CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Questions and Answers

Enforcing segregation of duties between the vendor master file and invoicing is the best process control to mitigate the risk of an employee issuing fraudulent payments to a vendor. This is because segregation of duties is a key internal control that prevents or detects errors, fraud, or abuse by ensuring that no single person can perform incompatible or conflicting tasks. The vendor master file is a database that contains the information and settings for each vendor, such as name, address, bank account, payment terms, etc. Invoicing is the process of generating and sending bills to the vendors for the goods or services they provide. If the same person can access and modify the vendor master file and issue invoices, he or she could create fictitious vendors, alter vendor information, or generate false or duplicate invoices, and then divert the payments to his or her own account. By segregating these duties, the organization can reduce the opportunity and likelihood of such fraudulent activities. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, segregation of duties is one of the key IT control objectives and practices1. According to the web search results, segregation of duties between the vendor master file and invoicing is a common and recommended control to prevent vendor fraud

Train all staff on relevant information security best practices, because it helps to increase the awareness and understanding of the employees regarding the acceptable use policy and its purpose, and to improve their skills and knowledge on how to protect and handle confidential information. An acceptable use policy is a document that outlines the standards and expectations for the proper usage of the organization’s IT resources, such as systems, applications, networks, or devices, and the consequences of non-compliance. Confidential information is information that is sensitive or proprietary, and may cause harm or damage to the organizationor its stakeholders if disclosed or compromised, such as trade secrets, customer data, or financial records. Training all staff on relevant information security best practices is the best way to reinforce the effectiveness of the policy, as it helps to ensure that the employees are aware of and comply with the policy, and that they adopt the appropriate behaviors and techniques to prevent or mitigate the risk of disclosing confidential information.

Communicating sanctions for policy violations to all staff, obtaining signed acceptance of the new policy from employees, and implementing data loss prevention (DLP) within the corporate network are all possible ways to reinforce the effectiveness of the policy, but they are not the best way, as they do not directly address the awareness and understanding of the employees regarding the policy and its purpose, and they may not be sufficient or effective to prevent or mitigate the risk of disclosing confidential information.

Risk likelihood is most likely to be reassessed as a result of implementing a machine learning-based solution to monitor IT usage and analyze user behavior in an effort to detect internal fraud, as it may change the probability of fraud occurrence or detection, and affect the risk assessment and response. Risk culture, risk appetite, and risk capacity are not the most likely to be reassessed, as they are more stable and strategic aspects of risk management, and are not directly influenced by the implementation of a specific solution. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 108.

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.

Reassessing the risk profile is the first course of action that a risk practitioner should take after a hospital recently implemented a new technology to allow virtual patient appointments. This is because reassessing therisk profile can help identify, analyze, and evaluate the new or changed risks that the new technology may introduce or affect, such as data privacy, security, quality, reliability, or compliance risks. Reassessing the risk profile can also help determine the appropriate risk response and mitigation strategies, as well as monitor and report the risk performance and outcomes. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, reassessing the risk profile is one of the key steps in the IT risk management process1. According to the web search results, reassessing the risk profile is a common and recommended practice for addressing the risks of virtual patient appointments

 Understanding Business Impact Analysis (BIA):

BIA is a process used to identify and evaluate the potential effects (impact) of interruptions to critical business operations as a result of a disaster, accident, or emergency.

It helps quantify the potential loss impact of cyber risks by assessing the financial and operational consequences of disruptions.

 Quantifying Loss Impact:

BIA involves determining the value of business processes and the impact of their loss. This includes evaluating factors such as revenue loss, additional operational costs, legal penalties, and reputational damage.

By analyzing the criticality of business functions and their dependencies, BIA provides a detailed understanding of potential impacts, aiding in the development of risk mitigation strategies.

 Comparing Other Techniques:

Cost-Benefit Analysis:Useful for evaluating the cost-effectiveness of controls but does not provide a comprehensive assessment of potential loss impacts.

Penetration Testing:Identifies vulnerabilities but does not quantify the business impact of exploiting those vulnerabilities.

Security Assessment:Evaluates security controls but is not focused on the broader business impact of potential disruptions.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the role of BIA in assessing the impact of risks on business operations and quantifying potential losses (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.7 Business Impact Analysis)​​.

Introducing recovery control procedures is the best way to address the risk of an outage of the fraud detection system for an online payment processor, because it helps to restore the functionality and availability of the system as quickly and effectively as possible, and to minimize the impact and disruption to the business operations and customers. A fraud detection system is a system that monitors and analyzes the transactions and activities of an online payment processor, and detects and prevents any fraudulent or suspicious behavior, such as identity theft, money laundering, or chargebacks. An outage is a situation where the system is unavailable or inaccessible, due to factors such as technical failure, human error, or malicious attack. An outage of the fraud detection system may have severe consequences for the online payment processor, such as financial losses, reputational damage, customer dissatisfaction, or regulatory penalties. A recovery control procedure is a procedure that defines the steps and actions to be taken to recover the system from an outage, such as identifying the root cause, isolating the affected components, restoring the data and functionality, testing the system, and reporting the incident. Introducing recovery control procedures is the best way to address the risk, as it helps to ensure that the system is back online and operational as soon as possible, and that the risk exposure and impact are reduced and contained. Implementing continuous control monitoring, communicating the risk to management, and documenting a risk response plan are all possible ways to address the risk, but they are not the best way, as they do not directly address the recovery of the system from an outage, and they may not be sufficient or effective to mitigate the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 208

The source that provides the most reliable evidence to support conclusions after completing an information systems controls assessment is the information generated by the systems, as it reflects the actual and objective data and results of the system operations and performance, and can be verified and tested against the control objectives and criteria. The other options are not the most reliable sources, as they may be subjective, biased, or incomplete, and may not reflect the actual or current state of the system controls, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

Risk mitigation is most effective when the residual risk is optimized, as it means that the risk exposure and impact have been reduced to the level that is aligned with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization, and that the risk response is cost-effective and optimal. The other options are not the factors that determine the effectiveness of risk mitigation, as they are more related to the types or sources of risk, respectively, rather than the level or outcome of risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

Biased recommendations from AI models can perpetuate or exacerbate organizational risks, especially in decision-making processes, regulatory compliance, and ethical standards. Addressing such concerns is vital under theEmerging Technology Risksdomain in risk management.

When disposing of storage media, the best way to prevent the loss of highly sensitive data is physical destruction. Here’s why:

Physical Destruction:

Physical destruction involves destroying the storage media so that the data it contains cannot be recovered or reconstructed.

Methods include shredding, crushing, incinerating, or using industrial-grade degaussers that destroy the magnetic fields on the media.

Comparison with Other Methods:

Degaussing:This method erases data by disrupting the magnetic fields of the storage media. While effective for some types of media, it may not work on all (e.g., solid-state drives) and does not provide a visual confirmation that the data is irrecoverable.

Data Anonymization:This process involves altering data to prevent identification of individuals, but it does not destroy the data itself and is not applicable for disposing of storage media.

Data Deletion:Simply deleting data does not remove it permanently. Deleted data can often be recovered using specialized software unless it is overwritten multiple times, which is still less reliable than physical destruction.

Security Best Practices:

Physical destruction is considered the most secure method because it ensures that the media is rendered completely unusable and the data cannot be retrieved by any means.

This method is recommended by various standards and frameworks, including NIST Special Publication 800-88 Guidelines for Media Sanitization.

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.

The risk practitioner’s best recommendation when one of an organization’s key IT systems cannot be patched because the patches interfere with critical business application functionalities is to identify additional mitigating controls, as they may reduce the likelihood or impact of the vulnerabilities being exploited, and align the residual risk with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. The other options are not the best recommendations, as they may not address the risk adequately, or may introduce unacceptable consequences, such as disrupting the businessoperations, changing the risk strategy, or accepting excessive risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

Regulatory restrictions for cross-border data transfer can significantly impact compliance, making this the most critical consideration. Addressing such restrictions ensures adherence toLegal and Regulatory Requirementsin risk management.

 The best way to validate whether controls to reduce user device vulnerabilities have been implemented according to management’s action plan is to rescan the user environment, as it provides an objective and reliable way to measure and verify the effectiveness and adequacy of the controls, and to detect any remaining or new vulnerabilities. Surveying device owners, requiring annual end user policy acceptance, and reviewing awareness training assessment results are not the best ways, as they may not provide sufficient assurance, evidence, or timeliness of the control validation, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

Updating IT Policy Framework for Cloud Usage:

Gap Analysis: The first step in updating the IT policy framework is to conduct a gap analysis to identify discrepancies between the current state and the desired target framework for cloud usage.

Assessment of Current State: This involves reviewing existing policies, controls, and practices related to cloud usage to understand current capabilities and limitations.

Target Framework Definition: Define the desired state based on industry best practices, regulatory requirements, and organizational objectives.

Importance of Gap Analysis:

Focused Improvements: Identifying gaps allows the organization to focus on specific areas that need enhancement to align with best practices and compliance requirements.

Resource Allocation: Helps in allocating resources effectively to address the most critical gaps first.

Comparison with Other Options:

Consult with Industry Peers: Useful for gathering insights but should follow the gap analysis to ensure relevance to the organization’s specific context.

Evaluate Adherence to Existing Policies: Part of the gap analysis but not the initial step.

Adopt Industry-leading Framework: Important for long-term strategy but should be based on identified gaps.

Best Practices:

Comprehensive Review: Conduct a thorough review of existing policies and compare them with industry standards.

Stakeholder Involvement: Engage relevant stakeholders in the gap analysis to ensure all perspectives are considered.

Commitment to controls is the degree to which the organization and its stakeholders support and adhere to the controls that are designed and implemented to manage or mitigate the risks1. Commitment to controls is essential for ensuring the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, as well as the achievement of the organization’s objectives and strategies2. The best way to promote commitment to controls is to assign control ownership, which is the process ofidentifying and assigning the person or entity that has the authority and accountability for a control and its management3. By assigning control ownership, the organization can ensure that the controls are properly and promptly designed, implemented, monitored, and maintained, and that the issues or gaps in the controls are identified andresolved4. Assigning control ownership also helps to establish and communicate the roles and responsibilities of the control owners and the other stakeholders, and to enforce the accountability and performance of the control owners5. Assigning appropriate resources, assigning a quality control review, and performing regular independent control reviews are not the best ways to promote commitment to controls, as they do not provide the same level of authority and accountability as assigning control ownership. Assigning appropriate resources is the process of allocating and providing the necessary funds, staff, equipment, or technology that are required to support or enable the controls. Assigning appropriate resources can enhance the quality and performance of the controls, but it does not ensure that the controls are managed or maintained by a specific person or entity. Assigning a quality control review is the process of conducting and documenting a systematic and objective examination and evaluation of the controls, to ensure that they meet the established standards and requirements. Assigning a quality control review can improve the reliability and compliance of the controls, but it does not ensure that the controls are owned or operated by a specific person or entity. Performing regular independent control reviews is the process of performing and reporting an independent and impartial assessment and verification of the controls, to provide assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls. Performing regular independent control reviews can provide feedback and recommendations for the controls, but it does notensure that the controls are implemented or improved by a specific person or entity. References = 1: Commitment Controls - IMF2: 17 COSO Principles of Effective Internal Control | Weaver3: [Control Ownership - ISACA] 4: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] 5: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : Resource Allocation - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : Quality Control Review - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : IT Risk Resources | ISACA : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

To ensure IT asset protection, having procedures for risk assessments on IT assets is the most important. These procedures enable an organization to systematically identify, evaluate, and mitigate risks associated with its IT assets. This process is crucial for understanding thevulnerabilities and threats that could potentially harm the assets and for implementing the necessary controls to protect them.

