarily aggregate risk scenarios identified across different business units, and it may not be a sufficient or effective way to achieve a holistic or integrated view of the organization’s risk profile.

Building a threat profile of the organization for management review means creating or developing a summary or representation of the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, and presenting or reporting it to the senior management for their awareness and approval. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors does not necessarily build a threat profile of the organization for management review, and it may not be a comprehensive or reliable way to create or develop a summary or representation of the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 172

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Risk responses 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 effective way to increase the likelihood that risk responses will be implemented is to assign ownership, which is the process of identifying and appointing the individuals or groups who are responsible and accountable for the execution and monitoring of the risk responses34.

Assigning ownership is the most effective way because it ensures the clarity and commitment of the roles and responsibilities for the risk responses, and avoids the confusion or ambiguity that may arise from the lack of ownership34.

Assigning ownership is also the most effective way because it enhances the communication and collaboration among the stakeholders involved in the risk responses, and provides the feedback and input that are necessary for the improvement and optimization of the risk responses34.

The other options are not the most effective way, but rather possible steps or tools that may support or complement the assignment of ownership. For example:

Creating an action plan is a step that involves defining and documenting the specific tasks, resources, timelines, and deliverables for the risk responses34. However, this step is not the most effective way because it does not guarantee the implementation of the risk responses, especially if there is no clear or agreed ownership for the action plan34.

Reviewing progress reports is a tool that involves collecting and analyzing the information and data on the status and performance of the risk responses, and identifying the issues or gaps that need to be addressed34. However, this tool is not the most effective way because it does not ensure the implementation of the risk responses, especially if there is no ownership for the progress reports or the corrective actions34.

Performing regular audits is a tool that involves conducting an independent and objective assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk responses, and providing the findings and recommendations for improvement56. However, this tool is not the most effective way because it does not ensure the implementation of the risk responses, especially if there is no ownership for the audit results or the follow-up actions56. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

4: ProjectManagement.com - How to Implement Risk Responses2

5: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

6: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

When determining an appropriate risk assessment approach, the most important factor to understand is the value of information assets. This is because the value of information assets determines the potential impact of risks and the level of protection required. The value of information assets can be assessed based on their confidentiality, integrity, availability, and relevance to the business objectives and processes. A risk assessment approach should be aligned with the value of information assets and the risk appetite of the organization. The other options are not the most important factors to understand when determining a risk assessment approach, although they may influence the choice of methods and tools. The complexity of the IT infrastructure may affect the scope and depth of the risk assessment, but it does not indicate the level of risk or the priority of risk management. The management culture may affect the risk tolerance and the risk communication, but it does not reflect the value of information assets or the risk exposure. The threats and vulnerabilities may affect the likelihood and severity of risks, but they do not measure the value of information assets or the risk acceptance. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 582

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the security management function is responsible for ensuring that effective cybersecurity controls are established and maintained. The security management function should:

Define the cybersecurity strategy and objectives aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and business goals

Establish and maintain the cybersecurity policies, standards, procedures and guidelines

Implement and monitor the cybersecurity controls and processes

Coordinate and communicate with other stakeholders, such as risk owners, IT management, enterprise risk function, internal and external auditors, regulators and third parties

Report on the cybersecurity performance and risk posture to senior management and the board

Continuously improve the cybersecurity capabilities and maturity

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Management Roles and Responsibilities, pp. 29-301

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: The Control Process | Principles of Management4

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

Detailed Explanation:An updated risk register ensures 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.

 The analysis of logs and system events will best help validate whether suspicious network activity is malicious, because they provide detailed and timely information about the source, destination, content, and context of the network traffic. Logs and system events can be collected from various sources, such as firewalls, routers, switches, servers, applications, and endpoints, and can be correlated and analyzed using tools such as security information and event management (SIEM) systems. By analyzing logs and system events, an organization can identify anomalies, patterns, trends, and indicators of compromise (IOCs) that may signal malicious network activity, such as unauthorized access, data exfiltration, malware infection, denial-of-service attack, or lateral movement. Logs and system events can also help determine the scope, impact, and root cause of the malicious network activity, and support the incident response and remediation process. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 221

Detailed Explanation:SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) is used in the risk identification phase to comprehensively analyze the organization's internal and external environments. 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.

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

The best method to ensure a terminated employee’s access to IT systems is revoked upon departure from the organization is to have the human resources (HR) system automatically revoke system access, which is a process that involves integrating the HR system with the IT system, and triggering the removal of access rights for the employee as soon as the termination is recorded in the HR system12.

This method is the best because it provides the most timely, accurate, and consistent way of revoking access, and reduces the risk of human error, oversight, or delay that may occur in manual or semi-automated processes12.

This method is also the best because it enhances the security and compliance of the organization, and prevents the terminated employee from accessing or compromising the IT systems or data after departure12.

The other options are not the best methods, but rather alternative or supplementary methods that may have some limitations or drawbacks. For example:

Login attempts are reconciled to a list of terminated employees is a method that involves monitoring and verifying the login activities of the IT systems, and comparing them with a list of terminated employees to identify and block any unauthorized access attempts34. However, this method is not the best because it is reactive rather than proactive, and may not prevent the terminated employee from accessing the IT systems before the reconciliation is done34.

A list of terminated employees is generated for reconciliation against current IT access is a method that involves creating and maintaining a list of terminated employees, and checking it against the current IT access rights to identify and remove any access that is no longer needed34. However, this method is not the best because it is manual and labor-intensive, and may introduce errors or inconsistencies in the list or the access rights34.

A process to remove employee access during the exit interview is implemented is a method that involves conducting an exit interview with the terminated employee, and revoking the employee’s access to the IT systems during or immediately after the interview34. However, this method is not the best because it depends on the availability and cooperation of the terminated employee, and may not cover all the IT systems or access rights that the employee had34. References =

1: IT Involvement in Employee Termination, A Checklist3

2: Best Practices to Ensure Departing Employees Retain No Access5

3: User Termination Best Practices - IT Security - Spiceworks2

4: IT Security for Employee Termination - Policies, Checklists, Templates - Endsight1

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

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

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

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

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

Enhance the security awareness and resilience of the organization

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the next course of action when there is a gap between the acceptable downtime and the actual recovery time of an application is to prepare a cost-benefit analysis of alternatives available to reduce the gap. The cost-benefit analysis should compare the costs of implementing different risk response options, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer or acceptance, with the benefits of reducing the impact and likelihood of the risk. The cost-benefit analysis should also consider the alignment of the risk response options with the enterprise’s risk appetite, business objectives and strategy. The cost-benefit analysis should help the application owner and the risk owner to select the most appropriate risk response option that optimizes the value of the application and minimizes the residual risk.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: Risk Response Process, pp. 162-1631

The control environment is the set of internal and external factors and conditions that influence and shape the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. It includes the organization’s culture, values, ethics, structure, roles, responsibilities, policies, standards, etc.

Uncontrolled changes are changes or modifications to the control environment that are not planned, authorized, documented, or monitored, and that may have unintended or adverse consequences for the organization. Uncontrolled changes may be caused by various drivers or events, such as technological innovations, market trends, regulatory changes, customer preferences, competitor actions, environmental issues, etc.

The greatest concern when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment is an increase in the level of residual risk, which is the amount and type of risk that remains after the implementation and execution of the risk responses or controls. An increase in the level of residual risk means that the risk responses or controls are not effective or sufficient to mitigate or prevent the risks, and that the organization may face unacceptable or intolerable consequences if the risks materialize.

An increase in the level of residual risk is the greatest concern when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment, because it indicates that the organization’s risk profile and performance have deteriorated, and that the organization may not be able to achieve its objectives or protect its value. It also indicates that the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance have been violated, and that the organization may need to take corrective or compensating actions to restore the balance between risk and return.

The other options are not the greatest concerns when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment, because they do not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the organization.

A decrease in control layering effectiveness means a decrease in the extent or degree to which the organization uses multiple or overlapping controls to address the same or related risks, and to provide redundancy or backup in case of failure or compromise of one or more controls. A decrease in control layering effectiveness may indicate a weakness or gap in the organization’s control design or implementation, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the control layering is required or recommended by the organization’s policies or standards.

An increase in inherent risk means an increase in the amount and type of risk that exists in the absence of any risk responses or controls, and that is inherent to the nature or characteristics of the risk source, event, cause, or impact. An increase in inherent risk may indicate a change or variation in the organization’s risk exposure or level, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the inherent risk exceeds the organization’s risk appetite or tolerance.

An increase in control vulnerabilities means an increase in the number or severity of the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s risk responses or controls that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. An increase in control vulnerabilities may indicate a weakness or gap in the organization’s control design or implementation, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the control vulnerabilities are exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm. 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 174

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that may affect the enterprise’s objectives and operations. It involves determining the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their significance and urgency.

A WiFi access point is a device that allows wireless devices to connect to a wired network using radio signals. It can provide convenience and flexibility for users, but it can also introduce security risks, such as unauthorized access, data leakage, malware infection, or denial of service attacks.

If departments have installed their own WiFi access points on the enterprise network, without proper authorization, configuration, or monitoring, it means that they have bypassed the network security policy and controls, and created potential vulnerabilities and exposures for the enterprise.

The most important information to include in a report to senior management is the potential business impact of this risk, which is the estimated loss or damage that the enterprise may suffer if the risk materializes. The potential business impact can be expressed in terms of financial, operational, reputational, or legal consequences, and it can help senior management to understand the severity and urgency of the risk, and to decide on the appropriate risk response and allocation of resources.

The other options are not the most important information to include in a report to senior management, because they do not convey the magnitude and significance of the risk, and they may not be relevant or actionable for senior management.

The network security policy is the set of rules and guidelines that define the security objectives, requirements, and responsibilities for the enterprise network. It is important to have a clear and comprehensive network security policy, and to ensure that it is communicated, enforced, and monitored across the enterprise, but it is not the most important information to include in a report to senior management, because it does not indicate the actual or potential impact of the risk, and it may not reflect the current or desired state of the network security.

The WiFi access point configuration is the set of parameters and settings that define the functionality, performance, and security of the WiFi access point. It is important to have a secure and consistent WiFi access point configuration, and to follow the best practices and standards for wireless network security, but it is not the most important information to include in a report to senior management, because it does not indicate the actual or potential impact of the risk, and it may not be relevant or understandable for senior management.

The planned remediation actions are the steps and measures that are intended to mitigate, transfer, avoid, or accept the risk, and to restore the normal operation and security of the enterprise network. It is important to have a feasible and effective plan for remediation actions, and to implement and monitor them in a timely and efficient manner, but it is not the most important information to include in a report to senior management, because it does not indicate the actual or potential impact of the risk, and it may not be feasible or appropriate without senior management’s approval or support. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 146

 The results of risk analyses should be presented in quantitative or qualitative terms based primarily on the requirements of management, because they are the intended audience and users of the risk information, and they have the authority and responsibility to make risk-based decisions. The requirements of management may vary depending on the purpose, scope, and context of the risk analysis, and the level of detail, accuracy, and reliability that they need. Quantitative risk analysis uses numerical data and mathematical models to estimate the probability and impact of risks, and to express the risk exposure and value in monetary or other measurable units. Qualitative risk analysis uses descriptive data and subjective judgments to assess the likelihood and severity of risks, and to rank the risks according to their relative importance or priority. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, and they can be used separately or together, depending on the situation and the availability of data and resources. However, the primary factor that determines the choice of the method is the requirements of management, as they are the ones who will use the risk information to support their objectives, strategies, and actions. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 141

Detailed Explanation:The next step is to identify risk response options to address the noncompliance and mitigate its impact. This may include corrective actions, implementing controls, or negotiating terms to reduce exposure.

