CCSFP Certified CSF Practitioner 2025 Exam Questions and Answers

HITRUST offers Rapid Assessments as a lightweight reporting option for organizations and their relying parties. These assessments provide high-level visibility without requiring large numbers of requirements. In fact, a Rapid Assessment may contain fewer than 60 requirement statements depending on scoping and factors selected. There is no requirement that an assessment or insights report exceed 60 requirements to qualify as a rapid assessment. Instead, the determination is based on the selected assessment type (e1, i1, or targeted factors) and whether the output is requested in “rapid” format. This flexibility allows small organizations or specific use cases to leverage HITRUST without unnecessary burden.

A Corrective Action Plan (CAP) is used when a requirement statement is not fully satisfied. HITRUST requires specific information to ensure the CAP is actionable and trackable:

Responsible party → assigns accountability.

Status → indicates if the CAP is open, in progress, or closed.

Steps for remediation → outlines actions that will be taken.

Estimated completion date → provides a timeline for closure.

The amount of capital/expense is not a required element in HITRUST documentation, as CAPs focus on remediation planning and accountability, not budgeting.

Extract Reference (HITRUST CSF Assurance Program, CCSFP Guide, CAP Documentation [0064]):

Each CAP must include responsible individual(s), remediation steps, current status, and estimated completion date to be valid in MyCSF.

HITRUST defines sample sizes for manual controls based on the frequency of operation. For controls that operate weekly, the required sample size is 5 items. This ensures that the assessor can evaluate consistency over multiple weeks without excessive burden. For example, if access logs are reviewed weekly, five weeks of logs must be tested. A higher frequency (e.g., daily controls) requires larger samples, such as 25. Conversely, less frequent controls (e.g., monthly or quarterly) may only require 2 or 1 sample. The structured sampling methodology provides consistency across assessments, ensures sufficient evidence for scoring, and prevents under-testing of critical controls.

HITRUST uses a scoring scale from 0 to 100, with categories for Fully Compliant, Mostly Compliant, Partially Compliant, Somewhat Compliant, and Non-Compliant. A score of 37 falls into the “Somewhat Compliant” category. This reflects significant weaknesses in Policy, Procedure, or Implementation maturity levels. Such a low score indicates a gap that must be addressed. Depending on whether the control is required for certification, HITRUST may require a Corrective Action Plan (CAP). CAPs are required when certification-critical controls score below thresholds (e.g., Implementation not at 100% where required). Therefore, a Requirement Statement score of 37 would be treated as a gap with a possible required CAP, depending on its criticality within the certification process.

For an r2 Certification:

Certification is valid for two years, but an Interim Assessment must be performed at the 12-month mark to maintain certification status.

This ensures continuous compliance, validation of CAP progress, and confirmation of no significant scope changes.

Extract Reference (HITRUST Assurance Program, CCSFP Guide [0023]):

Interim Assessments are required 12 months after r2 certification to maintain certification validity for the second year.

Secondary scoping components in HITRUST are environmental or supporting elements that contribute to how primary components are protected. For the requirement related to secure destruction of sensitive media, an appropriate secondary scoping component would be shred bins. Shred bins represent the physical mechanism through which media or documents containing sensitive information are collected and securely destroyed. They directly support the requirement for secure media destruction methods. Fire extinguishers, fire bags, trash cans, or storage boxes do not directly relate to this requirement, as they address other aspects of physical safety or storage rather than secure destruction. Including shred bins ensures that physical controls are properly validated as part of secure media disposal processes, aligning with HITRUST’s risk-based approach to protecting sensitive data.

The HITRUST CSF is designed to protect all forms of sensitive information, not just structured digital data. This includes words (text documents, records), numbers (financial data, identifiers), pictures (images, radiology scans, photographs), and sounds (voice recordings, call center data). The comprehensive scope ensures that entities consider every medium in which sensitive information may exist, whether electronic, physical, or spoken. This aligns with regulatory definitions, such as HIPAA, which recognizes both electronic and non-electronic forms of protected health information. By covering all forms, HITRUST ensures organizations apply consistent safeguards across their environments and do not overlook exposures outside IT systems, such as printed reports or recorded conversations.

HITRUST requires independent validation of security controls, and vulnerability testing is a critical part of that process. External assessors are expected to review vulnerability management programs and may conduct their own independent vulnerability testing to validate results. While many organizations perform internal scans, assessors may request additional testing or re-scans if evidence is insufficient. The notion that external assessors should “never” perform such testing is incorrect. In fact, the assurance program allows assessors to conduct testing directly, provided it is within agreed scope and does not disrupt production systems. This ensures the assessor can independently verify that vulnerabilities are managed appropriately and controls are functioning as intended.

