CRISC Questions and Answers

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

 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.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), assessing changes in residual risk is the best approach for determining whether a risk action plan is effective, as it measures the impact and value of the risk response actions and controls on the risk level. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response actions and controls have been implemented. Assessing changes in residual risk helps to:

Evaluate the extent to which the risk response actions and controls have reduced the likelihood and/or impact of the risk to an acceptable level

Identify and report any deviations, errors, or weaknesses in the risk response actions and controls and their performance

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

Monitor and measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response actions and controls and their alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

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

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

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

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

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

 The 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.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, impact assessment is the process of identifying and evaluating the potential effects of changes to IT services on the organization’s business objectives, processes, resources, and risks. Impact assessment is essential for ensuring that the changes are aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and risk appetite, and that the benefits of the changes outweigh the costs and risks. Impact assessment also helps to prioritize, plan, and implement the changes effectively and efficiently, and to monitor and measure the outcomes of the changes. Therefore, the most important factor for a risk practitioner to consider when evaluating plans for changes to IT services is the impact assessment of the change. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 224.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The MOST important consideration when developing IT risk scenarios is the potential threats and vulnerabilities that may have an impact on the business, because they are the key elements of a risk scenario that describe the sources and causes of the risk, and the potential consequences and impacts of the risk on the business objectives and processes. The other options are not as important as the potential threats and vulnerabilities, because:

Option A: The impact of controls on the efficiency of the business in delivering services is a secondary consideration that may affect the cost-benefit analysis of the risk response, but it does not directly affect the identification and assessment of the risk scenario.

Option B: Linkage of identified risk scenarios with enterprise risk management is a good practice that ensures the alignment and integration of the IT risk management with the overall enterprise risk management, but it does not directly affect the identification and assessment of the risk scenario.

Option D: Results of network vulnerability scanning and penetration testing are useful sources of information that may reveal some of the threats and vulnerabilities in the IT environment, but they are not the only or the most important consideration when developing IT risk scenarios, as they may not cover all the aspects and dimensions of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 104.

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.

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

The best way to ensure that information system controls are effective is to test them periodically. Testing controls periodically helps to verify that the controls are operating as intended, and that they are aligned with the enterprise’s objectives, policies, and standards. Testing controls periodically also helps to identify any gaps, weaknesses, or deficiencies in the controls, and to implement corrective actions or improvements. Responding promptly to control exceptions, implementing compensating controls, and automating manual controls 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 641.

 Residual risk is the risk that remains after security controls have been implemented on a system. Residual risk can be accepted, transferred, avoided, or further mitigated. The most important consideration when deciding whether to accept residual risk is the cost versus benefit of additional mitigating controls. This means comparing the potential impact of the residual risk with the cost and effectiveness of implementing more controls to reduce it. If the cost of additional controls outweighs the benefit of reducing the residual risk, then it may be acceptable to accept the residual risk. However, if the benefit of additional controls exceeds the cost, then it may be advisable to implement more controls to lower the residual risk to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.4: Risk Response Selection, p. 156-157.

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

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

 A detective control is a type of internal control that seeks to uncover problems in a company’s processes once they have occurred. Examples of detective controls include physical inventory checks, reviews of account reports and reconciliations, as well as assessments of current controls1. A periodic access review is a detective control that involves verifying the access rights and privileges of users to ensure that they are appropriate and authorized. A periodic access review can help to detect any unauthorized or inappropriate access, such as excessive or redundant permissions, segregation of duties violations, or dormant or orphaned accounts23. The other options are not detective controls, but rather preventive controls, which are designed to prevent errors or fraud from occurring in the first place. A limit check is a preventive control that validates the input data against a predefined range or limit, and rejects any data that falls outside the acceptable range4. Access control software is a preventive control that restricts the access to information systems or resources based on the identity, role, or credentials of the user5. Rerun procedures are preventive controls that ensure the accuracy and completeness of data processing by repeating the same process and comparing the results6. References = Detective Control: Definition, Examples, Vs. Preventive Control; Detective Control - What Is It, Examples, Vs Preventive Control; Limit Check - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics; Access Control Software - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics; Rerun Procedures - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual1, lessons learned from materialized risk scenarios are the insights and knowledge gained from analyzing the causes, impacts, and responses of actual risk events that occurred in the past. Lessons learned from materialized risk scenarios are the most helpful resource when creating a manageable set of IT risk scenarios, as they help to identify and prioritize the most relevant and realistic risks that could affect the organization’s objectives, processes, and resources. Lessons learned from materialized risk scenarios also help to improve the risk management practices and capabilities, and to avoid repeating the same mistakes or gaps in the future. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 206.

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

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

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

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

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

A business case will BEST communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives to senior management, because it provides a clear and concise justification of the objectives, benefits, costs, and risks of the proposed initiatives. A business case helps to align the risk mitigation initiatives with the enterprise’s strategy and goals, and to obtain the necessary approval and support from senior management. The other options are not as effective as a business case, because:

Option B: A balanced scorecard is a tool to measure and monitor the performance of the enterprise across four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth. It does not communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives, but rather the outcomes and impacts of them.

Option C: Industry standards are benchmarks or best practices that define the minimum requirements or expectations for a certain domain or activity. They do not communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives, but rather the compliance or alignment of them with the external environment.

Option D: A heat map is a tool to visualize and prioritize the risks based on their likelihood and impact. It does not communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives, but rather the severity and distribution of the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 118.

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

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

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

Information security risk factors are the sources of uncertainty that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information assets within an organization. Information security risk factors can include threats, vulnerabilities, or impacts that may compromise the security of information assets. Information security risk factors should be mitigated when developing in-house applications, which are software applications that are designed, developed, and maintained by the organization itself, rather than by external vendors or providers. Mitigating information security risk factors when developing in-house applications can help prevent or reduce the occurrence or consequences of security incidents, such as data breaches, cyberattacks, unauthorized access, or data loss. The best way to ensure that information security risk factors are mitigated when developing in-house applications is to identify information security controls in the requirements analysis. The requirements analysis is the stage of the system development life cycle (SDLC) where the business needs and expectations of the application are defined and documented. The requirements analysis should include the functional and non-functional requirements of the application, such as the features, functions, performance, quality, reliability, and security of the application. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can help ensure that the security requirements of the application are clearly specified and agreed upon by the stakeholders, and that they are aligned with the organization’s security policies, standards, and regulations. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can also help ensure that the security requirements are integrated into the design, development, testing, and deployment of the application, and that they are verified and validated throughout the SDLC. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can also help ensure that the security requirements are traceable, measurable, and manageable, and that they can be monitored and reviewed for effectiveness and efficiency. References = THE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE (SDLC), p. 2-3, System Development Life Cycle - GeeksforGeeks, 7.3: Systems Development Life Cycle - Engineering LibreTexts, What Is SDLC? 7 Phases of System Development Life Cycle - Intetics.

 A vulnerability is a system flaw or weakness that can be exploited by a threat actor, potentially leading to a security breach or incident. A vulnerability that has been exploited means that a threat actor has successfully taken advantage of the vulnerability and compromised the system or network. Implementing controls can help reduce the impact of a vulnerability that has been exploited, by limiting or preventing the damage or loss caused by the security breach or incident. Controls are the mechanisms or procedures that ensure the security, reliability, and quality of an IT system or process. Controls can be classified into different types, depending on their purpose and function. The four types of controls mentioned in the question are:

Detective control: A control that monitors and detects the occurrence or attempt of a security breach or incident, and alerts the appropriate personnel or system. For example, a log analysis tool that identifies and reports any unauthorized access or activity on the system or network.

Deterrent control: A control that discourages or prevents a threat actor from exploiting a vulnerability or performing a malicious action, by increasing the perceived difficulty, risk, or cost of doing so. For example, a warning message that informs the user of the legal consequences of unauthorized access or use of the system or network.

Preventive control: A control that blocks or stops a threat actor from exploiting a vulnerability or performing a malicious action, by eliminating or reducing the vulnerability or the opportunity. For example, a firewall that filters and blocks any unwanted or malicious traffic from entering or leaving the system or network.

Corrective control: A control that restores or repairs the system or network to its normal or desired state, after a security breach or incident has occurred, by fixing or removing the vulnerability or the impact. For example, a backup and recovery tool that restores the data or functionality of the system or network that has been corrupted or lost due to the security breach or incident.

The best type of control for reducing the impact of a vulnerability that has been exploited is the corrective control, because it directly addresses the damage or loss caused by the security breach or incident, and restores the system or network to its normal or desired state. Corrective controls can help minimize the negative consequences of a security breach or incident, such as downtime, data loss, reputational harm, legal liability, or regulatory sanctions. Corrective controls can also help prevent or reduce the recurrence of the security breach or incident, by fixing or removing the vulnerability that has been exploited. References = Types of Security Controls, Security Controls: What They Are and Why You Need Them, Security Controls: Definition, Types & Examples.

