CRISC Sample Questions Answers

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

IT risk scenarios are the descriptions or representations of the possible or hypothetical situations or events that may cause or result in an IT risk for the organization. IT risk scenarios usually consist of three elements: a threat or source of harm, a vulnerability or weakness, and an impact or consequence.

The best approach to use when creating a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios is to map scenarios to a recognized risk management framework, which is an established or recognized model or standard that provides the principles, guidelines, and best practices for the organization’s IT risk management function. Mapping scenarios to a recognized risk management framework can help the organization to create a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios by providing the following benefits:

It can ensure that the IT risk scenarios are relevant, appropriate, and proportional to the organization’s IT objectives and needs, and that they support the organization’s IT strategy and culture.

It can ensure that the IT risk scenarios are consistent and compatible with the organization’s IT governance, risk management, and control functions, and that they reflect the organization’s IT risk appetite and tolerance.

It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the identification, analysis, evaluation, and communication of the IT risk scenarios, and for the alignment and integration of the IT risk scenarios with the organization’s IT risk policies and standards.

The other options are not the best approaches to use when creating a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that mapping scenarios to a recognized risk management framework provides, and they may not be specific or applicable to the organization’s IT objectives and needs.

Deriving scenarios from IT risk policies and standards means creating or generating the IT risk scenarios based on the rules or guidelines that define and describe the organization’s IT risk management function, and that specify the expectations and requirements for the organization’s IT risk management function. Deriving scenarios from IT risk policies and standards can help the organization to create a consistent and compliant set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not cover all the relevant or significant IT risks that may affect the organization, and it may not support the organization’s IT strategy and culture.

Gathering scenarios from senior management means collecting or obtaining the IT risk scenarios from the senior management or executives that oversee or direct the organization’s IT activities or functions. Gathering scenarios from senior management can help the organization to create a high-level and strategic set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not reflect the operational or technical aspects of the IT risks, and it may not involve the input or feedback from the other stakeholders or parties that are involved or responsible for the IT activities or functions.

Benchmarking scenarios against industry peers means comparing and contrasting the IT risk scenarios with those of other organizations or industry standards, and identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats that may affect the organization’s IT objectives or operations. Benchmarking scenarios against industry peers can help the organization to create a competitive and innovative set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization’s IT objectives and needs, and it may not comply with the organization’s IT policies and standards. 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 199

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

A risk-aware culture is a culture that recognizes, understands, and values the importance of risk management in achieving the organization’s objectives and goals. A risk-aware culture is also a culture that supports and encourages the identification, assessment, response, and monitoring of risks across the organization, as well as the sharing and learning of risk information and best practices. One of the activities that would best contribute to promoting an organization-wide risk-aware culture is communicating components of risk and their acceptable levels. This is a technique to inform and educate the stakeholders and decision makers about the nature and scope of the risks that the organization faces, as well as the criteria and standards that the organization uses to measure and manage the risks. Communicating components of risk and their acceptable levels can help to increase the awareness and understanding of the risks and their impact on the organization’s performance and value, as well as to align the expectations and behaviors of the stakeholders and decision makers with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Communicating components of risk and their acceptable levels can also help to foster a transparent and collaborative environment for risk management, where the stakeholders and decision makers can openly discuss and address the risks and their implications, as well as to provide and receive feedback and support. The other options are not the best activities to promote an organization-wide risk-aware culture, although they may be relevant and useful. Performing a benchmark analysis and evaluating gaps is a technique to compare and improve the organization’s risk management process and performance with the industry standards or best practices, as well as to identify and close the gaps or weaknesses in the organization’s risk management capabilities or maturity. However, this technique does not necessarily promote a risk-aware culture, as it focuses on the process and performance of risk management, not the attitude and behavior of risk management. Conducting risk assessments and implementing controls is a technique to identify and analyze the risks that the organization faces, as well as to select and execute the appropriate actions to address the risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risks. However, this technique does not directly promote a risk-aware culture, as it focuses on the actions and outcomes of risk management, not the values and beliefs of risk management. Participating in peer reviews and implementing best practices is a technique to evaluate and enhance the quality and effectiveness of the organization’s risk management activities and deliverables, as well as to adopt and apply the proven and successful methods or solutions for risk management. However, this technique does not effectively promote a risk-aware culture, as it focuses on the improvement and optimization of risk management, not the communication and collaboration of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 982; The 6 key elements to creating and maintaining a good risk culture3; How to increase risk awareness - Project Management Institute4

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: ISO - ISO 31000 — Risk management1

2: Risk Management Standards2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

 Business process owners would provide the most important input when identifying IT risk scenarios. IT risk scenarios are the situations or events that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance due to the use of information and technology1. Identifying IT risk scenarios means finding, recognizing, and describing the IT risks that the organization faces, as well as their sources, drivers, consequences, and responses2. Business process owners are the persons or entities who are responsible for the design, implementation, and operation of the business processes that support the organization’s goals and values3. Business process owners would provide the most important input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they can:

Provide the context and perspective of the business objectives, strategies, and requirements that are affected or supported by the IT risks and controls;

Identify and prioritize the IT risks that are relevant and significant to their business processes, as well as the IT assets and resources that are involved or impacted by the IT risks;

Evaluate and communicate the likelihood and impact of the IT risks on their business processes, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance of their business units;

Suggest and implement the most suitable and effective IT risk response actions or measures to mitigate the IT risks, as well as monitor and report on the IT risk and control performance;

Align and integrate the IT risk management activities and outcomes with the business risk management framework, policies, and standards. The other options are not the most important roles for providing input when identifying IT risk scenarios, as they are either less relevant or less specific than business process owners. Information security managers are the persons or entities who are responsible for the planning, implementation, and maintenance of the information security measures and controls that protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the organization’s data and systems4. Information security managers can provide input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they can:

Provide the expertise and guidance on the information security risks and controls that are related to the use of information and technology;

Identify and assess the information security vulnerabilities and threats that may affect the organization’s data and systems, as well as the information security assets and resources that are involved or impacted by the information security risks;

Recommend and implement the most appropriate and effective information security risk response actions or measures to reduce or eliminate the information security risks, as well as monitor and report on the information security risk and control performance;

Align and integrate the information security risk management activities and outcomes with the information security framework, policies, and standards. However, information security managers are not the most important roles for providing input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they may not have the full understanding or visibility of the business objectives, strategies, and requirements that are affected or supported by the IT risks and controls, or the risk appetite and tolerance of the business units. Internal auditors are the persons or entities who are responsible for the independent and objective assurance and consulting on the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s governance, risk management, and internal control system5. Internal auditors can provide input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they can:

Provide the assurance and validation on the design and operation of the IT risks and controls that are related to the use of information and technology;

Identify and evaluate the IT risk and control gaps or deficiencies that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance, as well as the IT risk and control objectives and activities that are involved or impacted by the IT risk and control gaps or deficiencies;

Report and recommend improvements or enhancements to the IT risks and controls, as well as follow up and verify the implementation and effectiveness of the IT risk and control improvements or enhancements;

Align and integrate the IT risk and control assurance and consulting activities and outcomes with the internal audit framework, policies, and standards. However, internal auditors are not the most important roles for providing input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they may not have the authority or responsibility to implement or operate the IT risks and controls, or to decide or prioritize the IT risk response actions or measures. Operational risk managers are the persons or entities who are responsible for the identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment of the risks that arise from the failures or inadequacies of the organization’s people, processes, systems, or external events6. Operational risk managers can provide input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they can:

Provide the oversight and coordination of the operational risk management activities and performance across the organization, including the IT risks and controls that are related to the use of information and technology;

Identify and prioritize the operational risks that are relevant and significant to the organization, as well as the operational assets and resources that are involved or impacted by the operational risks;

Evaluate and communicate the likelihood and impact of the operational risks on the organization, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization;

Suggest and implement the most suitable and effective operational risk response actions or measures to mitigate the operational risks, as well as monitor and report on the operational risk and control performance;

Align and integrate the operational risk management activities and outcomes with the operational risk management framework, policies, and standards. However, operational risk managers are not the most important roles for providing input when identifying IT risk scenarios, because they may not have the specific knowledge or expertise on the IT risks and controls that are related to the use of information and technology, or the context and perspective of the business processes that are affected or supported by the IT risks and controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 85.

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

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.

The primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan should be that the risk response reduces risk to an acceptable level. A risk response action plan is a document that describes the actions or measures that are taken or planned to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk1. Validating a risk response action plan means verifying whether the plan is feasible, effective, and efficient in addressing the risk2. The main objective of validating a risk response action plan is to ensure that the risk response reduces risk to an acceptable level, which is the level of risk that the organization is willing to tolerate or bear, based on its risk appetite and risk criteria3. Reducing risk to an acceptable level means that the risk response actions can lower the likelihood or impact of the risk to a point where the risk does not pose a significant threat or challenge to the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance. Reducing risk to an acceptable level also means that the risk response actions can balance the benefits and costs of the risk response, and that they can provide a reasonable assurance of the risk management effectiveness and efficiency4. The other options are not the primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as they are either less relevant or less specific than reducing risk to an acceptable level. Quantifying risk impact is a component or element of validating a risk response action plan, not a focus of it. Quantifying risk impact means measuring or estimating the potential effects or consequences of the risk on the organization5. Quantifying risk impact can help to evaluate the severity and priority of the risk, as well as to compare the risk against the risk criteria and the risk appetite. However, quantifying risk impact is not the primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not address the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. Aligning with business strategy is a secondary or incidental benefit of validating a risk response action plan, not a primary or essential focus of it. Aligning with business strategy means ensuring that the risk response actions are consistent and coherent with the organization’s goals and values6. Aligning with business strategy can help to integrate the risk response actions with the organization’s culture and governance, as well as to support and enable the achievement of the organization’s mission and vision. However, aligning with business strategy is not the main focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not indicate the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. Advancing business objectives is a tertiary or indirect outcome of validating a risk response action plan, not a primary or direct focus of it. Advancing business objectives means contributing to the improvement and enhancement of the organization’s performance and results7. Advancing business objectives can help to create value and deliver benefits for the organization and its stakeholders, as well as to optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities. However, advancing business objectives is not the main focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not address the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

 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

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

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

An organization’s policies are the set of rules and guidelines that define the organization’s objectives, expectations, and responsibilities for its activities and operations. They provide the direction and framework for the organization’s governance, risk management, and compliance functions.

The most important characteristic of an organization’s policies is to reflect the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its goals. The risk appetite is usually expressed as a range or a threshold, and it is aligned with the organization’s strategy and culture.

Reflecting the organization’s risk appetite in its policies ensures that the policies are consistent, appropriate, and proportional to the level and nature of the risks that the organization faces, and that they support the organization’s objectives and values. It also helps to optimize the balance between risk and return, and to create and protect value for the organization and its stakeholders.

The other options are not the most important characteristic of an organization’s policies, because they do not address the fundamental question of whether the policies are suitable and acceptable for the organization.

The risk assessment methodology is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. It involves determining the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their significance and urgency. The risk assessment methodology is important to inform and support the organization’s policies, but it is not the most important characteristic of the policies, because it does not indicate whether the policies are aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The capabilities are the resources and abilities that the organization has or can acquire to achieve its objectives and manage its risks. They include the people, processes, technologies, and assets that the organization uses or relies on. The capabilities are important to enable and implement the organization’s policies, but they are not the most important characteristic of the policies, because they do not indicate whether the policies are aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The asset value is the worth or importance of the assets that the organization owns or controls, and that may be affected by the risks that the organization faces. The assets include the tangible and intangible resources that the organization uses or relies on, such as data, information, systems, infrastructure, reputation, etc. The asset value is important to measure and monitor the organization’s policies, but it is not the most important characteristic of the policies, because it does not indicate whether the policies are aligned with the organization’s risk appetite. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 29-30, 34-35, 38-39, 44-45, 50-51, 54-55

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 148

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The greatest challenge for a risk practitioner during a merger of two organizations is the variances between organizational risk appetites, as they may indicate a significant difference in the risk culture, strategy, and objectives of the two organizations, and may require a complex and lengthy process of alignment and integration. Different taxonomies to categorize risk scenarios, disparate platforms for governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) systems, and dissimilar organizational risk acceptance protocols are not the greatest challenges, as they are more related to the technical, operational, or procedural aspects of risk management, rather than the strategic or cultural aspects of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

The main reason for documenting the performance of controls is to provide accurate risk reporting. Risk reporting is a process that communicates and discloses the relevant and reliable information about the risks and their management to the stakeholders and decision makers. Risk reporting is an essential component of the risk management process, as it helps to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring activities, as well as to support and inform the risk governance and oversight functions. Documenting the performance of controls is a technique that records and tracks the results and outcomes of the controls that are implemented to address the risks, such as the control objectives,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack - ISACA

Line Manager - CIO Wiki

Engaging Line Managers in Risk Management - IRM

Risk Culture - CIO Wiki

Risk Ownership - CIO Wiki

Risk Leadership - CIO Wiki

Internal Audit - CIO Wiki

[System Documentation - CIO Wiki]

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 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.

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

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

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

A baseline assessment is the first step in assessing the maturity of an organization’s internal control environment. A baseline assessment is a comprehensive evaluation of the current state of the internal control structure, processes, and activities across the organization. A baseline assessment helps to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the existing internal controls, as well as the gaps and opportunities for improvement. A baseline assessment also provides a reference point for measuring the progress and effectiveness of the internal control improvement initiatives. The other options are not the first steps in assessing the maturity of an internal control environment, although they may be part of the subsequent steps. Validating control process execution is a technique to verify that the internal control activities are performed as designed and intended. Determining if controls are effective is a process to evaluate the adequacy and efficiency of the internal controls in achieving the desired outcomes and mitigating the risks. Identifying key process owners is a task to assign the roles and responsibilities for the internal control design, implementation, and monitoring to the appropriate individuals or groups within the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 153-1541; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 742

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

6: Security Incident Reporting and Response, ISACA, 2019

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

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

: System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, University of Toronto, 2017

: System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, ISACA, 2019

: User Access Management and Control, University of Toronto, 2017

: User Access Management and Control, ISACA, 2019

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

Conducting phishing exercises would best help minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats, because they can help to raise awareness and educate employees about the common techniques and tactics used by social engineers, such as sending deceptive emails or text messages that ask for sensitive information or direct users to malicious websites. Phishing exercises are simulated attacks that test the employees’ ability to recognize and respond to social engineering attempts, and provide feedback and guidance on how to improve their security behavior. By conducting phishing exercises, the organization can measure and improve the employees’ level of security awareness and resilience, and reduce the likelihood and impact of falling victim to social engineering attacks. The other options are less effective ways to minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats. Enforcing employees’ sanctions can help to deter and punish employees who violate the security policies or procedures, but it may not prevent or reduce the occurrence of social engineering attacks, as they may target employees who are unaware, careless, or coerced by the attackers. Enforcing segregation of duties can help to prevent or limit the damage caused by social engineering attacks, by restricting the access and authority of employees to perform certain tasks or functions, but it may not address the root cause or source of the attacks, which is the human factor. Reviewing the organization’s risk appetite can help to define and communicate the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, but it may not directly affect or influence the employees’ behavior or attitude toward social engineering threats, which may depend on their individual or situational factors. References = How to Prevent and Mitigate Social Engineering Attacks 1

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

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

The percentage of unpatched systems is best classified as a Key Risk Indicator (KRI). KRIs are metrics used by organizations to provide an early signal of increasing risk exposures in various areas of the business. Here’s a detailed explanation:

Understanding KRIs:

Definition: KRIs are specific metrics that provide insights into the risk level of an organization. They help in identifying potential risks that could impact the business negatively if not addressed promptly.

