CRISC Questions and Answers

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, threat impact analysis is the process of estimating and evaluating the potential effects of a threat event on the organization’s objectives, processes, resources, and risks. Threat impact analysis helps to quantify and qualify the severity and likelihood of the threat, and to identify the possible consequences and implications for the organization. Communicating the results of the threat impact analysis is the most effective way to improve stakeholders’ understanding of the effect of a potential threat, as it helps to inform and educate the stakeholders about the nature and magnitude of the threat, and to solicit their feedback and input for the risk response. Communicating the results of the threat impact analysis also helps to align the stakeholder expectations and preferences, and to facilitate risk-based decision making and action planning. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 208.

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

 The FIRST thing that should be done when a KRI has remained below its established trigger point for an extended period of time is to recommend a re-evaluation of the current threshold of the KRI, because it may indicate that the trigger point is set too high or too low, or that the KRI is not relevant or effective in measuring the risk exposure. A re-evaluation of the current threshold of the KRI may result in adjusting the trigger point, changing the KRI, or removing the KRI. The other options are not the first thing that should be done, because:

Option B: Notifying management that KRIs are being effectively managed is not the first thing that should be done, because it may not reflect the true risk status and performance. A KRI that remains below its trigger point for a long time may not be a valid or reliable indicator of the risk exposure, and it may not capture the changes or trends in the risk environment.

Option C: Updating the risk rating associated with the KRI in the risk register is not the first thing that should be done, because it may not be accurate or consistent. A risk rating is based on the likelihood and impact of the risk, and it should be derived from a comprehensive risk analysis, not just from a single KRI. A KRI that remains below its trigger point for a long time may not reflect the actual likelihood and impact of the risk, and it may not be aligned with the other risk indicators and assessments.

Option D: Updating the risk tolerance and risk appetite to better align to the KRI is not the first thing that should be done, because it may not be appropriate or feasible. Risk tolerance and risk appetite are the acceptable level of risk exposure and variation that the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, and they are determined by the executive management and the board of directors, based on the enterprise’s strategy and goals. A KRI that remains below its trigger point for a long time may not represent the desired or optimal level of risk exposure and variation, and it may not be aligned with the enterprise’s strategy and goals. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 121.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the application owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the achievement of the application objectives and the management of the associated risks. The application owner is responsible for defining the level of resiliency needed for the application, which is the ability of the application to recover from disruptions and continue to operate. The application owner is also responsible for accepting or rejecting the residual risks after the implementation of the disaster recovery controls, which are the measures to restore the application functionality and data in the event of a disaster. Therefore, the risk owner in this scenario is the application owner, as they are the ones who will be affected by the potential impact of the disaster on the application and its objectives. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 194.

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

When establishing leading indicators for the information security incident response process, it is most important to consider the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the service level agreement (SLA). A leading indicator is a metric that can predict or influence the future performance or outcome of a process or activity. A leading indicator for the information security incident response process should measure how well the process is achieving its objectives, such as minimizing the impact of incidents, restoring normal operations as quickly as possible, and preventing recurrence of incidents. The percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is a leading indicator that reflects the efficiency and effectiveness of the information security incident response process. It shows how well the process is meeting the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders, such as the business units, customers, and regulators. It also shows how well the process is managing the resources, such as time, budget, and personnel, that are allocated for incident response. A high percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA indicates that the information security incident response process is performing well and delivering value to the organization. A low percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA indicates that the information security incident response process is facing challenges and needs improvement. The percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA can also help identify the root causes of incidents, the gaps in the process, and the areas for improvement. For example, if the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is low, it may indicate that the process has issues with the following aspects: - Incident detection and reporting: The process may not have adequate tools, techniques, or procedures to detect and report incidents in a timely and accurate manner. - Incident prioritization and classification: The process may not have clear and consistent criteria to prioritize and classify incidents based on their severity, impact, and urgency. - Incident analysis and investigation: The process may not have sufficient skills, knowledge, or evidence to analyze and investigate the incidents and determine their root causes, scope, and consequences. - Incident containment and eradication: The process may not have effective methods or measures to contain and eradicate the incidents and prevent them from spreading or escalating. - Incident recovery and restoration: The process may not have reliable backup and recovery plans or systems to restore the normal operations and functionality of the affected systems or services. - Incident communication and escalation: The process may not have proper communication and escalation channels or protocols to inform and involve the relevant stakeholders, such as the management, the users, the vendors, or the authorities. - Incident documentation and closure: The process may not have adequate documentation and closure procedures to record and report the incidents and their resolution. - Incident review and improvement: The process may not have regular review and improvement activities to evaluate and enhance the process and its performance. Therefore, the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is the most important leading indicator for the information security incident response process, as it can provide valuable insights and feedback for the process and its improvement. References = Information Security Incident Response | Process Street1, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Security Operations and Incident Response2, 7 Incident Response Metrics and How to Use Them3

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.

The risk practitioner’s primary role during the change is to manage the third-party risk, as this involves identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks associated with outsourcing the business operations for the emerging technology. The risk practitioner should ensure that the third-party provider has the necessary capabilities, security, and compliance to deliver the expected outcomes and meet the contractual obligations. The risk practitioner should also monitor the performance and service levels of the third-party provider and report any issues or incidents. Developing risk scenarios, managing the threat landscape, and updating risk appetite are all important activities for the risk practitioner, but they are not the primary role during the change. Developing risk scenarios is a technique for identifying and analyzing potential risk events and their impacts. Managing the threat landscape is a process of identifying and responding to the external and internal threats that may affect the organization. Updating risk appetite is a decision that reflects the organization’s willingness to accept or avoid risk in pursuit of its objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 48.

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

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

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

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

Balanced Scorecard Basics - Balanced Scorecard Institute

Using the Balanced Scorecard to Measure and Manage IT Risk

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Overview

Internal Audit Planning: The Basics - The IIA

[Control Self-Assessment - ISACA]

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

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

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

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

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

Reviewing KRIs is the most helpful way to determine the effectiveness of an organization’s IT risk mitigation efforts. This means that the organization monitors and evaluates the actual results and outcomes of the risk responses, compares them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identifies any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and reports them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.

The other options are not the most helpful ways to determine the effectiveness of an organization’s IT risk mitigation efforts. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

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

 A policy exception is a deviation from the established policies, standards, or procedures of the enterprise, such as the information security policy. A policy exception may be granted by the management when there is a valid business reason or justification for the deviation, and when the risk associated with the deviation is acceptable or mitigated. The best course of action when a business unit has decided to accept the risk of implementing an off-the-shelf, commercial software package that uses weak password controls is to obtain management approval for policy exception. This will ensure that the business unit is aware of the implications and consequences of the policy exception, and that the management agrees with the risk acceptance and approves the policy exception. The other options are not the best course of action, as they involve different risk response strategies or outcomes:

Develop an improved password software routine means that the business unit modifies or enhances the password controls of the software package, such as by increasing the password length, complexity, or expiration. This may not be a feasible or effective way to address the risk of weak password controls, as it may violate the terms and conditions of the software vendor, or may not be compatible or consistent with the software package.

Select another application with strong password controls means that the business unit replaces the software package with another application that has better password controls, such as by using encryption, authentication, or authorization. This may not be a desirable or efficient way to address the risk of weak password controls, as it may incur additional costs, delays, or complexities, or may not meet the business requirements or expectations of the business unit.

Continue the implementation with no changes means that the business unit proceeds with the software package without any modifications or improvements to the password controls, or without any approval or documentation of the policy exception. This may not be a responsible or ethical way to address the risk of weak password controls, as it may expose the enterprise to legal, financial, or reputational risks, or may compromise the security or compliance of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1.1, pp. 121-122.

The business owner should own the risk if the ERP and payroll system fail to operate as expected, because the business owner is ultimately responsible for the business processes and objectives that depend on the systems. The other options are not the risk owners, because:

Option B: The ERP administrator is responsible for the technical aspects of the ERP system, but not the payroll system or the business outcomes.

Option C: The project steering committee is responsible for overseeing the project of replacing the ERP system, but not the ongoing operation and maintenance of the systems or the business risks.

Option D: The IT project manager is responsible for managing the project of replacing the ERP system, but not the payroll system or the business risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 90.

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 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

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

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

The first thing that the risk practitioner should do upon learning that a new third-party system on the corporate network has introduced vulnerabilities that could compromise corporate IT systems is to notify information security management. This will help to escalate the issue to the appropriate authority and responsibility level, and to initiate the incident response process. Information security management can also coordinate with the third party, the IT department, and other stakeholders to assess the impact and severity of the vulnerabilities, and to implement the necessary actions to contain, eradicate, and recover from the incident. Confirming the vulnerabilities with the third party, identifying procedures to mitigate the vulnerabilities, and requesting IT to remove the system from the network are not the first things that the risk practitioner should do, as they may not address the urgency and priority of the issue, and may not involve the relevant decision makers and responders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.2, page 1931

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 659.

Residual risk is the amount of risk that remains after the implementation of risk mitigation controls. If the fraud detection controls in an online payment system do not perform as expected, the residual risk will most likely change as a result, because the controls will not be able to reduce the impact or likelihood of the fraud risk as intended. The residual risk may increase or decrease depending on the performance of the controls, and the risk practitioner may need to adjust the risk response strategy accordingly. The other options are not as likely to change as the residual risk, because they are not directly affected by the performance of the controls, but rather depend on other factors, such as the source of the risk, the organization’s objectives, or the external environment, as explained below:

A. Impact is the extent or magnitude of the harm or loss caused by a risk. The impact of the fraud risk in an online payment system may not change as a result of the controls’ performance, because the impact is determined by the potential consequences of the fraud, such as financial losses, reputational damage, or legal liabilities, which are independent of the controls.

C. Inherent risk is the amount of risk that exists before the implementation of any risk mitigation controls. The inherent risk of the fraud risk in an online payment system may not change as a result of the controls’ performance, because the inherent risk is determined by the nature and characteristics of the risk, such as the type, source, or frequency of the fraud, which are independent of the controls.

D. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. The risk appetite of the organization may not change as a result of the controls’ performance, because the risk appetite is determined by the organization’s strategy, culture, and values, which are independent of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 32. What is Residual Risk? Definition, Examples, and More, Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com, Residual Risk: What It Is and How to Manage It

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.

 Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe potential events or actions that could affect the achievement of enterprise objectives. The design of relevant risk scenarios should consider the following factors: the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise, the key risk indicators and risk drivers, the potential impact and likelihood of the scenarios, and the alignment with the risk management capabilities of the enterprise. The scenarios should be realistic, plausible, and consistent with the enterprise’s context and objectives. The scenarios should also be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect changes in the internal and external environment. The alignment with the risk management capabilities is the most critical factor, as it ensures that the scenarios are relevant for the decision making and risk response processes of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3.2, pp. 67-69.

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses. An effective risk management program should aim to reduce the residual risk to a level that is acceptable by the enterprise, in alignment with its risk appetite and tolerance. The reduction of residual risk indicates that the risk responses are appropriate and effective, and that the enterprise is achieving its objectives while managing its risks. The other options are not necessarily indicative of an effective risk management program, as they may depend on other factors, such as the reporting culture, the audit scope and methodology, and the nature and source of the inherent risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.3.1, pp. 24-25.

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

Data confidentiality risk is the risk that the data may be accessed, disclosed, or modified by unauthorized parties, resulting in breaches of privacy, trust, or compliance1. Platform as a Service (PaaS) is a cloud computing model that provides a platform for developing, testing, and deploying applications, without requiring the users to manage the underlying infrastructure2. An internally developed payroll application is an application that is created and maintained by the organization itself, rather than by a third-party vendor, and that is used to process and manage the payroll data of the organization’s employees3. The owner of the data confidentiality risk is the person or entity that has the authority and accountability for the data and its protection, and that is responsible for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risk. The owner of the data confidentiality risk related to an internally developed payroll application that leverages PaaS infrastructure from the cloud is the human resources head, as they are the person who oversees the human resources function and the payroll data of the organization. The human resources head has the best understanding of the sensitivity, value, and usage of the payroll data, and the potential impacts and implications of a data confidentiality breach. The human resources head also has the ability and responsibility to define and implement the policies, procedures, and controls that are necessary to protect the payroll data, and to monitor and report on the performance and compliance of the data confidentiality risk management. The IT infrastructure head, the supplier management head, and the application development head are not the best choices for owning the data confidentiality risk related to an internally developed payroll application that leverages PaaS infrastructure from the cloud, as they do not have the same level of authority and accountability as the human resources head. The IT infrastructure head is the person who oversees the IT infrastructure function and the PaaS infrastructure of the organization. The IT infrastructure head may be involved in providing input and feedback to the human resources head on the data confidentiality risk management, especially those related to the PaaS infrastructure, but they do not have the final say or the overall responsibility for the payroll data and its protection. The supplier management head is the person who oversees the supplier management function and the relationship with the cloud service provider that provides the PaaS infrastructure. The supplier management head may be involved in negotiating and enforcing the service level agreements and the security requirements with the cloud service provider, but they do not have the authority or the expertise to manage the data confidentiality risk of the payroll data. The application development head is the person who oversees the application development function and the development, testing, and deployment of the payroll application. The application development head may be involved in designing and implementing the security features and controls of the payroll application, but they do not have the perspective or the influence to manage the data confidentiality risk of the payroll data. References = 3: Payroll Software: What Is It & How Does It Work? | QuickBooks2: What is Platform as a Service (PaaS)? | IBM1: Data Confidentiality: Identifying and Protecting Assets Against Data … : [Risk Ownership - Risk Management] : [Human Resources and Payroll Security Policy - University of …] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Concepts, pp. 17-19.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

A risk assessment with stakeholders is the best course of action because it will help the risk practitioner to evaluate the value and risk of the third-party blockchain integration platform in relation to the organization’s objectives, risk appetite, and risk tolerance. A risk assessment will also help to identify and prioritize the risks and opportunities associated with the platform, and to develop appropriate risk responses and controls.

References: The answer is based on the following sources:

•CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, pages 75-761

•CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 12 Month Subscription, Question ID: QID-10012

 Configuration updates are changes made to the settings, parameters, or components of an IT system or network. Configuration updates can affect the functionality, performance, security, and reliability of the system or network. Therefore, configuration updates should follow formal change control, which is a process that ensures that changes are authorized, documented, tested, and implemented in a controlled manner. Formal change control can help prevent errors, conflicts, disruptions, and vulnerabilities that may arise from configuration updates. Configuration updates that do not follow formal change control should be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner when determining the effectiveness of IT controls, as they can introduce new risks or compromise existing controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.5: Control Monitoring and Reporting, p. 161-162.

 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 factor to understand when developing KRIs is stakeholder requirements, which are the needs and expectations of the persons or entities that have an interest or influence in the organization’s risk management2. By understanding stakeholder requirements, the organization can ensure that the KRIs are aligned with the organization’s strategy, vision, and mission, and that they reflect the current and emerging risks and their potential consequences. Understanding stakeholder requirements can also help to establish and communicate the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders, and to enforce the accountability and performance of the risk management. KRI thresholds, integrity of the source data, and control environment are not the most important factors to understand when developing KRIs, as they do not provide the same level of insight and relevance as stakeholder requirements. KRI thresholds are the values or ranges that indicate the level of risk exposure and the need for action or escalation3. KRI thresholds can help to measure and monitor the performance and compliance of the risk management, but they do not ensure that the KRIs are appropriate and accurate for the organization’s risk profile. Integrity of the source data is the quality and reliability of the data that are used to support or enable the development of KRIs4. Integrity of the source data can enhance the validity and consistency of the KRIs, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are comprehensive and compatible with the organization’s risk environment. Control environment is the set of policies, processes, and systems that provide the foundation and structure for the risk management5. Control environment can improve the security and efficiency of the risk management, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are relevant and realistic for the organization’s risk objectives and strategies. References = 1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture2: Stakeholder Requirements - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics3: Risk Threshold: Definition, Meaning & Example - PM Study Circle4: Data Integrity - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics5: Control Environment - 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.] : [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.]

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, the first step in prioritizing risk response is to address the high risk factors that have efficient and effective solutions. This means that management should focus on the risks that have the most impact on the organization’s objectives and can be mitigated with the least amount of resources and effort. This approach helps to optimize the risk response process and achieve the best results in terms of risk reduction and value creation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, Page 223.

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

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

The organization’s information security manager is responsible for IT security controls that are outsourced to an external service provider. The information security manager is accountable for ensuring that the security policies and standards of the organization are followed by the service provider, and that the security objectives and requirements are met. The information security manager is also responsible for monitoring and evaluating the security performance and compliance of the service provider, and for managing the security risks and incidents that may arise from the outsourcing arrangement. The organization’s risk function, the service provider’s IT management, and the service provider’s information security manager are not responsible for IT security controls that are outsourced, as they have different roles and responsibilities in the outsourcing process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.2, page 2461

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 651.

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, 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.

According to the LDR514: Security Strategic Planning, Policy, and Leadership Course, after mapping generic risk scenarios to organizational security policies, the next course of action should be to validate the risk scenarios for business applicability. This is because generic risk scenarios are not specific to the organization’s context, objectives, and environment, and they may not capture the unique threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts that the organization faces. Therefore, validating the risk scenarios for business applicability will help to ensure that the risk scenarios are relevant, realistic, and consistent with the organization’s security policies. Validating the risk scenarios will also help to identify any gaps, overlaps, or conflicts between the risk scenarios and the security policies, and to resolve them accordingly. References = LDR514: Security Strategic Planning, Policy, and Leadership Course, Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative

Automated data indicating that risk has been reduced provides the most tenable evidence that a business process control is effective, because it shows the actual impact and outcome of the control on the risk level. A demonstration that the control is operating as designed, a successful walk-through of the associated risk assessment, and a management attestation that the control is operating effectively are not the most tenable evidence, because they are based on subjective judgments, assumptions, or expectations, not on objective facts or results. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

A risk management program is a set of processes, policies, and tools that enable an enterprise to identify, analyze, evaluate, treat, monitor, and communicate its risks. The maturity level of a risk management program indicates how well the program is integrated, standardized, and aligned with the enterprise’s objectives, culture, and values. The best indication that an organization’s risk management program has not reached the desired maturity level is large fluctuations in risk ratings between assessments. Risk ratings are the measures of the impact and likelihood of the risks, and they should be consistent and comparable across the enterprise and over time. Large fluctuations in risk ratings between assessments suggest that the risk management program is not stable, reliable, or effective, and that the risk identification and analysis methods are not robust, accurate, or transparent. The other options are not as indicative of the maturity level of the risk management program, as they involve different aspects or outcomes of the risk management program:

Significant increases in risk mitigation budgets means that the enterprise is spending more resources on implementing risk responses, such as controls, policies, or procedures. This may indicate that the enterprise is facing more or higher risks, or that the risk responses are more costly or complex, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the enterprise’s risk appetite, tolerance, and strategy.

A steady increase in the time to recover from incidents means that the enterprise is taking longer to restore its normal operations after a disruption or a loss. This may indicate that the enterprise is not prepared or resilient enough to deal with the incidents, or that the incidents are more frequent or severe, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the nature and source of the incidents, or the availability and effectiveness of the recovery plans.

A large number of control exceptions means that the enterprise is deviating from the established controls, policies, or procedures, either intentionally or unintentionally. This may indicate that the enterprise is not complying with the risk management program, or that the controls are not adequate or appropriate for the enterprise’s needs, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the reasons and justifications for the exceptions, or the approval and monitoring processes for the exceptions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.3.1, pp. 14-15.

 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 service level agreement (SLA) is a contract between a SaaS vendor and a customer that defines the quality and availability of the SaaS service, as well as the responsibilities and obligations of both parties. An SLA is most important to include in a SaaS vendor agreement because it sets the expectations and standards for the SaaS service, provides a mechanism for measuring and monitoring the service performance, and establishes the remedies and penalties for service failures or breaches. An SLA can also help to mitigate the risks and liabilities associated with SaaS delivery, such as data security, privacy, compliance, and disaster recovery. The other options are not the most important to include in a SaaS vendor agreement, although they may be beneficial or desirable depending on the context and nature of the SaaS service. An annual contract review is a process of evaluating and revising the SaaS vendor agreement to reflect the changing needs and circumstances of the customer and the vendor, but it is not a mandatory or essential element of the agreement. A requirement to adopt an established risk management framework is a way of ensuring that the SaaS vendor follows the best practices and standards for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks related to the SaaS service, but it is not a specific or measurable term of the agreement. A requirement to provide an independent audit report is a way of verifying and validating the SaaS vendor’s compliance with the SLA and other contractual obligations, but it is not a direct or primary component of the agreement. References = SaaS Agreements: Key Contractual Provisions, SaaS Agreement: Everything You Need to Know, Essential checklist for SaaS agreement negotiations, Key Clauses To Understand and Evaluate in SaaS Contracts, SaaS Reseller Agreement: Everything You Need to Know

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.