A decision tree is a technique that can be used during a risk assessment to demonstrate to stakeholders that all known alternatives were evaluated. A decision tree is a graphical tool that shows the possible outcomes and consequences of different choices or actions in a sequential and hierarchical manner. A decision tree can help to compare and contrast the alternatives based on their expected values, costs, benefits, and risks, as well as to identify the optimal or preferred alternative that maximizes the value or minimizes the risk. A decision tree can also help to communicate and explain the rationale and assumptions behind the decision-making process to the stakeholders. The other options are not the best techniques to demonstrate to stakeholders that all known alternatives were evaluated, although they may be useful and complementary. A control chart is a technique that monitors the performance and quality of a process or activity over time by plotting the data points and the control limits. A control chart can help to detect and analyze the variations or deviations from the expected or desired results, as well as to identify and correct the causes or sources of the variations. A sensitivity analysis is a technique that measures the impact of changes in one or more variables or parameters on the outcome or result of a model or a system. A sensitivity analysis can help to assess the uncertainty or variability of the outcome or result, as well as to determine the most influential or critical variables or parameters that affect the outcome or result. A trend analysis is a technique that examines the patterns or movements of data or information over time by using statistical or graphical methods. A trend analysis can help to forecast or predict the future behavior or direction of the data or information, as well as to identify and explain the factors or drivers that influence the data or information. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 922; Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA3; Risk Assessment: Process, Examples, & Tools | SafetyCulture4

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

A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the technical vulnerabilities that exist or may arise in the organization’s information systems or resources, and determining their severity and impact. A vulnerability assessment can help the organization to assess and prioritize the risks, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the risks.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 195

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A 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

Detailed Explanation:The Recovery Point Objective (RPO) specifies the maximum tolerable period in which data might be lost due to an incident. In this case, the organization is indicating that it cannot afford to lose more than three hours of data, defining its RPO.

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), threat analysis would be the most helpful when estimating the likelihood of negative events, as it involves identifying and evaluating the sources and causes of potential harm or loss to the IT assets and processes. Threat analysis helps to:

Determine the frequency and probability of occurrence of different types of threats, such as natural disasters, human errors, malicious attacks, system failures, etc.

Assess the impact and severity of the threats on the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the IT assets and processes

Prioritize the threats based on their likelihood and impact

Develop appropriate risk response strategies to prevent, mitigate, transfer or accept the threats

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 35-361

Detailed Explanation:Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) are metrics used to monitor changes in risk exposure, enabling proactive adjustments to keep risks within appetite. They provide early warnings of potential breaches in risk thresholds.

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

Detailed Explanation:Data bias in machine learning algorithms can lead to inaccurate predictions or decisions, as biases in training data are amplified in the output. Addressing bias is essential for ethical and reliable algorithm performance.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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 the internal 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

A risk assessment of a production system is a process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating the risks that may affect the performance, quality, or safety of the production system, which is a system that transforms inputs into outputs using various resources, processes, and technologies12.

The most appropriate action for the risk manager to take after undertaking a risk assessment of a production system is to inform the process owner of the concerns and propose measures to reduce them, which is a process of communicating and consulting with the person who is responsible for the design, operation, and improvement of the production system, and suggesting possible risk responses that can prevent, mitigate, transfer, or accept the risks34.

This action is the most appropriate because it ensures the involvement and collaboration of the process owner, who has the authority and accountability to implement and monitor the risk responses, and who can provide feedback and input on the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed measures34.

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

The other options are not the most appropriate actions, but rather possible alternatives or supplements that may have some limitations or drawbacks. For example:

Recommending a program that minimizes the concerns of the production system is an action that involves designing and planning a set of coordinated and interrelated activities and tasks that aim to reduce the likelihood or impact of the risks34. However, this action is not the most appropriate because it does not involve the process owner, who is the key stakeholder and decision maker for the production system, and who may have different views or preferences on the risk responses34.

Informing the development team of the concerns, and together formulating risk reduction measures is an action that involves communicating and consulting with the group of people who are responsible for creating, testing, and deploying the products or services that are produced by the production system, and jointly developing possible risk responses34. However, this action is not the most appropriate because it does not involve the process owner, who is the primary owner and user of the production system, and who may have different needs or expectations on the risk responses34.

Informing the IT manager of the concerns and proposing measures to reduce them is an action that involves communicating and consulting with the person who is responsible for managing and overseeing the IT resources, processes, and systems that support the production system, and suggesting possible risk responses34. However, this action is not the most appropriate because it does not involve the process owner, who is the main stakeholder and beneficiary of the production system, and who may have different requirements or constraints on the risk responses34. References =

1: Risk Assessment for the Production Process1

2: Risk Assessment for Industrial Equipment2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

A cost-benefit analysis is the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan. A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions or measures that are taken or planned to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk1. Selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan means choosing the most suitable and effective option for addressing the risk, based on the organization’s objectives, strategies, and risk criteria2. A cost-benefit analysis is a method of comparing the benefits and costs of different alternatives or options, and selecting the one that maximizes the net benefit or value3. A cost-benefit analysis is the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, because it helps to:

Evaluate the feasibility, effectiveness, and efficiency of the risk treatment options, and compare them against the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance;

Balance the benefits and costs of the risk treatment options, and consider both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the risk and the risk response;

Optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities, and ensure that the risk treatment options are aligned and integrated with the organization’s goals and values;

Support the risk decision making and prioritization, and provide a rational and transparent basis for selecting the best risk treatment option. The other options are not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as they are either less comprehensive or less relevant than a cost-benefit analysis. A risk mitigation budget is a document that allocates the financial resources for implementing and maintaining the risk mitigation actions or measures4. A risk mitigation budget can help to ensure the availability and adequacy of the funds for the risk treatment options, as well as to monitor and control the risk treatment expenditures. However, a risk mitigation budget is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the benefits or value of the risk treatment options, or the suitability or effectiveness of the risk treatment options. A business impact analysis is a method of estimating the potential effects or consequences of a risk on the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance5. A business impact analysis can help to assess the severity and priority of the risk, as well as to identify the critical assets and resources that are involved or impacted by the risk. However, a business impact analysis is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the costs or feasibility of the risk treatment options, or the alternatives or options for the risk treatment. A return on investment is a metric that measures the profitability or efficiency of an investment, project, or activity, by comparing the benefits and costs of the investment, project, or activity6. A return on investment can help to evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the risk treatment options, as well as to compare the risk treatment options with other investments, projects, or activities. However, a return on investment is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the qualitative or intangible aspects of the risk and the risk response, or the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

Unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator is a security risk that involves altering, deleting, or inserting data on a database without proper authorization or approval, by a person who has privileged access to the database, such as a database administrator12.

The best control to detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator is to review database activity logs, which are records that capture and store the details and history of the transactions or activities that are performed on the database, such as who, what, when, where, and how34.

Reviewing database activity logs is the best control because it provides evidence and visibility of the database operations, and enables the detection and reporting of any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator34.

Reviewing database activity logs is also the best control because it supports the accountability and auditability of the database operations, and facilitates the investigation and resolution of any unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator34.

The other options are not the best controls, but rather possible measures or techniques that may supplement or enhance the review of database activity logs. For example:

Reviewing database access rights is a measure that involves verifying and validating the permissions and privileges that are granted or revoked to the users or roles who can access or modify the data on the database56. However, this measure is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the database administrator has legitimate access rights to the data56.

Comparing data to input records is a technique that involves matching and reconciling the data on the database with the original or source data that are entered or imported into the database, and identifying and correcting any discrepancies or errors78. However, this technique is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the input records are also modified or compromised78.

Reviewing changes to edit checks is a technique that involves examining and evaluating the modifications or updates to the edit checks, which are rules or validations that are applied to the data on the database to ensure their accuracy, completeness, and consistency9 . However, this technique is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the edit checks are bypassed or disabled9 . References =

1: Database Security: Attacks and Solutions | SpringerLink2

2: Unauthorised Modification of Data With Intent to Cause Impairment3

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia4

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva5

5: Database Access Control - Wikipedia6

6: Database Access Control: Best Practices for Database Security7

7: Data Reconciliation - Wikipedia8

8: Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection9

9: Edit Check - Wikipedia

: Edit Checks: A Data Quality Tool

 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 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 a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, owners, and status. The risk register is an essential 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?

 The most important reason to revisit a previously accepted risk is to ensure that the risk levels have not changed. A previously accepted risk is a risk that the organization has decided to tolerate or retain without taking any further action, because the risk is either low or unavoidable, or the cost or effort of mitigation outweighs the potential benefit. However, risk acceptance is not a static or permanent decision, as the risk levels may change over time due to various factors, such as new threats, vulnerabilities, impacts, or opportunities. Therefore, it is essential to revisit a previously accepted risk periodically or when there is a significant change in the internal or external environment, to verify that the risk is still within the acceptable range and that the risk acceptance rationale is still valid. If the risk levels have increased or decreased, the organization may need to revise the risk acceptance decision and consider other risk response options, such as avoidance, reduction, sharing, or exploitation. The other options are not the most important reason to revisit a previously accepted risk, although they may be relevant or necessary depending on the context and nature of the risk. Updating risk ownership is a part of the risk governance process, which ensures that the roles and responsibilities for managing the risk are clearly defined and assigned, but it does not affect the risk levels or the risk acceptance decision. Reviewing the risk acceptance with new stakeholders is a part of the risk communication process, which ensures that the risk information and the risk acceptance rationale are shared and understood by the relevant parties, but it does not change the risk levels or the risk acceptance decision. Ensuring that the controls are still operating effectively is a part of the risk monitoring and review process, which ensures that the risk response actions are implemented and maintained properly, but it does not apply to the accepted risks, as they do not have any additional controls. References = Understanding Accepted Risk - SC Dashboard | Tenable®, Risk Acceptance — ENISA, Accepting Risk - Overview, Advantages, Disadvantages, Alternatives

The application risk profile should be updated when reviewing functional requirements. This will help to identify and assess the potential risks that may arise from the changes to the application, and to plan and implement appropriate risk responses. Updating the application risk profile at this stage will also help to ensure that the changes are aligned with the organization’s objectives, policies, and standards, and that they meet the stakeholders’ expectations and needs. Updating the application risk profile after user acceptance testing, upon release to production, or during backlog scheduling are not the best points to update the risk profile, as they may be too late or too early to capture the relevant risks and their impacts. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.1, page 511

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 655.