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

B. maximum tolerable loss of data.

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

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

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.

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

The BEST way to demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives is through risk scenarios, because they are the descriptions and illustrations of the potential events or situations that may affect the achievement of the business objectives and processes. Risk scenarios can help to demonstrate how the risk profile, which is the summary and representation of the identified and assessed risks, is related and relevant to the business objectives and processes, and how the risk responses and controls are designed and implemented to support and enable the business objectives and processes. The other options are not the best way, because:

Option B: Risk tolerance is the level of variation or deviation from the expected or desired outcome that the organization is willing to accept or endure, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of ensuring that the risk profile and the business objectives are consistent and compatible with each other.

Option C: Risk policy is the document that defines the principles, guidelines, and requirements for the risk management process and activities in the organization, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of showing and proving that the risk profile and the business objectives are coherent and integrated with each other.

Option D: Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to take or pursue in order to achieve its objectives and goals, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of establishing and maintaining that the risk profile and the business objectives are aligned and balanced with each other. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 104.

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite is the most influential factor when management makes risk response decisions, as it helps to define the boundaries and thresholds for acceptable risk levels, and to align the risk responses with the organization’s strategy, goals, and culture. Risk appetite also helps to balance the potential benefits and costs of risk responses, and to communicate the risk expectations and preferences to the stakeholders. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 192.

A risk register is a document that is used as a risk management tool to identify and track risks that may affect a project or an organization1. A risk register should be updated regularly to reflect the current status and changes of the risks, as well as the actions taken to mitigate or resolve them2. The most comprehensive information for updating a risk register would come from the results of the latest risk assessment, which is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts3. A risk assessment provides a detailed and systematic overview of the risks, their sources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences, as well as the existing and planned controls and responses4. A risk assessment also helps to prioritize the risks based on their level of exposure and urgency, and to align them with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance5. Therefore, the results of the latest risk assessment would provide the most relevant and complete information for updating a risk register and ensuring that it reflects the current risk profile and situation of the project or the organization. Results of a risk forecasting analysis are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a complete picture of the risks and their impacts. A risk forecasting analysis is a technique that uses historical data, trends, and scenarios to estimate the potential outcomes and impacts of future events that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance6. A risk forecasting analysis can help to anticipate and prepare for the risks, but it does not provide specific information on the sources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. A review of compliance regulations is not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as it does not cover all the aspects and dimensions of risk management. A review of compliance regulations is a process that involves checking and verifying that the organization’s activities, processes, and systems are in accordance with the applicable laws, rules, and standards7. A review of compliance regulations can help to identify and mitigate the risks related to legal or regulatory violations, but it does not provide specific information on the other types and sources of risks, such as operational, strategic, financial, or reputational risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. Findings of the most recent audit are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a current and holistic view of the risks and their impacts. An audit is an independent examination and evaluation of the organization’s activities, processes, and systems, to provide assurance and advice on their adequacy and effectiveness. An audit can help to identify and report the issues or gaps in the organization’s risk management, but it does not provide specific information on the current status and changes of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

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

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

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

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

 The average time to identify critical information security incidents is the best indicator of effective information security incident management, as it measures how quickly the organization can detect and respond to the most severe threats to its information assets. The faster the organization can identify critical incidents, the lower the potential impact and damage they can cause. The average time to identify critical incidents also reflects the efficiency and accuracy of the monitoring and reporting mechanisms, as well as the awareness and training of the staff and stakeholders. The other options are not the best indicators of effective information security incident management, as they do not directly measure the performance or quality of the incident response process. The monthly trend of information security-related incidents may show the frequency or severity of the incidents, but not how well they are managed. The frequency of information security incident response plan testing may show the preparedness or maturity of the organization, but not the actual effectiveness of the plan. The percentage of high-risk security incidents may show the risk exposure or appetite of the organization, but not the risk mitigation or treatment. References = 7 Types of Information Security Incidents and How to Respond; Annex A.16: Information Security Incident Management - ISMS.online; CISM Isaca Exam Questions and Answers - CertLibrary.com

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

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

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

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

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

Engaging key stakeholders in risk management practices is the best way to embed risk management within the organization. This means that the risk practitioner involves and communicates with the people who have an interest or influence in the organization’s objectives, activities, and risks, such as senior management, business unit managers, employees, customers, suppliers, regulators, etc.

Engaging key stakeholders in risk management practices helps to create a risk-aware culture, align risk management with the organization’s strategy and vision, ensure the ownership and accountability of risks and controls, obtain the support and commitment for risk management initiatives, and improve the risk management performance and outcomes.

The other options are not the best ways to embed risk management within the organization. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 17

Information Technology & Security, page 11

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 9

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

 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 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.

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, cost of controls is the amount of money or resources that an organization is willing to spend to implement and maintain risk responses. Cost of controls is one of the factors that influences the risk appetite of an organization, as it reflects the trade-off between the benefits and costs of risk responses. Cost of controls helps to determine the optimal level of risk that an organization can accept in pursuit of its objectives, and to align the risk responses with the organization’s strategy, goals, and culture. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 193.

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

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric used to measure and monitor the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system within an organization1. KRIs are typically used in risk management to provide early warning signs of potential risks and to help organizations take proactive steps to mitigate those risks. KRIs are designed to be quantitative and measurable, allowing organizations to track changes in risk levels over time and to identify trends and patterns that may indicate an increased likelihood of risk. A negative security return on investment (ROI) would be most beneficial as a KRI, as it would indicate that the organization is spending more on security than the value it is generating or protecting. A negative security ROI would suggest that the organization is either over-investing in security, under-utilizing its security assets, or facing significant security threats or incidents that erode its security value. A negative security ROI would alert the organization to review its security strategy, budget, and performance, and to adjust them accordingly to optimize its security ROI and reduce its risk exposure2. Current capital allocation reserves are not the most beneficial as a KRI, as they do not directly measure the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system. Capital allocation reserves are the amount of capital that an organization sets aside to cover potential losses or liabilities arising from its activities. Capital allocation reserves may reflect the organization’s overall risk appetite and tolerance, but they do not provide specific information on the sources, types, or impacts of risks that the organization faces3. Project cost variances are not the most beneficial as a KRI, as they do not directly measure the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system. Project cost variances are the differences between the actual and planned costs of a project. Project cost variances may indicate the performance or efficiency of a project, but they do not provide specific information on the risks that may affect the project’s objectives, scope, quality, or schedule4. Annualized loss projections are not the most beneficial as a KRI, as they do not directly measure the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system. Annualized loss projections are the estimates of the potential losses that an organization may incur in a year due to various risk events. Annualized loss projections may help the organization to plan and budget for its risk management activities, but they do not provide specific information on the likelihood, frequency, or severity of risk events that may occur5. References = 1: Key risk indicator - Wikipedia2: What Is A Key Risk Indicator?3: Capital Allocation - Overview, Importance, and Methods4: Project Cost Variance: Definition, Formula, and Examples5: [Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) - Definition, Formula, and Example]

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 13

Information Technology & Security, page 7

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 5

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 18

Information Technology & Security, page 12

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 10

When 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.

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 21

Information Technology & Security, page 15

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 13

A risk heat map is a graphical tool that displays the level of risk for each risk area based on the impact and likelihood of occurrence. It also provides a summary of the risk assessment results, such as the number and severity of risks, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the risk response strategies. A risk heat map can help senior management to understand the risk profile of the organization, prioritize the risks that need attention, and allocate resources accordingly. A risk heat map is more effective than the other options because it can communicate complex information in a simple and visual way, and it can highlight the key risk areas and trends. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2, page 97.