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

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

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

A vendor risk assessment is a process of evaluating and managing the risks associated with outsourcing IT services or functions to a third-party provider, such as a cloud service provider.

One of the most important documents to request from a cloud service provider during a vendor risk assessment is an independent audit report. This is a report that provides an objective and reliable assurance on the quality, security, and performance of the cloud service provider’s operations, processes, and controls, based on the standards and criteria established by an independent auditor or a recognized authority, such as ISACA, ISO, NIST, etc.

An independent audit report helps to verify the compliance and effectiveness of the cloud service provider’s risk management practices, identify any gaps or issues that may affect the service delivery or security, and recommend improvements or corrective actions.

The other options are not the most important documents to request from a cloud service provider during a vendor risk assessment. They are either secondary or not essential for vendor risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 22

Information Technology & Security, page 16

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 14

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

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

The first course of action for the risk practitioner when an organization has decided to expand into new product areas is to identify any new business objectives with stakeholders. Business objectives are the specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that the organization aims to accomplish through its products and services. Stakeholders are the parties who have an interest or influence in the organization and its products and services, such as customers, employees, shareholders, suppliers, regulators, or competitors. Identifying any new business objectives with stakeholders is the first course of action, because it helps to understand and define the purpose, scope, and criteria of the new product areas, and to align them with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy. Identifying any new business objectives with stakeholders also helps to establish the expectations, needs, and requirements of the stakeholders, and to ensure their engagement and support for the new product areas. Identifying any new business objectives with stakeholders is the basis for the subsequent risk management activities, such as identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and responding to the risks associated with the new product areas. The other options are not the first course of action, although they may be related or subsequent steps in the risk management process. Presenting a business case for new controls to stakeholders is a part of the risk response process, which involves selecting and executing the appropriate actions to reduce, avoid, share, or exploit the risks associated with the new product areas. Presenting a business case for new controls to stakeholders can help to justify and communicate the value and impact of the new controls, and to obtain the approval and resources for implementing them. However, this is not the first course of action, as it depends on the identification and prioritization of the business objectives and the risks. Revising the organization’s risk and control policy is a part of the risk governance process, which involves defining and updating the rules and guidelines for managing the risks and the controls associated with the new product areas. Revising the organization’s risk and control policy can help to ensure the consistency and effectiveness of the risk management process, and to comply with the relevant laws and regulations. However, this is not the first course of action, as it follows the identification and assessment of the business objectives and the risks. Reviewing existing risk scenarios with stakeholders is a part of the risk monitoring and review process, which involves evaluating and improving the performance and outcomes of the risk management process for the new product areas. Reviewing existing risk scenarios with stakeholders can help to identify and address any changes or issues in the risk levels or the risk responses, and to provide feedback and learning for the risk management process. However, this is not the first course of action, as it requires the identification and analysis of the business objectives and the risks. References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA, How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA, The Role of Executive Management in ERM - Corporate Compliance Insights

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.

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

A risk practitioner should evaluate the relevance of the evolving threats to the organization’s industry, as this is the best course of action to understand the current and future risk landscape, and to align the risk management strategy accordingly. By evaluating the relevance of the evolving threats, the risk practitioner can determine the impact and likelihood of the threats affecting the organization’s objectives, assets, and processes, and prioritize the most critical and urgent risks. The risk practitioner can also identify the gaps and weaknesses in the existing controls, and recommend appropriate risk response measures to mitigate the threats. The other options are not as good as evaluating the relevance of the evolving threats, because they do not address the root cause of the rising security incidents, but rather focus on the symptoms or consequences of the incidents. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 85.

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

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

Classifying information assets is a process of identifying and categorizing the data and information resources that are owned, controlled, or used by an organization, based on their value, sensitivity, and criticality.

Classifying information assets helps to determine the appropriate level of control that is needed to protect them from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction. Control level refers to the degree of protection or assurance that a control provides against a risk.

Classifying information assets also helps to communicate risk to senior management, assign risk ownership, and facilitate internal audit. These are other benefits of risk management that are not directly related to determining the appropriate level of control.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 11

Information Technology & Security, page 5

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 3

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.

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

The most important factor for a risk practitioner to consider when determining the control requirements for data privacy arising from emerging technologies is the laws and regulations that apply to the organization and the technologies. Laws and regulations are the legal and ethical obligations that the organization must comply with when collecting, processing, storing, and sharing personal data. Laws and regulations can vary depending on the jurisdiction, sector, and type of data involved, and they can impose different requirements and restrictions on the use of emerging technologies that may affect data privacy. For example, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the United States, and the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) in Singapore are some of the laws and regulations that govern data privacy and protection in different regions and contexts123. A risk practitioner should consider the laws and regulations when determining the control requirements for data privacy arising from emerging technologies, because they can help to ensure that the organization respects the rights and interests of the data subjects, avoids legal and reputational risks, and maintains trust and accountability. The other options are not the most important factor, although they may be relevant or influential to the control requirements for data privacy arising from emerging technologies. Internal audit recommendations are the suggestions and feedback from the internal audit function, which evaluates and improves the effectiveness of the governance, risk management, and control systems of the organization, but they do not supersede or replace the laws and regulations. Policies and procedures are the rules and guidelines that define how the organization operates and conducts its activities, but they should be aligned and consistent with the laws and regulations. Standards and frameworks are the best practices and benchmarks that are adopted by the organization to guide and support its processes and performance, but they should be compatible and compliant with the laws and regulations. References = Emerging privacy-enhancing technologies: Current regulatory and policy approaches | en | OECD, Data and Cybersecurity: 2023 Regulatory Challenges - KPMG, Ethical Dilemmas and Privacy Issues in Emerging Technologies: A … - MDPI

When updating a risk register with the results of an IT risk assessment, the risk practitioner should log the known risk scenarios, because they are the risk scenarios that have been identified and assessed in the IT risk assessment process. The risk register should document and track the known risk scenarios, their characteristics, their status, and their responses. The other options are not the ones that should be logged, because:

Option A: High impact scenarios are the risk scenarios that have a high potential impact on the business objectives and processes, but they are not the only ones that should be logged. The risk register should include all the known risk scenarios, regardless of their impact level.

Option B: High likelihood scenarios are the risk scenarios that have a high probability of occurrence, but they are not the only ones that should be logged. The risk register should include all the known risk scenarios, regardless of their likelihood level.

Option C: Treated risk scenarios are the risk scenarios that have been addressed by the risk response actions, but they are not the only ones that should be logged. The risk register should include all the known risk scenarios, regardless of their treatment status. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 108.

 Involving business management in evaluating and managing risk is beneficial, as it enables management to have a comprehensive and holistic view of the risk environment and its impact on the organization’s objectives and strategy. By participating in the risk management process, management can make better-informed business decisions, as they can consider the risk factors and implications of their choices, and align their decisions with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Involving business management in evaluating and managing risk can also enhance the risk culture and governance of the organization, and foster a proactive and collaborative approach to risk management. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 253. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 253. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

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

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

The most significant risk to an organization when updating the incident response plan is the undefined assignment of responsibility. An incident response plan is a document that defines the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for responding to an incident that could disrupt the normal operations of the organization, or compromise its assets, reputation, or compliance. An incident response plan should clearly assign the responsibility for each task and activity involved in the incident response process, such as detection, containment, analysis, eradication, recovery, and reporting. Undefined assignment of responsibility could lead to confusion, duplication, conflict, or omission among the stakeholders, and impair the effectiveness and efficiency of the incident response process. Undefined assignment of responsibility could also increase the risk of escalation, recurrence, or impact of the incident, and affect the accountability and performance of the organization. Obsolete response documentation, increased stakeholder turnover, and failure to audit third-party providers are also risks, but they are not as significant as undefined assignment of responsibility, as they do not directly affect the execution and outcome of the incident response process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 130.

An external audit is the most reliable input to evaluate residual risk in the vendor’s control environment, as it provides an independent and objective assessment of the vendor’s financial systems and processes. An external audit is conducted by a third party, such as a certified public accountant (CPA) or a professional auditing firm, that follows the generally accepted auditing standards (GAAS) and the generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). An external audit can help to verify the accuracy and completeness of the vendor’s financial statements, identify any material misstatements or errors, and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the vendor’s internal controls. An external audit can also provide assurance and confidence to the organization and other stakeholders that the vendor is complying with the relevant laws, regulations, and contractual obligations.