Procedures for Risk Assessments on IT Assets (Answer A):

Importance: Regular risk assessments help in identifying vulnerabilities and threats to IT assets, allowing the organization to prioritize and implement appropriate risk mitigation strategies.

Implementation: These procedures should be well-documented and regularly updated to reflect the changing threat landscape and the organization's evolving IT infrastructure.

Outcome: Effective risk assessments ensure that IT assets are protected from potential risks, thereby safeguarding the organization's data, systems, and overall IT environment.

Comparison with Other Options:

B. An IT asset management checklist:

Purpose: This helps in tracking and managing IT assets.

Limitation: It does not address risk assessment and mitigation directly.

C. An IT asset inventory populated by an automated scanning tool:

Purpose: Provides a detailed list of IT assets.

Limitation: While it helps in knowing what assets exist, it does not assess the risks associated with those assets.

D. A plan that includes processes for the recovery of IT assets:

Purpose: Focuses on recovery after an incident.

Limitation: It is reactive rather than proactive in protecting assets.

 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)​​.

Assigning a data owner ensures accountability and responsibility for classifying and protecting data according to its sensitivity. This role is critical in implementing effectiveData Governance Practices.

The risk practitioner’s best course of action after identifying risk scenarios related to noncompliance with new industry regulations is to escalate to senior management, as they have the authority and responsibility to decide on the appropriate risk response and allocate the necessary resources. Transferring the risk, implementing monitoring controls, and recalculating the risk are possible risk responses, but they require senior management approval and direction. References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit, page 19; CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 107.

 Building Key Risk Indicators (KRIs):

KRIs are metrics used to provide an early signal of increasing risk exposure in various areas of an organization.

 Importance of Representative Data Sets:

To ensure KRIs are accurate and meaningful, it is critical that the data used is representative of the entire population or relevant subset of activities being monitored.

Representative data ensures that the KRIs reflect the true state of risk and are not biased or incomplete.

 Impact on KRIs:

Using representative data sets improves the reliability and validity of KRIs, enabling better risk detection and management.

It ensures that the KRIs provide a realistic view of potential risk trends and patterns.

 Comparing Other Data Sources:

Business Process Owners:While they provide valuable insights, data from them alone may not be representative.

Industry Benchmark Data:Useful for comparisons but not specific to the organization’s unique context.

Data Automation Systems:Helpful for efficiency but must ensure the data is representative.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of using representative data to build effective KRIs (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.11 Data Collection Aggregation Analysis and Validation) ​​.

The risk owner holds ultimate accountability for risk treatment, as they are responsible for decisions regarding the management and mitigation of the risk. This is a fundamental principle ofRisk Ownership and Accountabilitywithin the CRISC framework.

The primary reason for logging is to provide evidence of activities, ensuring accountability and traceability. This supports investigations, audits, and compliance requirements, aligning withControl Monitoring and Reportingstandards.

Establishing a code of conduct for employee behavior is the most important factor for managing ethical risk, because it defines the standards and expectations for ethical conduct and decision making within the organization, and provides guidance and direction for employees to act in a responsible and ethical manner. Ethical risk is the risk of violating the moral principles or values that govern the behavior and actions of individuals or organizations, such as honesty, integrity, fairness, or respect. A code of conduct is a document that outlines the ethical principles, values, and rules that the organization and its employees must follow, and the consequences of non-compliance. A code of conduct helps to promote a positive and ethical culture within the organization, and to prevent or mitigate the ethical risks that may arise from conflicts of interest, fraud, corruption, discrimination, or other misconduct. Involving senior management in resolving ethical disputes, developing metrics to trend reported ethics violations, and identifying the ethical concerns of each stakeholder are all useful factors for managing ethical risk, but they are not the most important factor, as they do not directly address the ethical conduct and decision making of employees. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.5.1, page 67

Continuous monitoring of key risk indicators (KRIs) will provide an early warning so that proactive action can be taken, because it helps to detect and measure the changes or trends in the risk level or performance, and to alert the risk owners and stakeholders when the risk exceeds the predefined thresholds or targets. 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. Continuous monitoring is a process of collecting and analyzing data on a regular or real-time basis, to provide timely and relevant information for decision making or action taking. Continuous monitoring of KRIs will provide an early warning, as it helps to identify and address the risk issues or incidents before they escalate or cause significant damage or disruption. Ensuring that risk will not exceed the defined risk appetite of the organization, providing a snapshot of the risk profile, and ensuring that risk tolerance and risk appetite are aligned are all possible outcomes of continuous monitoring of KRIs, but they are not the best answer, as they do not reflect the main purpose and benefit of continuous monitoring of KRIs, which is to provide an early warning. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 97

Organizational objectives should be the primary input to determine risk tolerance, as they define the desired outcomes and performance of the organization, and guide the selection of the acceptable level of risk that the organization is willing to take to achieve those objectives. Regulatory requirements, annual loss expectancy (ALE), and risk management costs are not the primary inputs, as they are more related to the external or internal constraints or factors that affect the risk tolerance, rather than the drivers or determinants of the risk tolerance. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

KRIs provide measurable indicators that flag when risks exceed predefined thresholds, enabling swift and effective risk response. This supports theMonitoring and Reportingfunction in risk management, ensuring risks are managed proactively.

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

Addressing Technical Complexity:

Security Architecture Alignment: Aligning with a security architecture helps manage the complexity by providing a structured framework for implementing and managing security controls.

Comprehensive Framework: A security architecture ensures that all security controls are integrated and aligned with the organization’s overall security strategy, reducing the risk associated with technical complexity.

Steps Involved:

Develop or Adopt a Security Architecture: Use established frameworks such as SABSA, TOGAF, or Zachman.

Implementation: Apply the security architecture across all systems and processes to ensure consistency and integration.

Monitoring and Maintenance: Continuously monitor the security architecture and update it as necessary to address new threats and technologies.

Comparison with Other Options:

Documenting System Hardening Requirements: Important but does not address the overall complexity.

Minimizing Dependency on Technology: Not always feasible and does not fully address the inherent complexity.

Establishing Configuration Guidelines: Helpful but should be part of the broader security architecture.

Best Practices:

Continuous Improvement: Regularly update and improve the security architecture to adapt to evolving threats and technologies.

Training and Awareness: Ensure that all relevant personnel understand the security architecture and their role in maintaining it.

Reviewing configuration settings is the best way for an organization to ensure that servers are compliant to security policy, because it helps to check and verify that the servers are configured and maintained according to the established security standards and guidelines, and that any deviations or violations are identified and corrected. A configuration setting is a parameter or option that defines the behavior or functionality of a server, such as a system, an application, or a service. A security policy is a document that outlines the security objectives, principles, and rules that the organization and its employees must follow, and the consequences of non-compliance. Reviewing configuration settings is the best way, as it helps to ensure that the servers are secure and compliant, and that any security risks or issues are detected and resolved. Reviewing change logs, server access logs, and anti-malware compliance are all possible ways to ensure that servers are compliant to security policy, but they are not the best way, as they do not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the configuration settings and their compliance status. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 200

Ethics committees are typically responsible for developing, implementing, and overseeing an organization’s ethical guidelines and policies. They play a crucial role in mitigating ethical risk by ensuring that the organization’s operations align with its ethical standards123.

References

1What Is Ethically Informed Risk Management? - Journal of Ethics

2Five Ways to Reduce Ethics and Compliance Risk - Free Ethics Toolkit

35 Ways to Manage Ethical Risks - ClearRisk

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

Skill Level of Threat Actors:

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

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

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

Factors Influencing Likelihood of Exploitation:

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

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

Assessment of Likelihood:

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

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

Comparison with Other Factors:

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

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

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

The first step in selecting a risk response after a penetration test reveals several vulnerabilities in a web-facing application is to assess the level of risk associated with the vulnerabilities, as it involves evaluating the likelihood and impact of the vulnerabilities being exploited, and comparing them with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. Correcting the vulnerabilities, developing a risk response action plan, and communicating the vulnerabilities are possible steps in selecting a risk response, but they are not the first step, as they require the prior knowledge of the risk level and the optimal risk response. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 108.

 The key performance indicator (KPI) that best measures the effectiveness of an organization’s disaster recovery program is the percentage of critical systems recovered within the recovery time objective (RTO). The RTO is the acceptable timeframe within which a business process or system must be restored after a disruption. The percentage of critical systems recovered within the RTO indicates how well the disaster recovery program can meet the business continuity requirements and minimize the impact of the disruption. The other options are not as good as the percentage of critical systems recovered within the RTO, as they are related to the efficiency, quality, or scope of the disaster recovery program, not the effectiveness of the disaster recovery program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control StudyManual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

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.

The proposed benefit that is most likely to influence senior management approval to reallocate budget for a new security initiative is the reduction in residual risk, as it indicates the expected value and outcome of the initiative in terms of reducing the risk exposure and impact to the level that is aligned with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. The other options are not the most likely benefits, as they may not reflect the actual or optimal risk reduction, or may not be relevant or measurable for the senior management, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

Restricting access to the risk register on a need-to-know basis is important because it contains vulnerabilities and threats that could expose the organization to potential harm or loss if they are disclosed or exploited by unauthorized parties. The risk register is a tool that captures and documents the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes1. The risk register contains sensitive information such as the sources and causes of risk, the potential impacts and consequences of risk, the likelihood and frequency of risk occurrence, and the risk response actions and plans1. If this information is accessed by unauthorized parties, such as competitors, hackers, or malicious insiders, they could use it to launch attacks, sabotageoperations, or gain an unfair advantage over the organization. Therefore, access to the risk register should be limited to those who have a legitimate need and authorization to view, modify, or use the information, such as the risk owners, managers, or practitioners

When an organization restructures its business processes, the first step in revising the BCP is to identify new potentially disruptive scenarios that may affect the continuity of the critical functions and processes. This can be done by conducting a risk assessment or a business impact analysis (BIA) to determine the likelihood and impact of various threats and vulnerabilities onthe organization’s objectives and operations. By identifying new potentially disruptive scenarios, the organization can then update its recovery strategies, objectives, and plans accordingly.

Change management is the best way to prevent an unscheduled application of a patch, because it ensures that any changes to the IT environment are planned, approved, tested, and documented. Change management is a process that controls the implementation of changes to IT systems, applications, infrastructure, or processes. It aims to minimize the risk of disruption, errors, or failures caused by changes. Applying a patch is a type of change that may affect the security, functionality, or performance of an IT system or application. Therefore, applying a patch should follow the change management process and schedule, and avoid any unscheduled or unauthorized patching. Network-based access controls, compensating controls, and segregation of duties are all useful controls to protect the IT environment from unauthorized or malicious access, but they do not prevent an unscheduled application of a patch, as they do not address the change management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.2, page 211

The integrity of data should be the greatest concern for a risk practitioner upon learning of failures in a data migration activity, because it affects the accuracy, completeness, and consistency of the data that are transferred from one system or format to another. Data integrity is a property of data that ensures that the data are valid, reliable, and trustworthy, and that they have not been altered or corrupted by unauthorized or accidental means. Data migration is a process of moving or copying data from one system or format to another, usually as part of a system upgrade, consolidation, or transformation. Data migration can pose risks to the integrity of data, such as data loss, duplication, inconsistency, or corruption, due to factors such as incompatible formats, human errors, technical glitches, or malicious attacks. Therefore, the integrity of data should be the greatest concern, as it impacts the quality and usability of the data, and the performance and functionality of the system. The availability of test data, the cost overruns, and the system performance are all possible concerns for a risk practitioner, but they are not the greatest concern, as they do not directly affect the integrity of data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

The effectiveness of risk treatment determines whether the selected response sufficiently mitigates the identified risk. This consideration ensures alignment with risk appetite and reduces residual risk to acceptable levels, reflecting the priorities set out in theRisk Response and Treatmentdomain of CRISC.