Purpose: KRIs are used to monitor the effectiveness of risk management strategies and to provide an early warning system for emerging risks.

Percentage of Unpatched Systems as a KRI:

Indicator of Vulnerability: The percentage of unpatched systems directly indicates how vulnerable an organization is to cyber threats. Unpatched systems are a common entry point for attackers, making this metric critical for assessing the organization's exposure to cyber risks.

Impact on Security Posture: A high percentage of unpatched systems can significantly increase the likelihood of security incidents, making it a valuable metric for risk management.

Proactive Risk Management: By monitoring this KRI, organizations can take proactive measures to address vulnerabilities before they are exploited.

Comparison with Other Options:

Threat Vector: A threat vector refers to the path or means by which a threat can reach and impact an asset. It is not a metric like the percentage of unpatched systems.

Critical Success Factor (CSF): CSFs are essential elements necessary for an organization to achieve its mission. While important, they are not specific metrics used to measure risk.

Key Performance Indicator (KPI): KPIs measure how effectively an organization is achieving its key business objectives. While related, KPIs focus on performance rather than risk exposure.

CRISC Review Manual: Provides detailed insights into KRIs and their role in risk management.

ISACA Risk IT Framework: Discusses the use of KRIs in monitoring and managing IT risks effectively.

References:

The risk owner is listed as the department responsible for decision making would pose the greatest concern for a risk practitioner who is reviewing accountability assignments for data risk in the risk register, as it indicates a lack of clarity and specificity on who is accountable for the risk and its response. The risk owner should be an individual, not a department, who has the authority and responsibility to manage the risk and its associated controls. The other options are not the greatest concern, as they do not necessarily imply a lack of accountability, but rather a possible difference in roles and responsibilities between the risk owner and the control owner, the business unit and the IT department, or the staff member and the department manager. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The objective of aligning mitigating controls to risk appetite is to ensure that the cost of controls does not exceed the expected loss. The cost of controls is the amount of resources and efforts required to implement and maintain the controls that are designed to reduce the risk exposure. The expected loss is the estimated amount of loss or harm that may result from a risk event. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. By aligning mitigating controls to risk appetite, the organization can optimize the balance between the cost of controls and the expected loss, and avoid over- or under-investing in controls. Exposures being reduced to the fullest extent, exposures being reduced only for critical business systems, and insurance costs being minimized are other possible objectives, but they are not as relevant as the cost of controls not exceeding the expected loss. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

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

The best way to determine whether system settings are in alignment with control baselines is to perform configuration validation. Configuration validation is the process of verifying that the system settings and parameters are consistent with the predefined standards and requirements, and that they reflect the current and desired state of the system. Configuration validation helps to ensure that the system is configured correctly and securely, and that it complies with the relevant policies, regulations, and best practices. Configuration validation also helps to identify and correct any deviations or errors in the system settings, and to prevent or mitigate any potential risks or issues. The other options are not as effective as configuration validation, although they may provide some input or information for the system alignment. Control attestation, penetration testing, and internal audit review are all activities that can help to assess or evaluate the system alignment, but they do not necessarily determine or validate the system settings. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 3-11.

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

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

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

Verifying the deficiency and then notifying the business process owner is the best response when a potential IT control deficiency has been identified. This is because verifying the deficiency can help confirm the existence, nature, and extent of the deficiency, as well as its root causes and impacts. Notifying the business process owner can help ensure that the deficiency is communicated to the person who is responsible for the process and its outcomes, and who has the authority and accountability to take appropriate actions to address the deficiency. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk response techniques is to report the risk to the relevant stakeholders, such as the business process owners1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, verifying the deficiency and then notifying the business process owner is the correct answer to this question2.

Remediating and reporting the deficiency to the enterprise risk committee or senior executive management are not the best responses when a potential IT control deficiency has been identified. These are possible actions that can be taken after the deficiency has been verified and notified to the business process owner, but they are not the first or immediate responses. Remediating the deficiency without verifying it can lead to ineffective or inappropriate solutions, as well as wasted time and resources. Reporting the deficiency to the enterprise risk committee or senior executive management without notifying the business process owner can create confusion, conflict, or delay in the risk response process, as well as undermine the ownership and accountability of the business process owner.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Database Security: Attacks and Solutions | SpringerLink2

2: Unauthorised Modification of Data With Intent to Cause Impairment3

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia4

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva5

5: Database Access Control - Wikipedia6

6: Database Access Control: Best Practices for Database Security7

7: Data Reconciliation - Wikipedia8

8: Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection9

9: Edit Check - Wikipedia

: Edit Checks: A Data Quality Tool

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), monitoring key access control performance indicators is the best way to provide an early warning that network access of terminated employees is not being revoked in accordance with the service level agreement (SLA), as it measures the effectiveness and efficiency of the access control process and its alignment with the SLA objectives and requirements. The SLA is a contract that defines the expectations and responsibilities of the service provider and the service recipient in terms of the quality, availability, and scope of the service. Monitoring key access control performance indicators helps to:

Evaluate the extent to which the access control process has met the SLA targets and standards

Identify and report any deviations, errors, or breaches in the access control process and its compliance with the SLA

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address the issues or findings in the access control process

Communicate and coordinate the monitoring results and recommendations with the relevant stakeholders, such as the service provider, the service recipient, and the senior management

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

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

 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.

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.

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

 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Control Self Assessments - PwC1

2: Control self-assessment - Wikipedia2

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

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

5: Residual Risk - Definition and Examples5

6: Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management6

7: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

The best way to facilitate the alignment of IT risk management with enterprise risk management (ERM) is to link IT risk scenarios to enterprise strategy, because this ensures that the IT risks are considered in the context of the enterprise’s mission, vision, and goals. Linking IT risk scenarios to enterprise strategy also helps to prioritize the IT risks based on their impact and relevance to the enterprise’s objectives, and to select the appropriate risk responses and resources. The other options are not the best ways to facilitate the alignment of IT risk management with ERM, because they do not address the integration or alignment of the IT and enterprise perspectives. Adopting qualitative or quantitative enterprise risk assessment methods, and linking IT risk scenarios to technology objectives are examples of techniques or tools that can be used to perform IT risk management or ERM, but they do not ensure the alignment or consistency of the two processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.3, p. 22.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Enhance the security awareness and resilience of the organization

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

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control documents, implementing record retention tools and techniques is the best solution in this scenario. Record retention involves managing the lifecycle of records, including their creation, usage, storage, and disposal. By implementing record retention policies, organizations can define how long emails and other data should be retained before being deleted. This helps in efficiently managing storage space and reducing unnecessary storage costs.

Establishing e-discovery and data loss prevention (DLP) (Option B) focuses more on legal and compliance aspects and may not directly address the issue of reducing storage costs. Sending notifications when near storage quota (Option C) is a reactive approach and may not prevent the exponential increase in storage costs. Implementing a bring your own device (BYOD) policy (Option D) is unrelated to the issue of email storage costs.

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual

A risk dashboard is a graphical tool that displays the key indicators and metrics of the organization’s IT risk profile, such as the risk level, status, trend, performance, etc., using charts, graphs, tables, etc. A risk dashboard can help the organization to monitor and communicate the IT risk profile, and to support the decision making and planning for the IT risk management.

A risk dashboard is the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it provides a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and highlights the most significant and relevant IT risks that need to be addressed or monitored. A risk dashboard can also help to compare and contrast the IT risk profile with the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite, and to identify the gaps or opportunities for improvement.

The other options are not the most effective tools in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because they do not provide the same level of visibility and clarity that a risk dashboard provides, and they may not be updated or aligned with the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite.

A risk self-assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, using the input and feedback from the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the IT activities or functions. A risk self-assessment can help the organization to understand and document the IT risk profile, and to align it with the organization’s IT strategy and culture, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not reflect the current or accurate state and performance of the IT risk profile, and it may not cover all the relevant or emerging IT risks that may exist or arise.

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the information and status of the identified IT risks and their responses. It includes the IT risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, priority, response, owner, action plan, status, etc. A risk register can help the organization to identify, analyze, evaluate, and communicate the IT risks and their responses, and to align them with the organization’s IT strategy and culture, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not provide a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and it may not highlight the most significant and relevant IT risks that need to be addressed or monitored.

A risk map is a graphical tool that displays the results of the IT risk analysis in a matrix format, using colors and symbols to indicate the level and priority of the IT risks. A risk map can show the distribution and comparison of the IT risks based on various criteria, such as likelihood, impact, category, source, etc. A risk map can help the organization to assess and prioritize the IT risks, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the IT risks, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not provide a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and it may not reflect the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite. 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 180

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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.

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

 The best way to support risk-based decisions by senior management would be to map findings to objectives, because this would help them understand how the identified risks affect the achievement of the organization’s goals and priorities. Mapping findings to objectives would also help senior management evaluate the trade-offs between different risk responses and allocate resources accordingly. By linking risks to objectives, the risk practitioner can communicate the value and impact of risk management in a clear and relevant way. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the primary reason a risk practitioner would be interested in an internal audit report is to evaluate the maturity of the risk management process, as it provides an independent and objective assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management activities and controls. An internal audit report helps to:

Identify and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the risk management process and its alignment with the organization’s objectives and strategy

Detect and report any gaps, errors, or deficiencies in the risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring processes and controls

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address the issues or findings in the risk management process

Communicate and coordinate the audit results and recommendations with the relevant stakeholders, such as the risk owners, the senior management, and the board

Enhance the accountability and transparency of the risk management process and its outcomes

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: IT Risk Reporting, pp. 223-2241

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures the exposure to a given risk at a particular time. A threshold is a level or point that triggers an action or a warning when a KRI reaches or exceeds it. Therefore, the most likely cause of a KRI exceeding a threshold is the occurrence of specific events that increase the likelihood or impact of the risk. For example, a KRI for cyber risk could be the number of phishing attempts per month, and a threshold could be 10. If more than 10 phishing attempts occur in a month, the KRI would exceed the threshold and indicate a higher level of cyber risk.

References

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva

•Key risk indicators (KRIs) definition - Risk.net

The criticality of the asset is the most important factor to consider when determining the value of an asset during the risk identification process, because it reflects the importance or significance of the asset to the organization’s objectives or functions, and the potential impact or consequence of losing or compromising the asset. An asset is a resource or capability that has value to the organization, such as data, systems, applications, infrastructure, or people. The value of an asset is a measure of the worth or benefit of the asset to the organization, and the cost or loss of the asset to the organization. The risk identification process is a process of systematically identifying the sources and types of risk that an organization faces, and estimating their likelihood and impact. The criticality of the asset is the most important factor, as it helps to prioritize and focus on the assets that have the highest value and impact, and to determine the appropriate level of protection and investment for the assets. The monetary value of the asset, the vulnerability profile of the asset, and the size of the asset’s user base are all possible factors to consider when determining the value of an asset, but they are not the most important factor, as they do not directly reflect the criticality of the asset to the organization’s objectives or functions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 83

The information classification policy is the most important document regarding the treatment of sensitive data, because it defines the categories and criteria for classifying data according to their sensitivity, confidentiality, and value to the organization, and specifies the appropriate handling and protection measures for each category. Sensitive data are data that contain personal, proprietary, or confidential information that may cause harm or damage to the organization or its stakeholders if disclosed, modified, or destroyed without authorization. An information classification policy helps to ensure that sensitive data are identified and treated in a consistent and secure manner, and that the organization complies with the applicable laws and regulations regarding data protection and privacy. An encryption policy, an organization risk profile, and a digital rights management policy are all useful documents for the treatment of sensitive data, but they are not the most important document, as they do not directly address the classification and handling of sensitive data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

Lack of common understanding of the organization’s risk culture is the greatest barrier to achieving the initiative’s objectives, because it hinders the alignment and integration of risk management across the organization. Risk culture is the set of shared values, beliefs, and behaviors that influence how risk is perceived and managed in an organization. A risk universe is a comprehensive and structured representation of all the sources and types of risk that an organization faces. Developing a risk universe requires a common understanding of the organization’s risk culture, as it affects the risk appetite, tolerance, and strategy of the organization. Lack of cross-functional risk assessment workshops, lack of quantitative methods to aggregate the total risk exposure, and lack of an integrated risk management system are all challenges that may affect the development of a risk universe, but they are not the greatest barrier, as they can be overcome with appropriate tools and techniques. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 44

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The best way to ensure key risk indicators (KRIs) provide value to risk owners is to provide timely notification of the changes in the risk exposure. KRIs are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. By providing timely notification of the KRI values, the risk owners can be alerted of the risk situation and take appropriate actions to manage the risk. Ongoing training, return on investment (ROI), and cost minimization are other possible ways to ensure KRIs provide value, but they are not as effective as timely notification. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 10; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 140.

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

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

The best 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.

Conducting vulnerability scans is the best way for a risk practitioner to validate the effectiveness of a patching program. Vulnerability scans are automated tools that identify and report on the vulnerabilities in a system or network, such as missing patches, misconfigurations, or outdated software. Vulnerability scans can help the risk practitioner to verify that the patches have been applied correctly and consistently, and that there are no remaining or new vulnerabilities that need to be addressed. Conducting penetration testing, interviewing IT operations personnel, and reviewing change control board documentation are also useful methods to evaluate the patching program, but they are not as comprehensive, objective, or timely as vulnerability scans. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3, page 2-28.

 The best method of creating risk awareness in an organization is to ensure senior management commitment to risk training. Senior management plays a vital role in setting the tone and direction of the risk culture and governance in the organization. By demonstrating their support and participation in risk training, they can influence and motivate the employees to follow the risk policies and procedures, and to enhance their risk knowledge and skills. Marking the risk register available to project stakeholders, providing regular communication to risk managers, and appointing the risk manager from the business units are other methods of creating risk awareness, but they are not as effective as ensuring senior management commitment to risk training. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

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

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

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

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

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 business continuity plan (BCP) is a document that describes the procedures and actions that an organization will take to ensure the continuity of its critical functions and operations in the event of a disruption or disaster12.

Testing a business continuity plan is a method of evaluating the effectiveness and readiness of the BCP, and identifying and addressing any gaps or weaknesses in the plan34.