The other options are not the most reliable inputs to evaluate residual risk in the vendor’s control environment. An internal audit is conducted by the vendor itself, which may introduce bias or conflict of interest. An internal audit may also have a different scope, methodology, or quality than an external audit. A vendor performance scorecard is completed by the organization, which may not have the sufficient access, expertise, or authority to assess the vendor’s control environment. A vendor performance scorecard may also focus more on the service level agreement (SLA) compliance, rather than the financial systems and processes. A regulatory examination is conducted by a regulator, such as a government agency or a standard-setting body, which may have a different purpose, criteria, or perspective than the organization. A regulatory examination may also have a limited scope, frequency, or transparency. References = Guide to Vendor Risk Assessment | Smartsheet, Understanding Inherent Vs. Residual Risk Assessments - Resolver, Assessing Internal Controls over Compliance - HCCA Official Site

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

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are most useful during the monitoring phase of the risk management process, as they provide timely and relevant information on the current and future risk status and performance. KRIs are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the effectiveness of risk response strategies, and they have predefined thresholds that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable risk status. By monitoring the KRIs, the risk practitioner can identify and report any changes or deviations in the risk level, and take appropriate actions to manage the risk. KRIs are not most useful during the analysis, identification, or response selection phases, as they do not help to assess the likelihood or impact of the risk, to find the sources or causes of the risk, or to evaluate or choose the optimal risk response option. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 222.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Providing actionable recommendations and solutions to address the identified risks

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

References =

The Importance of Integrating Risk Management with Strategy

Four steps for managing risk at the CEO level

5 Key Principles of Successful Risk Management

Controls should be incorporated into system specifications in the design phase of the system development life cycle (SDLC), because this is the phase where the system requirements are translated into detailed specifications and architectures that define how the system will be built and operated. Incorporating controls in the design phase ensures that the system is secure, reliable, and compliant from the start, and reduces the cost and complexity of implementing controls later in the SDLC. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not the phases where controls are incorporated into system specifications. The implementation phase is the phase where the system is installed, configured, and tested. The development phase is the phase where the system is coded, integrated, and tested. The feasibility phase is the phase where the system concept and scope are defined and evaluated. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

 Information security policies are the foundation of an organization’s security program, as they define the objectives, roles, responsibilities, and standards for protecting the information assets and systems. However, information security policies are not static, and they need to be reviewed and updated regularly to reflect the changes in the organization’s environment, risk profile, and compliance requirements. Therefore, the best course of action when conducting an organization-wide risk assessment is to review the policies against current needs to determine adequacy. This means comparing the policies with the current threats, vulnerabilities, controls, and best practices, and identifying any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. The other options are not the best course of action, as they do not consider the current needs of the organization. Reviewing and updating the policies to align with industry standards may not be sufficient, as the organization may have specific or unique needs that are not covered by the standards. Determining that the policies should be updated annually may not be realistic, as the frequency of updates may depend on the nature and complexity of the policies and the organization. Reporting that the policies are adequate and do not need to be updated frequently may not be accurate, as the policies may be outdated or ineffective, and may expose the organization to unnecessary risks. References = Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA, Does Your Organization Need a Security Risk Assessment? - ISACA, SP 800-39, Managing Information Security Risk: Organization, Mission …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A 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

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

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

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

Why did the application code require rework?

What were the errors or defects in the application code?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 189

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Conducting periodic reviews of authorizations granted helps to mitigate risks associated with excessive access by authorized users. This practice ensures that users have only the necessary permissions required to perform their roles and that any outdated or unnecessary access rights are removed promptly. Here’s a detailed explanation:

Periodic Reviews of Authorizations Granted:

Regular Audits: Regularly scheduled reviews or audits help identify any discrepancies in user access levels. These audits ensure that users' access rights align with their current roles and responsibilities within the organization.

Detection of Excessive Privileges: During these reviews, any excessive or unnecessary access privileges that have been granted can be identified and revoked. This reduces the risk of unauthorized activities, either intentional or accidental, by users who have more access than required.

Compliance with Policies: Ensuring that user access rights are reviewed periodically aligns with best practices and regulatory requirements, supporting the overall governance framework of the organization.

Comparison with Other Options:

Revoking Access for Users Changing Roles: While revoking access for users changing roles is crucial, it is a reactive measure that only applies when roles change. Periodic reviews are proactive and continuous.

Monitoring User Activity Using Security Logs: Monitoring security logs is essential for detecting and responding to suspicious activities but does not prevent the initial granting of excessive access.

Granting Access Based on Least Privilege: Least privilege is a fundamental principle, but it needs to be continuously enforced and validated through periodic reviews to be effective.

Best Practices:

Automation: Implementing automated tools for access reviews can streamline the process and reduce human errors.

Documentation: Maintaining detailed records of the reviews and any changes made helps in compliance and provides an audit trail.

Segregation of Duties: Ensuring that the review process itself is subject to segregation of duties, preventing conflicts of interest and ensuring objectivity.

CRISC Review Manual: Discusses the importance of periodic reviews in ensuring the effectiveness of access controls and maintaining a secure environment.

ISACA Standards and Guidelines: Emphasize the need for continuous monitoring and review of user access to mitigate risks associated with excessive permissions.

References:

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the primary benefit of selecting an appropriate set of key risk indicators (KRIs) is that they provide a warning of emerging high-risk conditions. KRIs are metrics that monitor changes in the level of risk exposure and contribute to the early warning signs that enable organizations to report risks, prevent crises, and mitigate them in time. KRIs help risk managers to identify potential threats, assess their impact and likelihood, and take proactive measures to reduce the risk or seize the opportunity12

1: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Study Guide, 4th Edition, page 33 2: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Handbook, 1st Edition, page 25

The observation from a third-party service provider review that would be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner is that the service level agreements (SLAs) have not been met over the last quarter, as it indicates a significant performance issue or breach that may affect the quality, functionality, or security of the outsourced services, and may require a remediation or escalation action. The other options are not the greatest concerns, as they may not indicate a performance issue or breach, but rather a contractual, personnel, or financial issue, respectively, that may not affect the outsourced services directly or significantly. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

 A risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and status. A risk register can help manage and communicate risks throughout the risk management process. A risk register should be updated regularly to reflect the current state of risks and their responses. Due to a change in business processes, an identified risk scenario may no longer require mitigation, as the risk level may have decreased or the risk may have been eliminated. However, the risk should remain in the risk register, as the most important reason is to monitor for potential changes to the risk scenario. This means keeping track of the internal and external factors that may affect the risk scenario, such as new threats, vulnerabilities, opportunities, or controls. Monitoring for potential changes to the risk scenario can help identify and respond to any emerging or reoccurring risks, and ensure that the risk register is accurate and complete. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: Risk Register, p. 41-43.

 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 important information to be communicated during security awareness training is management’s expectations. This will help to establish the security culture and behavior of the enterprise, and to align the staff’s actions with the enterprise’s objectives, policies, and standards. Management’s expectations also provide the basis for measuring and evaluating the effectiveness of the security awareness program. Corporate risk profile, recent security incidents, and the current risk management capability are also important information to be communicated during security awareness training, but they are not as important as management’s expectations. 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 642.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 9

Information Technology & Security, page 3

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 1

The best 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.

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 PRIMARY basis for selecting a security control is the ability to mitigate risk, because it is the measure of how well the control can prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk, and how effectively the control can achieve the desired level of security and protection for the system and the data. The ability to mitigate risk is the most important criterion for selecting a security control, as it directly relates to the purpose and value of the control. The other options are not the primary basis, because:

Option A: To achieve the desired level of maturity is a goal of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The desired level of maturity is the state or condition of the security control that reflects its quality, consistency, and reliability, and it should be aligned with the organization’s security objectives and standards. The desired level of maturity is a result of selecting a security control, not a reason for selecting it.

Option B: The materiality of the risk is a factor of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The materiality of the risk is the degree or extent of the risk that affects the organization’s performance, reputation, and value, and it should be considered when selecting a security control, but it is not the only or the most important factor. The materiality of the risk is an input to selecting a security control, not an output of selecting it.

Option D: The cost of the control is a constraint of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The cost of the control is the amount of resources and expenditure that are required to implement and maintain the control, and it should be balanced with the benefit and effectiveness of the control, but it is not the only or the most important constraint. The cost of the control is a limitation of selecting a security control, not a motivation for selecting it. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 211.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

A post-implementation RCSA is a process of verifying whether the risk treatment plan has been executed as intended and whether the residual risk is within the acceptable level. It involves testing the effectiveness of the controls that have been implemented to mitigate the risk and identifying any gaps or issues that need to be addressed. A BIA, the original risk response plan, and the training program and user awareness documentation are not sufficient to validate the effectiveness of the risk treatment plan, as they do not measure the actual performance of the controls or the residual risk.

References:

•ISACA, Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, 2019, p. 761

•ISACA, Risk and Information Systems Control Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2020, p. 2112

Conducting a risk assessment is a critical process that helps organizations identify, evaluate, and prioritize risks that could impact their objectives. The introduction of a new product line is most likely to trigger the need for a risk assessment due to the following reasons:

Introduction of a New Product Line (Answer D):

Significance: Launching a new product involves significant changes to business processes, technologies, and possibly market dynamics. It introduces new elements that could affect the organization's risk profile.

Complexity and Uncertainty: New products often come with unknown risks and uncertainties. Understanding these risks is crucial to ensure they are managed effectively.

Impact on Operations: A new product can impact various facets of the organization, including production, supply chain, IT infrastructure, and customer support. Assessing risks helps in planning and mitigating potential disruptions.

Compliance and Regulatory Considerations: New products might have to comply with new regulations or standards, necessitating a review of associated risks.

Comparison with Other Options:

A. An incident resulting in data loss:

Purpose: While incidents like data loss are serious and require immediate response and investigation, they typically trigger incident management and post-incident reviews rather than a full risk assessment.

B. Changes in executive management:

Purpose: Changes in leadership can influence the strategic direction and priorities of the organization, but they do not inherently introduce new operational risks that necessitate an immediate risk assessment.

C. Updates to the information security policy:

Purpose: Policy updates are often based on previously identified risks and aim to mitigate them. They are more about adjusting controls rather than reassessing the risk landscape completely.

References:

ISACA CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2, "IT Risk Assessment," which highlights the importance of conducting risk assessments in response to significant organizational changes, such as the introduction of new products, which can significantly alter the risk profile of the organization. This aligns with the need to reassess risks to ensure appropriate controls and mitigation strategies are in place for new initiatives​​.

Comparing risk rating against appetite is the most helpful criterion when prioritizing action plans for identified risk, as it helps to determine the urgency and importance of addressing the risk. Risk rating is the level of risk after considering the likelihood and impact of a risk event, and risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. By comparing risk rating against appetite, an organization can identify which risks are above, within, or below its tolerance level, and prioritize the action plans accordingly. Risks that are above the appetite level should be treated with the highest priority, as they pose a significant threat to the organization’s objectives and performance. Risks that are within the appetite level should be monitored and controlled regularly, as they are acceptable but still require attention. Risks that are below the appetite level should be reviewed periodically, as they are negligible or insignificant.

References:

•ISACA, Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, 2019, p. 751

•ISACA, Tips for Prioritizing Risk in Your Risk Register2

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

The accuracy of a key risk indicator (KRI) is the degree to which the indicator reflects the true level and trend of the risk. It is most important that the indicator is correlated to risk and tracks variances in the risk, as this ensures that the indicator is relevant, reliable, and responsive to the risk situation. A correlated indicator has a strong and consistent relationship with the risk, meaning that changes in the indicator reflect changes in the risk. A variance-tracking indicator measures the difference between the actual and expected risk level, meaning that the indicator can detect and report deviations from the risk appetite or threshold. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, correlation and variance tracking are two of the key characteristics of an effective KRI1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, correlation and variance tracking are the correct answer to this question2.