Scanning the Internet for unauthorized usage of the enterprise's brand proactively identifies fraudulent activities and enables timely response. This aligns withBrand Protection and Risk Mitigationstrategies.

The primary reason for an organization to include an acceptable use banner when users log in is to reduce the likelihood of insider threat, as it informs the users of the policies, rules, andexpectations for the use of the organization’s IT resources, and deters them from engaging in unauthorized or malicious activities. The other options are not the primary reasons, as they are more related to the detection, prevention, or mitigation of insider threat, respectively, rather than the reduction of the likelihood of insider threat. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

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 strategicor cultural aspects of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

Risk scenarios should reflect probable events to ensure relevance and practicality in risk assessments. This guidance supports theRisk Identification and Scenario Developmentprocess.

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 excessivevolume 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

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

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

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

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The most important consideration when selecting KPIs for control monitoring is that the source information is consistently available, meaning that it can be obtained regularly, reliably, and timely from the same or equivalent data sources. This ensures that the KPIs can measure the performance of the controls over time and across different units or functions, and provide meaningful and comparable results. Source information that is acquired at stable cost, tailored by removing outliers, or readily quantifiable are also desirable, but not as essential as consistency.

Providing assurance on risk management processes is the activity that should only be performed by the third line of defense, because it is the role and responsibility of the independent andobjective assurance function, such as internal audit or external audit, to evaluate and report on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management processes and controls. The third line of defense is the last layer of the three lines of defense model, which is a framework that defines the roles and responsibilities of different functions and levels within the organization for risk management and control. The first line of defense is the operational management and staff, who are responsible for identifying, assessing, and managing the risks and controls within their areas of responsibility. The second line of defense is the oversight and support functions, such as risk management, compliance, or legal, who are responsible for establishing and monitoring the risk policies, standards, and frameworks, and providing guidance and advice to the first line of defense. The third line of defense is the assurance function, who are responsible for providing independent and objective assurance on the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk management processes and controls, and reporting to the senior management and the board of directors. Operating controls for risk mitigation, testing the effectiveness and efficiency of internal controls, and recommending risk treatment options are all activities that can be performed by the first or second line of defense, but not by the third line of defense, as they are not part of the assurance function. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.4.1, page 59

 Computer-enabled fraud is the use of information technology (IT) to commit or conceal fraudulent activities, such as theft, manipulation, or unauthorized access of data, systems, or networks. Computer-enabled fraud can pose significant risks to an organization, such as financial loss, reputational damage, legal liability, or regulatory sanctions. Therefore, an organization should establish a comprehensive and effective framework to prevent, detect, and respond to computer-enabled fraud. The framework should involve three lines of defense, which are theroles and responsibilities of different functions within theorganization to manage and control risks. The first line of defense consists of the business owners, whose role is to identify, assess, and manage risks, including computer-enabled fraud risks. The primary responsibility of the first line of defense related to computer-enabled fraud is to implement processes to detect and deter fraud. This means designing and executing controls that can prevent or reduce the occurrence of computer-enabled fraud, such as authentication, authorization, encryption, logging, or segregation of duties. This also means monitoring and reporting any suspicious or anomalous activities or transactions that may indicate computer-enabled fraud, such as unusual patterns, volumes, or frequencies of data or system access or usage. Implementing processes to detect and deter fraud can help the first line of defense to protect the organization’s assets, data, and reputation from computer-enabled fraud, and to comply with the organization’s policies and regulations. References = Three Lines of Defence, Roles of Three Lines of Defense for Information Security and Governance, THE THREE LINES OF DEFENSE IN EFFECTIVE RISK MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL, The Three Lines of Defense.

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

References

1Standardized Scoring for Security and Risk Metrics - ISACA

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

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

The result of a control working as desired, but having an annual cost of maintenance that exceeds the expected annual loss exposure, is that the control is inefficient, as it implies that the control is not cost-effective or optimal, and may require a review or adjustment. The other options are not the correct results, as they do not reflect the performance or adequacy of the control, but rather the maturity, effectiveness, or optimization of the control, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

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

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

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

When proposing a risk acceptance framework for an organization, the most important consideration for the risk practitioner is to clearly define the individuals or roles authorized to approve risk acceptance. This ensures that the process is controlled, accountable, and aligned with the organization’s risk management policies.

Risk Acceptance Framework:

Purpose:A risk acceptance framework provides structured criteria and processes for deciding whether to accept a risk. This includes evaluating the risk against the organization's risk appetite and tolerance.

Authorization:Identifying who has the authority to accept risk is critical. This ensures that only those with the appropriate knowledge, experience, and understanding of the organization's risk appetite and strategic objectives can make these decisions.

Importance of Authorized Individuals:

Accountability:Clearly defined roles for risk acceptance ensure accountability. It is essential that those making the decisions are accountable for the outcomes and understand the potential impact of their decisions.

Consistency:By defining specific roles, the organization ensures consistency in risk acceptance decisions, reducing the likelihood of ad-hoc or inconsistent risk management practices.

Alignment with Strategy:Authorized individuals are typically those who understand the strategic objectives of the organization, ensuring that risk acceptance aligns with these goals.

 Role of the Board and Executive Management:

The board of directors and executive management are responsible for setting the overall strategic direction of the organization, including its risk tolerance.

They have the authority and oversight necessary to define the levels of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives.

 Defining Risk Tolerance:

Risk tolerance refers to the acceptable level of variation in performance relative to the achievement of objectives. It is essentially the degree of risk the organization is willing to endure.

The board and executive management establish risk tolerance based on the organization's strategic goals, capacity to absorb losses, and regulatory requirements.

 Importance of Senior Leadership:

Senior leadership's involvement ensures that risk tolerance is aligned with the organization's overall strategy and risk appetite.

It provides a top-down approach to risk management, ensuring consistency and alignment across the organization.

 Comparing Other Stakeholders:

IT Compliance and IT Audit:These functions are responsible for monitoring and ensuring adherence to policies but do not set risk tolerance.

Regulators and Shareholders:They influence risk management practices through external pressures but do not define risk tolerance directly.

Enterprise Risk Management (ERM):ERM frameworks support the implementation of risk management but the actual definition of risk tolerance comes from the board and executive management.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses how senior management, including the board, is responsible for defining risk tolerance and ensuring it aligns with the organization's risk appetite (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.10 Risk Appetite, Tolerance, and Capacity) .

 The organization’s risk tolerance should be defined and approved by the board of directors, as they are the highest governing body of the organization and have the ultimate responsibility and accountability for the strategic direction and oversight of the risk management process. The board of directors should establish and communicate the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and ensure that they are aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, values, and goals. The board of directors should also monitor and review the risk management performance and outcomes, and provide guidance and support to the management and staff. The other options are not the correct answers, as they do not have the authority or responsibility to define and approve the organization’s risk tolerance, although they may have some roles or involvement in the risk management process. The chief risk officer (CRO) is the senior executive who leads and coordinates the risk management activities across the organization, and reports to the board of directors and the chief executive officer (CEO). The CRO should advise and assist the board of directors in defining and approving the risk tolerance, but they cannot do it on their own. The chief executive officer (CEO) is thehighest-ranking manager of the organization and has the responsibility and accountability for the execution and implementation of the risk management process. The CEO should support and communicate the risk tolerance defined and approved by the board of directors, but they cannot do it on their own. The chief information officer (CIO) is the senior executive who oversees and manages the information and technology functions and resources of the organization. The CIO should ensure that the IT risks and controls are aligned with the risk tolerance defined and approved by the board of directors, but they cannot do it on their own. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, page 24.

 Understanding Reputational Risk:

Reputational risk arises from negative public perception, which can be fueled by disinformation campaigns. These campaigns spread false or misleading information about an organization, potentially damaging its reputation.

 Mitigating Reputational Risk:

The best way to mitigate this risk is to actively counteract false information and restore public trust. This involves debunking false stories and correcting misinformation promptly and effectively.

 Role of Public Relations:

Engaging public relations (PR) personnel is crucial in managing the organization's reputation. PR professionals are skilled in crafting messages, dealing with media, and using communication strategies to address and correct false narratives.

PR personnel can issue press releases, organize press conferences, and leverage social media to reach a wide audience, ensuring the correct information is disseminated.

 Monitoring and Awareness Training:

While monitoring digital platforms and providing awareness training are important, they are more preventive measures. Monitoring helps in early detection, and training aids in internalmanagement of such risks. However, they do not actively counteract the false information once it is in the public domain.

 Restricting Social Media:

Restricting social media usage on corporate networks does not address the core issue of disinformation campaigns. It may reduce internal risks but does not mitigate external reputational damage.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses strategies for managing reputational risk and highlights the importance of proactive communication and public relations efforts (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.3.4 The Value of Risk Communication)​​.

Conducting User Acceptance Testing (UAT) is the best way for an organization to avoid situations where users voice concerns about missing functionality after a system implementation.

User Acceptance Testing (UAT):

Definition:UAT involves testing the system with actual users to ensure it meets their needs and requirements. It verifies that the system performs in real-world scenarios as expected by the users.

Involvement of Users:UAT includes the end-users in the testing process, ensuring that their feedback is incorporated and that the system functionalities align with their expectations.

Benefits:

Identifying Gaps:UAT helps in identifying gaps between the delivered system and user expectations. This early detection allows for adjustments before the system goes live.

Improved Satisfaction:By involving users in the testing process, the likelihood of the system meeting their needs increases, leading to higher user satisfaction and reduced post-implementation issues.

Completing a gap analysis identifies discrepancies between current controls and the requirements of the IT control framework, ensuring a focused approach to compliance. This supportsRisk Assessment for Compliance Requirements.

 Zero Trust Architecture:

Zero Trust is a security concept centered on the belief that organizations should not automatically trust anything inside or outside their perimeters and must verify everything attempting to connect to their systems.

 Basic Tenets of Zero Trust:

The primary principle is "never trust, always verify." This means every access request is authenticated, authorized, and encrypted regardless of where it originates.

Zero Trust requires securing all communication, whether it occurs within the internal network or comes from external sources. This approach prevents lateral movement by potential attackers who have breached the network perimeter.

 Key Components:

Authentication and Authorization:Continuous verification of user identities and access privileges.

Microsegmentation:Dividing the network into small, isolated segments to limit the spread of threats.

Encryption:Ensuring that all data, whether at rest or in transit, is encrypted to protect its confidentiality and integrity.

 Other Options:

Incoming Traffic Inspection:While important, this is just one aspect of Zero Trust.

Security Frameworks and Libraries:These are tools and guidelines to implement security but do not define the core tenets of Zero Trust.

Digital Identities:Implementing digital identities is part of the broader Zero Trust strategy but not a standalone tenet.

 References:

The CISSP Study Guide explains the Zero Trust architecture and its emphasis on securing all communications regardless of network location (Sybex CISSP Study Guide, Chapter 8: Principles of Security Models, Design, and Capabilities)​​.

Risk threshold exceptions are instances when a KRI exceeds or falls below a predefined level or point that triggers an action or a warning. An increase in the number of risk threshold exceptions indicates that the KRIs are not reflecting the current risk exposure or environment accurately oreffectively. This may suggest that the KRIs are outdated, irrelevant, or poorly defined. Therefore, the KRIs should be revised to ensure that they are aligned with the organizational objectives, risk appetite, and risk management strategy.