 A review of a third-party vendor is a process that involves examining and evaluating the performance, quality, and compliance of the vendor that provides a product or service to the organization1. A review of a third-party vendor can help to identify and address the risks and issues that may arise from the vendor relationship, such as data breaches, service disruptions, contract violations, or reputation damage2. Following a review of a third-party vendor, it is most important for an organization to ensure that the results of the review are accurately reported to management, as this will enable the management to make informed and timely decisions and actions based on the findings and recommendations of the review. Accurate reporting of the results of the review will also help to establish and maintain the trust and transparency between the organization and the vendor, and to demonstrate the accountability and responsibility of the organization for its vendor risk management3. Identified findings are reviewed by the organization, results of the review are validated by internal audit, and identified findings are approved by the vendor are not the most important things to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as they do not provide the same level of impact and value as accurate reporting of the results of the review. Identified findings are reviewed by the organization is a process that involves analyzing and interpreting the outcomes and implications of the review of a third-party vendor, and determining the appropriate risk responses and actions to address the findings4. This is an important step in the vendor risk management process, but it is not the most important thing to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as it does not communicate or inform the management or the vendor of the results of the review. Results of the review are validated by internal audit is a process that involves verifying and confirming the accuracy and reliability of the review of a third-party vendor, and providing assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the vendor risk management. This is an important step in the vendor risk management process, but it is not the most important thing to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as it does not report or share the results of the review with the management or the vendor. Identified findings are approved by the vendor is a process that involves obtaining the consent and agreement of the vendor on the outcomes and recommendations of the review of a third-party vendor, and ensuring their cooperation and compliance with the risk responses and actions. This is an important step in the vendor risk management process, but it is not the most important thing to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as it does not report or inform the management of the results of the review. References = 1: The guide to third-party vendor reviews - TerraTrue HQ | TerraTrue2: 4 Tips For Organizations To Evaluate Third-Party Vendors – Forbes Advisor3: Vendor Risk Management: Best Practices for 2023 - Venminder4: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Options, pp. 113-115.] : [IT Risk Resources | ISACA] : Who Is Considered a Third Party or Vendor? - Venminder : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

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

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

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

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

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

The primary reason to update a risk register with risk assessment results is to communicate the level and priority of assessed risk to management, as this enables them to make informed decisions about risk response and allocation of resources. The risk register is a tool for documenting and reporting the current status of risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, and responses. Updating the risk register with risk assessment results ensures that the information is accurate, relevant, and timely. The risk register also helps to monitor and track the progress and effectiveness of risk management activities. The other options are not the primary reasons to update the risk register, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of doing so. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Assessment, page 109.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 The primary purpose of vulnerability assessments is to detect weaknesses that could lead to system compromise. A vulnerability assessment is a systematic review of security weaknesses in an information system. It evaluates if the system is susceptible to any known vulnerabilities, assigns severity levels to those vulnerabilities, and recommends remediation or mitigation, if and whenever needed1. By identifying and prioritizing the vulnerabilities, a vulnerability assessment helps to prevent or reduce the risk of cyberattacks that could exploit the vulnerabilities and compromise the system. The other options are not the primary purpose, but they may be secondary or tertiary outcomes or benefits of a vulnerability assessment. Providing clear evidence that the system is sufficiently secure is a result of a successful vulnerability assessment and remediation process, but it is not the main objective. Determining the impact of potential threats is a part of the risk assessment process, which complements the vulnerability assessment process, but it is not the same as detecting the vulnerabilities. Testing intrusion detection systems (IDS) and response procedures is a part of the penetration testing process, which simulates a real-world attack on the system to evaluate its security posture, but it is not the same as scanning the system for vulnerabilities. References = What is Vulnerability Assessment | VA Tools and Best Practices - Imperva

According to the Gaining the competitive edge – measuring and assessing an organization’s risk culture article, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite should be aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and values, and should reflect the organization’s risk culture and capabilities. One of the main considerations when validating an organization’s risk appetite is the capacity to withstand loss, which is the ability of the organization to absorb the impact of adverse events without jeopardizing its viability or reputation. The capacity to withstand loss depends on various factors, such as the financial strength, the operational resilience, the governance structure, and the stakeholder expectations of the organization. By assessing the capacity to withstand loss, the organization can determine if its risk appetite is realistic and appropriate, or if it needs to be adjusted to match its risk profile and environment. References = Gaining the competitive edge – measuring and assessing an organization’s risk culture

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

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

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are measurable values that demonstrate how effectively an organization is achieving its key objectives. KPIs can be used to evaluate the progress and performance of a risk management program, as well as to identify the areas for improvement and alignment with the organization’s strategy. KPIs can provide the most useful information when determining a risk management program’s maturity level, because they can reflect the extent to which the program is integrated, consistent, proactive, and value-adding. KPIs can also be compared with industry benchmarks or best practices to assess the program’s maturity level relative to other organizations. The other options are not as useful as KPIs, because they do not provide a clear and comprehensive picture of the risk management program’s maturity level, but rather focus on specific aspects or outputs of the program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 18.

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

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a measurable value that demonstrates how effectively an organization is achieving its key objectives. A KPI should be relevant, specific, measurable, achievable, and time-bound. The number of identified system vulnerabilities is a KPI that measures the security posture and performance of the organization’s information systems. It also helps to identify the areas that need improvement or remediation. The number of identified system vulnerabilities is relevant to the organization’s objective of protecting its information assets, specific to the system level, measurable by using tools or methods, achievable by implementing security controls or practices, and time-bound by setting a target or threshold. Aggregate risk of the organization, number of exception requests processed in the past 90 days, and number of attacks against the organization’s website are not KPIs, as they are either too broad, not relevant, or not measurable. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.1.1, page 1741

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 647.

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

The greatest concern associated with the transmission of healthcare data across the internet is unencrypted data, as this exposes the data to unauthorized access, interception, modification, or disclosure, which may compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data. Healthcare data is sensitive and personal information that may include medical records, diagnoses, treatments, prescriptions, insurance claims, and biometric data. Healthcare data is subject to various legal and regulatory requirements, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States, that mandate the protection and privacy of the data. Encryption is a method of transforming the data into an unreadable format that can only be accessed or restored by authorized parties who have the decryption key. Encryption helps to prevent or reduce the risk of data breaches, identity theft, fraud, or other malicious attacks. The other options are not the greatest concerns associated with the transmission of healthcare data across the internet, although they may pose some challenges or issues. Lack of redundant circuits is a concern for the reliability and continuity of the data transmission, but it does not affect the security or privacy of the data. Low bandwidth connections is a concern for the speed and efficiency of the data transmission, but it does not affect the security or privacy of the data. Data integrity is a concern for the accuracy and completeness of the data, but it does not necessarily depend on the encryption of the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 156.

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

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

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

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

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

Strategic decisions on risk management are the decisions that involve setting the direction, objectives, and priorities for risk management within an organization, as well as aligning them with the organization’s overall strategy, vision, and mission1. Strategic decisions on risk management also involve defining the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, which are the amount and level of risk that the organization is willing and able to accept to achieve its goals2. The responsibility for strategic decisions on risk management should belong to the executive management team, which is the group of senior leaders who have the authority and accountability for the organization’s performance and governance3. The executive management team has the best understanding of the organization’s strategic context, environment, and stakeholders, and can make informed and balanced decisions that consider the benefits and costs of risk-taking4. The executive management team also has the ability and responsibility to communicate and cascade the strategic decisions on risk management to the rest of the organization, and to monitor and evaluate their implementation and outcomes5. The chief information officer (CIO), the audit committee, and the business process owner are not the best choices for being responsible for strategic decisions on risk management, as they do not have the same level of authority and accountability as the executive management team. The CIO is the senior leader who oversees the organization’s information and technology strategy, resources, and systems6. The CIO may be involved in providing input and feedback to the executive management team on the strategic decisions on risk management, especially those related to IT risk, but they do not have the final say or the overall responsibility for them. The audit committee is a subcommittee of the board of directors that oversees the organization’s financial reporting, internal controls, and external audits7. The audit committee may be involved in reviewing and approving the strategic decisions on risk management, as well as ensuring their compliance with the relevant laws and standards, but they do not have the authority or the expertise to make or implement them. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for a business process that supports or enables the organization’s objectives and functions. The business process owner may be involved in executing and reporting on the strategic decisions on risk management, as well as identifying and mitigating the risks related to their business process, but they do not have the perspective or the influence to make or communicate them. References = 1: Strategic Risk Management: Complete Overview (With Examples)2: [Risk Appetite and Tolerance - ISACA] 3: [Senior Management - Definition, Roles and Responsibilities] 4: Stanford Strategic Decision and Risk Management | Stanford Online5: A 7-Step Process for Strategic Risk Management — RiskOptics - Reciprocity6: [Chief Information Officer (CIO) - Gartner IT Glossary] 7: [Audit Committee - Overview, Functions, and Responsibilities] : [Business Process Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] : [Business Process Owner - Roles and Responsibilities] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Concepts, pp. 17-19.]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

An IT risk and control self-assessment (RCSA) is a process that helps organizations identify and evaluate operational risks and assess the effectiveness of their control measures12. It is a structured approach that involves identifying, assessing, mitigating, and monitoring risks across all levels of an organization12.

A report to senior management is a document that summarizes and communicates the results and findings of the RCSA, and provides recommendations and action plans for improving the risk management and control processes34.