Assigning the indicator to IT processes and projects with a low level of risk, having a high correlation with the process outcome, and triggering response based on risk thresholds are not the most important factors for determining the accuracy of a KRI. These factors may be useful or desirable, but they do not directly affect the accuracy of the indicator. Assigning the indicator to IT processes and projects with a low level of risk may reduce the complexity and uncertainty of the indicator, but it may also limit the scope and value of the indicator. Having a high correlation with the process outcome may indicate that the indicator is aligned with the business objectives, but it may not capture the risk factors or drivers that affect the outcome. Triggering response based on risk thresholds may indicate that the indicator is actionable and timely, but it may not reflect the actual or potential changes in the risk level.

Automated asset management software is the best method to track asset inventory, as it can provide accurate, timely, and comprehensive information about the organization’s IT assets, such as their location, status, configuration, ownership, and value. Automated asset management software can also help to optimize the utilization, performance, and lifecycle of the IT assets, and to reduce the risks of loss, theft, damage, or obsolescence. Automated asset management software can integrate with other systems, such as configuration management database (CMDB), service desk, and security tools, to enable better visibility, control, and governance of the IT assets.

References:

•ISACA, IT Asset Valuation, Risk Assessment and Control Implementation Model1

•ISACA, IT Asset Management: It’s All About Process2

•ISACA, IT Asset Management Audit/Assurance Program3

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

Skill Level of Threat Actors:

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

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

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

Factors Influencing Likelihood of Exploitation:

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

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

Assessment of Likelihood:

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

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

Comparison with Other Factors:

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

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

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

References:

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

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

The most important factor for management to consider when deciding whether to invest in an IT initiative that exceeds management’s risk appetite is C. Risk tolerance1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that management is willing to allow for any specific risk as the enterprise pursues its objectives. Risk tolerance reflects the degree of uncertainty that an organization is prepared to accept in relation to achieving its goals2

When an IT initiative exceeds management’s risk appetite, it means that the potential benefits of the initiative are outweighed by the potential negative consequences or losses that could result from the initiative. However, management may still decide to invest in the initiative if the level of uncertainty or variation is within the organization’s risk tolerance. For example, management may accept a higher level of risk for a strategic or innovative initiative that could provide a competitive advantage or a significant return on investment3

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA1

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

5: Risk and control self-assessment - KPMG Global3

6: Control Self Assessments - PwC4

7: Transaction Log - Wikipedia5

8: Transaction Logging - IBM6

: Benchmarking - Wikipedia7

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

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 heat map is a graphical tool that displays the results of a risk analysis in a matrix format, using colors and symbols to indicate the level and priority of the risks. A risk heat map can show the distribution and comparison of the risks based on various criteria, such as likelihood, impact, category, source, etc.

A risk heat map is most commonly used as part of an IT risk analysis to facilitate 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.

A risk heat map can help to facilitate risk assessment by providing a visual and intuitive representation of the risk profile, and highlighting the most critical and relevant risks that need to be addressed or monitored. A risk heat map can also help to communicate and report the risk analysis results to different stakeholders, and to support the decision making and planning for the risk response and treatment.

The other options are not the most common uses of a risk heat map as part of an IT risk analysis, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of a risk heat map, which is to facilitate risk assessment.

Risk identification is the process of finding and describing the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Risk identification involves defining the risk sources, events, causes, and impacts, and documenting them in a risk register. A risk heat map is not commonly used to facilitate risk identification, because it does not provide the detailed and comprehensive information that is needed to identify and describe the risks, and it may not cover all the relevant or potential risks that may exist or emerge.

Risk treatment is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate actions or plans to address the risks that have been identified, analyzed, and evaluated. Risk treatment involves choosing one of the following types of risk responses: mitigate, transfer, avoid, or accept. A risk heat map is not commonly used to facilitate risk treatment, because it does not provide the specific and feasible information that is needed to select and implement the risk responses, and it may not reflect the cost-benefit or feasibility analysis of the risk responses.

Risk communication is the process of exchanging and sharing the information and knowledge about the risks and their responses among the relevant stakeholders. Risk communication involves informing, consulting, and involving the stakeholders in the risk management process, and ensuring that they understand and agree on the risk objectives, criteria, and outcomes. A risk heat map is not commonly used to facilitate risk communication, because it does not provide the complete and accurate information that is needed to communicate and share the risks and their responses, and it may not address the different needs, expectations, and perspectives of the stakeholders. 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 169

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Implementing mock phishing exercises is the most effective way to validate organizational awareness of cybersecurity risk, because it helps to measure and test the knowledge and behavior of the employees regarding the detection and prevention of phishing attacks, which are one of the most common and dangerous forms of cybersecurity risk. A phishing attack is a fraudulent attempt to obtain sensitive or confidential information, such as usernames, passwords, or credit card details, by impersonating a legitimate or trusted entity, such as a bank, a government agency, or a colleague, through email, phone, or other communication channels. A mock phishing exercise is a simulated phishing attack that is conducted by the organization or a third party to assess the level of awareness and readiness of the employees to recognize and respond to phishing attacks, and to provide feedback and training to improve their skills and knowledge. Implementing mock phishing exercises is the most effective way, as it helps to validate the actual and practical awareness of cybersecurity risk, and to identify and address the gaps or weaknesses in the employees’ awareness and behavior. Conducting security awareness training, updating the information security policy, and requiring two-factor authentication are all useful ways to enhance organizational awareness of cybersecurity risk, but they are not the most effective way, as they do not directly validate the awareness and behavior of the employees regarding phishing attacks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

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

References

1Standardized Scoring for Security and Risk Metrics - ISACA

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

Risk Appetite:

Risk appetite defines the level of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. It serves as a benchmark for evaluating and prioritizing risk responses.

Prioritizing Risk Responses:

When determining how to address risks, the primary consideration should be whether the residual risk falls within the organization’s risk appetite.

If a risk exceeds the appetite, it needs to be mitigated, transferred, or avoided. If it is within the appetite, it might be accepted.

Influence of Other Factors:

Residual Risk: Important but must be evaluated against the risk appetite to determine if it is acceptable.

Mitigation Cost: Relevant for decision-making but secondary to aligning with risk appetite.

Inherent Risk: Initial risk assessment before controls are applied, but prioritization is based on residual risk and risk appetite.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual highlights the role of risk appetite in guiding the prioritization of risk responses (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.2.1 Prioritizing Risk Responses)​​.

The best metric to verify adherence to the policy that requires critical security patches to be deployed in production within three weeks of patch availability is the maximum time gap between patch availability and deployment, as it measures the longest duration that the organization takes to apply the patches, and ensures that it does not exceed the policy limit. The other options are not the best metrics, as they may not reflect the actual or optimal compliance with the policy, or may not be relevant or measurable for the policy, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A vulnerability assessment is a process that identifies and quantifies vulnerabilities in a system. It is the most effective process to determine the relevance of threats for risk scenarios as it helps in identifying potential security threats and vulnerabilities, quantifying the seriousness of each, and prioritizing techniques to mitigate attack and protect IT resources1.

References

2Identifying and Estimating Cybersecurity Risk for Enterprise Risk Management

3Threat Modeling Process | OWASP Foundation

1Threat modeling explained: A process for anticipating cyber attacks

4Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment: A Guide - SafetyCulture

5How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA

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

The most important information for the risk practitioner to communicate to senior management for contract negotiation purposes when the organization wants to transfer risk by purchasing cyber insurance is the current annualized loss expectancy report, as it provides an estimate of the potential financial loss or impact that the organization may incur due to a cyber risk event in a given year, and helps to determine the optimal coverage and premium of the cyber insurance. The other options are not the most important information, as they are more related to the audit, asset, or industry aspects of the cyber risk, respectively, rather than the financial aspect of the cyber risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

According to the CRISC EXAM TOPIC 2 LONG Flashcards, the first thing that a risk practitioner should do when an organization decides to use a cloud service is to review the vendor selection process and vetting criteria. This is because the vendor selection process and vetting criteria are essential steps to ensure that the cloud service provider meets the organization’s requirements and expectations, and that the risks associated with the cloud service are identified and managed. By reviewing the vendor selection process and vetting criteria, the risk practitioner can evaluate the quality, reliability, security, and compliance of the cloud service provider, and determine if the cloud service is suitable and beneficial for the organization. The risk practitioner can also identify any gaps or weaknesses in the vendor selection process and vetting criteria, and recommend improvements or alternatives accordingly. References = CRISC EXAM TOPIC 2 LONG Flashcards

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

A risk response action plan is a document that specifies the actions to be taken to address the identified risks, the resources required, the timelines, the owners, and the expected outcomes. The risk response action plan should be aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance, and should be approved by the relevant stakeholders. The best way to ensure the implementation of an effective risk response action plan is to assign clear roles and responsibilities to the individuals or groups who will execute the actions, monitor the progress, and report the results. This will help to avoid confusion, ambiguity, duplication, or omission of tasks, and will ensure accountability and ownership of the risk responses. The other options are not as directly related to the implementation of the risk response action plan, although they may be involved in some aspects of it. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1.1, pp. 121-122.

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.

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner reviewing current key risk indicators (KRIs) is that the KRIs’ source data lacks integrity, as this means that the data is inaccurate, incomplete, inconsistent, or outdated, and therefore cannot provide reliable and valid information on the risk level and performance. The KRIs are metrics that measure and monitor the changes in the risk exposure and the effectiveness of the risk response over time. The KRIs’ source data should be collected and verified from credible and relevant sources, and should be updated and maintained regularly. The KRIs’ source data should also be aligned and integrated with the enterprise’s data governance and quality standards. The other options are not the greatest concerns for a risk practitioner reviewing current key risk indicators (KRIs), although they may pose some challenges or limitations. The KRIs are not automated is a concern for the efficiency and timeliness of the KRI reporting and analysis, but it does not affect the integrity of the KRI source data. The KRIs are not quantitative is a concern for the objectivity and comparability of the KRI measurement and prioritization, but it does not affect the integrity of the KRI source data. The KRIs do not allow for trend analysis is a concern for the usefulness and relevance of the KRI communication and decision making, but it does not affect the integrity of the KRI source data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 183.