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

A contingency plan is a set of actions and procedures that aim to ensure the continuity of critical business functions in the event of a disruption or disaster. An alternate processing site is a location where the organization can resume its information systems operations in case the primary site is unavailable or damaged. The most important consideration when establishing a contingency plan and an alternate processing site for a company located on a moderate earthquake fault is to ensure that the alternative site does not reside on the same fault, no matter how far apart they are. This is because an earthquake can affect a large area along the fault line, and potentially damage both the primary and the alternative site, rendering them unusable. By choosing an alternative site that is not on the same fault, the company can reduce the risk of losing both sites, and increase the likelihood of restoring its operations quickly and effectively. The other options are not as important as the alternative site location, because they do not address the main threat of an earthquake, but rather focus on specific or partial aspects of the contingency plan, as explained below:

A. The alternative site is a hot site with equipment ready to resume processing immediately is a consideration that relates to the availability and readiness of the alternative site, but it does not ensure that the site is safe and secure from an earthquake. A hot site is a type of alternative site that has the necessary hardware, software, and network components to resume the information systems operations with minimal or no downtime. However, if the hot site is on the same fault as the primary site, it may not be accessible or functional after an earthquake, and the company may lose both sites and the data stored on them.

B. The contingency plan provides for backup media to be taken to the alternative site is a consideration that relates to the integrity and recoverability of the data, but it does not ensure that the site is safe and secure from an earthquake. Backup media are devices or systems that store copies of the data and information that are essential for the organization’s operations. Taking backup media to the alternative site can help the company to restore its data and resume its operations in case the primary site is damaged or destroyed. However, if the alternative site is on the same fault as the primary site, it may not be accessible or functional after an earthquake, and the company may lose both sites and the backup media.

C. The contingency plan for high priority applications does not involve a shared cold site is a consideration that relates to the performance and reliability of the alternative site, but it does not ensure that the site is safe and secure from an earthquake. A shared cold site is a type of alternative site that has the necessary space and infrastructure to accommodate the information systems operations, but does not have the hardware, software, or network components installed. A shared cold site is shared by multiple organizations, and may not be available or suitable for the company’s high priority applications, which require more resources and customization. However, if the alternative site is on the same fault as the primary site, it may not be accessible or functional after an earthquake, and the company may lose both sites and the ability to resume its high priority applications. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. How to conduct a contingency planning process - IFRC, CP-4(2): Alternate Processing Site - CSF Tools - Identity Digital, Information System Contingency Planning Guidance - ISACA

The first factor that should be considered when assessing risk associated with the adoption of emerging technologies is the organizational strategy. The organizational strategy defines the vision, mission, goals, and objectives of the enterprise, and provides the direction and guidance for its activities and decisions. The adoption of emerging technologies should be aligned with the organizational strategy, and support its achievement and performance. The organizational strategy also helps to determine the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise, and the criteria for evaluating the risks and benefits of the emerging technologies. Cost-benefit analysis, control self-assessment, and business requirements are also important factors to consider when assessing risk associated with the adoption of emerging technologies, but they are not the first factor to consider. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1.1, page 181

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 656.

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

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

 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.

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

The best thing to include when communicating changes in the IT risk profile is the gaps between the current and desired states of the control environment, as this shows the stakeholders the extent and impact of the changes, and the actions and resources needed to address them. The control environment is the set of policies, processes, and systems that provide reasonable assurance that the IT risks are identified, assessed, and treated effectively and efficiently. The current state of the control environment reflects the existing level and performance of the controls, and the residual risk that remains after the controls are applied. The desired state of the control environment reflects the target level and performance of the controls, and the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The gaps between the current and desired states of the control environment indicate the areas of improvement or enhancement for the IT risk management process, and the priorities and strategies for risk response. The other options are not the best things to include when communicating changes in the IT risk profile, although they may be useful or relevant information. A list of recent incidents affecting industry peers can provide some context and comparison for the IT risk profile, but it does not measure or explain the changes in the IT risk level or the control environment. Results of external attacks and related compensating controls can demonstrate the security and resilience of the IT systems and networks, but they do not cover the entire scope or spectrum of the IT risk profile or the control environment. A review of leading IT risk management practices within the industry can provide some insights and benchmarks for the IT risk management process, but it does not reflect the specific situation or needs of the organization or the stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 181.

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the business owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the achievement of the business objectives and the management of the associated risks. The business owner is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the IT services and solutions support the business needs and goals, and for accepting or rejecting the residual risks after the implementation of risk responses. Therefore, the business owner should own the risk associated with calculation errors, as they are the ones who will be affected by the potential impact of the errors on the financial data and decisions. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 194.

A risk owner should be the person accountable for the business process that is affected by the risk, as they have the authority, responsibility, and knowledge to manage the risk effectively. The risk owner should collaborate with the risk practitioner, who facilitates the risk management process, and the risk action owners, who implement the risk response actions. The risk owner should also ensure that the controls are adequate and functioning properly to mitigate the risk. The other options are not the best description of what a risk owner should be accountable for, as they are either too broad (the risk management process), too narrow (managing controls or implementing actions), or not directly related to the risk (the business process). References = Why Assigning a Risk Owner is Important and How to Do It Right; Definition of Risk Owner; What Is a Risk Owner in Project Management?

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, control process efficiency is the degree to which a control process achieves its intended objectives with minimum resources, time, and cost. The primary objective for automating controls is to improve control process efficiency, as automation can help to reduce human errors, increase consistency and accuracy, enhance scalability and flexibility, and optimize performance and productivity. Automation can also help to achieve other objectives, such as facilitating continuous control monitoring, complying with functional requirements, and reducing the need for audit reviews, but these are not the primary objective for automating controls. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 202.

 A control is an action or measure that reduces the likelihood or impact of a risk to an acceptable level. Controls can be classified into different types based on their purpose or function, such as detective, compensating, corrective, or preventive. Performing a background check on a new employee candidate before hiring is an example of a preventive control. A preventive control is a control that aims to prevent the occurrence or manifestation of a risk, such as by avoiding, removing, or reducing the risk sources, causes, or drivers. A background check is a process that verifies the identity, qualifications, and history of a potential employee, and helps to ensure that the employee is suitable and trustworthy for the job. A background check can prevent the risk of hiring an unqualified, fraudulent, or malicious employee, who could compromise the performance, security, or compliance of the enterprise. The other options are not examples of preventive controls, as they involve different types of controls:

A detective control is a control that aims to detect the occurrence or manifestation of a risk, such as by monitoring, measuring, or reporting the risk events, indicators, or outcomes. An example of a detective control is a log review, which is a process that analyzes the records of the activities or transactions on the IT systems or applications, and helps to identify any anomalies, errors, or violations that could indicate a risk.

A compensating control is a control that aims to compensate for the weakness or deficiency of another control, such as by providing an alternative or additional level of protection or assurance. An example of a compensating control is a firewall, which is a device or software that filters the network traffic and blocks the unauthorized or malicious access to the IT systems or applications, and helps to compensate for the lack or failure of other security controls, such as encryption, authentication, or authorization.

A corrective control is a control that aims to correct the occurrence or manifestation of a risk, such as by restoring, repairing, or improving the affected assets, processes, or functions. An example of a corrective control is a backup, which is a copy or replica of the data or information on the IT systems or applications, and helps to correct the loss or damage of the data or information due to a risk, such as a hardware failure, a software error, or a cyberattack. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3.1, pp. 62-63.

 According to the Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, the main reason for analyzing risk scenarios is to identify additional risk scenarios that may not have been considered in the initial risk identification process. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how, where, and why adverse events can occur. By analyzing risk scenarios, the risk manager can gain a better understanding of the relationships between assets, processes, threats, vulnerabilities, and other factors that may affect the organization’s objectives. Analyzing risk scenarios can also help to evaluate the likelihood and impact of the potential risks, as well as the effectiveness of the existing controls and the need for additional controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, Page 215. How to write good risk scenarios and statements

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

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

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

 The best way to address the request for IT risk profile reports associated with specific departments would be to use key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given operational risk1. KRIs can help to monitor the changes in risk levels over time, identify emerging risks, and trigger risk response actions when the risk exceeds the acceptable thresholds2. KRIs can also help to allocate resources for risk mitigation by prioritizing the risks that pose the greatest threat to the business objectives and performance of each department. The other options are not the best ways to address the request, as they do not provide the same level of insight and guidance as KRIs. The cost associated with each control may indicate the efficiency of the risk mitigation, but not the effectiveness or the necessity. Historical risk assessments may provide some baseline data, but not the current or future risk trends. Information from the risk register may include too much detail or irrelevant information, and not the key risk factors that need to be monitored and reported. References = Key Risk Indicators; Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide

The most important consideration when selecting either a qualitative or quantitative risk analysis is the time available for risk analysis, as this affects the level of detail and accuracy that can be achieved in the risk assessment process. Qualitative risk analysis is a method that uses subjective judgments and ratings to measure and prioritize the risks based on their likelihood and impact, as well as other factors such as urgency, velocity, and persistence. Qualitative risk analysis is usually faster and simpler than quantitative risk analysis, but it may also be less precise and consistent. Quantitative risk analysis is a method that uses numerical data and mathematical models to measure and prioritize the risks based on their probability and magnitude, as well as other factors such as frequency, duration, and correlation. Quantitative risk analysis is usually more complex and time-consuming than qualitative risk analysis, but it may also provide more objective and reliable results. The other options are not the most important considerations when selecting either a qualitative or quantitative risk analysis, although they may have some influence or relevance. Expertise in both methodologies is desirable, but it does not determine the choice of the risk analysis method, as it depends on the availability and suitability of the experts for the specific risk context and objectives. Maturity of the risk management program is important, but it does not dictate the choice of the risk analysis method, as it depends on the level of integration and alignment of the risk management activities with the enterprise’s strategy and goals. Resources available for data analysis are relevant, but they do not decide the choice of the risk analysis method, as they depend on the quality and availability of the data sources and tools for the risk assessment process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Assessment, page 81.ST

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

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

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), reviewing the business impact analysis (BIA) will best help an organization select a recovery strategy for critical systems, as it provides an assessment of the potential impact and consequences of a disruption to the organization’s critical business functions and processes. Reviewing the BIA helps to:

Identify and prioritize the critical systems and their dependencies that support the critical business functions and processes

Estimate the maximum tolerable downtime (MTD) and the recovery time objective (RTO) for each critical system

Evaluate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of various recovery strategies and options for each critical system

Select the most appropriate recovery strategy and option for each critical system based on the organization’s objectives and requirements

Develop and implement the recovery plan and procedures for each critical system

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

Outsourcing a web application and storing customer data in the vendor’s public cloud involves transferring some of the organization’s data processing and storage functions to a third-party service provider. This can bring benefits such as cost savings, scalability, and flexibility, but it also introduces risks such as data breaches, unauthorized access, compliance violations, and loss of control12.

To protect customer data, it is most important to ensure that the vendor’s responsibilities are defined in the contract. A contract is a legally binding agreement that specifies the terms and conditions of the outsourcing relationship, such as the scope, duration, quality, and cost of the services, as well as the rights and obligations of both parties. A contract should also address the following aspects of data protection :

Data ownership: The contract should clearly state that the organization retains the ownership and control of its customer data, and that the vendor has no rights to use, disclose, or retain the data for any purpose other than providing the agreed services.