The most important aspect of an IT risk and control self-assessment to include in a report to senior management is an increase in residual risk, which is the risk remaining after risk treatment, and represents the exposure or potential impact of the risk on the organization’s objectives56.

An increase in residual risk is the most important aspect because it indicates the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or tolerate, and the gap between the current and desired risk profile56.

An increase in residual risk is also the most important aspect because it requires the attention and decision of the senior management, who are responsible for defining the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, and criteria, and for ensuring that the residual risk is within the acceptable range56.

The other options are not the most important aspects, but rather possible components or outcomes of an IT risk and control self-assessment that may support or complement the report to senior management. For example:

Changes in control design are components of an IT risk and control self-assessment that involve modifying or updating the control measures to address the changes in the risk environment or the organization’s objectives56. However, changes in control design are not the most important aspect because they do not measure or reflect the residual risk, which is the ultimate goal of the risk treatment56.

A decrease in the number of key controls is an outcome of an IT risk and control self-assessment that indicates the improvement or optimization of the control processes, and the reduction of the complexity or redundancy of the control measures56. However, a decrease in the number of key controls is not the most important aspect because it does not indicate or imply the residual risk, which may depend on other factors such as the effectiveness or efficiency of the controls56.

Changes in control ownership are components of an IT risk and control self-assessment that involve assigning or reassigning the responsibility and accountability for the control processes to the appropriate individuals or groups within the organization56. However, changes in control ownership are not the most important aspect because they do not affect or determine the residual risk, which is independent of the control owners56. References =

1: Risk and control self-assessment - KPMG Global1

2: Control Self Assessments - PwC2

3: How-To Guide: Implementing Risk Control Self-Assessment Steps4

4: RISK MANAGEMENT SELF-ASSESSMENT TEMPLATE - Smartsheet5

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

According to the 1.9 Ownership & Accountability - CRISC, risk ownership is best established by mapping risk to specific business process owners. Details of the risk owner should be documented in the risk register. Results of the risk monitoring should be discussed and communicated with the risk owner as they own the risk and are accountable for maintaining the risk within acceptable levels. To ensure effective risk ownership, it is most important that risk owners have decision-making authority, as this enables them to take timely and appropriate actions to manage the risk and ensure that it is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Without decision-making authority, risk owners may not be able to implement the necessary risk responses or escalate the issues to the relevant stakeholders. Therefore, the answer is D. risk owners have decision-making authority. References = 1.9 Ownership & Accountability - CRISC, The Importance of Effective Risk Governance in the C-suite - Aon

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Escalation procedures are the processes and guidelines for communicating and sharing the information and status of the risks and their responses among the relevant stakeholders, and for escalating or transferring the risks and their responses to the appropriate levels or parties when necessary or required. Escalation procedures can help the organization to monitor KRIs by ensuring the awareness and involvement of the stakeholders, but they are not the essential elements that need to be in place, because they do not establish and specify the acceptable or tolerable ranges or limits for the KRIs.

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 206

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: IT Scenario Analysis in Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA2

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

3: Business Risk - Investopedia3

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

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

7: Executive Risk Council - ISACA5

8: Executive Risk Council: A Guide to Success6

9: IT System Downtime - ISACA7

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

: IT Risk Education - ISACA9

: IT Risk Education: A Guide to Success

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Risk responses are the actions or strategies that are taken to address the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation12.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

4: ProjectManagement.com - How to Implement Risk Responses2

5: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

6: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

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

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

Detailed Explanation:Multi-factor authentication (MFA) significantly reduces the risk of account compromise by requiring multiple forms of verification, such as a password and a one-time code, enhancing security beyond single-factor authentication methods.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 Strong authentication is the most effective measure against external threats to an organization’s confidential information. Confidential information is any data or information that is sensitive, proprietary, or valuable to the organization, and that should not be disclosed to unauthorized parties1. External threats are malicious actors outside the organization who attempt to gain unauthorized access to the organization’s networks, systems, and data, using various methods such as malware, hacking, or social engineering2. Strong authentication is a method of verifying the identity and legitimacy of a user or device before granting access to the organization’s resources or data3. Strong authentication typically involves the use of multiple factors or methods of authentication, such as passwords, tokens, biometrics, or certificates4. Strong authentication can prevent or reduce the risk of external threats to the organization’s confidential information, by making it more difficult and costly for the attackers to compromise the credentials or devices of the authorized users, and by limiting the access to the data or resources that are relevant and necessary for the users’ roles and responsibilities5. The other options are not the most effective measures against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as they are either less secure or less relevant than strong authentication. Single sign-on is a method of allowing a user to access multiple systems or applications with a single set of credentials, without having to log in separately for each system or application6. Single sign-on can improve the user experience and convenience, as well as reduce the administrative burden and cost of managing multiple accounts and passwords. However, single sign-on is not the most effective measure against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it can also increase the risk of credential compromise or misuse, and create a single point of failure or attack for the attackers to access multiple systems or data. Data integrity checking is a method of ensuring that the data or information is accurate, complete, and consistent, and that it has not been altered or corrupted by unauthorized parties or processes. Data integrity checking can involve the use of techniques such as checksums, hashes, digital signatures, or encryption. Data integrity checking can enhance the quality and reliability of the data or information, as well as detect and prevent any unauthorized or malicious changes or tampering. However, data integrity checking is not the most effective measure against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it does not prevent or reduce the risk of data theft or leakage, and it does not verify the identity or legitimacy of the users or devices accessing the data. Intrusion detection system is a system that monitors the network or system activities and events, and detects and alerts any suspicious or malicious behaviors or anomalies that may indicate an attempted or successful breach or attack. Intrusion detection system can help to identify and respond to external threats to the organization’s networks, systems, and data, by providing visibility and awareness of the network or system status and activities, and by enabling timely and appropriate actions or countermeasures. However, intrusion detection system is not the most effective measure against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it is a reactive or passive system that does not prevent or block the attacks, and it may generate false positives or negatives that can affect its accuracy and efficiency. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, Page 189.

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

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

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

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

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

Facilitate the implementation of corrective actions and risk mitigation strategies

Promote accountability and transparency in the risk management process

Enhance the security awareness and culture within the organization

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

Continuous risk management process improvement is the practice of evaluating and enhancing the risk management process on a regular basis, to ensure that it is effective, efficient, and aligned with the business objectives and strategy. Continuous risk management process improvement can help identify and address the gaps, weaknesses, or opportunities for improvement in the risk management process, and ensure that the process is responsive and adaptable to the changing risk environment. The most effective method for continuous risk management process improvement is periodic assessments, which are systematic and objective evaluations of the risk management process, performed at predefined intervals or after significant events. Periodic assessments can help measure and monitor the performance and maturity of the risk management process, using criteria such as the risk management framework, standards, policies, procedures, methods, tools, roles, responsibilities, and results. Periodic assessments can also help identify and analyze the strengths, weaknesses, threats, and opportunities of the risk management process, and provide feedback and recommendations for improvement. Periodic assessments can also help communicate and report the status and progress of the risk management process to the stakeholders, and obtain their input and support for improvement actions. References = Continuous Risk Management Guidebook, p. 7-8, ISO 31000: risk management and its continuous improvement, How Continuous Monitoring Drives Risk Management.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Top Four Damaging Consequences of Data Leakage | ZeroFox1

2: 8 Data Leak Prevention Strategies for 2023 | UpGuard2

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

4: Data Classification Policy Template - IT Governance USA4

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

6: Encryption Policy Template - IT Governance USA6

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

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

 Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying controls to mitigate the inherent risk. Inherent risk is the risk that exists before considering the controls. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation from the risk appetite. Improvements in the design and implementation of a control will most likely result in an update to the residual risk, because they will reduce the likelihood and impact of the risk event, and therefore lower the risk exposure and value. By improving the design and implementation of a control, the organization can enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the control, and ensure that it is aligned with the risk objectives, expectations, and outcomes. The improvement can also address any gaps, overlaps, redundancies, or conflicts among the controls, and any changes or enhancements that are needed to optimize the controls. The other options are less likely to be updated due to improvements in the design and implementation of a control. The inherent risk will not change, as it is based on the nature and value of the asset and the threats and vulnerabilities that exist. The risk appetite and the risk tolerance will also not change, as they are based on the organization’s culture, strategy, and stakeholder expectations. Therefore, the most likely factor to be updated is the residual risk, as it reflects the actual risk level that the organization faces after applying the controls. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

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

Codes of conduct or ethics

Policies or manuals

Training or awareness programs

Job descriptions or roles and responsibilities

Performance appraisals or incentives

Supervision or oversight

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

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), a contract associated with a cloud service provider must include ownership of responsibilities, as this defines the roles and obligations of both the cloud provider and the customer in relation to the cloud services. The contract should specify who is responsible for:

Service delivery and performance

Data security and privacy

Compliance with regulations and standards

Incident management and reporting

Business continuity and disaster recovery

Change management and configuration control

Intellectual property rights and licensing

Termination and data egress

The contract should also include service level agreements (SLAs) that measure and monitor the quality and availability of the cloud services, as well as remedies and penalties for non-compliance. The contract should also address pricing and payment terms, dispute resolution mechanisms, and liability and indemnification clauses.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 173-1741

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

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

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

Optimize the value and benefits of the risk response

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

Coordinate and communicate the risk response with the relevant stakeholders

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

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

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

To reduce risk impact, the best course of action is to implement corrective measures, which are actions taken to eliminate or minimize the negative effects of a risk event after it has occurred12.