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

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

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

 The most effective way to promote organization-wide awareness of data security in response to an increase in regulatory penalties for data leakage is to require training on the data handling policy, as it educates the employees on the importance, requirements, and procedures of data protection, and enhances their knowledge and skills to prevent, detect, and respond to data leakage incidents. Enforcing sanctions for noncompliance with security procedures, conducting organization-wide phishing simulations, and requiring regular testing of the data breach response plan are not the most effective ways, as they are more related to the enforcement, evaluation, or improvement of the data security, respectively, rather than the promotion of the data security awareness. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

Ensuring senior management understands the organization’s risk universe in relation to the IT risk management program is primarily to define effective enterprise IT risk appetite and tolerance levels. This understanding is essential for setting the boundaries within which the organization is willing to operate regarding IT risks.

Defining Effective IT Risk Appetite and Tolerance Levels (Answer A):

Purpose: Senior management needs to understand the range and nature of IT risks to set appropriate risk appetite and tolerance levels.

Impact: This enables the organization to make informed decisions about which risks to accept, mitigate, transfer, or avoid.

Alignment: It ensures that the IT risk management strategy is aligned with the overall business objectives and risk posture of the organization.

Comparison with Other Options:

B. To execute the IT risk management strategy in support of business objectives:

Purpose: While important, it follows the definition of risk appetite and tolerance.

Limitation: Without understanding the risk universe, execution may be misaligned.

C. To establish business-aligned IT risk management organizational structures:

Purpose: Structural alignment is crucial but secondary to setting risk appetite and tolerance.

D. To assess the capabilities and maturity of the organization’s IT risk management efforts:

Purpose: This is part of the ongoing process but not the primary purpose of understanding the risk universe.

References:

ISACA CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1, "Governance", which discusses the importance of risk appetite and tolerance in the context of IT risk management.

The risk practitioner’s next step after learning of an incident that has affected a competitor is to develop risk scenarios, as it involves identifying and describing the potential sources, events, impacts, and responses of the risk that may affect the organization in a similar way as the competitor, and assessing the likelihood and magnitude of the risk. Activating the incident response plan, implementing compensating controls, and updating the risk register are not the next steps, as they are more related to the reaction, mitigation, or reporting of the risk, respectively, rather than the identification and assessment of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

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

A risk action plan is a document that outlines the actions to be taken to mitigate or avoid a risk. A risk action plan should be revised when the risk associated with a new technology is found to be increasing, as this indicates that the current plan is not effective or sufficient. Revising the risk action plan can help identify the root causes of the risk increase, evaluate the effectiveness of current controls, and implement additional or alternative controls as needed. Re-evaluating current controls, escalating the risk to senior management, and implementing additional controls are possible steps in the revision process, but they are not the first course of action. The first course of action should be to update the risk action plan to reflect the current risk situation and the appropriate risk response.

The best course of action when a recent regulatory requirement has the potential to affect an organization’s use of a third party to supply outsourced business services is to conduct a gap analysis, as it involves comparing the current and desired states of compliance, and identifying any gaps or discrepancies that need to be addressed. Terminating the outsourcing agreement, identifying compensating controls, and transferring risk to the third party are not the best courses of action, as they may not be feasible, effective, or appropriate, respectively, and may require the prior knowledge of the compliance gaps and risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

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

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner when reviewing the findings of a security awareness program assessment is that the program uses non-customized training modules. Non-customized training modules are generic and may not address the specific security needs, issues, and challenges of the organization. They may also fail to engage and motivate the employees to follow the security policies and procedures, and to enhance their security knowledge and skills. The program not decreasing threat counts, not considering business impact, or being significantly revised are other possible findings, but they are not as concerning as the program using non-customized training modules. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

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

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

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

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 most effective way to reduce risk associated with an increase of online transactions on a retailer website is to implement website activity monitoring. Website activity monitoring can help to detect and prevent fraudulent transactions, unauthorized access, data breaches, and other cyber threats that may compromise the security and integrity of the website and its data. Scalable infrastructure, a hot backup site, and transaction limits are other possible ways to reduce risk, but they are not as effective as website activity monitoring. 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 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.

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

 The primary purpose of using key risk indicators (KRIs) to illustrate changes in the risk profile is to communicate risk trends to stakeholders. KRIs are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. By using KRIs to illustrate changes in the risk profile, the organization can communicate the risk trends to the stakeholders, such as the board, senior management, business units, and external parties, and enable them to take appropriate actions to manage the risk. Assigning ownership of emerging risk scenarios, highlighting noncompliance with the risk policy, and identifying threats to emerging technologies are other possible purposes, but they are not as important as communicating risk trends to stakeholders. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

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

The most concerning factor for a risk practitioner reviewing risk action plans for documented IT risk scenarios is that many action plans were discontinued after senior management accepted the risk. Risk action plans are documents that define the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for implementing the risk responses and strategies for the IT risk scenarios. Risk action plans help to reduce, transfer, avoid, or accept the IT risks, and to monitor and report on the IT risk performance and improvement. Discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk is a major concern, because it may indicate that the risk acceptance decision was not based on a proper risk analysis or evaluation, or that the risk acceptance decision was not communicated or coordinated with the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk may also create challenges or risks for the organization, such as compliance, legal, reputational, or operational risks, or conflicts or inconsistencies with the organization’s risk appetite, risk objectives, or risk policies. The other options are not as concerning as discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the risk management process. Individuals outside IT managing action plans for the risk scenarios, target dates for completion missing from some action plans, and senior management approving multiple changes to several action plans are all factors that could affect the quality and timeliness of the risk management process, but they do not necessarily indicate a lack of risk management accountability or oversight. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-32.

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 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.

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

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.

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

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 best recommendation to reduce the risk associated with potential system compromise when a vendor stops releasing security patches and updates for a business-critical legacy system is to segment the system on its own network. Network segmentation is the process of dividing a network into smaller subnetworks or segments, based on different criteria, such as function, location, or security level. Network segmentation helps to isolate the system from the rest of the network, and limit the exposure and access to the system. Network segmentation also helps to improve the performance and security of the network, by reducing the network traffic and congestion, and enhancing the monitoring and control capabilities. The other options are not as effective as segmenting the system on its own network, although they may provide some additional protection or recovery options. Ensuring regular backups take place, virtualizing the system in the cloud, and installing antivirus software on the system are all measures that can help to reduce the risk of data loss or system damage, but they do not address the root cause of the risk, which is the lack of security patches and updates for the system. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 3-11.

The best method to maintain a common view of IT risk within an organization is to establish and communicate the IT risk profile. An IT risk profile is a document that summarizes the key IT risks that the organization faces or accepts, and their likelihood, impact, and priority. An IT risk profile helps to identify and prioritize the most critical or relevant IT risks, and to align them with the organization’s objectives, strategy, and risk appetite. Establishing and communicating the IT risk profile is the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk, because it helps to create a shared understanding and awareness of the IT risks among the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Establishing and communicating the IT risk profile also helps to facilitate the IT risk decision-making and reporting processes, and to monitor and control the IT risk performance and improvement. The other options are not the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk, although they may be part of or derived from the IT risk profile. Collecting data for IT risk assessment, utilizing a balanced scorecard, and performing and publishing an IT risk analysis are all activities that can help to support or update the IT risk profile, but they are not the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 1-15.

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

The most 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The most comprehensive resource for prioritizing the implementation of information systems controls is the risk register. The risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their analysis, and their responses. The risk register provides a holistic and systematic view of the risk profile and the risk treatment of the organization. The risk register can help to prioritize the implementation of information systems controls by providing the information on the likelihood, impact, and exposure of the risks, the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, and the gaps or issues of the control environment. The other options are not as comprehensive as the risk register, as they are related to the specific aspects or components of the information systems controls, not the overall assessment and evaluation of the information systems controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

The most comprehensive information for developing a risk profile for a system is the risk assessment results. A risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the risks that could affect the system’s objectives or operations. A risk assessment provides comprehensive information for developing a risk profile, because it helps to determine the likelihood and impact of the risks, and to prioritize them based on their severity and relevance. A risk assessment also helps to select the most appropriate and effective controls to minimize the risks, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risks. A risk profile is a document that summarizes the key risks that the system faces or accepts, and their likelihood, impact, and priority. A risk profile helps to identify and prioritize the most critical or relevant risks, and to align them with the system’s objectives, strategy, and risk appetite. The other options are not as comprehensive as the risk assessment results, although they may be part of or derived from the risk profile. Results of a business impact analysis (BIA), a mapping of resources to business processes, and key performance indicators (KPIs) are all factors that could affect the system’s performance and improvement, but they do not necessarily identify, analyze, or evaluate the risks that could affect the system. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

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

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 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.

 In order to efficiently execute a risk response action plan, it is most important for the emergency response team members to understand their defined roles and responsibilities. This can help to ensure that the team members know what they are expected to do, how they should coordinate and communicate with each other, and how they should report the progress and outcome of the risk response. The system architecture in target areas, IT management policies and procedures, and business objectives of the organization are other important factors, but they are not as important as the defined roles and responsibilities. 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 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.

 A vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in the IT system or environment that could be exploited by a threat. A threat event is an occurrence or action that exploits a vulnerability and causes harm or damage to the IT system or environment. The lack of data to measure threat events is the most important factor, because it may affect the accuracy and reliability of the risk assessment and evaluation, and consequently, the risk response and strategy. The lack of data to measure threat events may also create challenges or risks for the organization, such as compliance, legal, reputational, or operational risks, or conflicts or inconsistencies with the organization’s risk appetite, risk objectives, or risk policies. The other options are not as important as the lack of data to measure threat events, although they may also influence the risk response and strategy. The likelihood and impact of threat events, the cost to implement the risk response, and the monetary value of the asset are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the risk response and strategy, but they do not necessarily affect the validity and quality of the risk assessment and evaluation

 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.