HITRUST requires strict independence within the External Assessor QA process. The Quality Assurance Reviewer must be independent of the engagement team to provide unbiased oversight. This role cannot be performed by the Engagement Executive, who is directly responsible for the client relationship and delivery of the assessment. Allowing the same individual to serve both roles would create a conflict of interest and undermine the credibility of the QA review. Instead, assessor organizations must designate separate personnel: the Engagement Executive to oversee project execution and a QA Reviewer to confirm accuracy, consistency, and compliance with HITRUST methodology. This separation supports objectivity and enhances the reliability of the assurance program.

The HITRUST e1 and i1 assessments are streamlined, moderate-effort assurance models designed to evaluate an entity’s implementation of essential cybersecurity hygiene controls. These assessments focus on baseline security practices recognized across industries as foundational for protecting sensitive information. The e1 is intended for smaller organizations or those with limited resources, covering a subset of controls that address basic hygiene. The i1 provides expanded coverage beyond e1, testing against controls deemed critical for medium assurance levels. By contrast, the r2 is the most rigorous and risk-tailored assessment, covering a broader and more detailed control set. Targeted assessments are specialized and do not focus broadly on hygiene. Therefore, the e1 and i1 assessments are the correct answers.

During an interim assessment for r2 certifications, only a subset of Requirement Statements is retested. This sample is not determined manually by assessors or clients but is systematically generated by MyCSF. The tool ensures randomness and fairness while including mandatory items such as:

Requirement Statements with open gaps from the prior validated assessment.

Requirement Statements with active Corrective Action Plans (CAPs).

A random selection of additional requirements to confirm continued control performance.

This approach balances efficiency and assurance. It ensures that areas of previously identified weakness are re-examined while still sampling across the broader control set. By automating sample selection, HITRUST prevents bias and ensures consistency across interim reviews.

An r2 certification is valid for two years, but only if an interim assessment is performed at the one-year mark and interim requirements are met. The interim assessment ensures that the organization continues to maintain its controls, remediate CAPs, and discharge any pending N/A justifications. If an interim is not completed or requirements are not met, the certification can lapse. Unlike option A, remediation of all CAPs and N/As is not required before certification is maintained, though CAP progress must be monitored. Certification is not automatically valid for two years (option C), nor is it indefinite (option D). Thus, the correct answer is that certification is valid for two years provided interim requirements are met.

The r2 assessment is the most risk-tailorable of all HITRUST assessment types. Unlike the standardized e1 and i1 assessments, which are designed for essential or moderate assurance, the r2 adapts dynamically based on organizational, technical, compliance, and operational risk factors. For example, the number of users, systems, or internet-facing components directly impacts the number and type of requirement statements. Regulatory drivers such as HIPAA, PCI-DSS, or GDPR also add requirements, ensuring the assessment aligns with the entity’s unique obligations. This tailoring ensures that organizations with higher risk exposure face more stringent testing, while lower-risk entities are not overburdened with unnecessary controls. Neither interim assessments nor bridge certificates are tailorable—they are point-in-time processes tied to existing validated assessments.

HITRUST’s MyCSF platform allows organizations to manage CAPs centrally. When a CAP is created in one assessment object, it can be tracked and viewed across other assessments. This capability gives organizations a consolidated view of open remediation items, progress, and deadlines. Centralized CAP management supports ongoing compliance by ensuring that unresolved issues are not siloed within individual assessments. It also enables organizations to demonstrate to assessors and stakeholders that CAPs are actively managed across their environment. This central view provides efficiencies for entities undergoing multiple assessments simultaneously.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

HITRUST permits organizations to select from active versions of the CSF framework. While using the most current version is recommended, it is not mandatory. Companies may choose the version that best aligns with their compliance timelines, regulatory obligations, or contractual requirements.

The tool does not automatically select the version.

The assessor does not choose the version—the organization makes this decision.

Selecting any active version gives flexibility while maintaining recognized assurance validity.