Corrective measures can include restoring normal operations, repairing or replacing damaged assets, recovering lost data, compensating affected stakeholders, and implementing lessons learned12.

Corrective measures can reduce risk impact by minimizing the duration, severity, and scope of the consequences of a risk event, as well as preventing recurrence or escalation of similar risks in the future12.

The other options are not the best course of action to reduce risk impact, but rather different types of risk responses that may have different objectives and effects. For example:

Creating an IT security policy is an example of a preventive measure, which is an action taken to avoid or reduce the likelihood of a risk event before it occurs12. A preventive measure can reduce risk exposure, but not risk impact.

Implementing detective controls is an example of a monitoring measure, which is an action taken to identify and measure the occurrence or status of a risk event during or after it occurs12. A monitoring measure can provide timely information and feedback, but not reduce risk impact.

Leveraging existing technology is an example of a mitigation measure, which is an action taken to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk event before it occurs12. A mitigation measure can reduce risk exposure, but not necessarily risk impact. References =

1: Risk Management Guide for Information Technology Systems, NIST Special Publication 800-30, July 2002

2: Project Risk Management Handbook, California Department of Transportation, June 2011

The risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk and its associated controls. The risk owner is also responsible for ensuring that the risk is within the acceptable level and that the risk response is effective and efficient. In this case, the risk owner is also the owner of the business service that depends on the managed hosting service. Therefore, the risk owner should be notified of the new information about the flood risk first, as they have the most interest and influence on the risk and its impact on the business objectives. The risk owner can then decide on the appropriate actions to take, such as reviewing the contract terms, requesting additional controls, or changing the service provider. The other options are not the correct answers because they are not the primary stakeholders of the risk and its consequences. The data center manager is an employee of the managed hosting service provider, not the organization that procured the service. The data center manager may not have the authority or the incentive to address the flood risk or inform the organization. The site manager is also an employee of the managed hosting service provider, and their role is to conduct annual risk assessments under the contract. The site manager may not be aware of the new information or have the responsibility to communicate it to the organization. The CIO is the senior executive who oversees the IT strategy and operations of the organization. The CIO may have a general interest in the managed hosting service and its risks, but they are not the direct owner or manager of the specific risk or the business service that relies on the service. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 702

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

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

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

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

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

The maturity of an IT risk management program is most influenced by the organization’s risk culture, as this reflects the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes that shape how the organization perceives and responds to risk. The risk culture determines the level of awareness, commitment, and involvement of the stakeholders in the IT risk management process, as well as the degree of integration and alignment with the enterprise’s objectives and strategy. A mature IT risk management program requires a strong and positive risk culture that fosters trust, collaboration, and accountability among the stakeholders, and supports continuous improvement and learning. The other options are not the most influential factors for the maturity of an IT risk management program, although they may have some impact or relevance. Benchmarking results against similar organizations can provide useful insights and comparisons, but they do not necessarily reflect the organization’s own risk culture or context. Industry-specific regulatory requirements can impose certain standards and expectations, but they do not guarantee the effectiveness or efficiency of the IT risk management program. Expertise available within the IT department can enhance the technical and operational aspects of the IT risk management program, but it does not ensure the strategic and cultural alignment with the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, page 23.

Detailed Explanation:When likelihood is unknown, range-based estimates from subject-matter experts provide informed and realistic insights into potential risk exposure. This approach helps approximate the inherent risk based on experience and expertise, supporting effective decision-making.

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

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

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 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

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

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

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

Optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities

Enhance the value and performance of the organization

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

A risk profile is a summary or representation of the organization’s exposure or level of risk, based on the results of the risk assessment and evaluation. A risk profile can show the distribution and comparison of the risks based on various criteria, such as likelihood, impact, category, source, etc. A risk profile can also indicate the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and the gaps or opportunities for improvement.

The primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register is that it helps to build a risk profile for management review, because it provides the data and information that are necessary and relevant for creating and updating the risk profile, and for communicating and reporting the risk profile to the management. Maintaining an up-to-date risk register can help to build a risk profile for management review by providing the following benefits:

It can ensure that the risk profile reflects the current and accurate state and performance of the organization’s risk management function, and that it covers all the relevant and significant risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations.

It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the identification, analysis, evaluation, and communication of the risks and their responses, and for the alignment and integration of the risks and their responses with the organization’s strategy and culture.

It can support the decision making and planning for the risk management function, and for the allocation and optimization of the resources, time, and budget for the risk management function.

The other options are not the primary benefits of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of building a risk profile for management review, which is to summarize and represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and to communicate and report it to the management.

Implementing uniform controls for common risk scenarios means applying and enforcing the same or similar controls or countermeasures for the risks that have the same or similar characteristics or features, such as source, cause, impact, etc. Implementing uniform controls for common risk scenarios can help to ensure the consistency and efficiency of the risk management function, but it is not the primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because it does not summarize or represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization’s objectives and needs.

Ensuring business unit risk is uniformly distributed means ensuring that the risks that are associated with the different business units or divisions of the organization are balanced or equalized, and that they do not exceed or fall below the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Ensuring business unit risk is uniformly distributed can help to optimize the performance and profitability of the organization, but it is not the primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because it does not summarize or represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and it may not be feasible or realistic for the organization.

Quantifying the organization’s risk appetite means measuring and expressing the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing and able to accept or take, in pursuit of its objectives and goals. Quantifying the organization’s risk appetite can help to establish and communicate the boundaries and expectations for the organization’s risk management function, but it is not the primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because it does not summarize or represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and it may not be consistent or compatible with the organization’s strategy and culture. 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 201

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

Enhance the security awareness and resilience of the organization

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

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

Detailed Explanation:Risk transfer involves shifting the responsibility for managing specific risks to a third party. By outsourcing the security function, the organization transfers the associated risk to a vendor specializing in security management.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the risk register is the most useful component of the review of the overall risk profile from the targeted organization, as it provides a comprehensive and up-to-date record of the identified risks, their likelihood and impact, their risk response actions, and their residual risk levels. The risk register helps to:

Understand the current and potential threats and vulnerabilities that may affect the targeted organization’s objectives and performance

Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management processes and controls implemented by the targeted organization

Identify the gaps or weaknesses in the risk management practices and capabilities of the targeted organization

Assess the compatibility and alignment of the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the targeted organization with the acquiring organization

Estimate the value and benefits of the acquisition and the potential risks and costs involved

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 38-391

End user acceptance testing is a process that verifies that a system or service meets the requirements and expectations of the end users, who are the actual or potential customers or beneficiaries of the system or service. End user acceptance testing is the final stage of testing before the system or service is deployed or released to the production environment. The results of end user acceptance testing are the most important consideration for a risk practitioner when making a system implementation go-live recommendation, as they indicate the quality, functionality, usability, and reliability of the system or service from the end user perspective. The results of end user acceptance testing can help to identify and resolve any defects, errors, or issues that may affect the performance, satisfaction, or acceptance of the system or service by the end users. The results of end user acceptance testing can also help to evaluate the benefits, value, and risks of the system or service for the end users and the organization. The other options are not the most important consideration for a risk practitioner when making a system implementation go-live recommendation, although they may be relevant and useful. The completeness of system documentation is a factor that affects the maintainability, supportability, and auditability of the system or service, but it does not measure the end user experience or satisfaction. The variances between planned and actual cost is a measure of the efficiency and budget management of the system or service development or implementation, but it does not reflect the end user needs or expectations. The availability of in-house resources is a resource that supports the system or service delivery and operation, but it does not ensure the end user acceptance or approval. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 180-1811; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 87

A change management process is a set of procedures and activities that aim to ensure that changes in an organization’s IT systems and services are implemented in a controlled and coordinated manner. The effectiveness of a change management process can be measured by how well it reduces the risks and costs associated with changes, and how well it supports the business objectives and customer expectations. One of the best metrics to demonstrate the effectiveness of a change management process is the percent of unauthorized changes. Unauthorized changes are changes that are made without following the established change management process, such as obtaining approval, documenting the change, testing the change, and communicating the change. Unauthorized changes can introduce errors, defects, security breaches, and disruptions to the IT systems and services, and can negatively affect the business performance and customer satisfaction. Therefore, a low percent of unauthorized changes indicates that the change management process is effective in ensuring that changes are properly planned, approved, executed, and monitored. The other options are not the best metrics to demonstrate the effectiveness of a change management process, as they do not directly reflect the quality and control of the changes. An increase in the frequency of changes may indicate that the organization is agile and responsive to the changing business needs and customer demands, but it does not necessarily mean that the changes are well-managed and beneficial. An increase in the number of emergency changes may indicate that the organization is able to handle urgent and critical situations, but it may also suggest that the organization is reactive and lacks proper planning and analysis of the changes. The average time to complete changes may indicate the efficiency and speed of the change management process, but it does not measure the effectiveness and value of the changes. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 156-1571; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 712

Nonrepudiation is the ability to prevent or deny the parties involved in an electronic transaction from disputing or rejecting the validity or authenticity of the transaction. Nonrepudiation ensures that the parties cannot claim that they did not send or receive the transaction, or that the transaction was altered or tampered with.