The most cost-effective way to test a business continuity plan is to conduct a tabletop exercise, which is a type of simulation that involves gathering the key stakeholders and participants of the BCP, and discussing and reviewing the roles, responsibilities, and actions that they will take in response to a hypothetical scenario of a disruption or disaster56.

A tabletop exercise is the most cost-effective way because it requires minimal resources and time, and can be conducted in a regular meeting room or online platform56.

A tabletop exercise is also the most cost-effective way because it provides a high-level overview and assessment of the BCP, and can identify and address the major issues or challenges that may arise in the implementation of the plan56.

The other options are not the most cost-effective ways, but rather possible alternatives or supplements that may have different levels of complexity or cost. For example:

Conducting interviews with key stakeholders is a way of testing a business continuity plan that involves asking and answering questions about the BCP, and collecting feedback and suggestions from the people who are involved or affected by the plan78. However, this way is not the most cost-effective because it may not cover all the aspects or scenarios of the BCP, and may not facilitate the interaction or collaboration among the stakeholders78.

Conducting a disaster recovery exercise is a way of testing a business continuity plan that involves activating and executing the BCP in a realistic and controlled environment, and measuring the outcomes and impacts of the plan . However, this way is not the most cost-effective because it requires a lot of resources and time, and may disrupt or interfere with the normal operations of the organization .

Conducting a full functional exercise is a way of testing a business continuity plan that involves simulating and testing the BCP in a live and dynamic environment, and involving the external entities and stakeholders that are part of the plan . However, this way is not the most cost-effective because it requires the most resources and time, and may pose the highest risk or challenge to the organization . References =

1: Business Continuity Plan (BCP) Definition1

2: Business Continuity Planning - Ready.gov2

3: Testing, testing: how to test your business continuity plan4

4: Comprehensive Guide to Business Continuity Testing | Agility5

5: How to Conduct a Tabletop Exercise for Business Continuity3

6: Tabletop Exercises: A Guide to Success6

7: How to Conduct Testing of a Business Continuity Plan7

8: Business Continuity Plan Testing: Interviewing Techniques8

: Disaster Recovery Testing: A Step-by-Step Guide

: Disaster Recovery Testing Scenarios: A Guide to Success

: Functional Exercises: A Guide to Success

: Functional Exercise Toolkit

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

The risk associated with an asset before controls are applied is also known as the inherent risk. It is the level of risk that exists in the absence of any mitigating actions or measures. To express the inherent risk, one needs to consider two factors: the likelihood and the impact of a potential threat. The likelihood is the probability or frequency of a threat occurring, while the impact is the magnitude or severity of the consequences if the threat materializes. The inherent risk can be calculated by multiplying the likelihood and the impact, or by using a risk matrix that assigns a risk rating based on the combination of these two factors. The other options are not correct ways of expressing the inherent risk, as they do not account for both the likelihood and the impact of a threat. The magnitude of an impact is only one component of the risk, and it does not reflect how likely the threat is to happen. The function of the cost and effectiveness of control is related to the residual risk, which is the risk that remains after controls are applied. The likelihood of a given threat is also only one component of the risk, and it does not indicate how severe the impact would be if the threat occurs. 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

According to ISACA, a risk register is a tool to record and track the identified risks, their ratings, responses, and status. The primary purpose of a risk register is to provide a centralized view of risk for the organization, as it enables the consolidation, communication, and reporting of risk information across different levels, units, and functions. A risk register can also support the risk management process, such as risk identification, assessment, treatment, monitoring, and review.

References:

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

•ISACA, Capability Maturity Model and Risk Register Integration: The Right Approach to Enterprise Governance2

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

References

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

•Risk Register - ISACA

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

 Role of the Control Owner:

The control owner is responsible for the design, implementation, and maintenance of a specific control.

They have detailed knowledge of the control’s purpose, its intended functionality, and its operational context within the organization.

 Responsibility for Remediation:

When a penetration testing team discovers an ineffectively designed access control, it is the control owner’s responsibility to ensure the design gap is remediated.

The control owner must assess the findings, determine the root cause of the ineffectiveness, and take necessary actions to redesign or enhance the control to address the identified weaknesses.

 Steps to Remediate Control Design Gap:

Assess the Findings: Understand the specific issues identified by the penetration testing team.

Redesign the Control: Modify the control design to address the identified gaps and ensure it meets security requirements.

Implement Changes: Apply the redesigned control and test its effectiveness.

Continuous Monitoring: Regularly review the control to ensure it remains effective over time.

 Comparing Other Roles:

Risk Owner: Manages overall risk but does not directly handle control design.

IT Security Manager: Oversees the security posture but delegates specific control responsibilities to control owners.

Control Operator: Operates the control but is not responsible for its design or remediation.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the control owner's responsibility in maintaining and improving control effectiveness (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.7 Control Design and Selection)​​.

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

Showing projected residual risk is the most helpful way to respond to the request of explaining how existing risk treatment plans would affect risk posture at the end of the year. Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses1. Projected residual risk is the estimated level of risk that will remain at a future point in time, based on the assumptions and expectations of the risk responses2. By showing projected residual risk, the risk practitioner can:

Demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk treatment plans, and how they reduce the risk level from the inherent risk (the risk before the risk responses) to the residual risk3.

Compare the projected residual risk with the risk appetite and tolerance, which are the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives4. This can help to determine whether the projected residual risk is acceptable or not, and whether the risk treatment plans are consistent and proportional to the risk level5.

Identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may affect the achievement of the projected residual risk, and recommend and implement appropriate improvement actions or contingency plans6.

The other options are not the most helpful ways to respond to the request, because:

Assessing risk with no controls in place is not the most helpful way, as it does not reflect the current or future risk posture of the organization. Controls are the measures or actions that are implemented to modify the risk, such as prevent, detect, correct, or mitigate the risk7. Assessing risk with no controls in place can help to measure the inherent risk, but it does not show the impact or outcome of the risk treatment plans.

Providing peer benchmarking results is not the most helpful way, as it does not reflect the specific or unique risk profile of the organization. Peer benchmarking is the process of comparing the organization’s risk level and performance with its peers or competitors, based on a common set of criteria or indicators8. Providing peer benchmarking results can help to provide a reference or a standard for the risk posture, but it does not show the effect or result of the risk treatment plans.

Assessing risk with current controls in place is not the most helpful way, as it does not reflect the future or projected risk posture of the organization. Assessing risk with current controls in place can help to measure the current residual risk, but it does not show the expected or estimated residual risk at the end of the year.

References =

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Projected Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Risk Treatment Plan - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite: What It Is and Why It Matters - Gartner

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Control - CIO Wiki

Benchmarking - CIO Wiki

[Risk Treatment - CIO Wiki]

The effectiveness of anti-malware software is the degree to which it can detect, prevent, and remove malicious software (malware) from the system or network. Malware is any software that is designed to harm, exploit, or compromise the functionality, security, or privacy of the system or network1. Some common types of malware are viruses, worms, Trojans, ransomware, spyware, adware, and rootkits2.

One of the best indicators of the effectiveness of anti-malware software is the number of successful attacks by malicious software, which means the number of times that malware has managed to bypass, evade, or disable the anti-malware software and cause damage or disruption to the system or network. The lower the number of successful attacks, the higher the effectiveness of the anti-malware software. This indicator can measure the ability of the anti-malware software to protect the system or network from known and unknown malware threats, and to respond and recover from malware incidents34.

The other options are not the best indicators of the effectiveness of anti-malware software, because:

Number of staff hours lost due to malware attacks is a measure of the impact or consequence of malware attacks on the productivity or performance of the staff. It does not directly reflect the ability of the anti-malware software to detect, prevent, or remove malware, as there may be other factors that affect the staff hours lost, such as the severity of the attack, the availability of backup or recovery systems, or the skills and awareness of the staff5.

Number of downtime hours in business critical servers is a measure of the impact or consequence of malware attacks on the availability or reliability of the servers. It does not directly reflect the ability of the anti-malware software to detect, prevent, or remove malware, as there may be other factors that affect the downtime hours, such as the type of the server, the configuration of the network, or the maintenance of the hardware6.

Number of patches made to anti-malware software is a measure of the maintenance or improvement of the anti-malware software. It does not directly reflect the ability of the anti-malware software to detect, prevent, or remove malware, as there may be other factors that affect the number of patches, such as the frequency of the updates, the quality of the software, or the compatibility of the system7.

References =

What is Malware? - Definition from Techopedia

Common Types of Malware and Their Impact - Techopedia

What is Anti-Malware? Everything You Need to Know (2023) - SoftwareLab

The 10 Best Malware Protection Solutions Compared for 2024 - Techopedia

The Cost of Malware Attacks - Security Boulevard

The Impact of Malware on Business - Kaspersky

What is Patch Management? - Definition from Techopedia

 A violation of segregation of duties is when the same person performs two or more conflicting tasks that could compromise the security or integrity of a system or process. In the context of IT risk management, segregation of duties aims to prevent fraud, errors, sabotage, theft, misuse of information, and other security breaches. One of the common categories of functions to be separated is the authorization function, which involves evaluating and approving transactions or changes. Another category is the custody function, which involves managing or accessing physical or digital assets. A programmer who writes and promotes code into production is performing both the authorization and the custody functions, which creates a high-risk conflict. The programmer could introduce malicious or erroneous code into the system without proper review or approval, and potentially cause harm to the organization or its stakeholders. Therefore, this scenario is a violation of segregation of duties. References =

Segregation of Duties: Examples of Roles, Duties & Violations

Separation of duties - Wikipedia

Segregation of duties: prevent fraud and error - eftsure

The percentage of projects with developed controls on scope creep is the best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure how effectively risk management practices are embedded in the project management office (PMO), as it reflects the ability of the PMO to identify, assess, and respond to the risk of project scope changes that may affect the project objectives, budget, and schedule. The other options are not the best KPIs, as they do not directly measure the effectiveness of risk management practices in the PMO, but rather the outcomes or consequences of risk management decisions. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

Data usage exceeding individual consent presents the greatest risk to the organization’s reputation, as it violates the privacy and trust of the customers and exposes the organization to legal and regulatory liabilities. Customers have the right to know and control how their personal data is collected, processed, and shared by the organization, and they expect the organization to respect their preferences and comply with the applicable laws and standards. If the organization uses the data for purposes beyond the scope of the consent, or without obtaining the consent in the first place, it may damage its reputation and lose its customers’ loyalty and confidence. Third-party software used for data analytics, revenue generated from data analytics, and use of a data analytics system are not inherently risky to the organization’s reputation, as long as they are transparent, secure, and ethical. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers - The Knowledge Academy; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 203.

Lack of organizational policy regarding open source software should be the greatest concern for an organization that uses open source software applications, as it may expose the organization to legal, security, and operational risks. Open source software is software that is freely available and can be modified and distributed by anyone, subject to certain conditions and licenses. An organizational policy regarding open source software should define the criteria and procedures for selecting, acquiring, using, and maintaining open source software, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders involved. Lack of reliability, lack of monitoring, and lack of professional support are not the greatest concerns, as they can be addressed by implementing quality assurance, configuration management, and community engagement practices for open source software. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 214; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 214.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual, performing the assessment as it would normally be done is the best approach when a risk practitioner has been asked by a business unit manager for special consideration during a risk assessment of a system, because it ensures that the risk practitioner maintains their objectivity, integrity, and professionalism. The risk practitioner should not compromise the quality or accuracy of the risk assessment, regardless of any external pressure or influence. The risk practitioner should follow the established risk assessment methodology and standards, and report the risk results and recommendations based on the facts and evidence. The other options are not the best approaches, because they may affect the credibility or reliability of the risk assessment. Conducting an abbreviated version of the assessment may result in incomplete or insufficient risk information, which may lead to poor risk decisions or actions. Reporting the business unit manager for a possible ethics violation may escalate the situation or create a conflict of interest, which may hinder the risk assessment process or outcome. Recommending an internal auditor perform the review may transfer the responsibility or accountability of the risk practitioner, which may undermine their role or authority. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 74.

Multi-factor authentication is the most effective way to mitigate the risk of unauthorized access to the system, as it requires the users to provide more than one piece of evidence to prove their identity, such as a password, a token, a biometric feature, etc. This reduces the likelihood of compromising the credentials and ensures that only authorized users can perform maintenance on the system.

Single sign-on is a convenience feature that allows users to access multiple systems with one set of credentials, but it does not address the risk of sharing credentials among multiple users.

Audit trail review is a detective control that can help identify and investigate unauthorized access to the system, but it does not prevent or mitigate the risk of credential compromise.

Data encryption at rest is a security measure that protects the data stored on the system from unauthorized access, but it does not prevent or mitigate the risk of credential compromise. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, page 107-108.

Fraudulent transactions are those that involve deception, manipulation, or misrepresentation of information or data to obtain an unauthorized or improper benefit or advantage1. Fraudulent transactions can pose significant risks and losses for an organization, such as financial damages, legal liabilities, reputational damages, or operational disruptions2.

Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems are integrated software applications that support the core business processes and functions of an organization, such as accounting, finance, human resources, supply chain, inventory, or customer relationship management3. ERP systems can facilitate the efficiency, accuracy, and security of business transactions, but they can also be vulnerable to fraudulent transactions, such as:

Creating fake vendors or customers and processing false invoices or payments

Manipulating or falsifying financial or accounting data or reports

Changing or deleting critical or sensitive information or records

Abusing or misusing access privileges or credentials

Bypassing or compromising the system controls or security measures4

The design of procedures to prevent fraudulent transactions within an ERP system should be based on the control environment. The control environment is the set of standards, processes, and structures that provide the basis for carrying out internal control across the organization. The control environment comprises the following elements:

The tone at the top, which reflects the leadership’s commitment and attitude towards internal control and ethical conduct

The organizational structure, which defines the roles and responsibilities, reporting lines, and authority levels for internal control

The human resource policies and practices, which ensure that the staff have the appropriate skills, competencies, and incentives for internal control

The risk assessment process, which identifies and evaluates the potential risks and threats to the organization’s objectives and transactions

The control activities, which are the specific policies, procedures, and mechanisms that prevent, detect, or correct errors or fraud in transactions

The information and communication systems, which provide reliable and timely data and information for internal control and decision-making

The monitoring and evaluation activities, which measure and report the performance and effectiveness of internal control and ensure continuous improvement

By basing the design of procedures to prevent fraudulent transactions within an ERP system on the control environment, the organization can:

Ensure that the procedures are aligned with the organization’s objectives, values, and expectations regarding internal control and fraud prevention

Provide clear and consistent guidance and instructions for the staff and stakeholders involved in the transactions and the ERP system

Implement adequate and appropriate controls and safeguards to mitigate the risks and vulnerabilities of the transactions and the ERP system

Monitor and evaluate the compliance and effectiveness of the procedures and the ERP system, and identify and address any issues or gaps

References = What is Fraud?, Fraud Risk Management - AICPA, What is ERP?, ERP Fraud: How to Prevent It - ERP Focus, [COSO – Control Environment - Deloitte], [How to use COSO to assess IT controls - Journal of Accountancy]

Requesting a formal risk acceptance sign-off is the most likely scenario when the residual risk in excess of the risk appetite cannot be mitigated, because it indicates that the organization is willing to tolerate a higher level of risk than it normally would, and that the risk owner has the authority and accountability to accept the risk and its consequences. Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging the existence of a risk and deciding not to take any action to reduce it. Risk acceptance is usually chosen when the cost or effort of mitigating the risk outweighs the potential benefits, or when no feasible mitigation options are available. Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying controls or mitigating factors. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Inherent risk, cancellation of an initiative, change of risk appetite, and constant residual risk are all possible scenarios that may affect the risk management process, but they are not the most likely to cause a risk practitioner to request a formal risk acceptance sign-off, as they do not necessarily involve a risk owner accepting a higher level of risk than the organization’s risk appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2, page 103

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that help organizations monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their operations, financial health, or overall performance1. KRIs should have certain characteristics that make them effective for risk monitoring, such as:

Ability to measure the right thing (e.g., supports the decisions that need to be made)

Quantifiable (e.g., damages in dollars of profit loss)

Capability to be measured precisely and accurately

Relevant (measuring the right thing associated with decisions)2

Among the four options given, only option C (sensitivity to changes in risk levels) best enables effective risk monitoring. This is because KRIs should be able to capture the changes in risk levels over time and alert organizations to emerging or escalating risks3. A high sensitivity to changes in risk levels indicates that the KRI is responsive and timely, and can help organizations take preventive or corrective actions before the risks become too severe.

References = Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide, Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions, Key Risk Indicators - Wikipedia

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

 Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure how well a specific control is performing in reducing the causes, consequences, or likelihood of a risk1. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure changes in the risk exposure or the potential impact of a risk2. By linking an effective KCI to relevant KRIs, the organization can monitor changes in the risk environment and assess how the control is influencing the risk level3. This can help the organization to:

Identify emerging or escalating risks and take timely and appropriate actions

Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the control and make improvements if needed

Align the control with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization

Communicate the risk and control status to stakeholders and regulators

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 6: Risk Response and Mitigation4

 The number of projects going live without a security review is the best key control indicator (KCI) to indicate whether security requirements are identified and managed throughout a project life cycle, because it measures the compliance and effectiveness of the security review process. A security review is a process that ensures that the security requirements are defined, implemented, tested, and verified for each project, and that any security risks or issues are identified and resolved before the project is deployed. The number of projects going live without a security review should be minimized or eliminated, as it indicates a failure or weakness of the security review process. The other options are not the best KCIs, because they do not directly measure the identification and management of security requirements. The number of employees completing project-specific security training, the number of security projects started in core departments, and the number of security-related status reports submitted by project managers are examples of input or output indicators that measure the activities or results of the project, but not the security requirements. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

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

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

The most effective method for uniquely identifying the originator of electronic transactions is a digital signature. A digital signature is a cryptographic technique that uses a pair of keys, one public and one private, to authenticate the identity and integrity of the sender and the message. A digital signature is created by applying the sender’s private key to a hash of the message, and is verified by applying the sender’s public key to the signature and comparing it with the hash of the message. A digital signature ensures that the sender cannot deny sending the message (non-repudiation), and that the message has not been altered or tampered with during transmission (data integrity). References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3, page 1301

 According to the CRISC Review Manual, formal approval of the account by the user’s manager is the best evidence that a user account has been properly authorized, because it ensures that the user’s role and access rights are consistent with the business needs and the principle of least privilege. The user’s manager is responsible for verifying the user’s identity, job function, and access requirements, and for approving or rejecting the account request. The other options are not the best evidence of proper authorization, because they do not involve the user’s manager’s approval. An email from the user accepting the account is a confirmation of the account creation, but it does not indicate that the account was authorized by the user’s manager. Notification from human resources that the account is active is an administrative process that does not verify the user’s access rights and role. User privileges matching the request form is a verification of the account configuration, but it does not ensure that the request form was approved by the user’s manager. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.2, page 163.

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

The risk identification number and description

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, probabilities, responses, and owners. It is a living document that should be updated regularly to reflect the changes in the risk environment and the status of the risk responses12. The best way to improve a risk register is to ensure that it is updated based upon significant events, such as:

New risks are identified or existing risks are eliminated

Risk probabilities or impacts change due to internal or external factors

Risk responses are implemented or modified

Risk owners or stakeholders change

Risk incidents or issues occur

Risk thresholds or appetite change

Risk reporting or communication requirements change

Updating the risk register based upon significant events can help to:

Maintain the accuracy and relevance of the risk information

Enhance the risk awareness and accountability of the risk owners and stakeholders

Support the risk monitoring and reporting activities

Facilitate the risk evaluation and decision-making processes

Improve the risk management performance and maturity

References =

Risk Register - Project Management Knowledge

How to Create a Risk Register: A Step-by-Step Guide - ProjectManager.com

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

The most effective way to reduce risk associated with an increase of online transactions on a retailer website is to implement website activity monitoring. Website activity monitoring can help to detect and prevent fraudulent transactions, unauthorized access, data breaches, and other cyber threats that may compromise the security and integrity of the website and its data. Scalable infrastructure, a hot backup site, and transaction limits are other possible ways to reduce risk, but they are not as effective as website activity monitoring. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

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

The first step to ensure continuity of operations when performing a risk assessment of a new service to support a new business process is to identify the conditions that may cause disruptions to the service or the process. This is because identifying the potential sources, causes, and scenarios of disruptions helps to determine the impact and likelihood of the risks, and to select the appropriate risk responses and recovery strategies. The other options are not the first steps, although they may also be part of the risk assessment process. Reviewing incident response procedures, evaluating the probability of risk events, and defining metrics for restoring availability are examples of subsequent steps that depend on the identification of the conditions that may cause disruptions. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The most significant factor that would impact management’s decision when conducting an operational risk assessment on an initiative to outsource the organization’s customer service operations overseas is the cross-border information transfer restrictions in the outsourcing country. Cross-border information transfer restrictions are the laws, regulations, standards, or contracts that govern the collection, processing, storage, or transmission of information across national or regional boundaries. Cross-border information transfer restrictions may affect the organization’s outsourcing initiative, because they may impose limitations, obligations, or penalties on the organization or the outsourcing company, such as requiring consent, notification, or authorization, or prohibiting or restricting certain types or categories of information. Cross-border information transfer restrictions may also create challenges or risks for the organization’s outsourcing initiative, such as compliance, legal, reputational, or operational risks, or conflicts or inconsistencies with the organization’s own policies, regulations, standards, or contracts. The other options are not as significant as the cross-border information transfer restrictions, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the organization’s outsourcing initiative. Time zone difference of the outsourcing location, ongoing financial viability of the outsourcing company, and historical network latency between the organization and outsourcing location are all factors that could affect the efficiency and effectiveness of the outsourcing initiative, but they do not directly affect the legality or security of the outsourcing initiative. References = 3

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

A risk treatment plan typically includes the following elements2:

Risk description: A brief summary of the risk, its causes, and its consequences.

Risk owner: The person or entity who is responsible for managing the risk and implementing the risk treatment plan.

Risk response: The strategy or method chosen to deal with the risk, such as avoid, reduce, transfer, or accept.

Risk actions: The specific tasks or steps that need to be performed to execute the risk response.

Risk resources: The human, financial, technical, or other resources that are required or available to support the risk actions.

Risk timeline: The schedule or deadline for completing the risk actions and achieving the desired risk level.

By recommending a risk treatment plan, the risk practitioner can help the organization to:

Analyze and prioritize the vulnerabilities detected on the systems, and determine their impact and likelihood.

Evaluate and compare the possible risk responses, and select the most suitable and feasible one for each vulnerability.

Define and assign the roles and responsibilities for the risk treatment process, and ensure the accountability and collaboration of the stakeholders.

Monitor and measure the progress and effectiveness of the risk treatment process, and report the results and outcomes to the management.

The other options are not the best course of action, because:

Recommending the business change the application is not a realistic or practical option, as it may be costly, time-consuming, or technically challenging to modify the application to make it compatible with the updated servers. It may also create other issues or risks, such as compatibility problems with other systems, performance degradation, or user dissatisfaction.

Including the risk in the next quarterly update to management is not a proactive or timely option, as it may delay or defer the risk treatment process and increase the exposure or vulnerability of the systems. It may also indicate a lack of urgency or importance of the risk, and undermine the credibility or trust of the management.

Implementing compensating controls is not a sufficient or comprehensive option, as it may not address the root cause or the source of the risk. Compensating controls are alternative or additional controls that are implemented when the primary or preferred controls are not feasible or effective3. They may reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk, but they may not eliminate or resolve the risk.

References =

Risk Treatment Plan - CIO Wiki

Risk Treatment Plan Template - ISACA

Compensating Control - CIO Wiki

According to the GDPR, personal data shall be collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes1. This means that a business unit can only use personal information for a different purpose if it has obtained the consent of the data subject, or if it has a clear legal basis or obligation to do so2. Therefore, informed consent should be the first consideration when a business unit wants to use personal information for a purpose other than for which it was originally collected.

References = GDPR Article 5 (1) (b) and Article 6 (4)1, ICO Principle (b): Purpose limitation2

The best course of action when a risk practitioner identifies a database application that has been developed and implemented by the business independently of IT is to include the application in IT risk assessments. IT risk assessments are the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT-related risks that could affect the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives. By including the application in IT risk assessments, the risk practitioner can identify the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts associated with the application, and recommend the appropriate controls and mitigation strategies to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Escalating the concern to senior management, documenting the reasons for the exception, and proposing that the application be transferred to IT are not the best courses of action, as they do not address the risk exposure and impact of the application, and may not be feasible or desirable for the business. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 47.

Enterprise risk management (ERM) is a holistic and strategic approach to managing the risks that an organization faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. ERM aims to align the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance with its objectives and vision, and to optimize the value and performance of the organization1.

IT risk management is a subset of ERM that focuses on identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks related to the use of information technology (IT) in the organization. IT risk management aims to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of IT resources and information, and to support the IT governance and strategy of the organization2.

The greatest benefit when ERM provides oversight of IT risk management is aligning IT with short-term and long-term goals of the organization, because it can help to:

Integrate IT risk management with the overall business strategy and risk management, and ensure that IT risks are considered and addressed at the enterprise level

Align IT risk appetite and tolerance with the business risk appetite and tolerance, and ensure that IT risks are balanced with the expected benefits and opportunities

Enhance IT risk awareness and communication among the stakeholders, and ensure that IT risks are reported and escalated appropriately

Optimize IT risk response and control, and ensure that IT risks are managed efficiently and effectively

Demonstrate IT risk value and impact, and ensure that IT risks are measured and monitored against the business objectives and performance34

The other options are not the greatest benefit when ERM provides oversight of IT risk management, but rather some of the outcomes or consequences of it. Ensuring the IT budget and resources focus on risk management is a benefit that can help to allocate and prioritize the IT resources and funds according to the IT risk level and the business needs. Ensuring senior management’s primary focus is on the impact of identified risk is a benefit that can help to increase the senior management’s involvement and accountability in IT risk management, and to support the IT risk decision making and reporting. Prioritizing internal departments that provide service to customers is a benefit that can help to improve the quality and efficiency of the IT service delivery and customer satisfaction. References =

Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA

IT Risk Management - ISACA

Aligning IT risks with Enterprise Risk Management (ERM)

Five Benefits of Enterprise Risk Management : Articles : Resources …

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The most important factor when developing risk scenarios is obtaining input from key stakeholders. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could affect the enterprise’s objectives, processes, or resources. Obtaining input from key stakeholders, such as business owners, process owners, subject matter experts, or external parties, helps to ensure that the risk scenarios are realistic, relevant, and comprehensive. It also helps to identify the sources, drivers, indicators, likelihood, impact, and responses of the risk scenarios, and to align them with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. Obtaining input from key stakeholders also fosters a collaborative and participatory approach to risk management, and enhances the risk awareness and ownership among the stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.3, page 621

The type of control that has been applied when an organization provides legal text explaining the rights and expected behavior of users accessing a system from geographic locations that have strong privacy regulations is directive. A directive control is a control that guides or instructs the users or the staff on the policies, procedures, or standards that they need to follow or comply with when performing their tasks or activities. A directive control can help to prevent or reduce the risk of non-compliance, errors, or violations, by ensuring that the users or the staff are aware and informed of the expectations and requirements of the organization or the system. A directive control can also help to enforce the accountability and responsibility of the users or the staff, and to support the audit and monitoring of their actions and behaviors. Providing legal text explaining the rights and expected behavior of users accessing a system from geographic locations that have strong privacy regulations is an example of a directive control, as it informs the users of the legal obligations and consequences of using the system, and instructs them on how to protect their privacy and the privacy of others. Detective, preventive, and compensating are not the correct types of control, as they do not match the definition or the purpose of the control that has been applied. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

This can help to:

Ensure that the implemented measures are effective and efficient in reducing the risk level to an acceptable level, and that they are aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization2.

Identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may arise from the deviation from the approved risk action plan, and recommend and implement appropriate improvement actions or contingency plans3.

Communicate and report the results and outcomes of the validation to the relevant stakeholders, such as the risk owner, the risk committee, or the chief risk officer, and obtain their feedback and approval4.

The other options are not the best course of action, because:

Reporting the observation to the chief risk officer (CRO) is not the best course of action, as it may not provide sufficient information or evidence to support the deviation from the approved risk action plan. The CRO may not be able to evaluate or approve the implemented risk mitigation measures without knowing their adequacy or impact on the risk level5.

Updating the risk register with the implemented risk mitigation actions is not the best course of action, as it may not reflect the current or accurate risk status or performance. The risk register is a document that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses6. Updating the risk register without validating the adequacy of the implemented risk mitigation measures may create inconsistencies or inaccuracies in the risk register.

Reverting the implemented mitigation measures until approval is obtained is not the best course of action, as it may expose the organization to higher or unacceptable levels of risk. Reverting the implemented mitigation measures may undo or negate the benefits or outcomes of the risk mitigation, and may increase the likelihood or impact of the risk events7.

References =

ISACA Risk Starter Kit provides risk management templates and policies

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Risk Reporting - CIO Wiki

Chief Risk Officer - CIO Wiki

Risk Register - CIO Wiki

Risk Mitigation - CIO Wiki

 A cloud access security broker (CASB) solution is the best way to enforce access control for an organization that uses multiple cloud technologies, as it provides a centralized and consistent platform to manage and monitor the access to various cloud services and applications. A CASB solution can help to implement and enforce the enterprise’s access policies and standards, as well as to detect and prevent unauthorized or malicious access attempts. Senior management support of cloud adoption strategies, creation of a cloud access risk management policy, and expansion of security information and event management (SIEM) to cloud services are not the best ways to enforce access control for an organization that uses multiple cloud technologies, as they do not provide the technical capabilities or tools to manage and monitor the access to various cloud services and applications. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 210; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 210.