Extract Reference (HITRUST CSF v11 Guidance, CCSFP Study Guide [0163]):

Organizations may use any active version of the HITRUST CSF for their assessment. While it is encouraged to adopt the most recent version, HITRUST allows organizations to choose the version that best meets their needs

HITRUST does not permit marking a requirement statement “Not Applicable” simply because most of the evaluative elements don’t apply. Requirement statements are mandatory unless a legitimate scoping or regulatory justification supports exclusion. For example, a control related to cardholder data could be marked N/A only if the organization does not process credit cards. However, if even one evaluative element applies, the requirement must be scored, and the non-applicable elements may be documented as part of evidence. HITRUST QA reviews all N/A designations, requiring organizations to justify exclusions in the Subscriber Comments field. Improperly marking requirements as N/A may result in assessment rejection or mandatory CAPs.

In MyCSF, the Reference Library is the designated area where users can browse the entire HITRUST CSF framework. This includes domains, control references, requirement statements, and illustrative procedures. The Reference Library provides an organized view of the framework that is independent of any active assessment object. This feature is especially useful for entities preparing for scoping, training, or developing internal control mappings. While the Search function allows keyword lookups and the Home page provides general dashboards, only the Reference Library offers the structured, domain-by-domain framework view. This ensures that users can review and study the CSF in its entirety before or during assessment preparation, without needing to navigate through specific assessment objects.

The MyCSF document repository is designed to provide efficiency in evidence management. Documents uploaded into the repository can be reused across multiple assessments or assessment objects without the need to upload them again. This helps organizations streamline audit evidence, reduce redundancy, and maintain consistency across different assessment scopes.

Extract Reference (HITRUST MyCSF Guidance, [0113]):

The document repository allows documents to be reused and accessed across multiple assessment objects, thereby improving efficiency in the evidence submission process.

All three validated assessment types—e1, i1, and r2—evaluate controls considered core to cybersecurity hygiene, though at different levels of assurance. For example, e1 is a low-effort model focusing on essential hygiene, i1 is a moderate-assurance model, and r2 is a comprehensive, risk-based model. Requirement statement counts can vary depending on the regulatory and organizational factors selected during scoping. For instance, adding PCI-DSS or HIPAA will increase requirement counts across all types. All assessment types also require testing of implementation, since evidence of operational control performance is mandatory for validation. The incorrect option is C: r2 assessments always include all 19 domains, and so do e1 and i1 assessments. What differs is the number of requirement statements in each domain, not the domains themselves.

Fully Compliant = 100

Mostly Compliant = 75

Partially Compliant = 50

Somewhat Compliant = 25

Non-Compliant = 0

HITRUST assigns specific numeric values to compliance categories within the scoring rubric to standardize assessments. These categories translate qualitative assessments into quantitative scores:

Fully Compliant (100): All criteria met with complete and verified evidence.

Mostly Compliant (75): Most criteria met; minor gaps exist.

Partially Compliant (50): Roughly half of the evaluative elements are met.

Somewhat Compliant (25): Only a small fraction of the evaluative elements are satisfied.

Non-Compliant (0): No evidence of compliance.

These values are applied at the Requirement Statement level and then averaged upward into Control Reference and Domain scores. This quantification ensures consistency and supports certification thresholds such as the domain-level requirement of 71 for r2 certification.

The A1 Security Assessment factor is an optional module that introduces requirements for evaluating the security and governance of AI-based systems. These requirements are mapped into HITRUST CSF across domains like risk management, monitoring, and governance. Importantly, the A1 factor is not restricted solely to r2 assessments. While r2 provides the most comprehensive assurance model, A1 can also be added to other eligible assessment types such as i1 when the scope involves AI risks. The factor is treated like any other regulatory or organizational factor in MyCSF—its selection generates additional tailored requirement statements. Therefore, the claim that A1 can only be added to r2 is inaccurate. The correct understanding is that A1 can apply to multiple assessment types, depending on scoping decisions.

HITRUST certifications are valid for two years, not three.

Interim assessments are required at the 1-year mark to maintain certification status.

Even if an organization scored 100% across all 19 domains, the maximum certification term is two years.

Extract Reference (HITRUST CSF Assurance Program Guide [0095]):

HITRUST certifications are valid for a period of two years, contingent upon the successful completion of an interim assessment after year one.

HITRUST Assurance Advisories (HAAs) are issued when necessary to communicate important updates, clarifications, or changes impacting the CSF Assurance Program. These advisories are not bound to a fixed schedule (monthly, quarterly, or annually), but rather published as needed.

Extract Reference (HITRUST CSF Assurance Program, CCSFP Content [0167]):

There is no formal schedule for issuing HITRUST Assurance Advisories; they are published on an as-needed basis to communicate relevant updates.