The best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the effectiveness of the security patching process is the percentage of patches installed successfully within the expected time frame. This KPI can help to evaluate how well the security patching process meets the predefined objectives and standards, and how timely the patches are applied to reduce the risk exposure. The percentage of patches installed by the security administration team, successfully during the first attempt, or without causing an unplanned system outage are other possible KPIs, but they are not as relevant as the percentage of patches installed successfully within the expected time frame. 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 best tool to help prioritize investment efforts in the organization’s cybersecurity program is to review the outcome of the latest security risk assessment. A security risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks associated with the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the organization’s information assets and systems. By reviewing the outcome of the security risk assessment, senior management can identify the most critical and urgent risks, and allocate the resources and funds accordingly. Analyzing cyber intelligence reports, engaging independent cybersecurity consultants, and increasing the frequency of updates to the risk register are other possible tools, but they are not as effective as reviewing the outcome of the security risk assessment. 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 primary reason to perform periodic vendor risk assessments is to monitor the vendor’s control effectiveness. A vendor risk assessment is a process of evaluating the risks associated with outsourcing a service or function to a third-party vendor. The assessment should be performed periodically to ensure that the vendor is complying with the contractual obligations, service level agreements, and security standards, and that the vendor’s controls are operating effectively to mitigate the risks. Providing input to the organization’s risk appetite, verifying the vendor’s ongoing financial viability, and assessing the vendor’s risk mitigation plans are other possible reasons, but they are not as important as monitoring the vendor’s control effectiveness. 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 input into the assessment of the risk of shadow IT usage is the classification of the data that is being processed, stored, or transmitted by the unauthorized applications or devices. This determines the level of confidentiality, integrity, and availability that is required for the data and the potential impact of a breach or loss. Business benefits of shadow IT, application-related expenses, and volume of data are less important inputs that may affect the risk analysis, but not as much as the data classification. References = Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, page 28; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 98.

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 best way to ensure key risk indicators (KRIs) provide value to risk owners is to provide timely notification of the changes in the risk exposure. KRIs are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. By providing timely notification of the KRI values, the risk owners can be alerted of the risk situation and take appropriate actions to manage the risk. Ongoing training, return on investment (ROI), and cost minimization are other possible ways to ensure KRIs provide value, but they are not as effective as timely notification. 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 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.

When preparing a risk status report for periodic review by senior management, it is most important to ensure the report includes risk exposure in business terms. Risk exposure is the potential loss or harm that may result from a risk event. Expressing risk exposure in business terms can help senior management to understand the impact and significance of the risk on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value. A detailed view of individual risk exposures, a summary of incidents that have impacted the organization, and recommendations by an independent risk assessor are other possible contents of the report, but they are not as important as risk exposure in business terms. 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 most concerning issue when reviewing the results of an independent control assessment to determine the effectiveness of a vendor’s control environment is that the controls had recurring noncompliance. This indicates that the vendor’s controls are not operating as intended or designed, and that the vendor is not taking corrective actions to address the control deficiencies. This can increase the risk exposure and liability for the organization that outsources the service or function to the vendor. The report being provided directly from the vendor, the risk associated with multiple control gaps being accepted, and the control owners disagreeing with the auditor’s recommendations are other possible issues, but they are not as critical as the recurring noncompliance. 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 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 course of action when an organization wants to reduce likelihood in order to reduce a risk level is to implement preventive measures. Likelihood is the probability or chance of a risk occurring, and risk level is the combination of likelihood and impact of a risk. Preventive measures are controls that are designed to prevent or deter the occurrence of a risk, such as policies, standards, procedures, guidelines, etc. Implementing preventive measures is the best course of action, because it helps to reduce the likelihood of a risk, and consequently, the risk level. Implementing preventive measures also helps to protect and enhance the organization’s objectives, performance, and improvement. The other options are not the best course of action, although they may be related to the risk management process. Monitoring risk controls, implementing detective controls, and transferring the risk are all activities that can help to manage or mitigate the risks, but they do not necessarily reduce the likelihood or the risk level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-21.

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

The most effective way to mitigate the risk of unintentional data disclosure through the use of social media sites is to conduct user awareness training. User awareness training is a process of educating and informing the users about the security policies, procedures, and practices that are relevant and applicable to their roles and responsibilities. User awareness training can help to increase the knowledge, understanding, and compliance of the users regarding the data protection and privacy requirements, and the potential risks and consequences of data disclosure through social media sites. User awareness training can also help to influence the behavior, attitude, and culture of the users toward data security and privacy. The other options are not as effective as conducting user awareness training, as they are related to the technical, procedural, or contractual measures to mitigate the risk, not the human or behavioral measures to mitigate the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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.

The next thing that the risk practitioner should do from a risk management perspective when the organization is considering the adoption of an aggressive business strategy to achieve desired growth is to identify new threats resulting from the new business strategy. A threat is a potential cause of an unwanted incident that may affect the achievement of the objectives. An aggressive business strategy is a strategy that involves pursuing high-risk, high-reward opportunities or initiatives to gain a competitive advantage or a significant market share. An aggressive business strategy may introduce new threats or increase the likelihood or impact of existing threats, such as market volatility, regulatory changes, customer dissatisfaction, or competitor retaliation. Therefore, the risk practitioner should identify the new threats resulting from the new business strategy, and assess their potential consequences and implications for the organization. The other options are not as immediate as identifying new threats resulting from the new business strategy, as they are related to the update, information, or measurement of the risk management process, not the identification or analysis of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

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

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

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.

 The most likely cause of the situation where the recovery team does not know what steps to take to recover critical data backups following a major flood is the failure to test the disaster recovery plan (DRP). A DRP is a document that describes the procedures and resources needed to restore the normal operations of an organization after a disaster. Testing the DRP is essential to ensure that the plan is feasible, effective, and up-to-date. Testing the DRP also helps to train the recovery team members, identify and resolve any issues or gaps, and improve the confidence and readiness of the organization. The lack of a well-documented business impact analysis (BIA), the lack of annual updates to the DRP, and the significant changes in management personnel are also possible factors that could affect the recovery process, but they are not as likely or as critical as the failure to test the DRP. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, page 5-19.

The first step for the risk practitioner to address the situation of extended network outages that have exceeded tolerance is to recommend a root cause analysis of the incidents. A root cause analysis is a process of identifying and resolving the underlying causes of a problem or an event. By performing a root cause analysis, the risk practitioner can determine why the network outages occurred, what factors contributed to them, and how they can be prevented or reduced in the future. Recommending additional controls, updating the risk tolerance level, and updating the incident-related risk trend are possible steps that may follow the root cause analysis, but they are not the first step. 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 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 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 completion of a project for implementing a new control would most likely require a risk practitioner to update the risk register. The risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their analysis, and their responses. The completion of a project for implementing a new control means that a risk response has been executed and a new control has been established. This may affect the likelihood and/or impact of the related risks, and the residual risk level. Therefore, the risk practitioner should update the risk register to reflect the current status and outcome of the risk response and the new control. The other options are not as likely to require a risk practitioner to update the risk register, as they are related to the reporting, planning, or assessment of the risks or the controls, not the implementation or completion of the risk response or the new control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

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

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.

 Risk tolerance is the best term to describe the situation where an organization has agreed to a 99% availability for its online services and will not accept availability that falls below 98.5%. Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk tolerance defines the acceptable variation in outcomes related to specific performance measures, such as availability, reliability, or security. Risk tolerance is usually expressed as a range, such as 99% +/- 0.5%. Risk mitigation, risk evaluation, and risk appetite are not the correct terms to describe this situation, because they refer to different aspects of risk management, such as reducing, assessing, or pursuing risk, respectively. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

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

The best 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

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

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

The most reliable evidence of a control’s effectiveness is a system-generated testing report. A system-generated testing report is a document that shows the results of automated tests performed by the system to verify that the control is functioning as intended and producing the expected outcomes. A system-generated testing report is reliable, because it is objective, consistent, accurate, and timely, and because it can provide a high level of assurance and confidence in the control’s effectiveness. The other options are not as reliable as a system-generated testing report, although they may provide some evidence of the control’s effectiveness. A risk and control self-assessment, senior management’s attestation, and a detailed process walk-through are all examples of manual or subjective evidence, which may be prone to errors, biases, or inconsistencies, and which may provide a lower level of assurance and confidence in the control’s effectiveness. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 3-32.

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

The best course of action for the risk practitioner who has identified that the agreed RTO with a SaaS provider is longer than the business expectation is to collaborate with the risk owner to determine the risk response plan. The risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage the risk within their scope of responsibility. The risk response plan is the document that describes the actions and resources needed to address the risk. By collaborating with the risk owner, the risk practitioner can help to analyze the gap between the agreed RTO and the business expectation, evaluate the potential impact and consequences, and select the most appropriate risk response option, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Documenting the gap in the risk register, including a right to audit clause in the service provider contract, or advising the risk owner to accept the risk are not the best courses of action, because they do not address the root cause of the problem, or provide a solution to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

 The most important step when developing risk scenarios using a list of generic scenarios based on industry best practices is to validate the generic risk scenarios for relevance. The generic risk scenarios may not be applicable or suitable for the specific context, objectives, and environment of the organization. Therefore, the risk practitioner should validate the relevance of the generic risk scenarios by comparing them with the organization’s risk profile, risk appetite, and risk criteria. Assessing generic risk scenarios with business users, selecting the maximum possible risk scenarios from the list, and identifying common threats causing generic risk scenarios are other steps that may be useful, but they are not as important as validating the relevance of the generic risk scenarios. 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 asset owner is the best suited to assist a risk practitioner in developing a relevant set of risk scenarios. The asset owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for the IT assets that support the business processes. The asset owner can provide valuable information on the business objectives, requirements, and expectations that the IT assets should meet. The asset owner can also help identify the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts that may affect the IT assets and the business processes. The asset owner can also suggest possible risk responses and mitigation strategies to address the risk scenarios. The other options are not as relevant as the asset owner, as they may not have the same level of knowledge, interest, or involvement in the IT assets and the business processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

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

The greatest concern for the risk practitioner when a big data project has resulted in the creation of an application used to support important investment decisions is the data quality. Data quality is the degree to which the data is accurate, complete, consistent, reliable, relevant, and timely. Data quality is essential for the success of any big data project, as it affects the validity and reliability of the analysis and the outcomes. Poor data quality could lead to erroneous or misleading results, which could have negative consequences for the investment decisions and the organization’s performance and reputation. The other options are not as concerning as the data quality, although they may also pose some challenges or risks for the big data project. Maintenance costs, data redundancy, and system integration are all factors that could affect the efficiency and effectiveness of the big data project, but they do not directly affect the accuracy and reliability of the analysis and the outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-20.