Shadow systems are IT systems, solutions, devices, or technologies used within an organization without the knowledge and approval of the corporate IT department1. They are often the result of employees trying to address specific functionality gaps in the organization’s official systems, such as the ERP system. However, shadow systems can pose significant risks to the organization, such as:

Data security and privacy breaches, as shadow systems may not comply with the organization’s security policies and standards, or may expose sensitive data to unauthorized parties2.

Data quality and integrity issues, as shadow systems may not synchronize or integrate with the organization’s official systems, or may create data inconsistencies or redundancies3.

Compliance and regulatory violations, as shadow systems may not adhere to the organization’s legal or contractual obligations, or may create audit or reporting challenges4.

Cost and resource inefficiencies, as shadow systems may duplicate or conflict with the organization’s official systems, or may consume more IT resources than necessary5.

The best way to reduce the risk associated with shadow systems is to implement an enterprise architecture (EA), which is a comprehensive framework that defines the structure, processes, principles, and standards of the organization’s IT environment6. By implementing an EA, the organization can:

Align the IT systems with the organization’s goals and strategy, and ensure that they support the business needs and requirements6.

Establish a governance structure and process for IT decision making, and ensure that all IT systems are approved, monitored, and controlled by the IT department7.

Enhance the communication and collaboration between the IT department and the business units, and ensure that the IT systems meet the expectations and preferences of the end users5.

Optimize the performance and efficiency of the IT systems, and ensure that they are scalable, flexible, and interoperable6.

References =

Shadow IT: What Are the Risks and How Can You Mitigate Them? - Ekran System

How to Reduce Risks of Shadow IT by Applying Governance to Public Clouds – BMC Software | Blogs

What is shadow IT? - Article | SailPoint

The Risks of Shadow IT and How to Avoid Them | SiteSpect

Start reducing your organization’s Shadow IT risk in 3 steps

What is enterprise architecture (EA)? - Definition from WhatIs.com

Enterprise Architecture Governance - CIO Wiki

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

 Understanding KPIs:

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are metrics used to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of a process. They must be accurate and relevant to provide meaningful insights.

 Process Inefficiency Despite No Control Issues:

If a KPI shows inefficiency but no control issues are noted, it suggests that the KPI may not be accurately reflecting the process performance.

Recalibrating the KPI ensures that it correctly measures what it is intended to, providing a true picture of the process efficiency.

 Steps for Recalibration:

Review the current KPI and its alignment with process objectives.

Adjust the KPI parameters or thresholds to better reflect process performance.

Validate the recalibrated KPI with historical data to ensure accuracy.

 Comparing Other Actions:

Implementing New Controls: Premature without understanding the root cause of the KPI discrepancy.

Redesigning the Process: Extensive and unnecessary if the KPI is simply miscalibrated.

Re-Evaluating Existing Control Design: Important but secondary to ensuring KPI accuracy.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of accurate KPIs in monitoring process performance and the need for recalibration when discrepancies are found (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.14 Key Performance Indicators)​​.

A security log is a record of security-related events or activities that occur in an IT system, network, or application, such as user authentication, access control, firewall activity, or intrusion detection1. Security logs can help to monitor and audit the security posture and performance of the IT environment, and to detect and investigate any security incidents, breaches, or anomalies2.

The integrity of a security log refers to the accuracy and completeness of the log data, and the assurance that the log data has not been modified, deleted, or tampered with by unauthorized or malicious parties3. The integrity of a security log is essential for ensuring the reliability and validity of the log analysis and reporting, and for providing evidence and accountability for security incidents and compliance4.

Among the four options given, the most important factor to the integrity of a security log is the inability to edit. This means that the security log data should be protected from any unauthorized or accidental changes or alterations, such as adding, deleting, or modifying log entries, or changing the log format or timestamps5. The inability to edit can be achieved by implementing various controls and measures, such as:

Applying digital signatures or hashes to the log data to verify its authenticity and integrity

Encrypting the log data to prevent unauthorized access or disclosure

Implementing least privilege access to the log data to restrict who can view, modify, or delete the log data

Using write-once media or devices to store the log data, such as CD-ROMs or WORM drives

Sending the log data to a secure and centralized log server or repository, and using syslog or other protocols to ensure secure and reliable log transmission

Performing regular backups and archiving of the log data to prevent data loss or corruption

References = Security Log: Best Practices for Logging and Management, Security Audit Logging Guideline, Confidentiality, Integrity, & Availability: Basics of Information Security, Steps for preserving the integrity of log data, Guide to Computer Security Log Management

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

Security awareness training is a process of educating and informing the users about the security policies, procedures, and best practices of the organization, and the potential threats and risks that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information and systems.

The best indicator of whether security awareness training is effective is user behavior after training. This means that the users demonstrate and apply the knowledge and skills that they have learned from the training, such as following the security rules and guidelines, reporting any security incidents or issues, avoiding any risky or malicious actions, etc.

User behavior after training helps to measure the actual impact and outcome of the training, compare them with the expected or desired objectives and standards, identify any gaps or issues that may affect the training effectiveness or efficiency, and take appropriate actions to address them.

The other options are not the best indicators of whether security awareness training is effective. They are either subjective or not essential for security awareness training.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 30

Information Technology & Security, page 24

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 22

The primary benefit of conducting continuous monitoring of access controls is the ability to identify possible noncompliant activities that lead to data disclosure. Continuous monitoring of access controls is a process that involves collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the performance and effectiveness of the access controls on a regular basis. Continuous monitoring of access controls helps to detect and prevent any unauthorized or inappropriate access to information assets, and to ensure that the access controls are aligned with the enterprise’s security policies and standards. Continuous monitoring of access controls also helps to identify possible noncompliant activities that lead to data disclosure, such as data leakage, data theft, data tampering, or data breach. By identifying these activities, the enterprise can take timely and appropriate actions to mitigate the risk and protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information assets. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 1411

 A cost-benefit analysis is a tool that compares the costs and benefits of different alternatives, such as updating software or continuing to use end-of-life software. A cost-benefit analysis can provide the most helpful information to justify investing in updated software, as it can show the potential savings, benefits, and risks of each option, and help the decision-makers choose the best course of action. A cost-benefit analysis can also include qualitative factors, such as security, compliance, performance, and customer satisfaction, that may be affected by the software update. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 231. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 8. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 231. CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question231.

The main purpose of reviewing a control after implementation is to validate that the control operates as intended, as this can help to ensure that the control is effective and efficient in mitigating the risk, and that it meets the control objectives and requirements. Reviewing a control after implementation can also help to identify and address any issues or gaps that may arise during the control operation, and to monitor and evaluate the performance and impact of the control. Reviewing a control after implementation can also provide feedback and information to the control owners and stakeholders, and enable them to adjust the control design and implementation accordingly. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 254. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 254. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

 Customer behavior data is the information that reflects how customers interact with a brand, product, or service, such as their preferences, needs, motivations, and feedback1. Collecting customer behavior data through social media advertising can help an organization to understand its target market, improve its customer experience, and optimize its marketing strategies2.

However, collecting customer behavior data through social media advertising also poses significant business risks, especially for a global organization that operates in different countries. Among the four options given, the most important business risk to be considered is the regulatory requirements that may differ in each country. This means that the organization should:

Be aware of the different laws and regulations that govern the collection, processing, storage, and transfer of personal data in each country, such as the GDPR in the EU, the CCPA in California, or the PDPA in Singapore3

Ensure that the organization complies with the relevant data protection and privacy rules and standards in each country, such as obtaining consent, providing notice, ensuring security, and respecting rights4

Avoid or mitigate the potential legal, financial, reputational, or operational consequences of violating the data protection and privacy laws and regulations in each country, such as fines, lawsuits, sanctions, or loss of trust5

References = What is Customer Behavior Data?, How to Collect Customer Behavior Data for Marketing, Data Protection Laws Around the World, Data Protection and Privacy: The Age of Intelligent Machines, The Risks of Non-Compliance with Data Protection Laws

A comparison of current risk levels with established tolerance is the most useful information for senior management when determining an appropriate risk response, as it shows the gap between the actual risk exposure and the desired risk exposure of the enterprise. This gap indicates the need and urgency for risk response actions, and helps senior management to prioritize and allocate resources for risk mitigation. A comparison of current risk levels with established tolerance also reflects the effectiveness of the existing risk management process and controls, and enables senior management to monitor and adjust the risk strategy and objectives accordingly. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 234. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 234. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 234.

The average time between user transfers and access updates is a trend that would cause the greatest concern regarding the effectiveness of an organization’s user access control processes, as it indicates the delay or inefficiency in updating the user access rights and privileges according to the user’s current role and responsibilities. This can result in unauthorized or excessive access to the organization’s information assets, and increase the risk of data leakage, fraud, or misuse. The user access control processes should ensure that the user access rights and privileges are reviewed and modified regularly, and especially when the user’s role or status changes, such as transfer, promotion, demotion, or termination. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 241. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 241. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 241.

 Contractually obligating the supplier to follow privacy laws is the best way to mitigate the risk of violating privacy laws when transferring personal information to a supplier, because it ensures that the supplier is legally bound to comply with the applicable laws and regulations that protect the privacy and security of the personal information. This also creates a clear accountability and liability for the supplier in case of a privacy breach, and defines the rights and obligations of both parties in relation to the personal information. The other options are not the best ways to mitigate the risk of violating privacy laws, although they may also be helpful in reducing the likelihood or impact of a privacy breach. Encrypting the data while in transit to the supplier, requiring independent audits of the supplier’s control environment, and utilizing blockchain during the data transfer are examples of technical or assurance controls that aim to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the personal information, but they do not address the legal or contractual aspects of the privacy laws. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying risk responses, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, or acceptance. It represents the level of exposure that the organisation is willing to tolerate or assume. Residual risk should be aligned with the organisation’s risk appetite and risk tolerance, which are determined by senior management. Therefore, the best way to obtain senior management support for investment in a control implementation would be to articulate the reduction in residual risk that the control would achieve. This would demonstrate how the control would help the organisation meet its risk objectives and reduce the likelihood or impact of adverse events. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 25.

 The greatest risk to change control in business application development over the complete life cycle is the introduction of requirements that have not been approved. Requirements are the specifications or expectations of the business users or stakeholders for the application, such as the features, functions, or performance1. Change control is the process of identifying, evaluating, approving, and implementing changes to the application, such as the design, code, or configuration2. By introducing requirements that have not been approved, the organization can face significant risks, such as:

Scope creep, which is the uncontrolled or unauthorized expansion of the project scope, and can result in increased costs, delays, or errors3.

Quality issues, which can affect the reliability, usability, or security of the application, and can lead to defects, failures, or breaches4.

Stakeholder dissatisfaction, which can arise from the mismatch or inconsistency between the delivered application and the expected application, and can cause complaints, disputes, or litigation5.

The other options are not the greatest risk to change control, because:

Emphasis on multiple application testing cycles is not a risk, but rather a benefit or a best practice for change control, as it can help to ensure that the application meets the requirements and standards, and that the changes are effective and efficient.

Lack of an integrated development environment (IDE) tool is a challenge, but not a risk, for change control, as it can affect the productivity, collaboration, or integration of the developers, and can cause difficulties or inefficiencies in the development process. However, it does not directly affect the requirements or the quality of the application, and it can be overcome by using other tools or methods.

Bypassing quality requirements before go-live is a risk, but not the greatest risk, for change control, as it can compromise the quality or performance of the application, and can expose the organization to errors, failures, or breaches. However, it is less likely or frequent than introducing requirements that have not been approved, and it can be detected or prevented by using quality assurance or quality control techniques.

References =

Requirements - CIO Wiki

Change Control - CIO Wiki

Scope Creep - CIO Wiki

Quality - CIO Wiki

Stakeholder Management - CIO Wiki

[Software Testing - CIO Wiki]

[Integrated Development Environment (IDE) - CIO Wiki]

[Quality Requirements - CIO Wiki]

[Software Development Life Cycle - CIO Wiki]

The best course of action for a risk practitioner who finds that the approved risk action plan has not been completed but other risk mitigation actions have been implemented is to verify the sufficiency of mitigating controls with the risk owner. This is because the risk owner is the person who is accountable for the risk and the risk response strategy, and therefore should be consulted to ensure that the alternative actions are adequate and effective in reducing the risk to an acceptable level. The other options are not the best course of action, although they may also be performed after verifying the sufficiency of mitigating controls with the risk owner. Reviewing the cost-benefit of mitigating controls, marking the risk status as unresolved within the risk register, and updating the risk register with implemented mitigating actions are secondary actions that depend on the outcome of the verification process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, p. 193.

 The best way to assess the effectiveness of an access management process is to reconcile a list of accounts belonging to terminated employees. This will ensure that the access rights of the employees who have left the organization are revoked in a timely and accurate manner, and that there are no orphaned or unauthorized accounts that could pose a security risk. Comparing the actual process with the documented process, reviewing access logs for user activity, and reviewing for compliance with acceptable use policy are also useful methods, but they are not as direct and conclusive as reconciling a list of accounts belonging to terminated employees. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

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

Identify the most critical risks that need immediate attention or action

Compare and prioritize risks based on their severity and probability

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

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

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

Risk assessment is a key process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the risks associated with the implementation of an emerging technology. It helps to determine the potential impact and likelihood of the risks, as well as the appropriate risk responses and controls. Lack of risk assessment can lead to poor decision making, inadequate risk mitigation, and unexpected consequences. Therefore, it should be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner reviewing the implementation of an emerging technology. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, p. 226-227

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics or measures that provide information on the current or potential exposure and performance of an organization in relation to specific risks. KRIs can help to monitor and track the changes or trends in the risk level and the risk response over time, identify and alert the risk issues or events that require attention or action, evaluate and report the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management processes and practices, and support and inform the risk decision making and improvement1.