References

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions - SolveXia

•Choosing and Using Key Risk Indicators - Institute of Risk Management

Senior management interviews would offer the MOST insight with regard to an organization’s risk culture, because they can reveal the attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors of the senior management towards risk management, and how they influence and support the risk management process and activities in the organization. Senior management interviews can also provide information on the risk appetite, tolerance, and objectives of the organization, and how they are communicated and implemented across the organization. The other options are not as insightful as senior management interviews, because:

Option A: Risk management procedures are the steps and methods that define how the risk management process and activities are performed in the organization, but they do not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the human and behavioral aspects of risk management.

Option C: Benchmark analyses are the comparisons of the performance and practices of the organization with those of similar or successful organizations, but they do not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the internal and unique aspects of risk management.

Option D: Risk management framework is the set of rules and standards that guide and support the risk management process and activities in the organization, but it does not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the leadership and commitment aspects of risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 82.

Regulatory requirements should be the primary basis for deciding whether to disclose information related to risk events that impact external stakeholders, because they define the rules or standards that the organization must comply with to meet the expectations of the regulators, such as government agencies or industry bodies, and to avoid legal or reputational consequences. A risk event is an occurrence or incident that may cause harm or damage to the organization or its objectives, such as a natural disaster, a cyberattack, or a human error. An external stakeholder is a person or group that has an interest or influence in the organization or its activities, but is not part of the organization, such as customers, suppliers, partners, investors, or regulators. Disclosing information related to risk events that impact external stakeholders is a process of communicating or reporting the relevant facts or details of the risk events to the affected or interested parties. Disclosing information related to risk events may have benefits, such as maintaining trust, transparency, and accountability, but it may also have drawbacks, such as exposing vulnerabilities, losing competitive advantage, or inviting litigation. Therefore, regulatory requirements should be the primary basis for deciding whether to disclose information, as they provide the legal and ethical obligations and boundaries for the disclosure process. Stakeholder preferences, contractual requirements, and management assertions are all possible factors for deciding whether to disclose information related to risk events, but they are not the primary basis, as they may vary or conflict depending on the situation or context, and may not override the regulatory requirements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

The risk practitioner’s best recommendation after recovery steps have been completed is B. Perform a root cause analysis. A root cause analysis is a process of identifying and assessing the underlying causes of a problem or an incident. By performing a root cause analysis, the risk practitioner can help the organization to understand how and why the cyber attack happened, what vulnerabilities and gaps were exploited, and what actions and controls can be implemented to prevent or mitigate similar incidents in the future12

A root cause analysis can also help the organization to improve its incident response plan, which is a set of instructions to help IT staff detect, respond to, and recover from network security incidents3 A root cause analysis can provide valuable feedback and lessons learned from the cyber attack, and help the organization to update and test its incident response plan accordingly45

Developing new key risk indicators, recommending the purchase of cyber insurance, and reviewing the incident response plan are all possible actions that the risk practitioner can take after a cyber attack, but they are not the best recommendation. Developing new key risk indicators can help the organization to monitor and measure its risk exposure and performance, but it does not address the root causes of the cyber attack12 Recommending the purchase of cyber insurance can help the organization to hedge against the financial losses caused by cyber incidents, but it does not prevent or solve the underlying issues67 Reviewing the incident response plan can help the organization to evaluate its effectiveness and identify areas for improvement, but it does not explain how and why the cyber attack occurred345

Therefore, the best recommendation is to perform a root cause analysis, as it can help the organization to understand, resolve, and prevent the cyber attack and its consequences12

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

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

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

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

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses. Residual risk is most commonly compared against the risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives. By comparing the residual risk with the risk appetite, the organization can determine if the risk response is adequate and effective, or if additional actions are needed to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Residual risk should be monitored and reported regularly to ensure that it stays within the risk appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, Page 222. A Comprehensive Guide to Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance

Prioritizing risk responses helps to balance the costs and benefits of managing IT risk by ensuring that the most significant risks are addressed first and that the resources allocated to risk management are used efficiently and effectively. Evaluating risk based on frequency and probability is a part of risk analysis, not risk response. Considering risk factors that can be quantified is also a part of risk analysis, and it does not necessarily capture all the relevant aspects of risk. Managing the risk by using controls is a possible risk response, but it does not guarantee that the costs and benefits of risk management are balanced, as some controls may be too expensive or ineffective for the level of risk they mitigate. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 145.

Robotics process automation (RPA) is the use of software robots to perform repetitive, rules-based tasks that interact with multiple applications. RPA can help internal audit departments automate certain continuous auditing tasks, such as data extraction, validation, analysis, and reporting. RPA can improve the efficiency, quality, and coverage of internal audit activities, and provide greater insight and value to the business. However, RPA also involves certain risks, such as errors, failures, security breaches, or compliance issues, that need to be identified, assessed, and managed. The risk associated with ineffective design of the software bots is the possibility and impact of the bots not functioning as intended, or producing inaccurate or unreliable results. The risk owner of this risk is the person or entity who has the authority and responsibility for managing the risk. The risk owner should be able to define the risk appetite, assess the risk level, select and implement the risk response, monitor and report the risk status, and ensure the risk alignment with the project objectives and strategy. The risk owner of the risk associated with ineffective design of the software bots is the project manager, who is the person in charge of planning, executing, monitoring, and closing the RPA project. The project manager understands the project scope, requirements, budget, timeline, and deliverables, and the potential consequences of ineffective design of the software bots. The project manager also has the resources and incentives to address the risk effectively and efficiently. Therefore, the project manager is the most appropriate risk owner of the risk associated with ineffective design of the software bots. References = Robotic Process Automation for Internal Audit, p. 3-4, Adopting robotic process automation in Internal Audit, Robotic Process Automation (RPA) – Internal Audit Use and Risks.

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

According to the Guide to Implementing an IT Risk Management Framework, the first activity that should be performed when establishing IT risk management processes is to assess the goals and culture of the organization. This is because the goals and culture of the organization define the context and scope of the IT risk management process, and influence the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. By assessing the goals and culture of the organization, the IT risk manager can align the IT risk management process with the organization’s strategy, vision, mission, values, and objectives. The IT risk manager can also identify the key stakeholders, roles, and responsibilities involved in the IT risk management process, and ensure that they have the necessary skills, knowledge, and resources to perform their tasks effectively. Additionally, the IT risk manager can establish the communication and reporting mechanisms for the IT risk management process, and ensure that they are consistent with the organization’s culture and expectations. References = Guide to Implementing an IT Risk Management Framework, An Overview of the Risk Management Process

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

Risk scenarios: Narratives that describe potential risk events, their causes, consequences, and likelihood1.

Internet of Things (IoT): A network of interconnected devices, software, sensors, and other things that communicate and exchange data without human intervention2.

IoT threat landscape: The range and types of threats and attacks that target IoT devices, systems, and networks3.

The most helpful thing to review when identifying risk scenarios associated with the adoption of IoT technology in an organization is the IoT threat landscape. The IoT threat landscape provides a comprehensive and current overview of the potential sources, methods, and impacts of cyberattacks on IoT devices, systems, and networks. Reviewing the IoT threat landscape can help an organization to:

Identify the most relevant and prevalent threats and vulnerabilities that affect IoT technology, such as weak passwords, insecure interfaces, insufficient data protection, poor device management, or lack of encryption4.

Assess the likelihood and impact of different types of attacks, such as malware infections, denial-of-service attacks, data breaches, unauthorized access, or sabotage4.

Prioritize the most critical and urgent risks that need to be addressed and mitigated.

Develop realistic and plausible risk scenarios that reflect the actual IoT threat environment and the organization’s specific context and objectives.

The other options are not as helpful as the IoT threat landscape when identifying risk scenarios associated with the adoption of IoT technology in an organization, because they do not provide a comprehensive and current view of the potential threats and attacks that target IoT technology. The business case for the use of IoT, which is the justification and rationale for adopting IoT technology based on the expected benefits, costs, and risks, may help to understand the value and purpose of IoT technology for the organization, but it does not provide detailed information on the specific threats and vulnerabilities that affect IoT technology. Policy development for IoT, which is the process of creating and implementing rules and guidelines for the governance, management, and security of IoT technology, may help to establish the standards and expectations for IoT technology within the organization, but it does not provide an overview of the external threats and attacks that target IoT technology. The network that IoT devices can access, which is the infrastructure and system that enables the connectivity and communication of IoT devices, may help to identify the potential entry points and attack vectors for IoT threats, but it does not provide a complete picture of the types and impacts of IoT threats.

References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit, What is the Internet of Things (IoT)? With Examples | Coursera, Top IoT security issues and challenges (2022) – Thales, 8 Internet of Things Threats and Security Risks - SecurityScorecard

A maturity model is a tool that assesses the level of development and performance of key processes within an organization. A maturity model typically defines a set of criteria, standards, and best practices for each process, and assigns a rating or score based on the degree of compliance or achievement. A maturity model can help compare the current state of key processes to their desired state, by identifying the strengths, weaknesses, gaps, and opportunities for improvement. A maturity model can also help establish a roadmap for process improvement, by setting realistic and measurable goals and objectives, and monitoring the progress and results. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Scenarios, p. 49-50.

A control assessment is the process of evaluating the design and effectiveness of controls that are implemented to mitigate risks. A control assessment can help identify the root causes of data loss, thegaps in the existing controls, and the potential solutions to improve the control environment. A control assessment should be conducted after identifying a high probability of data loss in a system, as it can provide valuable information for risk response and reporting. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.2: Control Assessment, p. 147-149.

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the business significance of the information is the most important criterion when developing a response to an attack that would compromise data, as it determines the impact and severity of the attack on the organization’s objectives and performance. The business significance of the information helps to:

Assess the value and sensitivity of the data that is compromised or at risk of compromise

Evaluate the potential losses or damages that the organization may incur due to the data compromise

Prioritize the data recovery and restoration activities based on the criticality and urgency of the data

Communicate and coordinate the data breach response and notification with the relevant stakeholders, such as the data owners, the customers, the regulators, and the media

Enhance the data protection and security measures to prevent or mitigate future data compromise incidents

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

The MOST critical requirement to include in the contract is the confidentiality of customer data, because it is a legal and ethical obligation of the bank to protect the privacy and security of its customers’ personal and financial information. Outsourcing the statement printing function to an external service provider exposes the customer data to potential unauthorized access, disclosure, or misuse by the service provider or its sub-contractors. Therefore, the contract should specify the terms and conditions for the handling, storage, and disposal of the customer data, as well as the penalties for any breach of confidentiality. The other options are not as critical as the confidentiality of customer data, because:

Option A: Monitoring of service costs is an important requirement to ensure that the service provider delivers the statement printing function within the agreed budget and scope, but it is not as critical as the confidentiality of customer data, which has legal and reputational implications for the bank.

Option B: Provision of internal audit reports is a useful requirement to verify that the service provider complies with the internal and external standards and regulations for the statement printing function, but it is not as critical as the confidentiality of customer data, which is a core value of the bank and its customers.

Option C: Notification of sub-contracting arrangements is a relevant requirement to ensure that the service provider does not delegate the statement printing function to another party without the bank’s consent and oversight, but it is not as critical as the confidentiality of customer data, which is the primary responsibility of the bank and its service provider. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 197.

A post-implementation review (PIR) is a process to evaluate whether the objectives of the project were met and whether the project delivered the expected benefits and outcomes1. The primary objective of a risk practitioner performing a PIR of an IT risk mitigation project is to verify that the risk level has been lowered as a result of the project implementation2. This can be done by comparing the actual risk level with theexpected risk level, assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk mitigation controls, and identifying any residual or emerging risks3. Documenting project lessons learned, validating the project completion, and confirming the project budget are important aspects of a PIR, but they are not the primary objective for a risk practitioner, as they do not directly measure the impact of the project on the risk level4. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.4: Post-Implementation Review, pp. 239-241.