Data security: The contract should define the minimum security standards and controls that the vendor must implement and maintain to protect the customer data from unauthorized or accidental access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction. The contract should also specify the security certifications or audits that the vendor must comply with or undergo to demonstrate its security posture.

Data privacy: The contract should ensure that the vendor complies with the applicable data privacy laws and regulations that govern the collection, processing, and transfer of customer data, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). The contract should also require the vendor to obtain the consent of the customers before collecting or sharing their data, and to respect their rights to access, correct, delete, or restrict their data.

Data breach notification: The contract should establish the procedures and timelines for the vendor to notify the organization and the relevant authorities in the event of a data breach or security incident that affects the customer data. The contract should also define the roles and responsibilities of both parties in responding to and resolving the incident, as well as the remedies and penalties for the vendor’s failure or negligence.

Data backup and recovery: The contract should outline the backup and recovery policies and practices that the vendor must follow to ensure the availability and integrity of the customer data in case of a disaster or system failure. The contract should also specify the frequency and format of the backups, the location and security of the backup storage, and the testing and restoration procedures.

Data retention and disposal: The contract should stipulate the retention period and disposal method for the customer data, in accordance with the organization’s data retention policy and the legal or regulatory requirements. The contract should also require the vendor to return or destroy the customer data at the end of the contract or upon the organization’s request, and to provide proof of the data deletion.

By defining the vendor’s responsibilities in the contract, the organization can ensure that the customer data is protected in a consistent and compliant manner, and that the vendor is accountable and liable for any data protection issues or breaches that may arise from the outsourcing arrangement .

The other options are not as important as defining the vendor’s responsibilities in the contract, because they do not address the core issue of establishing a clear and enforceable data protection framework between the organization and the vendor. Updating the organization’s incident response procedures, which are the plans and actions to be taken in the event of a data breach or security incident, may help to mitigate the impact and consequences of such events, but it does not prevent or reduce the likelihood of them occurring in the first place. Storing the data in the same jurisdiction, which means keeping the data within the same geographic or legal boundaries as the organization, may help to avoid some of the data privacy and sovereignty challenges that arise from cross-border data transfers, but it does not guarantee the security and confidentiality of the data. Restricting the administrative access to the vendor, which means limiting the ability to view, modify, or delete the data to the vendor’s personnel only, may help to reduce the risk of unauthorized or accidental access by the organization’s staff, but it does not ensure that the vendor’s staff are trustworthy and competent, and it may also impair the organization’s oversight and control over the data.

References = Consumer data protection and privacy | McKinsey, 9 Tips for Protecting Consumer Data (& Why It’s Important to Keep It …, [Outsourcing Contracts: Key Issues and Best Practices], [Data Protection in Cloud Services: A Guide for Businesses], [Incident Response Planning: Best Practices for Businesses], [Data Localization: What is it and Why is it Important?], [Administrative Access: Definition, Risks, and Best Practices]

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

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

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

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

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

An IT risk register is a document that records and tracks the IT risks that have been identified and assessed by the risk practitioner. It contains information such as the risk description, the risk owner, the risk level, the risk response, the risk status, and the risk monitoring and reporting activities. An IT risk register is a dynamic document that needs to be updated regularly to reflect the changes in the IT environment and the risk landscape. When a software upgrade renders an existing key control ineffective, the risk practitioner should update the IT risk register to indicate the new risk level, the new risk response, and the new risk monitoring and reporting activities. This will ensure that the IT risk register remains accurate, relevant, and useful for IT risk management. Updating the IT risk register is more important than updating the audit engagement letter, the risk profile, or the change control documentation, because the IT risk register is the primary source of information and guidance for managing IT risks. The audit engagement letter is a formal agreement between the auditor and the auditee that defines the scope, objectives, and terms of the audit. The risk profile is a summary of the organization’s risk appetite, risk tolerance, and risk exposure. The change control documentation is a record of the changes that have been made to the IT systems and processes. These documents are important for IT risk management, but they are not as critical as the IT risk register for updating when a key control becomes ineffective. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: Risk Register, pp. 69-711

The best control to reduce the likelihood of a successful network attack through social engineering is security awareness training. Security awareness training is a program that educates and trains employees on the common types, techniques, and indicators of social engineering attacks, such as phishing, baiting, pretexting, and quid pro quo12. Security awareness training also teaches employees how to protect themselves and the organization from social engineering attacks, such as by verifying the identity and legitimacy of the sender or caller, avoiding clicking on suspicious links or attachments, reporting any suspicious or unusual activity, and following the organization’s security policies and procedures. Security awareness training can help to reduce the likelihood of a successful network attack through social engineering, because it can increase the employees’ knowledge, skills, and confidence in recognizing and responding to social engineering attempts, and it can also foster a culture of security and responsibility among the employees. The other options are not the best control, although they may be useful or complementary to security awareness training. Automated controls are technical or procedural controls that are performed by a system or a device without human intervention, such as firewalls, antivirus software, encryption, and backups. Automated controls can help to protect the network from external or internal threats, but they may not be effective against social engineering attacks, which rely on human interaction and manipulation. Multifactor authentication is a security mechanism that requires users to provide two or more pieces of evidence to verify their identity and access a system or a service, such as a password, a token, a fingerprint, or a facial recognition. Multifactor authentication can help to prevent unauthorized access to the network, but it may not prevent social engineering attacks, which may persuade users to share or compromise their authentication factors. Employee sanctions are disciplinary actions that are taken against employees who violate the organization’s security policies and procedures, such as warnings, fines, suspensions, or terminations. Employee sanctions can help to deter and punish employees who fall victim to or facilitate social engineering attacks, but they may not prevent or reduce the likelihood of social engineering attacks, and they may also create a negative or fearful work environment. References = Avoiding Social Engineering and Phishing Attacks | CISA, What is Social Engineering | Attack Techniques & Prevention Methods …, 10 Types of Social Engineering Attacks - CrowdStrike

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 25

Information Technology & Security, page 19

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 17

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

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

According to the What Is Risk Management & Why Is It Important? article, risk management is the systematic process of identifying, assessing, and mitigating threats or uncertainties that can affect your organization. The primary goal of a risk management program is to help ensure objectives are met, by aligning the risk management process with the organization’s strategy, vision, mission, values, and objectives. By having a risk management program, an organization can identify potential problems before they occur and have a plan for addressing them, as well as monitor and report on the effectiveness of the risk responses. This can help the organization to achieve its desired outcomes and create value for its stakeholders. References = What Is Risk Management & Why Is It Important?

 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.

Conducting regular independent reviews will provide the best measure of compliance with IT policies, as this ensures that the policies are implemented and followed consistently and effectively across the organization. Independent reviews can also identify any gaps, weaknesses, or violations in the compliance process, and recommend corrective actions or improvements. Independent reviews can be performed by internal or external auditors, regulators, or consultants, depending on the scope and purpose of the review. Evaluating past policy review reports, performing penetration testing, and testing staff on their compliance responsibilities are not the best measures of compliance with IT policies, although they may be useful or complementary methods. Evaluating past policy review reports can provide some historical and comparative data, but it may not reflect the current or accurate situation of the compliance status. Performing penetration testing can assess the security and vulnerability of the IT systems and networks, but it does not measure the compliance with all the IT policies, such as those related to governance, operations, or quality. Testing staff on their compliance responsibilities can evaluate the awareness and knowledge of the staff, but it does not measure the actual behaviour or performance of the staff in complying with the IT policies. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 187.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

An organization may rely on third-party vendors to provide some of its IT systems, applications, or services, such as cloud computing, software development, or data processing. The organization should evaluate the control environment of the third-party vendors, which is the set of policies, procedures, and practices that establish the tone and culture of the vendor’s risk management and control activities. The best way to evaluate the control environment of several third-party vendors is to obtain independent control reports from high-risk vendors. Independent control reports are the documents that attest to the design, implementation, and effectiveness of the vendor’s controls, based on the standards or frameworks that are relevant and applicable for the vendor’s services, such as the ISAE 3402 or the SOC 2. Independent control reports are prepared by independent and qualified auditors, who provide an objective and reliable assessment of the vendor’s controls. High-risk vendors are the vendors that pose the highest level of risk to the organization, such as by having access to sensitive or confidential data, or by providing critical or complex services. By obtaining independent control reports from high-risk vendors, the organization can verify that the vendor’s controls are adequate and appropriate for the organization’s needs, and that the vendor complies with the contractual and regulatory requirements. The other options are not as good as obtaining independent control reports from high-risk vendors, as they may not provide sufficient or consistent information or evidence on the vendor’s control environment:

Review vendors’ internal risk assessments covering key risk and controls means that the organization examines the vendor’s own evaluation of its risks and controls, such as by reviewing the vendor’s risk register, risk matrix, or risk report. This may provide some information or insight on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as reliable or objective as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s internal risk assessments may have biases, conflicts, or gaps in their methodology, scope, or quality.

Review vendors performance metrics on quality and delivery of processes means that the organization measures and monitors the vendor’s performance and outcomes, such as by using key performance indicators (KPIs), service level agreements (SLAs), or customer satisfaction surveys. This may provide some information or feedback on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as comprehensive or relevant as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s performance metrics may not cover all the aspects or components of the vendor’s controls, or may not reflect the latest or updated status or results of the vendor’s controls.

Obtain vendor references from third parties means that the organization collects and verifies the testimonials or recommendations of the vendor’s services from other customers or stakeholders, such as by contacting them directly or by reading their reviews or ratings. This may provide some information or evidence on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as accurate or consistent as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s references from third parties may have biases, conflicts, or variations in their expectations, experiences, or opinions of the vendor’s services. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.2.1, pp. 147-148.

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 be applied 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

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

 A governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) solution is an integrated system that supports the management of governance, risk, and compliance activities across the enterprise. A GRC solution can provide benefits such as improved efficiency, consistency, transparency, and accountability. The best justification to invest in the development of a GRC solution is to facilitate risk-aware decision making by stakeholders. By providing a holistic view of the enterprise’s risk profile, a GRC solution can enable stakeholders to make informed decisions that are aligned with the enterprise’s objectives, risk appetite, and tolerance. A GRC solution can also help to monitor and report on the performance and outcomes of the risk management program, and provide feedback and assurance to the board of directors and senior management. The other options are not as compelling as the facilitation of risk-aware decision making, as they may not directly contribute to the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives or the management of its risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.2.1, pp. 12-13.

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

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

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

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

The MOST important thing to review when determining whether a potential IT service provider’s control environment is effective is an independent audit report, because it provides an objective and reliable assessment of the service provider’s controls and compliance with standards and regulations. The other options are not as important as an independent audit report, because:

Option B: Control self-assessment is a subjective and voluntary process that may not reflect the actual effectiveness of the service provider’s controls.

Option C: This option is incomplete and irrelevant to the question.

Option D: Service level agreements (SLAs) are contractual agreements that specify the expected performance and availability of the service provider, but they do not necessarily indicate the effectiveness of the service provider’s controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 195.