The best way to enable the identification of trends in risk levels is to ensure that the correlation between risk levels and KRIs is positive, because it means that the KRIs are aligned with and reflective of the risk levels, and that they can capture and indicate the variations or movements in the risk levels accurately and reliably. A positive correlation between risk levels and KRIs can be achieved by:

Selecting and defining the KRIs that are relevant and appropriate for the specific risks that the organization faces, and that are consistent and comparable across different domains and contexts

Collecting and analyzing the data and information that are reliable and sufficient for the KRIs, and that are sourced from various methods and sources, such as risk assessments, audits, monitoring, alerts, or incidents

Applying and using the tools and techniques that are suitable and feasible for the KRIs, such as risk matrices, risk registers, risk indicators, or risk models

Reviewing and updating the KRIs periodically or as needed, and ensuring that they reflect the current or accurate risk levels, which may change over time or due to external factors23

The other options are not the best ways to enable the identification of trends in risk levels, but rather some of the factors or aspects of KRIs. Measurements for KRIs are repeatable is a factor that can enhance the reliability and validity of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs can produce the same or similar results under the same or similar conditions. However, repeatability does not necessarily imply accuracy or sensitivity, and it may not capture or reflect the changes or trends in the risk levels. Quantitative measurements are used for KRIs is an aspect that can improve the objectivity and precision of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs are expressed in numerical or measurable values, such as percentages, probabilities, or monetary amounts. However, quantitative measurements may not be suitable or feasible for all types of risks or KRIs, and they may not capture or reflect the complexity or uncertainty of the risk levels. Qualitative definitions for KRIs are used is an aspect that can enhance the understanding and communication of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs are expressed in descriptive or subjective terms, such as high, medium, or low, based on criteria such as likelihood, impact, or severity. However, qualitative definitions may not be consistent or comparable across different risks or KRIs, and they may not capture or reflect the magnitude or variation of the risk levels. References =

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

Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

Key Risk Indicators: Types and Examples

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

Information security metrics are quantitative or qualitative measures that indicate the performance and effectiveness of the information security processes, controls, and objectives. The primary goal of developing information security metrics is to enable continuous improvement of the information security program and to align it with the business goals and strategy. Information security metrics can help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the security program, to monitor and report on the progress and outcomes of the security initiatives, to evaluate the return on investment and value of the security activities, and to provide feedback and guidance for improvement actions. Information security metrics should be relevant, reliable, consistent, and actionable. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, p. 116-117

Identifying potential sources of risk is the first step in the risk identification process, which is essential for developing a thorough understanding of risk scenarios. Sources of risk can be internal or external, and can include factors such as people, processes, technology, environment, regulations, and events. Identifying potential sources of risk can help to generate a comprehensive list of risk scenarios that can affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Identifying potential sources of risk can also help to raise risk awareness among the employees and to foster a risk culture within the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, p. 66-67

The best way to protect company sensitive information from being exposed when an organization allows employee use of social media accounts for work purposes is to require employees to sign nondisclosure agreements. Nondisclosure agreements are legal contracts that prohibit the employees from disclosing or sharing the company sensitive information with unauthorized parties, such as competitors, media, or regulators. Nondisclosure agreements also specify the scope, duration, and conditions of the nondisclosure obligation, and the penalties or remedies for breaching the agreement. Requiring employees to sign nondisclosure agreements is the best way to protect company sensitive information, as it helps to prevent or deter the employees from exposing or leaking the company sensitive information on social media, and to hold the employees accountable and liable for their actions. Requiring employees to sign nondisclosure agreements also helps to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements for data protection and privacy. Educating employees on what needs to be kept confidential, implementing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution, and taking punitive action against employees who expose confidential data are also useful ways, but they are not as effective as requiring employees to sign nondisclosure agreements, as they are either dependent on the employees’ awareness or behavior, or reactive or corrective measures, rather than proactive or preventive measures. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

The primary reason for prioritizing risk scenarios is to facilitate risk response decisions. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the possible causes, events, and consequences of a risk. Prioritizing risk scenarios is the process of ranking the risk scenarios according to their level of importance, urgency, or impact. Prioritizing risk scenarios helps to facilitate risk response decisions, which are the choices made to address the risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risks. Prioritizing risk scenarios helps to allocate the resources and efforts to the most significant or critical risk scenarios, and to select the most appropriate and effective risk responses. Prioritizing risk scenarios also helps to communicate and justify the risk response decisions to the stakeholders, and to monitor and report the risk status and performance. Providing an enterprise-wide view of risk, supporting risk response tracking, and assigning risk ownership are not the primary reasons for prioritizing risk scenarios, as they are either the inputs or the outputs of the risk prioritization process, and they do not address the primary need of responding to the risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

A risk management program is a systematic and structured approach to identify, analyze, evaluate, treat, monitor, and communicate the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance.

The greatest advantage of implementing a risk management program is enabling risk-aware decisions. This means that the organization incorporates the risk information and analysis into its decision making process, such as strategic planning, resource allocation, project management, etc.

Enabling risk-aware decisions helps to optimize the outcomes and benefits of the decisions, balance the opportunities and threats of the decisions, and align the decisions with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance.

The other options are not the greatest advantages of implementing a risk management program. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 25

Information Technology & Security, page 19

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 17

The best way to help an enterprise define and communicate its risk appetite is to use a risk register, which is a document that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses1. A risk register can help to:

Define the risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives2. The risk register can include the risk appetite statement, which is a clear and concise expression of the enterprise’s risk preferences and boundaries3.

Communicate the risk appetite, which is the process of sharing and informing the risk appetite to the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, the management, the employees, or the customers4. The risk register can be used as a communication tool, which can provide a consistent and transparent view of the enterprise’s risk profile and performance5.

The other options are not the best ways to help an enterprise define and communicate its risk appetite, because:

Gap analysis is a technique that compares the current state and the desired state of a process, system, or organization, and identifies the gaps or differences between them6. Gap analysis can help to assess the alignment or misalignment of the enterprise’s risk appetite with its risk level, but it does not help to define or communicate the risk appetite itself.

Risk assessment is a process that estimates the probability and impact of the risks, and prioritizes the risks based on their significance and urgency. Risk assessment can help to identify and analyze the risks that may affect the enterprise’s objectives, but it does not help to define or communicate the risk appetite itself.

Heat map is a graphical representation that uses colors to indicate the level or intensity of a variable, such as risk. Heat map can help to visualize and compare the risks based on their probability and impact, but it does not help to define or communicate the risk appetite itself.

References =

Risk Register - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite Statement - CIO Wiki

Risk Communication - CIO Wiki

Risk Reporting - CIO Wiki

Gap Analysis - CIO Wiki

[Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

[Heat Map - CIO Wiki]

[Risk and Information Systems Control documents and learning resources by ISACA]

The most common concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider is unauthorized data usage, which means the misuse, disclosure, or theft of the organization’s data by the service provider or its employees, contractors, or subcontractors1. Unauthorized data usage can pose significant risks to the organization, such as:

Data security and privacy breaches, which can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data, and expose the organization to legal liability, regulatory penalties, reputational damage, or loss of trust and credibility2.

Data quality and accuracy issues, which can affect the reliability and validity of the data, and impair the decision-making, reporting, or performance of the organization3.

Data ownership and control issues, which can limit the access and rights of the organization to its own data, and create dependency or lock-in with the service provider4.

The other options are not the most common concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, because:

Lack of technical expertise is a potential but not prevalent concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, as it may affect the quality and efficiency of the services provided by the service provider, and the compatibility and integration of the services with the organization’s systems and processes5. However, most service providers have sufficient technical expertise in their domain or field, and they can offer specialized skills or resources that the organization may not have internally6.

Combining incompatible duties is a possible but not frequent concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, as it may create conflicts of interest or segregation of duties issues for the service provider or the organization, and increase the risk of errors, fraud, or abuse7. However, most service providers have adequate governance and control mechanisms to prevent or mitigate such issues, and they can adhere to the organization’s policies and standards regarding the separation of duties8.

Denial of service attacks is a rare but not common concern associated with outsourcing to a service provider, as it may disrupt the availability or functionality of the services provided by the service provider, and affect the operations or continuity of the organization. However, most service providers have robust security measures and contingency plans to protect and recover from such attacks, and they can ensure the resilience and reliability of the services.

References =

Unauthorized Data Usage - CIO Wiki

What is outsourcing? Definitions, benefits, challenges, processes, advice | CIO

The Pros and Cons of Outsourcing in 2023 - GrowthForce

13 Common Problems of Outsourcing and How to Avoid Them - ENOU Labs

The Top 10 Problems with Outsourcing Implementation - SSON

10 problems with outsourcing (+ Solutions for each) - Time Doctor Blog

Segregation of Duties - CIO Wiki

Outsourcing Governance - CIO Wiki

[Denial-of-Service Attack - CIO Wiki]

[Business Continuity Planning - CIO Wiki]

Insecure data transmission protocols should be of greatest concern when an organization is implementing internet of Things (IoT) technology to control temperature and lighting in its headquarters, because they can expose the IoT devices and data to unauthorized access, interception, or manipulation. Insecure data transmission protocols can also compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the IoT system and the information it collects and transmits. The other options are not the greatest concerns, although they may also pose some challenges or risks to the IoT implementation. Insufficient network isolation, impact on network performance, and lack of interoperability between sensors are examples of technical or operational issues that can affect the functionality, efficiency, or compatibility of the IoT system, but they do not have the same severity or impact as insecure data transmission protocols. References = CRISC Sample Questions 2024

Risk scenarios are descriptions of possible events or situations that could cause or affect a risk. Risk scenarios can help a risk practitioner to enhance understanding of risk among stakeholders, as they can illustrate the causes, consequences, and impacts of the risk in a clear and realistic way. Risk scenarios can also facilitate communication and collaboration among stakeholders, as they can provide a common language and framework for risk identification, analysis, and response. Risk scenarios can also support decision-making and prioritization, as they can show the likelihood and severity of the risk outcomes. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 237.

 A compensating control is a temporary or alternative control that is implemented when the primary control for mitigating a risk is not feasible or available. A compensating control should provide a similar level of protection and assurance as the primary control, and should be aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The risk practitioner’s best course of action when a compensating control needs to be applied is to obtain the risk owner’s approval. The risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for managing a specific risk, and who is responsible for ensuring that the risk is within the acceptable level. The risk practitioner should consult with the risk owner to explain the situation, propose the compensating control, and seek their approval before implementing it. This way, the risk practitioner can ensure that the compensating control is appropriate, effective, and acceptable for the risk owner, and that the risk owner is aware of and agrees with the change in the risk treatment. The other options are not the best course of action, as they do not involve the risk owner’s approval or input. Recording the risk as accepted in the risk register implies that the risk is not treated or reduced, which may not be the case with a compensating control. Informing senior management may be a good practice, but it does not ensure that the risk owner is involved or agrees with the compensating control. Updating the risk response plan may be a necessary step after implementing the compensating control, but it does not require the risk owner’s approval or consultation. References = 5 Key Risk Mitigation Strategies (With Examples), Risk Management 101: Process, Examples, Strategies

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

Penetration testing is the best method for assessing control effectiveness against technical vulnerabilities that could be exploited to compromise an information system, as it simulates a real-world attack scenario and evaluates the security posture of the system. Penetration testing is a type of security testing that involves performing authorized and ethical hacking activities on a system to identify and exploit its vulnerabilities and weaknesses. Penetration testing can help to measure and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls implemented to protect the system from unauthorized access, modification, or damage.

The other options are not the best methods for assessing control effectiveness against technical vulnerabilities that could be exploited to compromise an information system. Vulnerability scanning is an automated process that uncovers potential vulnerabilities in systems and software, but it does not provide information on the impact and severity of the vulnerability or how they can be exploited using different exploitation techniques1. Systems log correlation analysis is a process of examining and analyzing the records of system activities and events, but it does not directly test the controls or simulate the attack scenarios. Monitoring of intrusion detection system (IDS) alerts is a process of tracking and auditing the system or network for any signs of malicious or anomalous activities, but it does not evaluate the control performance or identify the root causes of the vulnerabilities. References = Vulnerability Assessment Principles | Tenable®, A Complete Guide on Vulnerability Assessment Methodology, Karen Scarfone Scarfone Cybersecurity - NIST Computer Security Resource …

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

 The best control to help reduce the risk of fraudulent internal transactions in several business applications is the segregation of duties. Segregation of duties is the principle of dividing the roles and responsibilities of different individuals or groups involved in a business process or an IT service, so that no one person or group has complete control over the entire process or service. Segregation of duties can help to prevent or detect fraud, errors, conflicts of interest, or misuse of resources, by ensuring that there are checks and balances, and that there is adequate oversight and accountability. Segregation of duties can also help to reduce the risk of collusion, compromise, or coercion among the internal staff, by limiting their access and authority to the business applications and data. Periodic user privileges review, log monitoring, and periodic internal audits are also useful controls, but they are not as effective as segregation of duties, as they are reactive and detective measures, rather than proactive and preventive measures. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

A maturity model is a framework that describes the stages or levels of development and improvement of a certain domain, such as a process, a function, or an organization. A maturity model is most useful to an organization when it provides a reference for progress, meaning that it helps the organization to assess its current state, identify its strengths and weaknesses, set its goals and objectives, and measure its performance and improvement over time. A maturity model can also help the organization to compare itself with best practices and standards, but benchmarking against other organizations is not its primary purpose. A maturity model can also help the organization to manage its risks, but defining a qualitative measure of risk or providing risk metrics is not its main function. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2.1, p. 118-119

The best indicator that additional or improved controls are needed in the environment is when risk events and losses exceed risk tolerance. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation in performance or outcomes relative to the achievement of objectives. Risk events and losses are the negative consequences of risk that have occurred or are expected to occur. When risk events and losses exceed risk tolerance, it means that the existing controls are not sufficient or effective to prevent or mitigate the risk, and that the organization is exposed to unacceptable levels of risk that could impair its ability to achieve its objectives. Therefore, additional or improved controls are needed to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Management decreasing organizational risk appetite, the risk register and portfolio not including all risk scenarios, and emerging risk scenarios being identified are not as clear and direct indicators that additional or improved controls are needed in the environment, as they do not necessarily reflect the actual performance or outcomes of the risk management process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 41.

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

Disaster recovery plans are essential for ensuring the continuity and resilience of business operations in the event of a disruption or disaster. However, creating and maintaining separate disaster recovery plans for each business unit may not be cost-effective or efficient, as it may result in duplication, inconsistency, or gaps in the plans. Therefore, the best course of action would be to evaluate opportunities to combine disaster recovery plans across the business units, where possible and appropriate. This would help to achieve economies of scale, standardization, and alignment of the plans, as well as reduce complexity and costs. However, this does not mean that all disaster recovery plans should be identical or centralized, as different business units may have different risk profiles, recovery objectives, and requirements. Therefore, the combined disaster recovery plans should still be tailored and customized to suit the specific needs and characteristics of each business unit. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2, page 71.