Correct response: There is no formal schedule.

The Offline Assessment function is initiated within the assessment object in MyCSF. This feature allows assessors to export requirement statements into an Excel spreadsheet format, which can then be used offline to collect responses, notes, and preliminary evidence. Once populated, the spreadsheet can be uploaded back into MyCSF to synchronize with the online assessment object. This capability is particularly useful when assessors or clients must work in environments with limited internet access or when they prefer batch updates. It is not launched from the landing page, analytics, or via the support desk; it is always tied directly to a specific assessment object.

When a relying party requests an Insights Report covering AI risks, the appropriate selection in MyCSF is the A1 Risk Assessment. The A1 Security Assessment adds AI-related requirements to evaluate technical and governance safeguards for artificial intelligence systems. However, the A1 Risk Assessment is specifically designed to generate Insights Reports that highlight AI-related risk exposures, model governance practices, and data usage concerns. HITRUST distinguishes between these two factors to ensure organizations scope their assessment appropriately. By selecting the A1 Risk Assessment, the assessment object will include additional requirement statements aligned with AI risks, enabling the Insights Report output. This ensures stakeholders receive the necessary assurance information about the organization’s risk environment in relation to AI.

Corrective Action Plans (CAPs) represent identified gaps that must be tracked until they are fully remediated. Even if an organization remediates a CAP after an assessment is completed, the CAP remains part of the final validated report for transparency. The report will show the CAP along with its remediation status and closure details, but it cannot be deleted or excluded. This ensures stakeholders have a complete history of deficiencies and the corrective actions taken. CAPs demonstrate accountability and continuous improvement, which are central to HITRUST’s assurance model. Removing them would diminish trust and obscure the remediation journey, which is why HITRUST prohibits their removal post-assessment.

The AI Risk Assessment compliance factor is used to scope AI-related controls in assessments.

However, the HITRUST AI Security Certification requires assessment of AI Security requirements, not just the AI Risk Assessment factor.

Thus, the statement is incorrect.

Extract Reference (HITRUST AI Security Factor Guidance [0007]):

The AI Risk Assessment factor scopes AI-related controls but does not by itself equate to AI Security Certification.

HITRUST does not issue certifications limited solely to privacy-related requirements. While privacy is a critical part of the CSF—reflected in domains such as Data Protection & Privacy—HITRUST certifications require coverage of all 19 domains. This is because security and privacy are interdependent: without robust security, privacy cannot be protected. An entity may emphasize privacy controls during scoping and reporting, but certification itself is always tied to a full CSF assessment. Privacy-related frameworks, such as GDPR or HIPAA Privacy Rule, can be added as regulatory factors, which introduce additional privacy-focused requirements. However, the output will still be a standard HITRUST validated report or certification covering the entire environment, not a “privacy-only certification.”

HITRUST Assurance Advisories (HAAs) are official communications issued by HITRUST to:

Provide program updates.

Communicate framework updates (new/updated authoritative sources).

Define end-of-life progression for older framework versions.

Occasionally solicit assessor input or feedback.

Thus, they serve as a broad communication tool covering all listed items.

Extract Reference (HITRUST CSF Assurance Program Guidance [0051]):

Assurance Advisories communicate program updates, authoritative source changes, version end-of-life details, and solicit input from stakeholders.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

Assessors must maintain independence and avoid conflicts of interest.

If David assisted in remediating a gap, he cannot also validate the remediation, as that would compromise objectivity.

HITRUST requires separation of consulting/remediation support from assurance/validation activities.

Extract Reference (HITRUST CSF Assurance Program Independence Standards [0141]):

External Assessors may not validate remediation efforts they directly assisted in, to preserve independence.

Certification can only be achieved through a Validated Assessment (not readiness).

Eligible assessment types for certification are:

e1 Validated Assessment

i1 Validated Assessment

r2 Validated Assessment

Readiness Assessments, Customized, or Targeted Assessments cannot result in certification.

Extract Reference (HITRUST CSF Assurance Program [0158]):

Only validated e1, i1, or r2 assessments are eligible for HITRUST certification.