The tool that helps ensure compliance with a nonrepudiation policy requirement for electronic transactions is digital signatures, which are the electronic equivalents of handwritten signatures that are used to verify the identity and integrity of the sender and the content of the transaction. Digital signatures are generated by applying a cryptographic algorithm to the transaction, using the sender’s private key, which is a secret and unique code that only the sender knows and possesses. The digital signature can be verified by the receiver or any third party, using the sender’s public key, which is a code that is publicly available and corresponds to the sender’s private key. The digital signature can prove that the transaction was sent by the sender, and that the transaction was not altered or tampered with during the transmission.

The other options are not the tools that help ensure compliance with a nonrepudiation policy requirement for electronic transactions, because they do not provide the same level of verification and validation that digital signatures provide, and they may not be sufficient or effective to prevent or deny the parties from disputing or rejecting the transaction.

Encrypted passwords are the passwords that are converted into a secret or unreadable form, using a cryptographic algorithm, to protect them from unauthorized access or disclosure. Encrypted passwords can help to ensure the confidentiality and security of the passwords, but they are not the tools that help ensure compliance with a nonrepudiation policy requirement for electronic transactions, because they do not verify the identity and integrity of the sender and the content of the transaction, and they may not prevent or deny the parties from disputing or rejecting the transaction.

One-time passwords are the passwords that are valid or usable for only one session or transaction, and that are randomly generated or derived from a dynamic factor, such as time, location, or device. One-time passwords can help to enhance the security and authentication of the parties involved in the transaction, but they are not the tools that help ensure compliance with a nonrepudiation policy requirement for electronic transactions, because they do not verify the identity and integrity of the sender and the content of the transaction, and they may not prevent or deny the parties from disputing or rejecting the transaction.

Digital certificates are the electronic documents that contain the information and credentials of the parties involved in the transaction, such as their name, public key, expiration date, etc., and that are issued and signed by a trusted authority or entity, such as a certificate authority or a digital signature provider. Digital certificates can help to establish and confirm the identity and trustworthiness of the parties involved in the transaction, but they are not the tools that help ensure compliance with a nonrepudiation policy requirement for electronic transactions, because they do not verify the identity and integrity of the sender and the content of the transaction, and they may not prevent or deny the parties from disputing or rejecting the transaction. 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 197

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the sources, causes, and consequences of IT-related risks, and the potential impacts on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

A corporate risk register is a document that records and tracks the significant risks that the organization faces, and the responses and actions that are taken to address them34.

The greatest benefit of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register is that exposure is integrated into the organization’s risk profile, which is a comprehensive and integrated representation of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation56.

Exposure is integrated into the organization’s risk profile means that the organization has a complete and consistent view of the IT risk landscape, and the potential impacts and interdependencies of IT risks on other types of risks, such as financial, operational, strategic, or reputational risks56.

Exposure is integrated into the organization’s risk profile also means that the organization can make informed and balanced decisions on the risk responses and actions, and allocate the appropriate resources and priorities to the IT risk management and control processes56.

The other options are not the greatest benefit, but rather possible outcomes or consequences of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register. For example:

Corporate incident escalation protocols are established is an outcome of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register that indicates the organization has defined and implemented the procedures and mechanisms for reporting and resolving IT-related incidents, and for escalating them to the appropriate authorities or levels when necessary78. However, this outcome does not measure or reflect the exposure or the risk profile of the organization, which may depend on other factors such as the frequency, severity, or complexity of the incidents78.

Risk appetite cascades to business unit management is a consequence of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register that indicates the organization has communicated and aligned the risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue, to the business unit management, who are responsible for executing the risk strategy and objectives at the operational level . However, this consequence does not indicate or imply the exposure or the risk profile of the organization, which may vary depending on the context, environment, or stakeholder expectations .

The organization-wide control budget is expanded is an outcome of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register that indicates the organization has increased the amount of resources and funds that are allocated to the control processes, which are the procedures and activities that aim to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s operations, the reliability of its information, and the compliance with its policies and regulations . However, this outcome does not affect or determine the exposure or the risk profile of the organization, which is independent of the control budget . References =

1: IT Risk Scenarios - Morland-Austin3

2: Risk Scenarios Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

3: Risk Register Template and Examples | Prioritize and Manage Risk1

4: Risk Register Examples for Cybersecurity Leaders4

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

8: Security Incident Reporting and Response, ISACA, 2019

: Risk Appetite: Linking Strategy, Risk and Performance, ISACA, 2012

: Risk Appetite and Tolerance, ISACA Journal, Volume 4, 2013

: The Control Process | Principles of Management2

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

 Risk impact is the potential loss or damage that a risk event can cause to an organization. Risk impact can be expressed in qualitative or quantitative terms, such as financial, reputational, operational, or legal. A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the key information about the identified risks, such as their description, likelihood, impact, response, and status. A risk register helps an organization to monitor and manage its risks effectively and efficiently. When there is a change in the external or internal environment that affects the organization’s risks, such as new regulations, the risk register should be updated to reflect this change. The most important element of the risk register to update in this case is the risk impact, because the new regulations have significantly increased the penalties for data breaches, which means that the potential loss or damage that a data breach can cause to the organization has also increased. By updating the risk impact, the organization can reassess the severity and priority of the data breach risk, and adjust its risk response accordingly. The other elements of the risk register are less important to update in this case. The risk trend shows the direction and rate of change of the risk over time, which may or may not be affected by the new regulations. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, which is unlikely to change due to the new regulations. The risk likelihood is the probability of a risk event occurring, which is also independent of the new regulations. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

Control effectiveness is the degree to which a control achieves its intended objective and mitigates the risk that it is designed to address. It is measured by comparing the actual performance and outcome of the control with the expected or desired performance and outcome.

The best method for assessing control effectiveness is continuous monitoring, which is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the performance and outcome of the controls on an ongoing basis. Continuous monitoring provides timely and accurate information on the status and results of the controls, and enables the identification and correction of any issues or gaps in the control environment.

Continuous monitoring can be performed using various techniques, such as automated tools, dashboards, indicators, metrics, logs, audits, reviews, etc. Continuous monitoring 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 methods for assessing control effectiveness, because they do not provide the same level of timeliness, accuracy, and completeness of information on the performance and outcome of the controls.

Ad hoc control reporting is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the performance and outcome of the controls on an irregular or occasional basis. Ad hoc control reporting may be triggered by specific events, requests, or incidents, and it may not cover all the relevant or critical controls. Ad hoc control reporting may not provide sufficient or consistent information on the control effectiveness, and it may not enable the timely and proactive identification and correction of any issues or gaps in the control environment.

Control self-assessment is the process of allowing the control owners or operators to evaluate and report on the performance and outcome of their own controls. Control self-assessment can provide useful insights and feedback from the control owners or operators, and it can enhance their awareness and accountability for the control effectiveness. However, control self-assessment may not be objective, reliable, or independent, and it may not cover all the relevant or critical controls. Control self-assessment may not provide sufficient or consistent information on the control effectiveness, and it may not enable the timely and proactive identification and correction of any issues or gaps in the control environment.

Predictive analytics is the process of using statistical techniques and models to analyze historical and current data, and to make predictions or forecasts about future events or outcomes. Predictive analytics can provide useful insights and trends on the potential performance and outcome of the controls, and it can support the decision making and planning for the control effectiveness. However, predictive analytics may not be accurate, valid, or reliable, and it may not reflect the actual or current performance and outcome of the controls. Predictive analytics may not provide sufficient or consistent information on the control effectiveness, and it may not enable the timely and proactive identification and correction of any issues or gaps in the control environment. 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 150

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Automation of control monitoring is the application of technology to allow continuous or high-frequency, automated monitoring of controls to validate the effectiveness of controls designed to mitigate risk1.