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

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

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

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

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

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

 The MOST important consideration when performing a risk assessment of a fire suppression system within a data center is the maintenance procedures, because they ensure that the fire suppression system is functioning properly and reliably, and that it can prevent or minimize the damage caused by fire incidents. The maintenance procedures should include regular testing, inspection, and servicing of the fire suppression system components, such as sprinklers, detectors, alarms, and extinguishers. The other options are not as important as the maintenance procedures, because:

Option A: Insurance coverage is a financial measure that can compensate for the loss or damage caused by fire incidents, but it does not prevent or reduce the likelihood or impact of the fire incidents. Insurance coverage is also dependent on the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, which may not cover all the scenarios or costs of the fire incidents.

Option B: Onsite replacement availability is a contingency measure that can facilitate the recovery or restoration of the fire suppression system after a fire incident, but it does not prevent or reduce the likelihood or impact of the fire incidents. Onsite replacement availability is alsodependent on the availability and compatibility of the replacement parts, which may not match the original fire suppression system specifications or requirements.

Option D: Installation manuals are a reference source that can provide guidance on how to install or configure the fire suppression system, but they do not ensure that the fire suppression system is functioning properly and reliably. Installation manuals are also static documents that may not reflect the current or updated fire suppression system standards or practices. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 211.

A risk assessment indicates the residual risk associated with a new bring your own device (BYOD) program is within organizational risk tolerance. This means that the potential benefits of BYOD outweigh the potential risks, and that the controls in place are adequate to mitigate those risks.

The next step for the risk practitioner is to identify log sources to monitor BYOD usage and risk impact. Log sources are records of events or activities that occur in a system or network, such as file access, network traffic, user behavior, etc. Log sources can provide valuable information about how BYOD devices are used, what data they access, what applications they run, what threats they encounter, etc.

By monitoring log sources, the risk practitioner can track and measure the actual performance and security of BYOD devices, compare them with the expected outcomes and standards, identify any deviations or anomalies that may indicate a breach or a vulnerability, and take appropriate actions to address them.

Therefore, identifying log sources to monitor BYOD usage and risk impact is a recommended action after a successful risk assessment.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 10

Information Technology & Security, page 4

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 2

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

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

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

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

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

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

The programming project leader solely reviewing test results before approving the transfer to production would be a weakness in procedures for controlling the migration of changes to production libraries, because it violates the principle of segregation of duties, and it exposes the production libraries to the risk of unauthorized or erroneous changes. The programming project leader is responsible for developing and testing the changes, but not for approving and deploying them. The approval and deployment of the changes should be done by an independent and authorized party, such as the change control board or the operations manager. The other options are not weaknesses, but rather good practices, because:

Option B: Test and production programs being in distinct libraries is a good practice, because it prevents the accidental or intentional overwriting or mixing of the test and production programs, and it ensures the integrity and security of the production libraries.

Option C: Only operations personnel being authorized to access production libraries is a good practice, because it restricts the access and modification of the production libraries to the qualified and accountable staff, and it prevents the unauthorized or inappropriate access or modification of the production libraries by other parties.

Option D: A synchronized migration of executable and source code from the test environment to the production environment being allowed is a good practice, because it ensures the consistency and completeness of the changes, and it avoids the potential errors or discrepancies that may arise from the manual or partial migration of the changes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 215.

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

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

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

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

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

 Testing a disaster recovery plan is essential to ensure its effectiveness and identify any gaps or weaknesses that might hinder the recovery process. Without testing, the organization may face longer service interruptions than anticipated, which could result in loss of revenue, customer dissatisfaction, reputational damage, and regulatory penalties. Some of the best practices for disaster recovery testing are1:

Test many scenarios

Test regularly

Document everything

Keep everyone updated

Define metrics

Evaluate the results

Test your disaster recovery plan

References = Best Practices For Disaster Recovery Testing | Snyk

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

The most essential factor for an effective change control environment is the separation of development and production environments. This ensures that changes are tested and verified in a controlled environment before being implemented in the live environment, reducing the risk of errors, failures, and unauthorized modifications. Business management approval of change requests, requirement of an implementation rollback plan, and IT management review of implemented changes are important elements of change control, but they are not as essential as the separation of environments. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1.2, page 123.

The best answer is C. real-time monitoring of risk events and control exceptions. Real-time monitoring is a process of continuously collecting and analyzing data and information on the occurrence and impact of risk events and control exceptions, using automated tools and techniques, such as dashboards, alerts, or analytics12. Real-time monitoring can help to identify and respond to the risks and the issues as soon as they happen, and to prevent or mitigate the potential consequences. Real-time monitoring can also help to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the risk management process, and to provide timely and accurate reporting and communication to the stakeholders. Real-time monitoring is the best answer, because itrepresents a leading-edge practice in risk monitoring, as it leverages the latest technology and innovation, and it enables a proactive and agile approach to risk management. The other options are not the best answer, although they may be useful or necessary for risk monitoring. Procedures to monitor the operation of controls are a part of the risk monitoring process, but they are not the same as or a substitute for real-time monitoring, as they may not be able to capture and address the risks and the issues in a timely manner, and they may rely on manual or periodic methods, rather than automated or continuous ones. A tool for monitoring critical activities and controls is a resource or a device that supports the risk monitoring process, but it is not the same as or a substitute for real-time monitoring, as it may not be able to collect and analyze the data and information in real time, and it may depend on the quality and reliability of the tool. Monitoring activities for all critical assets is a scope or a coverage of the risk monitoring process, but it is not the same as or a substitute for real-time monitoring, as it may not be able to identify and respond to the risks and the issues as soon as they happen, and it may require a lot of resources and efforts. Performing a controls assessment is a process of evaluating and testing the design and operation of the controls, but it is not the same as or a substitute for real-time monitoring, as it may not be able to detect and report the risks and the issues in real time, and it may follow a predefined or scheduled plan, ratherthan a dynamic or adaptive one. References = Real-Time Risk Monitoring - ISACA, Real-Time Risk Monitoring: A Case Study - ISACA

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

The BEST information when determining whether to accept residual risk of a critical system to be implemented is the potential business impacts are within acceptable levels, because it indicates that the residual risk, which is the risk that remains after the risk response actions, does not exceed the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization, and that it does not pose a significant threat or disruption to the business objectives and processes. The potential business impacts are the consequences or outcomes of the residual risk on the organization’s performance, reputation, and value. The other options are not as informative as the potential business impacts, because:

Option A: Single loss expectancy (SLE) is a measure of the monetary loss that is expected from a single occurrence of a risk event, but it does not provide the best information when determining whether to accept residual risk, because it does not consider the frequency or probability of the risk event, or the qualitative aspects of the risk impact, such as customer satisfaction, employee morale, or regulatory compliance.

Option B: Cost of the information system is a measure of the total expenditure that is required to acquire, develop, operate, and maintain the information system, but it does not provide the best information when determining whether to accept residual risk, because it does not reflect the value or benefit of the information system, or the risk exposure or variation that the information system may introduce or encounter.

Option C: Availability of additional compensating controls is a measure of the alternative or supplementary controls that can be implemented to reduce the residual risk, but it does not provide the best information when determining whether to accept residual risk, because it does not indicate the effectiveness or efficiency of the compensating controls, or the cost-benefitanalysis of implementing them. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 122.

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and owners. The owner for each risk scenario is the person or group whohas the authority and accountability to manage the risk and its response. The best way to identify the owner for each risk scenario in a risk register is to map the identified risk factors to specific business processes. Risk factors are the internal and external variables that influence the occurrence and impact of risks. Business processes are the activities that produce value for the enterprise, such as sales, marketing, production, or delivery. By mapping the risk factors to the business processes, the risk practitioner can determine which business process is affected by or contributes to the risk, and who is responsible for the business process. The owner for each risk scenario should be the person or group who is responsible for the business process that is associated with the risk. The other options are not the best way to identify the owner for each risk scenario, as they involve different criteria or methods:

Determining which departments contribute most to risk means that the risk practitioner evaluates the degree of involvement or exposure of each department to the risk. This may not be a reliable or consistent way to identify the owner for each risk scenario, as the risk may span across multiple departments, or the department may not have the authority or accountability to manage the risk.

Allocating responsibility for risk factors equally to asset owners means that the risk practitioner assigns the same level of responsibility to each person or group who owns an asset that is affected by or contributes to the risk. An asset is a resource that has value for the enterprise, such as hardware, software, data, or people. This may not be a fair or effective way to identify the owner for each risk scenario, as the asset owners may have different levels of involvement or exposure to the risk, or may not have the authority or accountability to manage the risk.

Determining resource dependency of assets means that the risk practitioner analyzes the relationship and interdependence of the assets that are affected by or contribute to the risk. This may help to identify the potential impact or likelihood of the risk, but it does not directly help to identify the owner for each risk scenario, as the resource dependency may not reflect the authority or accountability to manage the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.1, pp. 95-96.

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and owners. The greatest concern when maintaining a risk register is that significant changes in risk factors are excluded. Risk factors are the internal and external variables that influence the occurrence and impact of risks. Risk factors can change over time due to changes in the business environment, the IT landscape, the threat landscape, or the regulatory requirements. If the risk register does not reflect the significant changes in risk factors, it may not provide an accurate and current view of the enterprise’s risk profile and may not support effective risk management decisions and actions. The other options are not as concerning as the exclusion of significant changes in risk factors, as they involve different aspects of the risk register:

Impacts are recorded in qualitative terms means that the risk register uses descriptive scales, such as low, medium, and high, to measure the potential consequences of the risks. This may not be asprecise or consistent as quantitative measures, such as monetary values or percentages, but it does not necessarily affect the validity or usefulness of the risk register.

Executive management does not perform periodic reviews means that the risk register is not regularly evaluated and updated by the senior leaders of the enterprise. This may indicate a lack of management commitment or oversight for risk management, but it does not directly affect the quality or completeness of the risk register.

IT risk is not linked with IT assets means that the risk register does not associate the identified risks with the specific IT resources, such as hardware, software, data, or services, that are affected by or contribute to the risks. This may limit the visibility and traceability of the risks, but it does not necessarily affect the identification or assessment of the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2.2, pp. 21-22.

 The PRIMARY objective of the board of directors periodically reviewing the risk profile is to help ensure that the risk strategy is appropriate, because the risk strategy defines the enterprise’s risk appetite, tolerance, and objectives, and guides the risk management process and activities. The board of directors should review the risk profile to ensure that it reflects the current internal and external environment, and that it aligns with the enterprise’s strategy and goals. The other options are not the primary objective, because:

Option B: KRIs and KPIs are aligned is a desirable outcome of the risk strategy, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. KRIs and KPIs are indicators that measure and monitor the risk exposure and performance of the enterprise, respectively, and they should be consistent with the risk strategy and objectives.

Option C: Performance of controls is adequate is a result of the risk response, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. Performance of controls is the degree to which the controls are effective and efficient in mitigating the risks, and it should be evaluated and reported by the risk management function and the internal audit function.

Option D: The risk monitoring process has been established is a prerequisite for the risk profile, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. The risk monitoring process is the process of tracking and reporting the risk status and performance, and it should be implemented and executed by the risk management function and the business process owners. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 119.