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 21

Information Technology & Security, page 15

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 13

An IT license audit is a process that verifies the compliance of the IT software and hardware assets with the licensing agreements and regulations. An IT license audit can reveal the existence of unlicensed copies of software, which can expose the enterprise to legal, financial, and reputational risks. The best course of action in such a situation is to report the issue to management so that appropriate action can be taken. Management can then decide on the most suitable risk response strategy, such as procuring the necessary licenses, uninstalling the unlicensed software, or negotiating with the software vendor. Reporting the issue to management can also help to prevent further violations, identify the root causes, and implement corrective and preventive measures. The other options are not the best course of action, as they may not address the issue effectively, efficiently, or ethically. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.1, pp. 156-157.

The main goal of the risk analysis process is to determine the frequency and magnitude of loss, because this will help to measure the level of risk exposure and the need for risk mitigation controls. Frequency refers to how often a risk event may occur, while magnitude refers to how much harm or damage a risk event may cause. By determining the frequency and magnitude of loss, the risk analysis process can quantify the impact and likelihood of the risks, and assign a risk rating and priority. The other options are not the main goal of the risk analysis process, because they are either inputs or outputs of the process, as explained below:

A. Potential severity of impact is an output of the risk analysis process, as it is the result of estimating the consequences of a risk event on the organization’s objectives, assets, or processes. The potential severity of impact is influenced by the magnitude of loss, but also by other factors, such as the timing, duration, and scope of the risk event.

C. Control deficiencies are an input of the risk analysis process, as they are the gaps or weaknesses in the existing controls that may increase the risk exposure or reduce the risk mitigation effectiveness. Control deficiencies are identified by comparing the current control environment with the desired control environment, and by evaluating the design and operation of the controls.

D. Threats and vulnerabilities are inputs of the risk analysis process, as they are the sources and causes of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, assets, or processes. Threats are external or internal factors that have the potential to exploit the vulnerabilities, while vulnerabilities are internal or external weaknesses that increase the susceptibility to the threats. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 45. What is Risk Analysis? Process, Types, Examples & Methods, Risk Analysis Tutorial - The Process | solver, What is the goal of a risk assessment? - Creative Safety Supply

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, senior management support is the commitment and involvement of the top-level executives and leaders in the risk management process. Senior management support is the most important enabler of effective risk management, as it helps to establish and communicate the risk vision, strategy, and culture of the organization. Senior management support also helps to allocate the necessary resources, authority, and accountability for risk management, and to ensure the alignment of the risk management objectives and activities with the organization’s strategy, goals, and values. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 198.

 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.

 The most essential content to include in an IT risk awareness program is how to comply with the organization’s IT risk and information security policies. This will help to ensure that the staff members are aware of their roles and responsibilities, and that they follow the best practices and standards to protect the organization’s information assets and systems. Compliance with the IT risk and information security policies also helps to reduce the likelihood and impact of IT-related incidents and breaches, and to align the IT activities with the organization’s objectives and strategies. Populating risk register entries, prioritizing IT-related actions, and defining the IT risk framework are important aspects of IT risk management, but they are not the most essential content to include in an IT risk awareness program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.1.1.2, page 2291

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 646.

Risk aggregation in a complex organization will be MOST successful when using the same scales in assessing risk, because it can help to ensure the consistency and comparability of the risk assessment results across different units, levels, and domains of the organization. Using the same scales in assessing risk can also help to avoid the potential errors or biases that may arise from using different scales, such as overestimating or underestimating the risk exposure, or misaligning the risk appetite and tolerance. The other options are not as important as using the same scales in assessing risk, because:

Option B: Utilizing industry benchmarks is a good way to improve the quality and validity of the risk assessment results, but it does not ensure the success of the risk aggregation, which is the process of combining and consolidating the risk assessment results into a holistic and comprehensive view of the risk profile and exposure of the organization.

Option C: Using reliable qualitative data for risk items is a useful way to capture and describe the risk items, which are the sources and causes of the risks, but it does not ensure the success of the risk aggregation, which is the process of quantifying and measuring the risk items, and their likelihood and impact on the business objectives and processes.

Option D: Including primarily low-level risk factors is a necessary way to identify and assess the risk factors, which are the characteristics and attributes of the risks, but it does not ensure the success of the risk aggregation, which is the process of prioritizing and ranking the risk factors, and their significance and relevance to the organization’s strategy and goals. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 105.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics used by organizations to monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their objectives and performance. KRIs also provide early warning signals that help organizations identify, analyze, and address risks before they escalate into significant issues1. The most important reason to monitor KRIs is to help management lessen the impact of realized risk, which is the actual or expected negative consequence of a risk event2. By monitoring KRIs, management can gain insight into the current and emerging risk exposures and trends, and evaluate their alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance3. This enables management to make informed and timely decisions and actions to mitigate or eliminate the risks, and to allocate resources and prioritize efforts where they are most needed. By lessening the impact of realized risk, management can also protect and enhance the organization’s reputation, performance, and value. Identifying early risk transfer strategies, analyzing the chain of risk events, and identifying the root cause of risk events are not the most important reasons to monitor KRIs, as they do not provide the same level of benefit and value as lessening the impact of realized risk. Identifying early risk transfer strategies is a process that involves finding and implementing ways to shift or share the risk or its impact to another party, such as through insurance, outsourcing, or hedging4. Identifying early risk transfer strategies can help to reduce the organization’s risk exposure and liability, but it does not necessarily lessen the impact of realized risk, as the risk or its impact may still occur or affect the organization indirectly. Analyzing the chain of risk events is a process that involves tracing and understanding the sequence and interconnection of the risk events that lead to a specific outcome or consequence5. Analyzing the chain of risk events can help to identify and address the root causes and contributing factors of the risk events, but it does not necessarily lessen the impact of realized risk, as the outcome or consequence may have already occurred or be unavoidable. Identifying the root cause of risk events is a process that involves finding and determining the underlying or fundamental source or reason of the risk events. Identifying the root cause of risk events can help to prevent or correct the recurrence or escalation of the risk events, but it does not necessarily lessen the impact of realized risk, as the impact may have already happened or be irreversible. References = 1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture2: Risk Impact - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics3: KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva4: Risk Transfer - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics5: Event Chain Methodology - Wikipedia : [Root Cause Analysis - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Key Risk Indicators, pp. 181-185.]

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

 The most important reason to create risk scenarios is to assist with risk identification. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how a risk event could occur and what the consequences would be. By creating risk scenarios, the enterprise can identify potential sources, causes, and impacts of risk, as well as the likelihood and severity of the risk. Risk scenarios also help to communicate and visualize the risk to stakeholders and decision makers. Determining risk tolerance, risk appetite, and risk responses are important outcomes of risk scenarios, but they are not the primary reason for creating them. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.2, page 521

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 639.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Once a risk owner has decided to implement a control to mitigate risk, it is most important to develop a process for measuring and reporting control performance. This process helps to monitor and evaluate the actual results and outcomes of the control, compare them with the expected or desired objectives and standards, identify any gaps or issues that may affect the control’s effectiveness or efficiency, and report them to the relevant stakeholders for decision making or improvement actions.

An alternate control design in case of failure of the identified control is a contingency plan that can be used to reduce the impact of a control failure or breakdown. It is not the most important thing to develop after implementing a control, but rather a backup option that can be activated when needed.

A process for bypassing control procedures in case of exceptions is a mechanism that allows authorized users to override or circumvent a control in certain situations, such as emergencies, errors, or special requests. It is not the most important thing to develop after implementing a control, but rather a risk response that can be applied when necessary.

Procedures to ensure the effectiveness of the control are the steps or actions that are required to implement, operate, and maintain the control in accordance with the risk owner’s expectations and requirements. They are not the most important thing to develop after implementing a control, but rather a part of the control design and implementation process.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 13

Information Technology & Security, page 7

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 5

 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The primary reason to establish the root cause of an IT security incident is to avoid recurrence of the incident. By identifying and addressing the underlying cause of the incident, the organization can prevent or reduce the likelihood of similar incidents in the future. This can also help to improve the security posture and resilience of the organization. The other options are not the primary reason, but they may be secondary or tertiary reasons. Preparing a report for senior management is an important step in communicating the incident and its impact, but it does not address the root cause. Assigning responsibility and accountability for the incident is a way to ensure that the appropriate actions are taken to remediate the incident and prevent recurrence, but it is not the reason to establish the root cause. Updating the risk register is a part of the risk management process, but it does not necessarily prevent recurrence of the incident. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4: Risk Response and Reporting, Section 4.3: Incident Management, p. 223-224.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, data selection is the process of choosing the appropriate data sources and variables for data analysis. Data selection is the most critical step in data analytics, as it determines the quality and validity of the results and insights derived from the analysis. Incorrect data selection is the greatest risk associated with the use of data analytics, as it can lead to inaccurate, incomplete, irrelevant, or biased outcomes that can adversely affect the decision making and performance of the organization. Incorrect data selection can also cause legal, regulatory, ethical, or reputational issues for the organization, if the data used for analysis is not authorized, reliable, or compliant. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 255.

The control evaluation phase of a risk assessment is the phase where the risk practitioner evaluates the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing or planned controls that mitigate the identified risks. Controls are the actions or measures that reduce the likelihood or impact of the risks to an acceptable level. The control evaluation phase involves testing, reviewing, and auditing the controls, and identifying any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. If the control evaluation phase reveals that multiple controls are ineffective, the risk practitioner’s first course of action should be to determine the root cause of the control failures. The root cause is the underlying or fundamental reason that leads to the problem or issue, such as the control failure. By determining the root cause of the control failures, the risk practitioner can understand why the controls are not working as intended, and what factors or variables are influencing the control performance. This will help the risk practitioner to identify and implement the most appropriate and effective risk response strategy and actions, such as recommending risk remediation, comparing the residual risk, or escalating the control failures. The other options are not the first course of action, as they involve different steps or outcomes of the risk management process:

Recommend risk remediation of the ineffective controls means that the risk practitioner suggests the actions or measures that can improve or restore the effectiveness of the controls, such as by modifying, replacing, or adding the controls. This may be a useful step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not address the root cause of the control failures, or may not be feasible or efficient for the enterprise’s needs.

Compare the residual risk to the current risk appetite means that the risk practitioner evaluates the level of risk that remains after considering the existing or planned controls, and compares it with the amount and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. This may be a helpful step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not reflect the true or current level of risk exposure, or may not account for the uncertainties or complexities of the risks or the controls.

Escalate the control failures to senior management means that the risk practitioner communicates the control failures to the senior leaders of the enterprise, who oversee the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provide guidance and direction to the risk owners and practitioners. This may be a necessary step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not provide sufficient or timely information or action to address the control failures, or may not reflect the urgency or priority of the control failures. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3.1, pp. 62-63.

The MOST important stakeholders to include during the initial risk identification process for a business application are the business process owners, because they are the ones who have the authority and responsibility for the business processes that are supported or enabled by the business application. The business process owners can provide valuable input and feedback on the business objectives, requirements, and expectations of the business application, as well as the potential risks, impacts, and opportunities that may affect the business processes and outcomes. The other options are not as important as the business process owners, because:

Option B: Business process consumers are the ones who use or benefit from the business processes that are supported or enabled by the business application, such as customers, employees, or partners. They can provide useful information and perspectives on the user needs, preferences, and satisfaction of the business application, but they are not as important as the business process owners, who have the ultimate accountability and authority for the business processes and outcomes.