Automation of control monitoring can provide benefits such as increased test coverage, improved timeliness, reduced risk velocity, greater visibility, improved consistency, and the ability to identify trends23.

However, automation of control monitoring also involves costs such as the acquisition, implementation, maintenance, and updating of the technology, as well as the training and support of the staff who use it45.

Therefore, the primary consideration when assessing the automation of control monitoring is the cost-benefit analysis of automation, which compares the expected benefits and costs of automation and determines whether the benefits outweigh the costs or vice versa45.

The other options are not the primary consideration, but rather secondary or tertiary factors that may influence the decision to automate or not. For example, the impact due to failure of control and the frequency of failure of control are aspects of the risk assessment that may indicate the need for automation, but they do not provide the basis for evaluating the feasibility and desirability of automation45. Similarly, the contingency plan for residual risk is a component of the risk response that may include automation as a risk mitigation strategy, but it does not measure the effectiveness and efficiency of automation45. References =

2: A Practical Approach to Continuous Control Monitoring, ISACA Journal, Volume 2, 2015

3: Continuous Controls Monitoring: The Next Generation Of Controls Testing, Forbes Technology Council, June 2, 2022

1: Making Continuous Controls Monitoring Work for Everyone, ISACA Now Blog, June 13, 2022

4: Controls Automation - Monitoring vs. Operation - Part 3, Turnkey Consulting, July 29, 2021

5: What’s Continuous Control Monitoring and Why Is It Important?, MetricStream Blog, October 15, 2019

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Encourage the reporting and escalation of risk issues and incidents

Reinforce the benefits and value of effective risk management

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk Assessment for the Production Process1

2: Risk Assessment for Industrial Equipment2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

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

The security risk associated with wearable technology in the workplace is the possibility and impact of unauthorized access, disclosure, or use of the data or information that are collected, stored, or transmitted by the wearable devices, such as smartwatches, fitness trackers, or glasses, that are worn or used by the employees12.

The first step in managing the security risk associated with wearable technology in the workplace is to identify the potential risk, which is the process of recognizing and describing the sources, causes, and consequences of the risk, and the potential impacts on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation34.

Identifying the potential risk is the first step because it provides the basis and input for the subsequent steps of the risk management process, such as assessing, treating, monitoring, and communicating the risk34.

Identifying the potential risk is also the first step because it enables the organization to understand and prioritize the risk, and to allocate the appropriate resources and controls for the risk management process34.

The other options are not the first step, but rather possible subsequent steps that may depend on or follow the identification of the potential risk. For example:

Monitoring employee usage is a step that involves collecting and analyzing data and information on the frequency, duration, and purpose of the wearable devices that are used by the employees, and detecting and reporting any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate a security risk5 . However, this step is not the first step because it requires the identification of the potential risk to provide the guidance and standards for the monitoring process5 .

Assessing the potential risk is a step that involves estimating and evaluating the likelihood and impact of the risk, and the level of risk exposure or tolerance for the organization34. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the identification of the potential risk to provide the information and data for the assessment process34.

Developing risk awareness training is a step that involves educating and training the employees and other stakeholders on the security risks and best practices associated with the wearable technology, and informing them of their roles, obligations, and responsibilities for the risk management process . However, this step is not the first step because it requires the identification of the potential risk to provide the content and objectives for the training process . References =

1: Wearable Devices in the Workplace: Security Threats and Protection1

2: 10 security risks of wearables | CSO Online2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

5: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA3

: Continuous Monitoring: A New Approach to Risk Management - ISACA Journal4

: What Is Security Awareness Training and Why Is It Important? - Kaspersky5

: Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: SWOT Analysis - ISACA1

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

5: Standard Operating Procedure - Wikipedia3

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

7: Benchmarking - Wikipedia5

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

: Control Gap Analysis - ISACA7

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Detailed Explanation:The impact to business objectives is paramount when developing risk scenarios, as the primary purpose of risk management is to protect and support business objectives. Understanding the impact helps tailor scenarios to potential risks that could disrupt key operations or strategic goals.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Implement and monitor the cybersecurity controls and processes

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

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

Continuously improve the cybersecurity capabilities and maturity

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

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

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

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

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

Prioritize the threats based on their likelihood and impact

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 208

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

The primary objective of promoting a risk-aware culture within an organization is enabling risk-based decision making, because this helps the organization to achieve its goals and objectives while managing its risks effectively and efficiently. A risk-aware culture is one where everyone understands the organization’s approach to risk, takes personal responsibility to manage risk in everything they do, and encourages others to follow their example. A risk-aware culture also fosters communication, collaboration, and learning about risk across the organization. By promoting a risk-aware culture, the organization can empower its employees to make informed and balanced decisions that consider both the potential benefits and the potential risks of their actions. This can enhance the organization’s performance, resilience, and competitiveness in a dynamic and uncertain environment. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

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

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

Detailed Explanation:An updated risk register ensures that decision-makers have accurate, timely information about current risks, enabling informed, risk-based decisions that align with organizational priorities and changes in the environment.

An organization’s account provisioning process is the process of creating, modifying, or deleting user accounts and access rights for the organization’s information systems and resources. It involves defining the access requirements, policies, and standards, and implementing and enforcing them across the organization.

The best evidence of the effectiveness of an organization’s account provisioning process is entitlement reviews, which are the periodic or regular reviews and validations of the user accounts and access rights that are granted or assigned to the users or entities that interact with the organization’s information systems and resources. Entitlement reviews can provide assurance and verification that the account provisioning process is accurate, consistent, and compliant, and that it meets the organization’s security and business objectives and requirements.

Entitlement reviews can be performed using various techniques, such as automated tools, reports, audits, surveys, etc. Entitlement reviews can also be integrated with the organization’s governance, risk management, and compliance functions, and aligned with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the best evidence of the effectiveness of an organization’s account provisioning process, because they do not provide the same level of assurance and verification that the account provisioning process is accurate, consistent, and compliant, and that it meets the organization’s security and business objectives and requirements.

User provisioning is the process of creating, modifying, or deleting user accounts and access rights for a specific user or entity, based on their identity, role, or function in the organization. User provisioning is an important part of the account provisioning process, but it is not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because it does not indicate whether the user accounts and access rights are appropriate and authorized, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

Role-based access controls are the controls that grant or restrict user accounts and access rights based on the predefined roles or functions that the users or entities perform or assume in the organization. Role-based access controls are an important part of the account provisioning process, but they are not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because they do not indicate whether the roles or functions are defined and assigned correctly and consistently, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

Security log monitoring is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the security events or activities that are recorded or logged by the organization’s information systems and resources. Security log monitoring is an important part of the account provisioning process, but it is not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because it does not indicate whether the security events or activities are legitimate or authorized, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards. 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 173

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: The Control Process | Principles of Management4

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

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

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

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

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

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

An IT risk profile is a document that summarizes the IT-related risks that an organization faces, as well as the information and actions related to those risks, such as the risk description, assessment, response, status, and owner. An IT risk profile is a valuable tool for managing and communicating IT risks and their impact on the organization’s objectives and operations. The best description of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions is that it helps assess the effects of IT decisions on risk exposure. This means that the IT risk profile can help to evaluate the potential consequences and implications of different IT choices or actions on the level and nature of the IT risks that the organization faces. The IT risk profile can also help to identify and address the gaps or opportunities for improvement in the IT risk management process and performance. The other options are not the best descriptions of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions, although they may be related or beneficial. Comparing performance levels of IT assets to value delivered is a technique to measure and optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of the IT resources and activities that support the organization’s goals and needs. However, this technique does not necessarily involve the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the output and outcome of the IT assets, not the input and impact of the IT risks. Facilitating the alignment of strategic IT objectives to business objectives is a technique to ensure that the IT strategy and plans are consistent and compatible with the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, and objectives. However, this technique does not depend on the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the direction and purpose of the IT objectives, not the probability and threat of the IT risks. Providing input to business managers when preparing a business case for new IT projects is a technique to support and justify the initiation and implementation of new IT initiatives that can create value or solve problems for the organization. However, this technique does not require the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the cost and benefit of the IT projects, not the risk and response of the IT risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 962; IT Risk Management Guide for 2022 | CIO Insight3; IT Risk Management Process, Frameworks & Templates4