The primary purpose of using a framework for risk analysis is to improve consistency. A framework for risk analysis is a set of principles, standards, methods, and tools that guide and govern the risk analysis process. Risk analysis is the process of estimating the impact and likelihood of the risk events, and determining the level and nature of the risk exposure. A framework for risk analysis helps to improve consistency, which is the degree of uniformity and agreement among the risk analysis results and practices. Improving consistency helps to ensure that the risk analysis is performed in a systematic and structured way, and that the risk analysis results are comparable and reliable. Improving consistency also helps to reduce the bias, uncertainty, and variability in the risk analysis process, and to enhance the quality and accuracy of the risk analysis results. Improving accountability, helping define risk tolerance, and helping develop risk scenarios are not the primary purposes of using a framework for risk analysis, as they are either the benefits or the objectives of the risk analysis process, and they do not address the primary need of improving the quality and reliability of the risk analysis results. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

A key control indicator (KCI) is a metric that provides information on the extent to which a given control is meeting its intended objectives in terms of loss prevention, reduction, etc. A KCI should have an explicit relationship to both the specific control and the specific risk against which the control has been implemented. For risk related to IT infrastructure failure, a possible control is to have a recovery plan that can restore the critical IT services and minimize the impact of the failure. A KCI that can measure the effectiveness of this control is the number of successful recovery plan tests, which indicates how well the recovery plan can be executed in a real scenario. The higher the number of successful tests, the lower the risk of IT infrastructure failure. Therefore, this is the best KCI among the given options. References =

Integrating KRIs and KPIs for Effective Technology Risk Management

Key Control Indicator (KCI) - CIO Wiki

Infrastructure Issues: Understanding and Mitigating Risks

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

The most important consideration when selecting a control to mitigate an identified risk is whether the cost of control exceeds the mitigation value, because this determines the cost-benefit ratio of the control. A control should not be implemented if the cost of implementing and maintaining it is higher than the expected benefit of reducing the risk exposure. The other options are not the most important considerations, although they may also influence the control selection process. The availability of internal resources, the potential compounding effects, and the possibility of eliminating the risk are secondary factors that depend on the cost and value of the control. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

According to the CRISC Review Manual, conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) is the task that should be completed prior to creating a disaster recovery plan (DRP), because it helps to identify the critical business processes and resources, and their dependencies, that need to be recovered in the event of a disaster. The BIA also helps to determine the recovery time objectives (RTOs) and recovery point objectives (RPOs) for each business process and resource, which are the key inputs for the DRP. The other options are not the tasks that should be completed prior to creating a DRP, as they are part of the DRP itself. Identifying the recovery response team is the task of defining the roles and responsibilities of the personnel involved in the recovery process. Procuring a recovery site is the task of selecting and acquiring an alternative location where the business operations can be resumed. Assigning sensitivity levels to data is the task of classifying the data based on its importance and protection requirements. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 237.

The best way to mitigate the risk to IT infrastructure availability is to establish a disaster recovery plan (DRP), because a DRP is a document that defines the procedures and resources needed to restore the IT infrastructure and resume the critical business functions in the event of a disaster or disruption. A DRP helps to minimize the downtime, data loss, and financial impact of a disaster, and ensures the continuity of operations and services. The other options are not the best ways to mitigate the risk to IT infrastructure availability, although they may also be helpful in supporting the DRP. Establishing recovery time objectives (RTOs), maintaining a current list of staff contact details, and maintaining a risk register are examples of planning or monitoring activities that aim to define the requirements, roles, and responsibilities for the disaster recovery process, but they do not address the actual implementation or execution of the DRP. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

A cause-and-effect diagram, also known as a fishbone diagram or an Ishikawa diagram, is a graphical tool that helps to identify and analyze the potential causes and effects of a problem or an event. A cause-and-effect diagram can be used to develop technical risk scenarios related to a recently developed ERP system, because it can help to:

Break down the complex problem or event into manageable and measurable categories and subcategories of causes and effects

Visualize the relationships and interactions among the various factors that contribute to the problem or event

Identify the root causes and the most significant effects of the problem or event

Generate ideas and hypotheses for testing and validating the problem or event

Communicate and present the problem or event clearly and logically to the stakeholders1

A cause-and-effect diagram can be constructed by following these steps:

Define the problem or event and write it in a box on the right side of the diagram

Draw a horizontal line from the box to the left side of the diagram, representing the main spine of the fishbone

Identify the major categories of causes that affect the problem or event, such as people, process, technology, environment, etc., and write them on the branches of the spine

For each category, brainstorm and list the possible subcategories and specific causes that influence the problem or event, and write them on the sub-branches of the spine

For each cause, identify and list the possible effects or consequences that result from the problem or event, and write them on the sub-sub-branches of the spine

Analyze the diagram and prioritize the causes and effects based on their frequency, severity, and controllability

Develop technical risk scenarios based on the most critical causes and effects, and describe how they could affect the ERP system and the organization1

The best tool for communicating strategic risk priorities is a heat map. A heat map is a graphical representation of the risk profile of an enterprise, showing the likelihood and impact of various risks on a matrix. A heat map can help to highlight the most significant risks that require attention, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance levels of the enterprise. A heat map can also facilitate the comparison of risks across different business units, processes, or objectives, and enable the communication of risk information to stakeholders in a clear and concise manner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, page 240.

Measurability and consistency are the most essential attributes of an effective key control indicator (KCI), because they ensure that the KCI can be quantified, compared, and reported over time. A KCI should be able to measure the performance or effectiveness of a control in mitigating a risk and provide consistent results across different periods, sources, and methods. The other options are not the most essential attributes, although they may also be desirable for a KCI. Flexibility and adaptability are not the most essential attributes, because they may compromise the reliability and comparability of the KCI. Robustness and resilience are not the most essential attributes, because they are more relevant for the control itself, not the KCI. Optimal cost and benefit are not the most essential attributes, because they are more related to the value and feasibility of the KCI, not the quality and accuracy of the KCI. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers

A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing is the best option to inform stakeholders risk decision-making, as it provides an accurate and timely assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s control environment. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing is a document that summarizes the results of the testing activities performed on the organization’s internal controls, such as design, implementation, operation, and monitoring. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing should include the following elements:

The scope, objectives, and methodology of the controls testing

The criteria and standards used to evaluate the controls

The findings and observations of the testing process

The root causes and impacts of the identified deficiencies

The recommendations and action plans to address the deficiencies

The roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders involved in the remediation process

A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing helps to inform stakeholders risk decision-making by providing them with relevant and reliable information on the current state of the organization’s control environment. It also helps to identify and prioritize the areas for improvement and enhancement of the control environment. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing also facilitates the communication, collaboration, and accountability among the stakeholders involved in the risk management and control processes.

The other options are not the best options to inform stakeholders risk decision-making. The audit plan for the upcoming period is a document that outlines the scope, objectives, and methodology of the planned audit activities, but it does not provide any information on the actual performance of the organization’s control environment. Spend to date on mitigating control implementation is a measure of the resources and costs incurred to implement the risk response actions, but it does not indicate the effectiveness or efficiency of the control environment. A status report of control deployment is a document that tracks and monitors the progress and performance of the control implementation process, but it does not evaluate the quality or adequacy of the control environment. References = Internal Control Deficiencies: Identification, Reporting and Communication, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Internal Control Testing: Techniques, Types, and Examples

A standardized risk taxonomy is a common language and structure for identifying, analyzing, and reporting risks across the enterprise. It enables consistent and comparable risk assessment and aggregation, as well as clear communication and coordination among different divisions. A list of control deficiencies, an enterprise risk ownership policy, and an updated risk tolerance metric are not sufficient to enable management of risk at the enterprise level, as they do not address the issue of risk alignment and integration among divisions. References = [CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version)], page 42; CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 197.

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

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

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

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

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

Reevaluating the design of the key risk indicators (KRIs) is the best recommendation when a KRI is generating an excessive volume of events, because it helps to determine whether the KRI is relevant, reliable, and valid, and whether it needs to be modified or replaced. A KRI is a metric or indicator that helps to monitor and evaluate the likelihood or impact of a risk, or the effectiveness or efficiency of a control. A KRI can be quantitative or qualitative, and can be derived from internal or external sources. An event is an occurrence or incident that may indicate a change or trend in the risk level or performance. A KRI that generates an excessive volume of events may indicate that the KRI is not well-designed or well-aligned with the risk objectives or criteria, and that it may produce false positives or negatives, or irrelevant or misleading information. Therefore, reevaluating the design of the KRIs is the best recommendation, as it helps to improve the quality and usefulness of the KRIs, and to avoid unnecessary or inappropriate actions or responses. Developing a corresponding key performance indicator (KPI), monitoring KRIs within a specific timeframe, and activating the incident response plan are all possible actions to perform after reevaluating the design of the KRIs, but they are not the best recommendation, as they do not address the root cause of the excessive volume of events. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 97

When moving critical assets to the cloud, the most important KPI to include in the SLA is the percentage of standard supplier uptime, which measures the availability and reliability of the cloud service provider. This KPI indicates how often the cloud service is operational and accessible, and how well it meets the agreed service level objectives. A high percentage of standard supplier uptime means that the cloud service provider can deliver the expected performance and functionality of the critical assets, and minimize the risk of service disruptions, downtime, or data loss. The percentage of standard supplier uptime should be aligned with the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery requirements, and should be monitored and reported regularly by the cloud service provider. The SLA should also specify the compensation or remediation actions in case of any breach of the agreed percentage of standard supplier uptime.

References:

•ISACA, Risk and Information Systems Control Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2020, p. 2501

•ISACA, Cloud Computing: Business Benefits With Security, Governance and Assurance Perspectives, 2009, p. 142

•What is an SLA? Best practices for service-level agreements3

Updating the risk likelihood in the risk register is appropriate when an improved control, such as an automated interface, is implemented. This change affects the probability of the risk occurring, thus reflecting the enhanced control environment.

Using the risk management process will best ensure that controls adequately support business goals and objectives, as it involves identifying, assessing, responding, and monitoring the risks that may affect the achievement of the business goals and objectives, and designing and implementing controls to mitigate those risks. Enforcing strict disciplinary procedures in case of noncompliance, reviewing results of the annual company external audit, and adopting internationally accepted controls are also good practices, but they are not the best, as they do not necessarily align the controls with the business goals and objectives. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 146.

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks what provides the best evidence that robust risk management practices are in place within an organization.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Regularly updated risk management procedures: Important but not as comprehensive as a risk register.

B. A management-approved risk dashboard: Useful for reporting but not as comprehensive as a risk register.

C. A current control framework: Important but does not provide ongoing evidence of risk management practices.

D. A regularly updated risk register: Provides comprehensive and current information on risks, their status, and the effectiveness of risk management efforts.

 Detailed Explanation:

Risk Register: A regularly updated risk register reflects the organization's ongoing risk management activities. It includes details of identified risks, their assessments, mitigation strategies, and current status, providing a comprehensive view of the risk landscape.

Evidence of Practices: Keeping the risk register up-to-date demonstrates that the organization is actively monitoring and managing risks, making it a clear indicator of robust risk management practices.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, highlights the importance of maintaining an updated risk register as part of effective risk management practices​​.

Payroll system risk mitigation plans are the actions that are taken to reduce or eliminate the risk associated with payroll processing. When a migration from an in-house developed system to an external cloud-based solution is affecting a previously rated key risk scenario related to payroll processing, the first part of the risk register that should be updated is the payroll system risk mitigation plans. This is because the migration may introduce new risks or change the existing risks, and the risk mitigation plans may need to be revised or replaced accordingly. Updating the payroll system risk mitigation plans can help ensure that the risk level is acceptable and the payroll process is secure and reliable. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk treatment techniques is to update the risk action plan, which is a document that outlines the risk mitigation plans1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, updating the risk mitigation plans is the correct answer to this question2.

Payroll system risk factors, payroll process owner, and payroll administrative controls are not the first part of the risk register that should be updated when a migration is affecting a key risk scenario. Payroll system risk factors are the sources or causes of risk, such as threats, vulnerabilities, or uncertainties. Payroll process owner is the person who is responsible for the payroll process and its outcomes. Payroll administrative controls are the policies, procedures, or guidelines that govern the payroll process. These parts of the risk register may also need to be updated, but they are not as urgent or critical as the risk mitigation plans. Updating the risk factors, process owner, and administrative controls can help identify, assess, and monitor the risk, but they do not directly address the risk response. The risk response is the most important part of the risk management process, as it determines how the risk is handled and controlled.

Reviewing the methodology used to conduct the business impact analysis (BIA) is the first thing that a risk practitioner should do when wanting to identify potential risk events that affect the continuity of a critical business process, because it helps to ensure that the BIA is conducted in a consistent, comprehensive, and reliable manner, and that it covers all the relevant aspects and scenarios of the business process and its continuity. A BIA is a process of analyzing the potential impact of disruption to the critical business functions or processes, and identifying the recovery priorities and requirements. A BIA methodology is a set of principles, standards, and techniques that guide and support the BIA process, such as the scope, objectives, data sources, data collection methods, data analysis methods, and reporting methods. Reviewing the BIA methodology is the first thing to do, as it helps to establish the foundation and framework for the BIA process, and to ensure that the BIA results are valid and useful for identifying the potential risk events and their consequences. Evaluating current risk management alignment with relevant regulations, determining if business continuity procedures are reviewed and updated on a regular basis, and conducting a benchmarking exercise against industry peers are all possible things to do after reviewing the BIA methodology, but they are not the first thing to do, as they depend on the quality and accuracy of the BIA process and outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 143

Independent Assessment:

Objective Evaluation: An assessment by a qualified independent party ensures that the evaluation of the new controls is unbiased and thorough. It provides a credible verification of the control's effectiveness.

Expertise and Standards: Independent assessors bring specialized expertise and follow established standards and best practices, ensuring a comprehensive review of the control implementation.

Validation and Assurance: This assessment provides assurance to stakeholders that the controls are functioning as intended and meet the required security and operational standards.

Comparison with Other Options:

Post-Implementation Review by Key Personnel: While valuable, this review may lack the objectivity and thoroughness of an independent assessment.

Senior Management Sign-Off: Sign-off from senior management is important but does not provide the detailed validation of control effectiveness that an independent assessment offers.

Daily Operation of Robots without Human Interference: This indicates operational stability but does not verify that all controls are functioning as intended.

Best Practices:

Regular Independent Assessments: Schedule regular independent assessments to continuously validate the effectiveness of controls.

Comprehensive Reporting: Ensure that the independent assessment includes comprehensive reporting on findings and recommendations for improvement.

Follow-Up Actions: Implement any recommended actions from the assessment to address identified gaps or weaknesses in the controls.

CRISC Review Manual: Recommends independent assessments as a best practice for validating control effectiveness and ensuring comprehensive risk management.

ISACA Standards: Support the use of independent assessments to provide objective and credible evaluations of control implementations.

References:

Assessing risk scenarios is the starting point when performing a risk analysis for an asset. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could cause harm or loss to an asset. Assessing risk scenarios involves identifying the sources and causes of risk, the potential impacts and consequences of risk, and the likelihood and frequency of risk occurrence. Assessing risk scenarios can help establish the risk context, scope, and criteria for the asset, and provide the basis for further risk analysis steps, such as evaluating threats, assessing controls, and updating the risk register. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, assessing risk scenarios is the first step in the IT risk assessment process1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, assessing risk scenarios is the correct answer to this question

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

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks for the best guidance for developing relevant risk scenarios.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Based on industry trends: Important but may not always be directly relevant to the specific organization.

B. Mapped to incident response plans: Useful but secondary to ensuring the scenarios are probable.

C. Related to probable events: Ensures the scenarios are realistic and likely, making them more relevant and actionable.

D. Aligned with risk management capabilities: Important for managing risks but not as critical as ensuring scenarios are probable.

 Detailed Explanation:

Probable Events: Developing risk scenarios that are based on probable events ensures that the organization is prepared for the most likely risks. This makes risk management efforts more practical and focused on real threats.