Option C: Application architecture team is the one who designs and develops the technical architecture and components of the business application, such as the hardware, software, network, and data. They can provide technical expertise and guidance on the feasibility, functionality, and security of the business application, but they are not as important as the business process owners, who have the primary stake and interest in the business application and its alignment with the business processes and objectives.

Option D: Internal audit is the one who provides independent assurance and consulting services on the governance, risk management, and control processes of the organization, including the business application. They can provide objective and impartial evaluation and recommendation on the effectiveness and efficiency of the business application and its compliance with the internal and external standards and regulations, but they are not as important as the business process owners, who have the direct involvement and influence on the business application and its performance and value. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 103.

 According to the IT Risk Management - Basics and Best Practices article, one of the best practices for IT risk management is to keep the risk register up to date. A risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and status. A risk register is a vital tool for IT risk management, as it helps to track and monitor the risks throughout their lifecycle, and to communicate the risks to the relevant stakeholders. However, a risk register is only useful if it reflects the current situation and environment of the organization. Therefore, the risk register should be regularly updated to capture any changes in the risk profile, such as new risks, resolved risks, modified risks, or escalated risks. Updating the risk register will help to ensure that the risk management process is effective and efficient, and that the risk responses are appropriate and timely. References = IT Risk Management - Basics and Best Practices

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 A cost-benefit analysis is a technique that compares the costs and benefits of different risk response strategies, such as mitigating, transferring, avoiding, or accepting risks. A cost-benefit analysis can help justify investment in risk response strategies by showing the expected return on investment, the net present value, the break-even point, and the cost-effectiveness of each option. A cost-benefit analysis can also help prioritize the most optimal risk response strategies based on the available resources, the risk appetite, and the stakeholder expectations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.4: Risk Response Selection, p. 156-157.

The risk practitioner should report that the associated risk has been deferred, as this means that the risk response has been postponed or delayed due to lack of resources or other constraints. Deferring a risk response implies that the risk owner acknowledges the risk and intends to implement the risk mitigation action plan at a later stage, when the resources or conditions are available. The other options are not correct, as they do not reflect the actual status of the risk response. Mitigating a risk means that the risk response has been implemented and the risk level has been reduced. Accepting a risk means that the risk response has been rejected or waived, and the risk level has been accepted as it is. Avoiding a risk means that the risk response has been implemented and the risk level has been eliminated or transferred. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 146.

Risk appetite is defined as "the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, before action is deemed necessary to reduce the risk."1 It represents a balance between the potential benefits of innovation and the threats that change inevitably brings. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk attitude and its willingness to accept risk in specific scenarios, with a governance model in place for risk oversight. Risk appetite helps to guide the organization’s approach to risk and risk management, and to align its risk decisions with its business objectives and context. The other options are not the best descriptions of risk appetite, as they are either too vague (the effective management of risk and internal control environments), too narrow (acceptable variation between risk thresholds and business objectives), or confusing (the acceptable variation relative to the achievement of objectives). References = Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference?

Risk policies provide the best indication of an organization’s risk tolerance, as they define the acceptable level of risk and the risk appetite of the organization. Risk policies also establish the roles and responsibilities, methodologies, and reporting mechanisms for risk management. Risk sharing strategy, risk transfer agreements, and risk assessments are not the best indicators of risk tolerance, as they are more related to risk response, risk mitigation, and risk identification, respectively. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1.2, page 19.

According to Wikipedia1, a maturity model is a framework for measuring an organization’s maturity, or that of a business function within an organization, with maturity being defined as a measurement of the ability of an organization for continuous improvement in a particular discipline. A maturity model will best indicate the effectiveness and efficiency of an organization or a business function, as it helps to evaluate how well they achieve their intended objectives with minimum resources, time, and cost. A maturity model also helps to identify and prioritize the areas and opportunities for improvement, and to establish and communicate the standards and best practices for the discipline. References = Wikipedia1

 A risk heat map is a visualization tool that shows the likelihood and impact of different risks on a matrix, using colors to indicate the level of risk. A risk heat map can help prioritize the risks that need the most attention and resources, and support the decision making and planning process for risk management. Mapping open risk issues to an enterprise risk heat map best facilitates risk response, which is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate actions to address the risks. Risk response can include strategies such as mitigating, transferring, avoiding, or accepting risks. By mapping open risk issues to a risk heat map, an organization can identify the most suitable risk response for each risk, based on the risk appetite, criteria, and objectives. A risk heat map can also help evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response, by showing the change in the level of residual risk after the risk response has been executed. References = What Is a Risk Heat Map & How Can It Help Your Risk Management Strategy, What Is a Risk Heat Map, and How Can It Help Your Risk Management Strategy, Risk Map (Risk Heat Map), How To Use A Risk Heat Map.

 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.

= Change management is the process of planning, implementing, and monitoring changes to IT systems, services, or infrastructure in a controlled and coordinated manner1. Change management controls are the policies, procedures, and tools that ensure changes are authorized, documented, tested, and reviewed before they are deployed to the production environment2.

Change-related exceptions are the deviations or violations from the established change management controls, such as unauthorized, untested, or failed changes3. Change-related exceptions pose a high risk to the organization, as they can cause system instability, performance degradation, security breaches, data loss, or compliance issues3.

An increase in change-related exceptions per month would be the greatest concern for an IT risk practitioner, as it indicates a lack of effectiveness, efficiency, or compliance of the change management process and controls. An increase in change-related exceptions per month could result from:

Poor change planning, prioritization, or scheduling

Insufficient change approval, review, or communication

Inadequate change testing, validation, or verification

Lack of change monitoring, reporting, or auditing

Low change awareness, training, or support

An IT risk practitioner should investigate the root causes of the increase in change-related exceptions per month, and recommend corrective and preventive actions to improve the change management process and controls, such as:

Aligning the change management process with the organization’s goals, strategies, and risk appetite

Implementing a standardized and consistent change management methodology, such as ITIL or COBIT

Defining clear roles and responsibilities for change management stakeholders, such as change owners, change managers, change advisory boards, change implementers, and change users

Establishing clear and measurable criteria and thresholds for change authorization, classification, and evaluation

Leveraging tools and technologies to automate and streamline the change management process and controls, such as change management software, configuration management databases, or change management dashboards

Enhancing the change management culture and capabilities, such as change management awareness, training, support, or feedback

The other options are not as concerning as an increase in change-related exceptions per month, because they do not directly imply a risk to the organization’s IT systems, services, or infrastructure. Rolled back changes below management’s thresholds, which are the changes that are reversed or undone due to errors, defects, or issues, may indicate a need for improvement in the change testing, validation, or verification processes, but they do not necessarily cause harm or damage to the production environment, as long as they are within the acceptable limits set by the management. The average implementation time for changes, which is the duration of the change deployment process, may affect the organization’s agility, efficiency, or productivity, but it does not necessarily compromise the quality, security, or reliability of the changes, as long as they are implemented according to the change management controls. The number of user stories approved for implementation, which are the requirements or features that are expressed from the perspective of the end users, may reflect the organization’s demand, innovation, or customer satisfaction, but it does not necessarily increase the risk of the changes, as long as they are managed and controlled by the change management process.

References = What is Change Management? | ITIL | AXELOS, Change Management Controls: Definition, Types, and Best Practices, Change Management Exceptions: Definition, Causes, and Impacts, ITIL Change Management: Best Practices & Processes - BMC Software, COBIT 2019: Change Enablement

A business continuity plan (BCP) is a system of prevention and recovery from potential threats to a company. The plan ensures that personnel and assets are protected and are able to function quickly in the event of a disaster1. The first task when developing a BCP should be to identify critical business functions and resources, because this will help to determine the scope, objectives, and priorities of the plan. Critical business functions and resources are those that are essential for the continuity of the company’s operations, and that would cause significant disruption or damage if they were interrupted or lost. By identifying critical business functions and resources, the company can focus its efforts and resources on protecting and restoring them, and minimizing the impact of a disaster. The other options are not the first task when developing a BCP, because they depend on the identification of critical business functions and resources, as explained below:

A. Determine data backup and recovery availability at an alternate site is a task that relates to the recovery strategy of the BCP, which aims to restore the data and information systems that support the critical business functions and resources. However, this task cannot be performed without first identifying which data and information systems are critical, and what level of availability and recovery they require.

C. Define roles and responsibilities for implementation is a task that relates to the organization and governance of the BCP, which aims to assign and communicate the duties and expectations of the personnel involved in the plan. However, this task cannot be performed without first identifying which personnel are critical, and what functions and resources they are responsible for.

D. Identify recovery time objectives (RTOs) for critical business applications is a task that relates to the analysis and evaluation of the BCP, which aims to measure the acceptable downtime and recovery speed of the critical business functions and resources. However, this task cannot be performed without first identifying which business applications are critical, and what impact and likelihood they have. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. What Is a Business Continuity Plan (BCP), and How Does It Work?, Business continuity plan (BCP) in 8 steps, with templates | BDC.ca, How Develop a Business Continuity Plan - Invenio IT, Business Continuity Planning | Ready.gov, Develop a Robust Business Continuity Plan | Wrike

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Brainstorming sessions would best contribute to identifying obscure risk scenarios, as they allow participants to generate and share ideas without being constrained by conventional thinking or assumptions. Brainstorming sessions can help to identify risks that are not obvious, not well understood, or not covered by existing controls. Control self-assessments, vulnerability analysis, and Monte Carlo analysis are useful methods for evaluating and quantifying risks, but they are not designed to identify obscure risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 59.

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

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

Zero-day malware is malware that exploits unknown and unprotected vulnerabilities. This novel malware is difficult to detect and defend against, making zero-day attacks a significant threat to enterprise cybersecurity1. The best way to detect zero-day malware on an end user’s workstation is to use file integrity monitoring, which is a technique that monitors and alerts on changes to files and directories that may indicate a malware infection or compromise2. By using file integrity monitoring, the end user can detect zero-day malware that may alter or damage the files or directories on their workstation, and take appropriate actions to remove or isolate the malware. File integrity monitoring can also help to prevent the spread of zero-day malware to other systems or networks, and to restore the integrity and availability of the affected files or directories. Antivirus program, database activity monitoring, and firewall log monitoring are not the best ways to detect zero-day malware on an end user’s workstation, as they are not as effective or reliable as file integrity monitoring. Antivirus program is a software that scans and removes known malware from a system or network3. Antivirus program can help to protect the end user’s workstation from common or known malware, but it may not be able to detect zero-day malware that does not have a signature or a pattern that matches the antivirus program’s database. Database activity monitoring is a technique that monitors and audits the activities and transactions on a database, such as queries, updates, or deletions4. Database activity monitoring can help to protect the end user’s database from unauthorized or malicious access or modification, but it may not be able to detect zero-day malware that does not target or affect the database. Firewall log monitoring is a technique that monitors and analyzes the logs generated by a firewall, which is a device or software that filters and controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules. Firewall log monitoring can help to protect the end user’s workstation from external or internal network attacks, but it may not be able to detect zero-day malware that bypasses or evades the firewall rules or that originates from the workstation itself. References = 1: What is Zero Day Malware? - Check Point Software2: File Integrity Monitoring - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics3: Antivirus Software - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics4: Database Activity Monitoring - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : [Firewall Log Analysis - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.] : [Zero-day attack detection: a systematic literature review | Artificial Intelligence Review] : [Zero-day Attacks Detection and Prevention Methods | Apriorit] 

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

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

 The best time to identify the risk associated with a major project to determine a mitigation plan is the project initiation phase. The project initiation phase is the first phase of the project management process, where the project is defined, authorized, and planned. The project initiation phase includes the activities of developing the project charter, identifying the stakeholders, and defining the scope and objectives of the project. The project initiation phase is the best time to identify the risk associated with the project, as it provides the opportunity to understand the project context, requirements, and expectations, and to establish the risk management framework, process, and plan. By identifying the risk early in the project, the mitigation plan can be integrated with the project plan, and the resources, budget, and schedule can be allocated accordingly. The other options are not as optimal as the project initiation phase, as they are related to the execution, closing, or planning of the project, not the definition or authorization of the project. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Process, page 15.