A risk factor is a condition or event that may increase the likelihood or impact of a risk, which is the effect of uncertainty on objectives1. An information systems review is a process that involves examining and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of the information systems and their related controls, policies, and procedures2. The purpose of an information systems review is to identify and report the risk factors that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and performance of the information systems and their outputs3. The best way to ensure that the risk factors identified during an information systems review are addressed is to assign action items and deadlines to specific individuals, who are responsible and accountable for implementing the appropriate risk responses. A risk response is an action taken or plannedto mitigate or eliminate the risk, such as avoiding, transferring, reducing, or accepting the risk4. By assigning action items and deadlines to specific individuals, the organization can ensure that the risk factors are properly and promptly addressed, and that the progress and results of the risk responses are monitored and reported5. Informing business process owners of the risk, reviewing and updating the risk register, and implementing new control technologies are not the best ways to ensure that the risk factors identified during an information systems review are addressed, as they do not provide the same level of accountability and effectiveness as assigning action items and deadlines to specific individuals. Informing business process owners of the risk is a process that involves communicating and sharing the risk information with the persons who have the authority and accountability for a business process that is supported or enabled by the information systems6. Informing business process owners of the risk can help to raise their awareness and understanding of the risk, but it does not ensure that they will take the necessary actions to address the risk. Reviewing and updating the risk register is a process that involves checking and verifying that the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the risks and their related information, is current, complete, and consistent7. Reviewing and updating the risk register can help to reflect the changes and updates in the risk factors and their status, but it does not ensure that the risk factors are resolved or reduced. Implementing new control technologies is a process that involves introducing or applying new software or hardware that can help to prevent, detect, or correct the risk factors affecting the information systems8. Implementing new control technologies can help to improve the security and performance of the information systems, but it does not ensure that the risk factors are eliminated or mitigated. References = 1: Risk Factors - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics2: InformationSystems Audit and Control Association (ISACA) - ISACA3: Information Systems Audit: The Basics4: Risk Response Strategy and Contingency Plans - ProjectManagement.com5: Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Options, pp. 113-115.6: [Business Process Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] 7: Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana8: Technology Control Automation: Improving Efficiency, Reducing … - ISACA : [Business Process Owner - Roles and Responsibilities] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.]

The observation that would be of GREATEST concern to a risk practitioner reviewing the implementation status of management action plans is that management has not begun the implementation, because it indicates that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored, and that the risks are not being addressed or mitigated. The lack of implementation may also imply that the management action plans are not realistic, feasible, or aligned with the enterprise’s strategy and objectives. The other options are not as concerning as the lack of implementation, because:

Option A: Management has not determined a final implementation date is a concern, but not the greatest one, because it may affect the timely completion and delivery of the management action plans, but it does not necessarily mean that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored.

Option B: Management has not completed an early mitigation milestone is a concern, but not the greatest one, because it may indicate a delay or deviation in the progress and performance of the management action plans, but it does not necessarily mean that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored.

Option C: Management has not secured resources for mitigation activities is a concern, but not the greatest one, because it may affect the quality and effectiveness of the management action plans, but it does not necessarily mean that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 123.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 According to the 6 Best Practices to Ensure Software License Compliance article, the best way to determine software license compliance is to conduct regular internal compliance audits. These self-assessments can be done with the help of software license management companies. The goal is to see where compliance issues lie and to take corrective actions before they become seriousproblems. Periodic compliance reviews can help to avoid fines, penalties, lawsuits, and reputational damage that may result from software license violations. They can also help to optimize software spending and utilization, and to identify any gaps or opportunities for improvement in the software license management process. References = 6 Best Practices to Ensure Software License Compliance

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

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a branch of computer science that aims to create machines or systems that can perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as learning, reasoning, decision making, etc.

An organization that is considering adopting AI should be aware of the potential risks and challenges that may arise from using AI, such as ethical, legal, social, technical, operational, or security issues.

The most important course of action for the risk practitioner is to identify applicable risk scenarios. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the context and objectives of theAI adoption, the stakeholders and their expectations, the data and information sources and quality, the AI models and algorithms and their reliability, the AI outputs and outcomes and their impact, and the AI governance and oversight mechanisms and their effectiveness.

Identifying applicable risk scenarios helps to assess the likelihood and impact of the risks, prioritize the risks, design and implement appropriate risk responses, monitor and evaluate the risk performance, and report and communicate the risk status and issues.

The other options are not the most important courses of action for the risk practitioner. They are either secondary or not essential for AI risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 24

Information Technology & Security, page 18

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 16

 A risk response plan is a document that outlines the actions to be taken to address the identified risk scenarios. A risk response plan should include the objectives, scope, roles and responsibilities, resources, timelines, and metrics for each risk response. Assigning ownership of the risk response plan is the most effective way to mitigate identified risk scenarios, as it ensures accountability, clarity, and communication among the stakeholders involved in the risk management process. Assigning ownership also helps to monitor and evaluate the progress and effectiveness of the risk response plan, and to make adjustments as needed. References = Riskand Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.3: Risk Response Plan, p. 152-155.

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

The risk register element that is most likely to be updated if the attack surface or exposure of an asset is reduced is the likelihood rating, as this reflects the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring. The attack surface or exposure of an asset is the measure of the extent and accessibility of the asset to potential threats or attackers. If the attack surface or exposure of an asset is reduced, the likelihood of the asset being compromised or damaged by a risk event is also reduced. Therefore, the likelihood rating of the risk should be updated accordingly. Theother options are not the risk register elements that are most likely to be updated if the attack surface or exposure of an asset is reduced, although they may be affected or influenced by it. Control effectiveness is the measure of how well the risk controls reduce the risk level or achieve the control objectives. Assessment approach is the method or technique used to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks. Impact rating is the measure of the magnitude or severity of the consequences of a risk event on the asset or the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 54.

 A business impact analysis (BIA) is the most helpful tool to management when determining the resources needed to mitigate a risk. A BIA is a process of identifying and evaluating the potential effects of disruptions or incidents on the critical functions and processes of an organization. A BIA helps to estimate the financial, operational, and reputational impacts of risks, as well as the recovery time objectives and recovery point objectives for each function and process. A BIA also helps to prioritize the functions and processes based on their importance and urgency, and to allocate the resources needed to protect, restore,and resume them. A BIA can provide valuable information to management for developing and implementing risk mitigation strategies and plans. The other options are not the most helpful tools to management when determining the resources needed to mitigate a risk, although they may be useful or complementary to the BIA. An internal audit is a process of evaluating and improving the effectiveness of the governance, risk management, and control systems of an organization, but it does not directly estimate the impacts of risks or the resources needed to mitigate them. A heat map is a graphical tool that displays the probability and impact of individual risks in a matrix format, but it does not provide the details of the functions and processes affected by the risks or the resources needed to protect them. A vulnerability report is a document that identifies and assesses the security weaknesses in an information system, but it does not measure the impacts of risks or the resources needed tomitigate them. References = Business Impact Analysis (BIA) | Ready.gov, Business Impact Analysis - ISACA, Business Impact Analysis - Risk Management from MindTools.com

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

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

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

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

 The interdependency of information systems means that the failure or disruption of one system can affect the performance or availability of other systems. Therefore, it is important to aggregate the results from multiple risk assessments on interdependent information systems to understand the overall impact to the organization. By aggregating the results, the risk manager can identify the potential cascading effects, the cumulative consequences, and the worst-casescenarios of interdependent risks. This can help theorganization to prioritize the risks, allocate the resources, and implement the risk response strategies accordingly. The other options are not as important as the overall impact to the organization, because they do not capture the full extent of the interdependency of information systems. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.3, page 99.

 The greatest risk associated with the transition of a sensitive data backup solution from on-premise to a cloud service provider is inadequate data encryption. Data encryption is a key security measure that protects the confidentiality and integrity of data, especially when it is stored or transmitted over a network. If the data encryption is inadequate, the data backup solution may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, modification, or disclosure by malicious actors or third parties. This could result in data breaches, regulatory fines, reputational damage, or legal liabilities for the enterprise. More complex test restores, inadequate service level agreement (SLA) with the provider, and more complex incident response procedures are also potential risks associated with the transition, but they are not as great as inadequate data encryption. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.1, page 245.

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

Risk transfer is a risk response strategy that involves shifting the responsibility or burden of a risk to another party, such as a third party, an insurance company, or a joint venture. Risk transfer does not eliminate the risk, but it reduces the exposure or impact of the risk to the enterprise. An example of risk transfer is engaging a third party to provide an Internet gateway encryption service that protects sensitive data uploaded to a cloud service. By doing so, the organization transfers the risk of data breach or loss to the third party, who is responsible for ensuring the security and availability of the data. The other options are not examples of risk transfer, as they involve different risk response strategies:

Risk mitigation is a risk response strategy that involves reducing the likelihood or impact of a risk to an acceptable level, such as by implementing controls, policies, or procedures.

Risk avoidance is a risk response strategy that involves eliminating the risk by not performing the activity that generates the risk, such as by discontinuing a product or service, or not entering a market.

Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging the risk and taking no action to address it, such as by tolerating the risk, exploiting the risk, or sharing the risk. References =Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1.1, pp. 107-108.

Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) are metrics used by organizations to provide early warning signs of potential risks, including unauthorized data disclosure. By monitoring KRIs, organizations can proactively identify vulnerabilities and take corrective actions before a risk materializes. This proactive approach is essential in minimizing the potential impact of data breaches.​

According to ISACA's CRISC Review Manual, KRIs are defined as "metrics capable of showing that the enterprise is, or has a high probability of being, subject to a risk that exceeds the defined risk appetite." They are critical to the measurement and monitoring of risk and performance optimization. ​ISACA

While data backups (Option B) are vital for data recovery post-incident, they do not prevent unauthorized disclosures. An incident response plan (Option C) is reactive, focusing on responding after an incident has occurred. Cyber insurance (Option D) provides financial compensation post-incident but does not prevent the occurrence of data breaches.​

Therefore, implementing and monitoring KRIs is the most proactive approach to minimizing the potential impact of unauthorized data disclosure.

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

A risk profile report is a document that summarizes the current status and trends of the risks that an organization faces, as well as the actions taken or planned to manage them1. A risk profile report is a useful tool for senior management to monitor and oversee the organization’s risk management performance and to make informed decisions and adjustments as needed2. One of the key components ofa risk profile report is the key performance indicators (KPIs), which are metrics used to measure andevaluate the achievement of the organization’s objectives and strategies3. KPIs are aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and they have specific targets or benchmarks that indicate the desired level of performance4. Therefore, if the KPIs are outside of targets, it means that the organization is not meeting its objectives and strategies, and that there may be gaps or issues in the risk management process or the risk response actions. This is a cause for further action by senior management, as they need to investigate the root causes of the deviation, assess the impact and implications of the underperformance, and take corrective or preventive measures to improve the situation and bringthe KPIs back to the targets. Incomplete KPI trend data, new KRIs, and lagging KRIs are not the most critical statements in a risk profile report that require further action by senior management, as they do not directly indicate a failure or a problem in the risk management performance or the achievement of the objectives and strategies. Incomplete KPI trend data means that there is missing or insufficient information on the historical or projected changes in the KPIs over time. This may affect the accuracy and reliability of the risk profile report, but it does not necessarily mean that the KPIs are outside of targets or that the objectives and strategies are not met. Senior management may need to request or obtain the complete KPI trend data, but this is not as urgent or important as addressing the KPIs that are outside of targets. New KRIs means that there are additional or revised metrics used to measure and monitor the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system within the organization. This may reflect the changes or updates in the risk environment, the risk appetite and tolerance, or the risk assessment methodology. However, new KRIs do not directly indicate a failure or a problem in the risk management performance or the achievement of the objectives and strategies. Senior management may need to review and approve the new KRIs, but this is not as urgent or important as addressing the KPIs that are outside of targets. Lagging KRIs means that there are metrics that measure and monitor the level of risk after a risk event has occurred or a risk response has been implemented. This may provide useful feedback and lessons learned for the risk management process, but it does not directly indicate a failure or a problem in the risk management performance or the achievement of the objectives and strategies. Senior management may need to analyze and evaluate the lagging KRIs, but this is not as urgent or important as addressing the KPIs that are outside of targets. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.3: Risk Reporting, pp. 201-205.