HITRUST accommodates organizations that cannot upload sensitive evidence to the MyCSF portal due to corporate or regulatory policies. The mechanism for this is QA Tasks. Through QA Tasks, HITRUST QA reviewers can request clarifications, additional evidence, or narrative responses, which can be provided without uploading sensitive raw data. This method allows entities to describe processes, reference documents, or provide redacted information while maintaining compliance with their internal data-handling policies. Options such as “Live QA” or “Onsite visits” are not part of the standard assurance program workflow. Escalated QA refers to dispute resolution or additional reviews and does not address evidence handling. QA Tasks are the standard method HITRUST uses to facilitate communication and evidence review without violating data-handling restrictions.

The Measured maturity level evaluates whether organizations actively monitor the effectiveness of controls. HITRUST defines seven criteria for Measured, including metrics, data collection, analysis, reporting, and corrective action tracking. If these seven criteria are fully met, scoring can begin at Tier 4 strength, reflecting a mature measurement process. In the example, system administrators are responsible for measuring firewall configuration security, and if they meet all seven criteria (such as reviewing firewall rules, analyzing logs, reporting deviations, and initiating remediation), the Measured compliance level can start at Tier 4. The assessor may then adjust scoring based on coverage and frequency, but the baseline is Tier 4 once all criteria are satisfied. This ensures consistent evaluation of advanced maturity levels across controls.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

According to the HITRUST CSF Assurance Program, the reliance period for a point-in-time assessment is one year (12 months) from the assessment report date.

The statement claims a two-year validity, which is incorrect.

Reliance beyond one year would require an updated assessment or interim assessment for assurance continuity.

Extract Reference (HITRUST CSF Assurance Program, CCSFP Objectives [0078]):

Point-in-time reports can only be relied upon if issued within one year from the assessment start date; two years is not permitted.

The HITRUST CSF is not intended to replace existing regulatory frameworks such as HIPAA or security standards like NIST 800-53. Instead, the CSF harmonizes and integrates requirements from these and other authoritative sources into a single certifiable framework. For example, HIPAA Security Rule provisions and NIST 800-53 controls are mapped into the CSF domains and requirement statements. This enables organizations to demonstrate compliance with multiple frameworks through one assessment. However, the CSF does not eliminate or supersede the original obligations. Covered entities must still comply with HIPAA, and federal contractors may still need to align with NIST standards directly. The CSF serves as a consolidated implementation tool, not a legal or regulatory replacement.

Regulatory factors are applied to scope based on legal, contractual, or regulatory obligations.

If an entity is required to comply with six regulatory factors, then all six must be included in the assessment scope.

Excluding any would result in an incomplete or non-compliant scope.

Extract Reference (HITRUST CSF Scoping Guidance [0088]):

All regulatory factors applicable to the entity’s obligations must be included in scope.

HITRUST CSF’s risk-based levels were adapted from NIST SP 800-53, which organizes controls into baseline categories based on impact levels: low, moderate, and high. Similarly, HITRUST assigns requirement statements across multiple implementation levels (Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3) depending on organizational, technical, and regulatory risk factors. This approach ensures scalability, so smaller organizations or lower-risk environments face fewer requirements, while larger, high-risk entities face more. HITRUST harmonized this concept with mappings to other frameworks (ISO, HIPAA, PCI-DSS), but the structure of escalating control rigor by risk exposure is directly derived from NIST’s model. This alignment reinforces HITRUST’s credibility as a risk-based framework consistent with widely accepted standards.

Illustrative Procedures are example testing steps provided in HITRUST to help assessors evaluate requirement statements consistently. They are not mandatory, but they serve as a guide for developing tailored testing procedures. Their uses include:

Implementation testing guidance (B): They show assessors what evidence to look for and how to test control performance.

Optional procedures (C): Organizations and assessors may adapt or replace them with equivalent procedures.

Test plan foundation (D): Assessors use them as a starting point to design their own testing plans, ensuring consistency and thoroughness.

Illustrative Procedures are not used for maintaining consistency between the entity and assessor responses (A), since testing must remain objective and independent. Their purpose is to promote consistent evaluation and reduce ambiguity.

HITRUST does not mandate that all required CAPs be remediated within a strict six-month deadline. Instead, CAPs must include a realistic remediation plan with target dates, owners, and milestones. Some CAPs may be resolved quickly, while others (such as large-scale encryption rollouts) may take longer. HITRUST requires that CAPs are tracked and updated until completion, and progress is reviewed at interim assessments. While assessors may encourage timely remediation (often aiming for six months where feasible), HITRUST does not impose a universal time limit. What matters is that CAPs are properly documented, tracked, and eventually closed. Therefore, the statement that all required CAPs must be remediated within six months is False.