The best way to reduce the risk associated with the theft of a laptop containing sensitive information is to use data encryption. Data encryption is a process that transforms the data into an unreadable or unintelligible format, using a secret key or algorithm, to protect the data from unauthorized access or disclosure. Data encryption helps to reduce the risk of data theft, because even if the laptop is stolen, the data on the laptop cannot be accessed or used by the thief without the proper key or algorithm. Data encryption also helps to comply with the relevant laws, regulations, standards, and contracts that may require the protection of sensitive data. The other options are not as effective as data encryption, although they may provide some protection for the laptop or the data. A cable lock, a periodic backup, and a biometrics access control are all examples of physical or logical controls, which may help to prevent or deter the theft of the laptop, or to recover or restore the data on the laptop, but they do not necessarily protect the data from unauthorized access or disclosure if the laptop is stolen. References = 8

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

The most important thing when implementing an organization’s security policy is to obtain management support. Management support means that the senior management and the board of directors endorse, approve, and fund the security policy and its implementation. Management support also means that the management communicates, promotes, and enforces the security policy across the organization. Management support can help to ensure that the security policy is aligned with the organizational strategy and objectives, and that it is effective, consistent, and sustainable. The other options are not as important as obtaining management support, as they are related to the specific aspects or components of the security policy implementation, not the overall success and acceptance of the security policy implementation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

A legacy system is an old or outdated IT system that is still in use by an organization. A legacy system may pose various risks to the organization, such as security vulnerabilities, compatibility issues, performance degradation, maintenance challenges, etc. When an internal audit report reveals that a legacy system is no longer supported by the vendor or the manufacturer, the risk practitioner’s most important action before recommending a risk response is to assess the potential impact and cost of mitigation, which means to estimate the consequences and expenses of the risk event if the legacy system fails or malfunctions. By assessing the potential impact and cost of mitigation, the risk practitioner can evaluate the risk exposure and determine the appropriate risk response, such as accepting, avoiding, transferring, or reducing the risk. References = 4

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

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

When performing a risk assessment of a new service to support a core business process, the first step is to identify the conditions that may cause disruptions to the service or the process. This involves identifying the sources and causes of potential risk events, such as natural disasters, cyberattacks, human errors, equipment failures, power outages, etc. that may affect the availability, integrity, or confidentiality of the service or the process. By identifying the conditions that may cause disruptions, the risk practitioner can then analyze the probability and impact of the risk events, evaluate the risk exposure, and determine the appropriate risk responses to ensure the continuity of operations. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 66.

The relationship owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for managing the relationship with the service provider. The relationship owner should be accountable for ensuring that risk responses are implemented, as they are the primary point of contact and communication with the service provider. The relationship owner can also monitor and evaluate the performance and compliance of the service provider, and enforce the contractual obligations and service level agreements. The other options are not as accountable as the relationship owner, as they are related to the assessment, security, or legal aspects of the service provider, not the management or oversight of the service provider. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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.

Recovery time objectives (RTOs) are the acceptable timeframes within which business processes must be restored after a disruption. RTOs should be based on the maximum tolerable downtime (MTD), which is the longest time that a business process can be inoperable without causing irreparable harm to the organization. The other options are not directly related to RTOs, as they refer to the amount of data loss or corruption that can be tolerated, not the time to restore the business processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.3: Key Risk Indicators, page 197.

Effective risk communication best benefits an organization by helping personnel make better-informed decisions. Risk communication is the process of exchanging information and opinions among stakeholders about the nature, magnitude, significance, or control of a risk. By communicating risk information clearly and consistently, the organization can enhance the understanding and awareness of the risk, and enable the personnel to make decisions that are aligned with the risk appetite and objectives of the organization. Assisting the development of a risk register, improving the effectiveness of IT controls, and increasing participation in the risk assessment process are other possible benefits, but they are not as important as helping personnel make better-informed decisions. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The greatest concern of maintaining independent departmental risk registers that are not automatically aggregated is that management may be unable to accurately evaluate the risk profile. The risk profile is the overall view of the risks that the organization faces and their impact on the organization’s objectives. It helps management to prioritize and allocate resources for risk management and to align the risk appetite and strategy. If the departmental risk registers are not aggregated, management may not have a complete and consistent picture of the risks across the organization. They may miss some important risks, overestimate or underestimate some risks, or have conflicting or redundant risk information. This may lead to poor risk management decisions and outcomes. The other options are also concerns, but they are not as critical as the inability to evaluate the risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2: IT Risk Analysis, page 63.

An information asset inventory is a list of all the information assets that an organization owns or uses. It includes information such as the asset name, description, owner, location, classification, value, and dependencies. The primary objective of maintaining an information asset inventory is to provide input to business impact analyses (BIAs), which are used to identify the criticality and recovery priorities of information assets in the event of a disruption. By having an updated and accurate information asset inventory, an organization can ensure that the BIAs reflect the current state and needs of the business processes that rely on the information assets. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 74.

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

The next step to determine the risk exposure after a vulnerability assessment of a web-facing application is to perform a penetration test. A penetration test is a simulated attack on the application to exploit the identified vulnerabilities and measure the potential impact and likelihood of a successful breach. A penetration test can help to quantify and prioritize the risks associated with the web-facing application. Code review, gap assessment, and business impact analysis (BIA) are other possible steps, but they are not as effective as a penetration test. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

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

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

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

The HR manager is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility to collect, process, and protect the personal data of the employees in the organization. The HR manager helps to manage the employee personal data, because they help to establish and enforce the data policies and standards for the employees, and to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements, such as the GDPR. The HR manager also helps to monitor and report on the data performance and compliance for the employees, and to identify and address any issues or gaps in the data management activities. The other options are not the best person to manage the employee personal data, although they may be involved in the process. System administrator, data privacy manager, and compliance manager are all examples of roles or functions that can help to support or implement the data management activities, but they do not necessarily have the authority or responsibility to collect, process, or protect the employee personal data

 Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite can be expressed in qualitative or quantitative terms, and can vary depending on the context and the stakeholder. Risk appetite should be defined and communicated by the senior management or the board of directors, and should guide the risk management decisions and actions throughout the organization. When a project team has accepted a risk outside the established risk appetite, the risk practitioner’s best course of action is to escalate the risk decision to the project sponsor for review, meaning that the risk practitioner should report the risk acceptance and its rationale to the project sponsor, who is the person or group that provides the resources and support for the project, and is accountable for its success. The project sponsor should review the risk decision and determine whether it is aligned with the organization’s objectives and strategy, and whether it requires any further approval or action. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, p. 25-26

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. The most important consideration for effectively maintaining a risk register is to update it frequently, as the risk environment is dynamic and subject to change. By updating the risk register regularly, an organization can ensure that the risk information is current, accurate, and relevant, and that the risk responses are timely, appropriate, and effective. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

 The best course of action for a risk practitioner when a bank recently incorporated Blockchain technology with the potential to impact known risk within the organization is to analyze the risk and update the risk register as needed. Blockchain technology is a new and emerging technology that may introduce new risks or change the existing risks for the bank. Therefore, the risk practitioner should perform a risk analysis to identify, assess, and evaluate the risks associated with the Blockchain technology, and update the risk register accordingly. Determining whether risk responses are still adequate, analyzing and updating control assessments, and conducting testing of the controls are possible actions that may follow the risk analysis, but they are not the best initial course of action. 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 potential scenario that presents the greatest risk to an organization when implementing a new database technology is that data may not be recoverable due to system failures. Data recovery is the process of restoring or retrieving data that has been lost, corrupted, or damaged due to system failures, such as hardware malfunctions, software errors, power outages, or natural disasters. Data recovery is essential for the continuity and integrity of the organization’s operations and information, as data is one of the most valuable and critical assets of the organization. Data recovery is also important for the compliance and accountability of the organization, as data may be subject to legal or regulatory requirements, such as retention, backup, or audit. Data recovery may be challenging or impossible when implementing a new database technology, because the new technology may not be compatible or interoperable with the existing systems, applications, or backups, or because the new technology may not have adequate or tested recovery mechanisms or procedures. Data recovery may also be costly or time-consuming when implementing a new database technology, because the new technology may require additional or specialized resources, tools, or expertise, or because the new technology may involve large or complex data sets or structures. The other options are not as risky as data recovery, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the new database technology implementation. The organization may not have a sufficient number of skilled resources, application and data migration cost for backups may exceed budget, and the database system may not be scalable in the future are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the new database technology, but they do not directly affect the continuity and integrity of the organization’s operations and information. References = 2

The most important risk consideration when the global company’s business continuity plan (BCP) requires the transfer of its customer information to a cloud computing environment in the event of a disaster is that the cloud computing environment is shared with another company. A cloud computing environment is a service model that provides on-demand access to a shared pool of computing resources, such as servers, storage, networks, and applications. A shared cloud computing environment means that the same computing resources are used by multiple customers or tenants, and that the data and activities of one customer may affect or be affected by the data and activities of another customer. This may pose a significant risk to the security, privacy, and availability of the customer information, as it may be exposed, accessed, modified, or deleted by unauthorized or malicious parties. The other options are not as important as the cloud computing environment being shared with another company, as they are related to the differences, agreements, or cultures of the company or the country, not the environment or the platform of the customer information transfer. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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

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

 The most important key performance indicator (KPI) to monitor the effectiveness of disaster recovery processes is the percentage of IT systems meeting the recovery time objective (RTO) during the disaster recovery test. The RTO is the maximum acceptable time that a system or process can be unavailable after a disruption. The disaster recovery test is a simulation of a disaster scenario to evaluate the readiness and capability of the organization to restore its critical functions and systems. By measuring the percentage of IT systems meeting the RTO during the test, the organization can assess how well the disaster recovery processes meet the predefined objectives and standards. Percentage of IT systems recovered within the mean time to restore (MTTR), percentage of issues arising from the disaster recovery test resolved on time, and percentage of IT systems included in the disaster recovery test scope are other possible KPIs, but they are not as important as the percentage of IT systems meeting the RTO. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

Internal audit reports provide the most useful information to assess the magnitude of identified deficiencies in the IT control environment. Internal audit reports are independent and objective evaluations of the design and operating effectiveness of the IT controls, as well as the compliance with policies, standards, and regulations. Internal audit reports also provide recommendations for improvement and follow-up actions for the control deficiencies. Internal audit reports can help measure the impact and severity of the control deficiencies, and prioritize the remediation efforts. Peer benchmarks, business impact analysis (BIA) results, and threat analysis results are not as directly related to the assessment of the control deficiencies, although they may provide some contextual or comparative information. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.1, page 1-19.