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

The most useful information for a risk practitioner when planning response activities after risk identification is the risk priorities. Risk priorities are the order or ranking of the risks based on their level of importance or urgency. Risk priorities help the risk practitioner to focus on the most critical risks, and allocate the resources and efforts accordingly. Risk priorities are usually determined by using a combination of factors, such as the likelihood and impact of the risks, the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and the cost and benefit of the risk responses. The other options are not as useful as the risk priorities, although they may provide some input or context for the risk response planning. The risk register is the document that records the details of all identified risks, but it does not necessarily indicate the risk priorities. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take, but it does not specify the risk priorities. The risk heat maps are graphical tools that display the risk level of each risk based on the likelihood and impact, but they do not show the risk priorities. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

The result of a realized risk scenario is a loss event. A loss event is an occurrence that causes harm or damage to the organization’s assets, resources, or reputation. A loss event is also known as an incident or a breach. A loss event is the outcome of a risk scenario, which is a description of a possible situation or event that could affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A risk scenario consists of three elements: a threat, a vulnerability, and an impact. A threat is a potential source of harm or damage. A vulnerability is a weakness or flaw that could be exploited by a threat. An impact is the consequence or effect of a threat exploiting a vulnerability. A risk scenario is realized when a threat exploits a vulnerability and causes an impact, which results in a loss event. The other options are not the result of a realized risk scenario, although they may be part of a risk scenario. A technical event, a threat event, and a vulnerability event are all types of events that could occur in a risk scenario, but they are not the final outcome or result of a risk scenario. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

The best way to mitigate the risk to operations caused by severe weather events is to develop a business continuity plan (BCP). A BCP is a document that describes the procedures and resources needed to ensure the continuity of the organization’s critical functions and processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. A BCP helps to identify the recovery objectives, strategies, and priorities, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the recovery team members. A BCP also helps to prepare and test the recovery capabilities and resources, such as alternate locations, backup systems, and communication channels. The other options are not as effective as developing a BCP, although they may be part of the BCP process or outcomes. Preparing a cost-benefit analysis to evaluate relocation, preparing a disaster recovery plan (DRP), and conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) for an alternate location are all activities that can help to develop or implement a BCP, but they are not the best way to mitigate the risk to operations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 5-9.

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

The 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.

 A heat map is a graphical tool that displays the level of risk severity for various risk scenarios or categories using different colors, shapes, or sizes. A heat map is most helpful in providing a high-level overview of current IT risk severity, as it can show the relative importance and urgency of the risks, and highlight the areas that require attention or action. A heat map can also help to communicate the risk information to the stakeholders, and facilitate the risk prioritization and decision making. References = 5

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

 A recovery time objective (RTO) is the maximum acceptable time that a business process or function can be disrupted or unavailable before it causes significant damage or loss to the organization. A business continuity plan (BCP) is a document that describes how the organization will resume its critical business operations in the event of a disaster or disruption. A disaster recovery plan (DRP) is a document that describes how the organization will restore its IT systems and infrastructure in the event of a disaster or disruption. The RTO defined in the BCP and the DRP should be consistent and aligned, as they both support the continuity and recovery of the business. If the RTO defined in the BCP is shorter than the RTO defined in the DRP, it means that the BCP expects the business process or function to be restored faster than the DRP can provide. This can create a gap or a conflict between the BCP and the DRP, and can compromise the effectiveness and efficiency of the continuity and recovery efforts. Therefore, the best way for the risk practitioner to address this concern is to communicate the discrepancy to the DR manager for follow-up, meaning that the risk practitioner should report the issue and its implications to the DR manager, who is responsible for developing and maintaining the DRP. The DR manager should review the discrepancy and determine whether it is justified or not, and whether it requires any adjustment or alignment of the RTOs in the BCP and the DRP. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.2, p. 206-207

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

The best approach to mitigate the risk associated with a control deficiency is to implement compensating controls. A control deficiency is a situation where a control is missing, ineffective, or inefficient, and cannot provide reasonable assurance that the objectives or requirements are met. A compensating control is a control that provides an alternative or additional measure of protection when the primary or preferred control is not feasible or effective. A compensating control can help to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk associated with the control deficiency, and maintain the compliance or performance level. The other options are not as effective as implementing compensating controls, as they are related to the analysis, assessment, or provision of the risk, not the mitigation of 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 way to mitigate the security risk associated with the inappropriate use of enterprise applications on the BYOD devices is to implement BYOD mobile device management (MDM) controls. MDM controls are software tools or services that allow the organization to remotely manage, monitor, and secure the BYOD devices and the enterprise applications and data on them. MDM controls can help to enforce security policies, restrict unauthorized access, encrypt sensitive data, wipe data in case of loss or theft, and update or patch applications. The other options are not as effective as implementing MDM controls, as they are related to the review, awareness, or recovery of the BYOD devices and applications, not the prevention or protection of the security risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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.

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

A multinational organization that operates in different countries should be aware of the legal and regulatory requirements of each jurisdiction. Some countries may have strict privacy laws that prohibit or limit the collection and use of personal information of employees, such as their criminal records, credit history, or medical conditions. Therefore, implementing standard background checks for all new employees may violate the laws in some countries and expose the organization to legal risks and reputational damage. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Factors, page 31.

The potential scenario that presents the greatest risk to an organization when implementing a new database technology is that data may not be recoverable due to system failures. Data recovery is the process of restoring or retrieving data that has been lost, corrupted, or damaged due to system failures, such as hardware malfunctions, software errors, power outages, or natural disasters. Data recovery is essential for the continuity and integrity of the organization’s operations and information, as data is one of the most valuable and critical assets of the organization. Data recovery is also important for the compliance and accountability of the organization, as data may be subject to legal or regulatory requirements, such as retention, backup, or audit. Data recovery may be challenging or impossible when implementing a new database technology, because the new technology may not be compatible or interoperable with the existing systems, applications, or backups, or because the new technology may not have adequate or tested recovery mechanisms or procedures. Data recovery may also be costly or time-consuming when implementing a new database technology, because the new technology may require additional or specialized resources, tools, or expertise, or because the new technology may involve large or complex data sets or structures. The other options are not as risky as data recovery, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the new database technology implementation. The organization may not have a sufficient number of skilled resources, application and data migration cost for backups may exceed budget, and the database system may not be scalable in the future are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the new database technology, but they do not directly affect the continuity and integrity of the organization’s operations and information. References = 2

The most important information to review when developing plans for using emerging technologies is the organizational strategic plan. The organizational strategic plan is a document that defines the vision, mission, goals, and objectives of the organization. It also outlines the strategies, actions, and resources that are needed to achieve them. The organizational strategic plan provides the direction, alignment, and guidance for the use of emerging technologies, and ensures that they are aligned with and support the organizational needs and priorities. The other options are not as important as the organizational strategic plan, as they are related to the current state, specific area, or potential issues of the use of emerging technologies, not the overall purpose and value of the use of emerging technologies. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: IT Risk Identification Methods, page 19.

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

The best 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 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 document the gap in the risk register and report to senior management. The risk register is the document that records the details of all identified risks, including their sources, causes, impacts, likelihood, and responses. The risk register should be updated regularly to reflect any changes in the risk environment or the risk status. Reporting to senior management is also important, because 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 risks are aligned with the organization’s goals and values. By documenting the gap in the risk register and reporting to senior management, the risk practitioner can communicate the issue clearly and effectively, and seek guidance and support for resolving the problem. Collaborating with the risk owner, including a right to audit clause, or advising the risk owner to accept the risk are not the best courses of action, because they may not be feasible, effective, or desirable in some situations, or they may require senior management approval or involvement. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

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

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

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

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

 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.

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

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

The 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 best course of action to determine the root cause of the high number of policy exceptions approved by senior management is to interview the control owner. The control owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for designing, implementing, and monitoring the controls that enforce the policy. The control owner can provide insight into the reasons, circumstances, and impacts of the policy exceptions, and the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls. The control owner can also suggest possible improvements or alternatives to the policy or the controls. The other options are not as useful as interviewing the control owner, as they are related to the review, analysis, or testing of the policy or the controls, not the investigation or understanding of the policy exceptions. 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 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.

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

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

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.

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 software version is the component of a software inventory that best enables the identification and mitigation of known vulnerabilities. The software version is the specific release or update of a software product that has a unique identifier, such as a number or a name. The software version indicates the features, functions, and security patches that are included in the software product. By knowing the software version, the organization can compare it with the latest available version and identify any missing or outdated security fixes. The organization can then mitigate the known vulnerabilities by updating or upgrading the software to the latest version. The other components of a software inventory, such as the assigned software manager, the software support contract expiration, and the software licensing information, are not as directly related to the identification and mitigation of known vulnerabilities, although they may provide some contextual or administrative information. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2, page 2-25.

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.