Relevance: By focusing on probable events, the scenarios will be more relevant to the organization's actual risk environment, making it easier to allocate resources and plan responses effectively.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, emphasizes the importance of identifying and evaluating probable risk events to develop effective risk scenarios​​.

 Maturity Models:

Maturity models provide a framework for assessing the development and optimization of processes within an organization.

They typically range from ad hoc and immature processes to well-defined and continuously improving processes.

 Assessing IT Process Improvement:

Changes in the organization’s position within a maturity model indicate that processes are becoming more mature, standardized, and optimized.

Improvements in maturity levels reflect enhancements in process efficiency, effectiveness, and consistency.

 Importance of Maturity Models:

Provides a clear and structured approach to evaluate and benchmark process improvements.

Helps senior management understand the progress and development of IT processes over time.

 Comparing Other Indicators:

Number of Security Exceptions: Useful for identifying issues but not a comprehensive measure of process improvement.

Risk Register Changes: Reflects risk management activities but not overall process maturity.

Number of Intrusions Detected: Indicates security effectiveness but not broader process improvements.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the use of maturity models to assess and improve risk management capabilities and IT processes (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.6 Capability Maturity Models)​​.

The operational risk associated with attacks on a web application should be owned by the individual in charge of the business function, because they are the primary stakeholder and beneficiary of the web application, and they are responsible for defining and achieving the business objectives and requirements that the web application supports or enables. An operational risk is a risk of loss or damage resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people, or systems, or from external events. An attack on a web application is a type of operational risk that involves a malicious or unauthorized attempt to compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the web application, such as a denial-of-service attack, a SQL injection attack, or a cross-site scripting attack. A web application is an application that runs on a web server and can be accessed or used through a web browser, such as an online shopping site, a social media platform, or a web-based email service. A business function is a set of activities or tasks that support or enable the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, such as marketing, sales, or customer service. A risk owner is a person or role that has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk, and to implement and monitor the risk response and controls. The individual in charge of the business function should be the risk owner, as they have the best understanding and interest of the web application and its business value and impact, and they have the ability and responsibility to manage the operational risk associated with the attacks on the web application. The individual in charge of network operations, the cybersecurity function, or application development are all possible candidates for the risk owner, but they are not the best choice, as they may not have the same level of stake and influence in the web application and its business objectives and requirements, and they may have different or conflicting priorities or perspectives on the operational risk and its management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 101

The type of risk that is most likely to materialize as a result of allowing several employees to retire early in order to avoid layoffs is institutional knowledge loss, as it represents the loss of valuable information, experience, and expertise that the employees have accumulated over time, and that may not be easily transferred or replaced. Confidentiality breach, intellectual property loss, and unauthorized access are not the most likely types of risk, as they are more related to the security, ownership, or access of information, respectively, rather than the retention or transfer of knowledge. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

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

References

2Identifying and Estimating Cybersecurity Risk for Enterprise Risk Management

3Threat Modeling Process | OWASP Foundation

1Threat modeling explained: A process for anticipating cyber attacks

4Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment: A Guide - SafetyCulture

5How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA

 Data Protection Controls:

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

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

 Steps in Evaluation:

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

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

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

 Importance of Evaluation:

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

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

 Comparing Other Actions:

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

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

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

 References:

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

The most important consideration when establishing a contingency plan and an alternate processing site for a company that has located its computer center on a moderate earthquake fault is that the alternative site does not reside on the same fault no matter how far the distance apart, as it ensures that the alternative site is not affected by the same earthquake event that may disrupt the primary site, and that the business continuity and recovery objectives can be met. The other options are not the most important considerations, as they are more related to the backup, priority, or readiness of the alternative site, respectively, rather than the location of the alternative site. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

 Understanding Strategic Risk:

Strategic risk refers to the potential losses that can arise from adverse business decisions, improper implementation of decisions, or lack of responsiveness to changes in the business environment.

 Reputational Impact of Cybersecurity Breaches:

A cybersecurity breach can severely damage an organization's reputation, affecting customer trust, investor confidence, and market value.

Such impacts go beyond immediate financial losses and can have long-term strategic implications for the organization's competitive position and strategic objectives.

 Classification of Risk:

Financial Risk: Direct financial losses due to a breach (e.g., fines, legal costs) but does not cover reputational impacts.

Data Risk: Focuses on the loss or compromise of data but not the broader strategic impact.

Operational Risk: Pertains to disruptions in business operations, while reputational damage influences the organization’s strategic direction and goals.

 Strategic Risk and Reputation:

Reputational damage from a cybersecurity breach can lead to a loss of customer base, reduced market share, and difficulties in strategic partnerships, all of which are strategic concerns.

Addressing reputational risk requires strategic planning, proactive communication, and long-term efforts to rebuild trust and credibility.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual highlights that reputational risk is a significant aspect of strategic risk, especially following cybersecurity incidents (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.1.3 Importance and Value of IT Risk Management)​​.

Internet of Things (IoT) is an emerging technology that refers to the network of devices, such as cameras, sensors, appliances, or vehicles, that can communicate and exchange data via the internet. IoT is frequently used for botnet distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, which are cyberattacks that aim to disrupt or disable a target’s online services by overwhelming them with traffic from multiple sources. IoT devices are often unsecured, unpatched, or misconfigured, which makes them vulnerable to being infected by malware and controlled by attackers. Attackers can use IoT devices to create large and powerful botnets that can launch DDoS attacks against various targets, such as websites, servers, or networks. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, IoT is one of the key emerging technologies that pose new IT risks, including DDoS attacks1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, IoT is the correct answer to this question2. According to the web search results, IoT devices are commonly used for botnet DDoS attacks, such as the Mirai botnet, the Emotet botnet, and the BoT-IoT dataset345.

A risk awareness program is a set of activities and communication methods that aim to increase the understanding and knowledge of risk among the stakeholders of an organization. The primary objective of a risk awareness program is to enhance the organizational risk culture, which is the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes that influence how risk is perceived and managed in the organization. A risk awareness program can help to promote a risk-aware culture by:

•Educating stakeholders on the concepts and benefits of risk management

•Aligning risk management with the organization’s vision, mission, and objectives

•Encouraging stakeholder participation and collaboration in risk management processes

•Fostering a positive attitude towards risk taking and learning from failures

•Reinforcing risk management roles and responsibilities

•Recognizing and rewarding good risk management practices

References: The answer is based on the following sources:

•CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, page 781

•Developing Collective Risk Leadership Through CRISC2

 Whistleblower Program:

A whistleblower program provides a confidential and anonymous channel for employees to report unethical behavior, violations of laws, regulations, or company policies.

It is a proactive approach to uncover ethical violations that might not be detected through regular monitoring and controls.

 Enabling Detection:

Encourages employees to come forward without fear of retaliation.

Provides management with early warning signs of potential ethical issues, allowing them to address problems before they escalate.

 Comparing Other Methods:

Transaction Log Monitoring: While useful for detecting anomalies, it may not specifically identify ethical violations.

Access Control Attestation: Ensures that users have appropriate access but does not directly address ethical behavior.

Periodic Job Rotation: Helps prevent fraud by reducing opportunities for unethical behavior but may not actively detect violations.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the role of whistleblower programs in managing ethical risks and detecting violations (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4.4 Reporting Mechanisms) .

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the primary purpose of periodically reviewing an organization’s risk profile is to enable risk-based decision making, because it helps to ensure that the risk information is current, relevant, and accurate. The risk profile is a snapshot of the organization’s risk exposure at a given point in time, based on the risk identification, analysis, and evaluation processes. Periodically reviewing the risk profile allows the organization to monitor the changes in the risk environment, the effectiveness of the risk responses, and the impact of the risk events. This enables the organization to make informed decisions about the risk management strategies and priorities. The other options are not the primary purpose of periodically reviewing the risk profile, as they are related to other aspects of the risk management process. Aligning business objectives with risk appetite is the purpose of establishing the risk context, which defines the scope and boundaries of the risk management activities. Designing and implementing risk response action plans is the purpose of the risk response process, which involves selecting and executing the appropriate risk responses. Updating risk responses in the risk register is the outcome of the risk monitoring and reporting process, which involves tracking the risk performance and communicating the risk information to the stakeholders. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.4, page 86.

Ensuring that database changes are correctly applied is the primary reason for monitoring activities performed in a production database environment, as it helps to maintain the integrity, availability, and performance of the database and the applications that depend on it. Database changes are any modifications made to the database structure, configuration, data, or code, such as adding or deleting tables, columns, indexes, or triggers, updating or inserting data, or altering stored procedures or functions. Database changes can have significant impacts on the database functionality and behavior, and may introduce errors, inconsistencies, or vulnerabilities if not applied correctly. Therefore, monitoring database changes is essential to verify that the changes are implemented as intended, comply with the design specifications and standards, and do not cause any adverse effects or conflicts with the existing database or application components.

The other options are not the primary reasons for monitoring activities performed in a production database environment. Enforcing that changes are authorized is an important aspect of database change management, but it is not the main purpose of database monitoring. Database change management is the process of planning, reviewing, approving, and implementing database changes in a controlled and consistent manner. Database change management helps to ensure that the changes are authorized by the appropriate stakeholders, aligned with the business requirements and objectives, and documented and communicated to the relevant parties. Database monitoring can support database change management by providing information and feedback on the change implementation and performance, but it does not enforce the change authorization. Deterring illicit actions of database administrators is a possible benefit of database monitoring, but it is not the primary reason for it. Database administrators are the users who have the highest level of access and privilege to the database, and they are responsible for managing and maintaining the database operations and security. Database monitoring can help to deter illicit actions of database administrators by tracking and auditing their activities and actions on the database, and alerting or escalating any suspicious or malicious behavior. However, database monitoring is not the only or the most effective way to prevent or detect illicit actions of database administrators. Other measures, such as implementing the principle of least privilege, segregating duties, enforcing password policies, and encrypting data, are also necessary to protect the database from unauthorized or improper access or manipulation by database administrators or other users. Preventing system developers from accessing production data is a possible benefit of database monitoring, but it is not the primary reason for it. System developers are the users who design, develop, and test the applications that interact with the database. System developers should not have access to the production data, as it may contain sensitive or confidential information that could be compromised or misused by the developers. System developers should only use test or dummy data for their development and testing purposes. Database monitoring can help to prevent system developers from accessing production data by controlling and restricting their access and privilege to the database, and logging and reporting any unauthorized or inappropriate access attempts. However, database monitoring is not the only or the most effective way to prevent system developers from accessing production data. Other measures, such as implementing access control policies, masking or anonymizing data, and isolating development and production environments, are also necessary to safeguard the production data from system developers or other users. References = Database Monitoring: Basics & Introduction | Splunk, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Best Practices for Database Performance Monitoring

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

Having the risk management process reviewed by a third party is a good practice that can provide various benefits for the organization, such as:

Enhancing the credibility and reliability of the risk management process and outcomes

Identifying and addressing any weaknesses, gaps, or errors in the risk management process and controls

Providing independent and objective feedback and recommendations for improving the risk management process and performance

Ensuring compliance with the relevant laws, regulations, and standards for risk management3

Among the four options given, the primary reason to have the risk management process reviewed by a third party is to obtain an objective view of process gaps and systemic errors. This means that the third party can help to:

Assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk management process and its alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

Detect and report any inconsistencies, inefficiencies, or inaccuracies in the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, or treatment activities

Identify and prioritize the root causes and consequences of the process gaps and systemic errors, and their impact on the organization’s risk exposure and acceptance

Suggest and implement corrective or preventive actions that can resolve or mitigate the process gaps and systemic errors, and prevent their recurrence

References = Risk Management Process - ISO 31000, Enterprise Risk Management - Wikipedia, How to Select a Third-Party Risk Management Framework

 A cost-benefit analysis of the control versus probable legal action is the best way to inform decision-makers about the value of a notice and consent control for the collection of personal information, as it quantifies the potential benefits and costs of implementing the control and compares them with the potential consequences of not implementing the control. This helps the decision-makers to evaluate the trade-offs and the return on investment of the control.

A comparison of the costs of notice and consent control options is not sufficient to inform decision-makers about the value of the control, as it does not consider the benefits or the risks of the control.

Examples of regulatory fines incurred by industry peers for noncompliance are not the best way to inform decision-makers about the value of the control, as they are based on historical data and may not reflect the current or future situation of the enterprise.

A report of critical controls showing the importance of notice and consent is not the best way to inform decision-makers about the value of the control, as it does not provide any quantitative or comparative data to support the decision. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, page 140-1411

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

Data archival processes should be the primary focus of a risk practitioner when ensuring that organization records are being retained for a sufficient period of time to meet legal obligations, because data archival processes ensure that records are stored securely, reliably, and accessibly for as long as they are needed. Data archival processes also help to manage the storage capacity, retention policies, and disposal procedures of records. Data duplication processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for backup and recovery purposes, not for long-term retention. Data anonymization processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for privacy and confidentiality purposes, not for legal compliance. Data protection processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for security and integrity purposes, not for retention requirements. References = Free ISACA CRISC Sample Questions and Study Guide

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.

The risk profile of an organization is a summary of the key risks that affect its objectives, operations, and performance. The risk profile can help senior management understand the current and potential exposure of the organization to various sources of uncertainty, and prioritize the risk response accordingly. An external security audit can reveal multiple findings related to control noncompliance, which indicate that the existing controls are not adequate, effective, or aligned with the organization’s risk appetite. These findings can have a significant impact on the organization’s risk profile, as they can increase the likelihood and/or impact of adverse events, such as data breaches, cyberattacks, regulatory fines, reputational damage, etc. Therefore, the most important information that the risk practitioner should communicate to senior management is the impact to the organization’s risk profile, as it can help them make informed decisions about the risk response and allocation of resources. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Risk Profile, p. 193-195.

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

 The BEST way to enable mitigation of newly identified risk factors related to internet of Things (loT) is to introduce control procedures early in the life cycle, because it can help to prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk factors, and to ensure that the loT devices and systems are designed and developed with security and quality in mind. The control procedures should include requirements analysis, design review, testing, validation, and verification of the loT devices and systems. The other options are not as effective as introducing control procedures early in the life cycle, because:

Option B: Implementing loT device software monitoring is a good way to detect and respond to the risk factors related to loT, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors, which is the proactive and preventive approach. Software monitoring is a reactive and corrective measure that may not be able to prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk factors, especially if they are embedded in the hardware or firmware of the loT devices.

Option C: Performing periodic risk assessments of loT is a necessary way to identify and evaluate the risk factors related to loT, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors, which is the action-oriented and solution-focused approach. Risk assessment is an analytical and descriptive process that may not provide the specific and effective measures to address or mitigate the risk factors, especially if they are complex or dynamic.

Option D: Performing secure code reviews is a useful way to verify and improve the security and quality of the software of the loT devices and systems, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors related to loT, which may involve more than just the software aspect. The risk factors related to loT may also include the hardware, firmware, network, communication, data, and integration aspects, which may not be covered or resolved by the code reviews. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 214.

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

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