The best way to increase the chances of a successful delivery of a new application and to assure the business management that IT has a plan in place for early identification of potential issues is to include business management on a weekly risk and issues report. A risk and issues report is a document that summarizes the current status, progress, and challenges of the IT project, as well as the actions and resources needed to address them. A risk and issues report helps to communicate and align the expectations and objectives of the IT and business stakeholders, and to facilitate timely and effective decision-making and problem-solving. A risk and issues report also helps to monitor and control the project scope, schedule, budget, and quality, and to ensure that the project delivers the desired value and benefits to the organization. The other options are not as effective as including business management on a weekly risk and issues report, although they may be part of the IT project management process or outcomes. Implementing a release and deployment plan, conducting comprehensive regression testing, and developing enterprise-wide key risk indicators (KRIs) are all activities that can help to ensure the quality and reliability of the new application, but they do not necessarily involve the business management or provide assurance for the early identification of potential issues. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 5-32.

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

The 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.

 The main purpose of selecting a risk response is to mitigate the residual risk to be within tolerance. Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying a risk response. Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk response is the process of selecting and implementing actions to address risk. The goal of risk response is to reduce the residual risk to a level that is acceptable to the organization and its stakeholders. The other options are not the main purpose of selecting a risk response, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

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

The acquisition phase of the system development life cycle (SDLC) is the phase where the organization decides to purchase a new IT system from an external vendor or develop it internally. During this phase, the identified risks will most likely lead to architecture and design trade-offs, as the organization will have to balance the cost, quality, functionality, security, and performance of the new IT system. The organization will have to evaluate the different options and alternatives available, and select the one that best meets the business needs and the risk appetite. The other phases of the SDLC are not as likely to involve architecture and design trade-offs, as they are more focused on implementing, testing, deploying, and maintaining the new IT system. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

 The control owner should be responsible for evaluating the residual risk after a compensating control has been implemented. A compensating control is a control that provides an alternative or additional measure of protection when the primary or preferred control is not feasible or effective. A residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response or mitigation has been applied. The control owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for designing, implementing, and monitoring the controls that enforce the policy. The control owner can assess the impact and effectiveness of the compensating control on the residual risk, and report the results and recommendations to the risk owner or the risk practitioner. The other options are not as responsible as the control owner, as they are related to the compliance, ownership, or management of the risk, not the evaluation of the control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

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

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

The best course of action to address the risk associated with data transfer if the relationship is terminated with the vendor is to ensure the language in the contract explicitly states who is accountable for each step of the data transfer process. This can help to avoid ambiguity, confusion, or disputes over the ownership, responsibility, and liability of the data and the data transfer process. Meeting with the business leaders, collecting requirements, and working with the information security officer are important activities, but they are not as effective as ensuring the contractual agreement is clear and enforceable. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

Risk appetite is the broad-based amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in its activities. Risk appetite reflects the level of risk that the organization is prepared to take to achieve its strategic goals, and provides guidance and boundaries for the risk management activities and decisions. The best way to balance the costs and benefits of managing IT risk is to prioritize and address risk in line with risk appetite, which means that the organization should identify, assess, treat, monitor, and communicate the risks that are within or exceed the risk appetite, and allocate the resources and efforts accordingly. By doing so, the organization can optimize its risk-return trade-off, align its risk exposure with its strategic objectives, and enhance its risk culture and performance. References = 5

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

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

 Performing a gap analysis is the best recommendation for a risk practitioner upon learning of an updated cybersecurity regulation that could impact the organization. A gap analysis can help identify the current state of compliance, the desired state of compliance, and the actions needed to achieve compliance. Conducting system testing, implementing compensating controls, and updating security policies are possible actions that may result from the gap analysis, but they are not the best initial recommendation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 1; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 143.

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

The most important concern when assigning multiple risk owners for an identified risk is that accountability may not be clearly defined. Accountability is the obligation of an individual or group to take responsibility for the risk and its associated actions and outcomes. If multiple risk owners are assigned for the same risk, there may be confusion, conflict, or overlap in their roles and responsibilities, and they may not be held accountable for the risk management performance. Risk ratings being inconsistently applied, different risk taxonomies being used, and mitigation efforts being duplicated are other possible concerns, but they are not as important as accountability not being clearly defined. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The best course of action for a risk practitioner when senior management is deciding whether to share confidential data with the organization’s business partners is to submit a report to senior management containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans. A risk practitioner is a professional who is responsible for identifying, assessing, and managing the risks that could affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A risk practitioner should provide senior management with the information and guidance they need to make informed and effective decisions regarding the sharing of confidential data. A risk practitioner should submit a report that outlines the possible risk scenarios, such as data loss, theft, or compromise, and their likelihood and impact. A risk practitioner should also suggest mitigation plans, such as encryption, access control, monitoring, or contractual agreements, that could reduce or transfer the risk. The other options are not as effective as submitting a report containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans, although they may be part of or derived from the report. Designing controls to encrypt the data to be shared, developing a project plan for classification of the data, and summarizing the data protection and privacy legislation are all activities or outcomes that could be included or referenced in the report, but they are not the best course of action for a risk practitioner. References = CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 2-23

Assigning a data owner would best facilitate the implementation of data classification requirements. A data owner is responsible for defining the classification of the data, ensuring that the data is properly labeled, and approving access requests. Implementing technical control over the assets, implementing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution, and scheduling periodic audits are important activities, but they are not as effective as assigning a data owner. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

Reporting risk assessment results to senior management is an essential part of risk communication, which is the process of sharing relevant and timely information about the risk exposure and risk management activities with the stakeholders. The most important benefit of reporting risk assessment results to senior management is to facilitate risk-aware decision making, which is the process of incorporating the risk information and analysis into the strategic and operational decisions of the organization. By reporting the risk assessment results, the risk practitioner can provide senior management with the insight and understanding of the current and potential risks, their likelihood and impact, their interrelationships and dependencies, and their alignment with the risk appetite and tolerance. This can help senior management 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 105.

The best way to ensure adequate resources will be allocated to manage identified risk is to assign risk ownership to appropriate roles. Risk ownership is the process of assigning the authority and responsibility to manage a specific risk or a group of related risks to a person or entity. Risk ownership helps to ensure adequate resources for managing risk, because it helps to define and clarify the roles and responsibilities of the risk owners, and to establish and enforce the expectations and standards for the risk owners. Risk ownership also helps to measure and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk owners, and to identify and address any issues or gaps in the risk management activities. The other options are not as effective as assigning risk ownership to appropriate roles, although they may be related to the risk management process. Prioritizing risk within each business unit, reviewing risk ranking methodology, and promoting an organizational culture of risk awareness are all activities that can help to support or improve the risk management process, but they do not necessarily ensure adequate resources for managing risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 2-11.

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

The 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.

The most reliable evidence of the effectiveness of security controls implemented for a web application is penetration testing. Penetration testing is a process that simulates an attack on the web application by exploiting its vulnerabilities, using the same tools and techniques as real attackers. Penetration testing helps to evaluate the effectiveness of security controls, because it helps to verify that the security controls can prevent, detect, or mitigate the attack, and to measure the impact and severity of the attack. Penetration testing also helps to identify and address any weaknesses or gaps in the security controls, and to provide recommendations and solutions for improving the security of the web application. The other options are not as reliable as penetration testing, although they may provide some evidence of the effectiveness of security controls. IT general controls audit, vulnerability assessment, and fault tree analysis are all examples of analytical or evaluative methods, which may help to assess or estimate the effectiveness of security controls, but they do not necessarily test or measure the effectiveness of security controls in a realistic scenario. References = 10

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

The result of postponing the assessment and treatment of several risk scenarios is that the risk associated with these new entries has been accepted. Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging the existence of a risk and deciding not to take any action to reduce its likelihood or impact. By postponing the assessment and treatment of the risk scenarios, the organization is implicitly accepting the risk and its consequences. Risk mitigation, deferral, and transfer are other possible risk response strategies, but they are not applicable in this case. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 9; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 137.

 The best evidence of an effective internal control environment is the independent audit results. Independent audit results are the outcomes or findings of an external or independent party that evaluates the design, implementation, and operation of the internal controls. Independent audit results can provide an objective, reliable, and consistent assessment of the internal control environment, and identify the strengths, weaknesses, gaps, or issues of the internal controls. Independent audit results can also provide assurance, recommendations, or improvement opportunities for the internal control environment. The other options are not as good as independent audit results, as they are related to the inputs, processes, or outputs of the internal control environment, not the evaluation or verification of the internal control environment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 69.

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

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

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

The most important objective from a cost perspective for considering aggregated risk responses in an organization is to address more than one risk response. Aggregated risk responses are risk responses that can affect multiple risks or objectives simultaneously. By addressing more than one risk response, the organization can achieve cost efficiency and effectiveness in risk management. Prioritizing risk response options, reducing likelihood, and reducing impact are other possible objectives, but they are not as important from a cost perspective as addressing more than one risk response. 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 way to enable a risk-based decision when considering the use of an emerging technology for data processing is to perform a gap analysis. A gap analysis is a technique that compares the current state and the desired state of a process, system, or capability, and identifies the gaps or differences between them. A gap analysis can help to evaluate the benefits, costs, risks, and opportunities of using an emerging technology for data processing, and to determine the feasibility, suitability, and readiness of adopting the emerging technology. The other options are not as helpful as a gap analysis, as they are related to the specific aspects or components of the data processing, not the overall assessment and comparison of the current and desired state of the data processing. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: IT Risk Identification Methods, page 19.

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

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

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner when process documentation is incomplete is the inability to identify the risk owner. The risk owner is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility to manage a specific risk or a group of related risks. The risk owner helps to identify, assess, and respond to the risks, and to monitor and report on the risk performance and improvement. The risk owner also helps to communicate and coordinate the risk management activities with the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. The risk owner is usually identified in the process documentation, which describes the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for each process. The inability to identify the risk owner is a major concern for the risk practitioner, because it may affect the accountability, transparency, and effectiveness of the risk management process, and may lead to confusion, conflicts, or gaps in the risk management activities. The other options are not as concerning as the inability to identify the risk owner, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the risk management process. Inability to allocate resources efficiently, inability to complete the risk register, and inability to identify process experts are all factors that could affect the quality and timeliness of the risk management process, but they do not necessarily affect the authority and responsibility of the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 2-11.

Business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that involves analyzing the potential consequences of an IT risk event on the organization’s critical business functions and processes. BIA can help to understand the severity and duration of the disruption, the financial and operational losses, the recovery time objectives, and the recovery point objectives. BIA can also help to prioritize the recovery activities and resources, as well as to determine the acceptable level of risk and the risk mitigation strategies. BIA is the most helpful tool to understand the consequences of an IT risk event, as it provides a comprehensive and quantitative assessment of the impact and the recovery requirements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.2, p. 206-207

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