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

An IT risk assessment is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT-related risks and their potential impacts on the organization’s objectives and performance1. Identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment is the process of determining and engaging the persons or entities that have an interest or influence in the IT risk management, such as the IT users, owners, managers, orproviders2. The primary benefit of identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment is to define the risk assessment scope, which is theboundary or extent of the IT risk assessment, such as the IT systems, processes, or functions that are included or excluded from the assessment3. By identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment, the organization can ensure that the risk assessment scope is relevant, realistic, and aligned with the organization’s strategy, vision, and mission, and that it reflects the current and emerging IT risks and their potential consequences. Identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment can also help to establish and communicate the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders, and to enforce the accountability and performance of the IT risk management. Obtaining funding support, selecting the risk assessment framework, and establishing inherent risk are not the primary benefits of identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment, as they do not provide the same level of insight and relevance as defining the risk assessment scope. Obtaining funding support is the process of securing and providing the necessary funds or resources that are required to support or enable the IT risk assessment4. Obtaining funding support can enhance the quality and performance of the IT risk assessment, but it is not the primary benefit of identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment, as it does not determine or influence the boundary or extent of the IT risk assessment. Selecting the risk assessment framework is the process of choosing or developing a set of principles, methods, and tools that guide and facilitate the IT risk assessment5. Selecting the risk assessment framework can improve the reliability and consistency of the IT risk assessment, but it is not the primary benefit of identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment, as it does not define or affect the scope or coverage of the IT risk assessment. Establishing inherent risk is the process of assessing the level of risk that exists before any controls or mitigating factors are considered. Establishing inherent risk can help to understand and prioritize the IT risks and their impacts, but it is not the primary benefit of identifying and communicating with stakeholders at the onset of an IT risk assessment, as it does not specify or limit the scope or range of the IT risk assessment. References = 1: IT Risk Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics2: Stakeholder Requirements - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics3: Risk Assessment Scope - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics4: Funding Support - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics5: Risk Assessment Framework - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : [Inherent Risk - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2: Risk Analysis, pp. 67-69.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Risk Evaluation, pp. 77-79.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1: RiskResponse Options, pp. 113-115.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Key Risk Indicators, pp. 181-185.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and ControlMonitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

According to the What To Look For When Assessing Your Organization’s Security Risk Posture article, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite should be aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and values, and should reflect the organization’s risk culture and capabilities. When reviewing a risk response strategy, senior management’s primary focus should be placed on the alignment with risk appetite, as this indicates how well the risk response strategy supports the organization’s objectives and expectations, and how consistent it is with the organization’s risk tolerance and risk profile. By ensuring the alignment with risk appetite, senior managementcan evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response strategy, and determine if any adjustments or improvements are needed. References = What To Look For When Assessing Your Organization’s Security Risk Posture

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk nomenclature and taxonomy is the set of terms and definitions that are used to describe and classify risks and their attributes. Risk nomenclature and taxonomy is the most important consideration when aligning IT risk management with the enterprise risk management (ERM) framework, as it helps to ensure a common and consistent understanding and communication of risks across the organization. Risk nomenclature and taxonomy also helps to integrate and harmonize the IT risk management processes and activities with the ERM framework, and to facilitatethe aggregation and reporting of risks at different levels of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 197.

To help ensure all applicable risk scenarios are incorporated into the risk register, it is most important to review the risk assessment results, which are the outputs of the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that affect a project or an organization. The riskassessment results provide information on the sources, causes, impacts, likelihood, and severity of the risks, as well as the existing controls and their effectiveness. The risk assessment results help to determine the risk level and priority of each risk scenario, and to select the most appropriate risk response strategy. The risk assessment results are the basis for creating and updating the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks theidentified risks, their characteristics, responses, owners, and status12. The other options are not the most important factors to review, as they are either derived from or dependent on the risk assessment results. The risk mitigation approach is the plan and actions to reduce the impact or likelihood of the risks, and it is based on the risk assessment results. The cost-benefit analysis is the comparison of the costs and benefits of implementing the risk response strategy, and it is influenced by the risk assessment results. The vulnerability assessment results are the identification and measurement of the weaknesses or gaps in the information systems or resources, and they are part of the risk assessment results. References = Risk Assessment in Project Management | PMI; Risk Assessment Process: Definition, Steps, and Examples; Risk Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics; Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; What Is a Risk Register? | Smartsheet

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

The risk owner is primarily accountable for risk treatment decisions, as they are the person or entity with the authority and responsibility to manage a particular risk. The risk owner shouldevaluate the available risk response options, select the most appropriate one, implement the chosen response, and monitor its effectiveness. The risk owner should also communicate and report on the risk status and any issues or changes. The business manager, data owner, and risk manager are not primarily accountable for risk treatment decisions, although they may be involved in the risk management process. The business manager is responsible for the overall performance and objectives of a business unit or function. The data owner is responsible for the security and quality of a specific data asset. The risk manager is responsible for facilitating and coordinating the risk management activities across the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 47.

According to the ERM - Step 3 - Risk Treatment article, risk transfer is a risk treatment option that involves passing ownership and/or liability of a risk to a third party, such as an insurance company, a contractor, or a supplier. Risk transfer is usually adopted when the organization does not have the capability or the resources to manage the risk internally, or when the cost of transferring the risk is lower than the cost of retaining the risk. In this case, the organization has outsourced its lease payment process to a service provider who lacks evidence of compliance with a necessary regulatory standard. This means that the organization has transferred the risk of non-compliance to the service provider, who is now responsible for ensuring that the lease payment process meets the regulatory requirements. Therefore, the answer is B. Transfer. References = ERM - Step 3 - Risk Treatment

The most relevant information to include in a risk management strategy is the organizational goals, because they provide the direction and purpose for the risk management activities. A risk managementstrategy is a document that outlines the objectives, scope, approach, roles, and responsibilities for managing risks in an organization. A risk management strategy should align with the organizational goals, which are the desired outcomes or results that the organization wants to achieve. The organizational goals should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART), and they should reflect the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy. By including the organizational goals in the risk management strategy, the risk practitioner can ensure that the risk management process supports and enables the achievement of the organizational goals. The risk practitioner can also use the organizational goals as a basis for identifying, assessing, prioritizing, and responding to the risks that may affect the organization’s performance and success. The risk practitioner can also monitor and measure the progress and effectiveness of the risk management process by comparing the actual results with the expected results based on the organizational goals. Therefore, the organizational goals are themost relevant information to include in a risk management strategy, as they provide the foundation and framework for the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Strategy, pp. 3-61

According to the Risk Management Essentials, a risk profile is established to enhance senior management’s analysis and decision making related to priority setting and resource allocation. A risk profile is a description of a set of risks that an organization faces, and it helps to make the risks visible and understandable. By having a documented risk profile, an organization can identify the nature and level of the threats, assess the likelihood and impact of the risks, evaluate the effectiveness of the controls, and determine the risk appetite and tolerance. This information can help the organization to make well-informed decisions on how to manage the risks and achieve its objectives. References = Risk Management Essentials, Risk Profile: Definition, Importance for Individuals & Companies

 A business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects of a disaster on the critical functions and processes of an organization1. A BIA helps to forecast the operational, financial, legal, and reputational impacts of a disaster, as well as the recovery priorities and resources needed to resume normal operations2. A BIA also helps to determine the recovery time objectives (RTO), which are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the critical functions and processes after a disaster3. Therefore, developing a BIA is the most important step for an organization to forecast the effects of a disaster and plan for its recovery. Defining RTOs is a part of the BIA process, not a separate activity. Analyzing capability maturity model gaps is a method to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s processes and practices, but it does not directly forecast the effects of adisaster4. Simulating a disaster recovery is a way to test and validate the recovery plans and procedures, but it does not forecast the effects of a disaster either5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.3: Business Continuity Planning, pp. 227-238.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 An exception to the information security policy is a permission to continue operating a system, service, or product that cannot comply with the established information security standards and requirements1. A risk owner is a person or entity that has the authority and accountability for a risk and its management2. A risk practitioner is a person or entity that has the knowledge and skills to perform risk management activities3. A high number of exceptions to the information security policy indicates that there are many systems, services, or products that do not meet the expected level of security and pose potential risks to the organization. The risk practitioner’s greatest concern should be that the aggregate risk, which is the total amount of risk that the organization faces from all sources, is approaching the tolerance threshold, which is the limit beyond which the organization does not want to tolerate the risk4. If the aggregate risk isapproaching the tolerance threshold, it means that the organization is exposed to a high level of risk that may exceed its risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives5. This may result in negative consequences for the organization, such as breaches, losses, damages, or reputational harm. Therefore, the risk practitioner should monitor and report the aggregate risk level and the tolerance threshold, and advise the risk owners and the management on the appropriate risk responses and actions to reduce the aggregate risk to an acceptable level. Security policies are being reviewed infrequently, controls are not operating efficiently, and vulnerabilities are not being mitigated are not the risk practitioner’s greatest concern, as they are not directly related to the aggregate risk level and the tolerance threshold. Security policies are being reviewed infrequently is a condition that indicates that the organization’s security policies are not updated or revised regularly to reflect the changes and updates in the security environment and the security requirements6. This may affect the relevance and effectiveness of the security policies, but it does not necessarilyincrease the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. Controls are not operating efficiently is a condition thatindicates that the organization’s controls, which are the measures or actions taken to manage or mitigate the risks, are not performing well or optimally7. This may affect the quality and performance of the controls, but it does not necessarily increase the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. Vulnerabilities are not being mitigated is a condition that indicates that the organization’s vulnerabilities, which are the weaknesses or gaps that may be exploited by the threats, are not being addressed or reduced8. This may increase the likelihood or impact of the risks, but it does not necessarily increase the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. References = 1: IT/Information Security Exception Request Process2: [Risk Ownership - Risk Management] 3: [Risk Practitioner - ISACA] 4: Risk Threshold: Definition, Meaning & Example - PM Study Circle5: Risk Appetite vs Risk Tolerance vs Risk Threshold - projectcubicle6: [Security Policy Review and Update - SANS Institute] 7: [Control Effectiveness and Efficiency - ISACA] 8: [Vulnerability Management - ISACA] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Concepts, pp. 17-19.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

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

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

Requiring a risk assessment with change requests is the most effective way to integrate business risk management with IT operations because it ensures that any changes to the IT environment are aligned with the business objectives and risk appetite. A risk assessment with change requests involves identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating the potential risks that may arise from the proposed changes, as well as monitoring and reviewing the outcomes of the changes. This way, the IT operations can support the business goals and mitigate the IT risks in a proactive and consistent manner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.2: Change Management, pp. 121-1231

Control testing is the process of verifying that the risk mitigation controls are designed and operating effectively, and that they achieve the intended objectives and outcomes. Control testing can involve various methods, such as observation, inspection, inquiry, re-performance, or simulation. Control testing results can provide evidence and assurance that the implementation of a risk mitigation control has been completed as intended, and that the control is functioning properly and consistently. Control testing results can also identify any issues or deficiencies in the control design or operation, and recommend corrective actions or improvements. The other options are not as helpful as control testing results, because they do not provide a direct and objective verification of the control implementation, but rather focus on other aspects or outputs of the risk management process, as explained below:

A. An updated risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their characteristics, and their status. An updated risk register can reflect the changes in the risk profile and exposure after the implementation of a risk mitigation control, but it does not verify that the control implementation has been completed as intended, or that the control is effective and reliable.

B. Risk assessment results are the outputs of the risk analysis and evaluation process, which measure the impact and likelihood of the risks, and assign a risk rating and priority. Risk assessment results can indicate the level of risk exposure and the need for risk mitigation controls, but they do not verify that the control implementation has been completed as intended, or that the control is effective and reliable.