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

 The most concerning issue found during the review of a newly created disaster recovery plan (DRP) is that some critical business applications are not included in the plan. This means that the DRP is incomplete and does not cover all the essential IT systems and services that support the business continuity. This could result in significant losses and damages in the event of a disaster. The other issues are not as critical, as they can be addressed by ensuring proper contracts, standards, and approvals are in place for the outsourced activities, the framework, and the CISO. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The greatest challenge to managing an organization’s end-user devices is having an incomplete end-user device inventory. An end-user device inventory is a document that records and tracks all the devices that are owned, used, or managed by the organization’s end-users, such as laptops, tablets, smartphones, etc. An end-user device inventory helps to identify and classify the devices based on their type, model, location, owner, status, etc. An end-user device inventory also helps to monitor and control the devices, such as enforcing security policies, applying patches and updates, detecting and resolving issues, etc. Having an incomplete end-user device inventory could lead to a lack of visibility and accountability for the devices, which could increase the risk of data loss, theft, or compromise, as well as the cost and complexity of device management. The other options are not as challenging as having an incomplete end-user device inventory, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the device management. Unsupported end-user applications, incompatible end-user devices, and multiple end-user device models are all factors that could affect the functionality and compatibility of the devices, but they do not necessarily affect the visibility and accountability of the devices. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 3-11.

The best way to resolve the concern where a control process has been implemented in response to a new regulatory requirement, but has significantly reduced productivity, is to escalate the issue to senior management. Senior management is the highest level of authority and responsibility in the organization, and they are responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization. Senior management should also oversee the risk management process, and ensure that the controls are aligned with the organization’s goals and values. Escalating the issue to senior management can help to find a balance between complying with the regulatory requirement and maintaining the productivity of the organization. The other options are not as effective or desirable as escalating the issue to senior management, because they either ignore the problem, violate the regulation, or compromise the control.

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.

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.

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

The best way to ensure the continued effectiveness of the IT risk management function within an organization experiencing high employee turnover is to have well documented policies and procedures. Policies and procedures are the formal documents that define the roles, responsibilities, processes, and standards for the IT risk management function. They provide guidance, consistency, and continuity for the IT risk management activities and outcomes. They also facilitate the knowledge transfer, training, and performance evaluation of the IT risk management staff. The other options are not as helpful as well documented policies and procedures, as they are related to the tools, mechanisms, or structures that support the IT risk management function, not the foundation and direction of the IT risk management function. 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 enable a risk practitioner to understand management’s approach to organizational risk is to know the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the organization. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take in order to achieve its objectives. Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in relation to specific performance measures, such as availability, reliability, or security. Risk appetite and risk tolerance reflect the management’s attitude, preferences, and expectations towards risk, and guide the risk management process, such as risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring. The other options are not as effective as knowing the risk appetite and risk tolerance, although they may provide some input or context for understanding the management’s approach to organizational risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

The situation that presents the greatest challenge to creating a comprehensive IT risk profile of an organization is having inaccurate documentation of enterprise architecture (EA). EA is the blueprint that describes the structure and operation of an organization, including its business processes, information systems, technology infrastructure, and governance. EA helps to align the IT strategy and objectives with the business strategy and objectives, and to identify and manage the IT risks and opportunities. Having inaccurate documentation of EA could lead to incomplete, inconsistent, or misleading information about the organization’s IT environment, which could affect the quality and reliability of the IT risk profile. The other situations are not as challenging as having inaccurate documentation of EA, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the IT risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 2-12.

The most important step to ensure regulatory requirements are adequately addressed within an organization is to develop a policy framework that addresses regulatory requirements. A policy framework is a set of principles, rules, and standards that guide the organization’s actions and decisions. By developing a policy framework that addresses regulatory requirements, the organization can establish a clear and consistent direction, expectation, and accountability for complying with the relevant laws and regulations. Obtaining necessary resources, performing a gap analysis, and employing IT solutions are other possible steps, but they are not as important as developing a policy framework. 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 greatest concern for a risk practitioner when an organization is adopting blockchain for a new financial system is the limited organizational knowledge of the underlying technology. Blockchain is a distributed ledger technology that enables secure and transparent transactions among multiple parties without the need for intermediaries or central authorities. Blockchain technology has many potential benefits for the financial sector, such as reducing costs, increasing efficiency, enhancing security, and improving trust. However, blockchain technology also poses many challenges and risks for the organization, such as technical complexity, interoperability issues, regulatory uncertainty, and cultural resistance. The limited organizational knowledge of the underlying technology is the greatest concern, because it affects the ability and readiness of the organization to adopt, implement, use, and maintain the blockchain system effectively and securely. The limited organizational knowledge could also result in poor decision-making, inadequate governance, insufficient training, and increased vulnerability to errors, fraud, or attacks. The other options are not as concerning as the limited organizational knowledge, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the blockchain adoption. Lack of commercial software support, varying costs related to implementation and maintenance, and slow adoption of the technology across the financial industry are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the blockchain system, but they do not directly affect the capability and maturity of the organization. References = 5

Implementing a data masking process is the best method to mitigate the risk of an unauthorized employee viewing confidential data in a database. Data masking is the process of replacing sensitive data with fictitious but realistic data, such as changing names, addresses, phone numbers, etc. Data masking protects the privacy and confidentiality of the data, while still allowing for testing, analysis, or training purposes. Implementing role-based access control, including sanctions in NDAs, and installing a DLP tool are also useful methods to reduce the risk of data exposure, but they are not as effective as data masking, which prevents the data from being accessed in the first place. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

 The business owner is the person who is responsible for approval when a change in an application system is ready for release to production. The business owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the business process or function that is supported by the application system. The business owner should approve the change to ensure that it meets the business requirements, objectives, and expectations, and that it does not introduce any adverse impacts or risks to the business operations. The information security officer, the IT risk manager, and the chief risk officer (CRO) are not responsible for the approval of the change, although they may provide input, feedback, or oversight. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 3-32.

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

 Encrypting data before it leaves the organization is the best way to protect sensitive data from administrators within a public cloud, as it ensures that the data is secured at the source and remains encrypted throughout the transmission and storage in the cloud. Using an encrypted tunnel to connect to the cloud, encrypting the data in the cloud database, and encrypting physical hard drives within the cloud are not the best ways, as they may not prevent the cloud administrators from accessing the data or the encryption keys, or may not protect the data from unauthorized interception or modification during the transmission. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 153.

Data Privacy Principles:

Consent and Purpose Limitation: According to data privacy regulations like GDPR, data subjects must provide explicit consent for specific purposes. Using data for purposes beyond what was consented to violates these principles, posing significant compliance risks.

Transparency and Accountability: Organizations must be transparent about how they use personal data and ensure accountability in data processing. Using data without consent undermines this transparency and accountability.

Greatest Risk of Noncompliance:

Legal and Regulatory Risks: Using personal data without consent can lead to severe penalties under laws like GDPR and CPRA. These laws impose heavy fines for noncompliance, making this scenario the highest risk.

Reputational Damage: Unauthorized use of personal data can severely damage an organization’s reputation, leading to loss of customer trust and potential financial losses.

Operational Impact: Ensuring compliance with consent requirements is fundamental to an organization's data processing activities. Failure to do so can disrupt business operations and necessitate significant remediation efforts.

Comparison with Other Options:

Making Data Available to a Larger Audience of Customers: While potentially risky, this does not inherently violate data privacy principles if done within consented uses.

Data Not Being Disposed According to the Retention Policy: This poses risks related to data minimization and retention principles but is less severe than unauthorized data use.

Personal Data Not Being De-identified Properly: This is a significant risk but typically involves fewer direct legal and regulatory implications compared to using data without consent.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Discusses the importance of informed consent and the principles of data privacy, emphasizing the severe implications of using personal data without consent .

ISACA Guidelines: Highlight the need for transparency and accountability in data processing, aligning with global privacy regulations .

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks which method best enables timely detection of changes in the security control environment.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Control self-assessment (CSA): Allows for continuous monitoring and quick detection of any changes or deficiencies in controls.

B. Log analysis: Useful for detecting security incidents but not as comprehensive as CSA for overall control environment changes.

C. Security control reviews: Typically periodic and might not be as timely.

D. Random sampling checks: Not as systematic or comprehensive as CSA.

 Detailed Explanation:

Control Self-Assessment (CSA): CSA involves regular, structured evaluations by internal staff to ensure controls are working effectively. It promotes early detection of issues by those directly responsible for the controls.

Timeliness: CSA is an ongoing process, making it more timely in identifying changes compared to periodic reviews or random checks.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, emphasizes the importance of CSA in maintaining and improving control environments​​.

The MOST important aspect for the risk practitioner to confirm is:

A. Appropriate approvals for the control changes

Ensuring that the control design changes have the appropriate approvals is crucial. This confirms that the changes are recognized and sanctioned by the necessary authority within the organization, aligning with governance practices and maintaining the integrity of the risk management process.

Prioritizing concerns based on frequency of reports is the most efficient approach to analyze the security-related concerns reported by employees, because it helps to identify and focus on the most common or recurring issues that may pose the highest risk or impact to the organization. A security-related concern is a potential or actual problem or threat that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the organization’s IT systems or data. A service desk is a function that provides a single point of contact for users to report and resolve their IT-related issues or requests. A workflow is a sequence of steps or tasks that are performed to achieve a specific goal or outcome. A workflow for supporting employee reports of security-related concerns may include capturing, categorizing, prioritizing, assigning, and resolving the concerns. Prioritizing concerns based on frequency of reports is the most efficient approach, as it helps to optimize the use of resources and time, and to reduce the likelihood and severity of security incidents or breaches. Mapping concerns to organizational assets, sorting concerns by likelihood, and aligning concerns to key vendors are all possible approaches to analyze the security-related concerns, but they are not the most efficient approach, as they may require more data collection, analysis, or coordination, and may not reflect the urgency or importance of the concerns. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 200

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

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, as the process owner has the authority and responsibility to manage the production system and its associated risks and controls, and to decide on the optimal risk response. Recommending a program that minimizes the concerns of that production system, informing the IT manager of the concerns and proposing measures to reduce them, and informing the development team of the concerns and together formulating risk reduction measures are not the most appropriate actions, as they may not involve the process owner, who is the key stakeholder and decision maker for the production system and its risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.