C. Technical control validation is the process of ensuring that the technical aspects of a control, such as hardware, software, or network components, are configured and functioning correctly. Technical control validation can verify that the control implementation meets the technical specifications and requirements, but it does not verify that the control implementation has been completed as intended, or that the control is effective and reliable from a business perspective. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, page 130.

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

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

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

Poor change planning, prioritization, or scheduling

Insufficient change approval, review, or communication

Inadequate change testing, validation, or verification

Lack of change monitoring, reporting, or auditing

Low change awareness, training, or support

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 An IT risk appetite statement is a document that expresses the amount and type of IT risk that an organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. An IT risk appetite statement can help guide the IT risk management process, by setting the boundaries, criteria, and targets for IT risk identification, assessment, response, and reporting. An IT risk appetite statement should be aligned with the organization’s overall risk appetite and strategy, and should be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect the changes in the internal and external environment. One of the factors that would most likely result in updates to an IT risk appetite statement is changes in senior management. Senior management is the group of executives who have the authority and responsibility for the strategic direction and performance of the organization. Changes in senior management can affect the IT risk appetite statement, as they may introduce new perspectives, priorities, expectations, or preferences for IT risk taking or avoidance. Changes in senior management can also affect the IT risk appetite statement, as they may require new or revised IT objectives, goals, or initiatives, which may entail different levelsor types of IT risk. Therefore, changes in senior management should trigger a review and update of the IT risk appetite statement, to ensure that it is consistent and compatible with the new leadership and direction of the organization. References = Organisations must define their IT risk appetite and tolerance, Risk Appetite Statements - Institute of Risk Management, Develop Your Technology Risk Appetite - Gartner.

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

 The best course of action for a risk practitioner upon learning that a control under internal review may no longer be necessary is to obtain approval to retire the control. This will help to ensure that the control is removed in a controlled and documented manner, and that the relevant stakeholders are informed and agree with the decision. Retiring unnecessary controls can also help to optimize the control environment, reduce costs and complexity, and improve efficiency and performance. Updating the status of the control as obsolete, consulting the internal auditor for a second opinion, and verifying the effectiveness of the original mitigation plan are not the best courses of action, as they may not address the root cause of the control’s obsolescence, and may delay or complicate the control retirement process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.2, page 1071

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 649.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The effectiveness of an IT risk management function depends on how well it can identify, analyze, evaluate, and treat the IT-related risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance. To achieve this, the IT risk management function needs to have processes that are updated and monitored on a continuous basis, so that they can capture the changes in the IT environment, the business context, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the regulatory requirements. Updating and monitoring the IT risk management processes also helps to ensure that they are consistent, reliable, and efficient, and that they provide timely and accurate information for decision making and reporting12. Aligning the IT risk management processes to an industry-accepted framework is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. A framework provides a common language, structure, and methodology for IT risk management, but it does not guarantee that the processes are updated and monitored on a continuous basis. A framework also needs to be customized and adapted to the specific needs and context of theorganization3. Reviewing and approving the IT risk management processes by senior management is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. Senior management support and endorsement are essential for establishing the tone and culture of IT risk management, as well as for allocating the necessary resources and authority for the function. However, senior management review and approval alone do not ensure that the processes are updated and monitored on a continuous basis. Senior management also need to oversee and evaluate the performance and outcomes of the IT risk management function4. Periodically assessing the IT risk management processes against regulatory requirements is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. Regulatory compliance is one of the objectives and drivers of IT risk management, and it requires the function to adhere to the applicable laws, rules, and standards. However, regulatory requirements are not the only source of IT risk, and they may not cover all the aspects and dimensions of IT risk management.Moreover, periodic assessment may not be sufficient to capture the dynamic and evolving nature of IT risk. Therefore, the IT risk management processes need to be updated and monitored on a continuous basis, not only to meet the regulatoryrequirements, but also to address the other sources and impacts of IT risk5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Process, pp. 121-123.

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite provides the most important information to facilitate a risk response decision, because it reflects the organization’s risk tolerance, preferences, and expectations, which guide the selection and implementation of the risk response strategies. Risk appetite helps the organization to balance the potential benefits and costs of taking risks, and to align the risk management process with the organizational strategy and culture. The other options are not as important as risk appetite, because they do not indicate the organization’s desired level of risk exposure, but rather provide supplementary or partial information for the risk response decision, as explained below:

A. Audit findings are the results and recommendations of the internal or external audit activities that evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes. Audit findings provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can identify the gaps or weaknesses in the current risk response strategies, and suggest corrective actions or improvements. However, audit findings do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the optimal risk response strategies.

C. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the impact and likelihood of the risks, and provide early warning signs of changes in the risk exposure. KRIs provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can monitor and report the performance and effectiveness of the current risk response strategies, and trigger corrective actions or adjustments. However, KRIs do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the acceptable level of risk exposure and performance.

D. Industry best practices are the standards, norms, and expectations for risk management that are established and followed by the peers or competitors in the same industry or sector. Industry best practices provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can benchmark and compare the organization’s risk response strategies with those of the leading or successful organizations, and identify areas for improvement or innovation. However, industry best practices do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the unique and customized risk response strategies that suit the organization’s needs and goals. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 40. Risk Appetite: What It Is and How to Use It, Risk Appetite: How Hungry Are You?, Risk Appetite: The Strategic Balancing Act

The best way to ensure that access remains appropriate for an organization that practices the principle of least privilege is to review user access rights on a regular basis by obtaining an access control matrix and approval from the user’s manager. An access control matrix is a table that shows the access rights and permissions of each user or role for each resource or function. An access control matrix helps to verify that the users have the minimum level of access required to perform their duties, and to identify any unauthorized or excessive access rights. Approval from the user’s manager helps to confirm that the user’s access rights are consistent with their current role and responsibilities, and to authorize any changes or exceptions as needed. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 1281

According to the CRISC Review Manual, monitoring against the configuration standard is the most effective control to maintain the integrity of system configuration files, because it ensures that any unauthorized or unintended changes are detected and corrected. Monitoring against the configuration standard involves comparing the actual configuration of the system with the approved baseline and identifying any deviations or discrepancies. The other options are not the most effective controls, because they do not ensure the integrity of the system configuration files. Recording changes to configuration files is a good practice, but it does not prevent unauthorized or unintended changes from occurring. Implementing automated vulnerability scanning is a preventive control that helps to identify and remediate potential weaknesses in the system, but it does not verify the integrity of the configuration files. Restricting access to configuration documentation is a security measure that limits the exposure of sensitive information, but it does not prevent unauthorized or unintended changes to the configuration files. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.3, page 184.

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

The business process owner should own the risk of customer data leakage caused by the service provider, as they have the responsibility and authority over the design, execution, and performance of the business process. The business process owner is also accountable for the risks and controls associated with their process, and they can provide valuable input and feedback on the likelihood and impact of customer data leakage on the process outcomes and objectives.

The other options are not the best choices for owning the risk of customer data leakage caused by the service provider. The service provider is responsible for delivering and supporting the billing function and ensuring the security and privacy of the customer data, but they may not have the full visibility or understanding of the business process and objectives. The vendor risk manager is responsible for managing and monitoring the vendor relationship and performance, but they may not have the direct involvement or influence on the business process and its risks and controls. The legal counsel is responsible for providing legal advice and guidance on the contractual and regulatory obligations and implications of the outsourcing arrangement, but they may not have the detailed knowledge or experience of the business process and its risks and controls. References = Guide to Vendor Risk Assessment | Smartsheet, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Data Ownership: Considerations for Risk Management - ISACA

 Risk culture is the system of values and behaviors present in an organization that shapes risk decisions of management and employees1. Risk culture influences how the organization perceives, responds to, and manages the risks that may affect its objectives, operations, or assets2.

The scenario described in the question best demonstrates an organization’s risk culture, because it shows how the management team’s attitude and actions towards risk are driven by the organization’s values and goals. In this case, the organization’s risk culture is characterized by:

A high risk appetite and tolerance, which means that the organization is willing to take and accept significant risks in order to achieve its strategic objectives of launching a new product and penetrating new markets

A low risk awareness and sensitivity, which means that the organization does not pay enough attention or consideration to the potential IT risk factors, threats, and vulnerabilities that may affect its product development and market entry

A weak risk governance and control, which means that the organization does not have adequate or effective policies, procedures, or mechanisms to identify, assess, respond, or monitor the IT risks and their impacts

References = Risk Culture of Companies | ERM - Enterprise Risk Management Initiative …, Taking control of organizational risk culture | McKinsey

The most important factor to consider when assessing the residual risk of implementing encryption for data at rest is the key management. Key management is the process of generating, storing, distributing, using, and destroying the cryptographic keys that are used to encrypt anddecrypt the data. Key management is essential for ensuring the security, availability, and integrity of the encrypted data, as well as for complying with the legal and regulatory requirements. Poor key management could result in the loss, theft, compromise, or corruption of the keys, which could lead to unauthorized access, data breach, data loss, or data recovery failure. Therefore, key management must be considered to assess the residual risk, which is the risk that remains after the risk treatment, such as encryption, is applied. Data retention requirements, data destruction requirements, and cloud storage architecture are not as important as key management, as they do not directly affect the encryption and decryption of the data, and they may not introduce significant residual risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

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

 The best indication that risk management is effective is when risk has been reduced to meet the risk appetite of the enterprise. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the enterprise’s risk culture, strategy, and values, and provides a basis for setting risk tolerance levels and risk response strategies. Risk management is effective when it enables the enterprise to align its risk exposure with its risk appetite, and to optimize the risk-return trade-off. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 181

 Reduced ability to evaluate key risk indicators (KRIs) will have the greatest impact on the ability to monitor risk when an information system for a key business operation is moved from an in-house application to a Software as a Service (SaaS) vendor, as it may limit the visibility and control over the risk exposure and performance of the system. KRIs are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the effectiveness of risk response strategies, and they should be aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and objectives. When the system is moved to a SaaS vendor, the enterprise may lose access to the data and processes that are used to calculate and report the KRIs, or the KRIs may become irrelevant or inconsistent with the vendor’s environment and standards. This may impair the ability to monitor risk and to take timely and appropriate actions to manage risk. Reduced access to internal audit reports, dependency on the vendor’s key performance indicators (KPIs), and dependency on service level agreements (SLAs) are not the greatest impacts on the ability to monitor risk, as they do not affect the measurement and reporting of the risk status and performance, but rather the assurance and evaluation of the system quality and reliability. References = CRISC Certified in Risk andInformation Systems Control – Question221; ISACACertified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 221.

The most appropriate action when a tolerance threshold is exceeded is to communicate the potential impact to the decision makers. A tolerance threshold is the acceptable level of variation or deviation from the expected or planned performance or outcome of a risk response. When a tolerance threshold is exceeded, it means that the risk response is not effective or efficient enough to reduce the risk to an acceptable level, and that the enterprise is exposed to unacceptable levels of risk that could impair its ability to achieve its objectives. Therefore, the potential impact of the risk should be communicated to the decision makers, such as senior management, risk owners, or risk committee, who have the authority and responsibility to decide on the appropriate actions to address the risk situation. Communicating the potential impact can help to raise the awareness and urgency of the risk issue, and to facilitate the risk-based decision making process. Researching the root cause of similar incidents, verifying the response plan is adequate, and increasing human resources to respond in the interim are not as appropriate as communicating the potential impact, as they do not address the primary need of informing and involving the decision makers, and may not be feasible or effective in resolving the risk issue. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 41.

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 maturitymodel can help to evaluate the current state, identify the strengths and weaknesses, set the goals and objectives, and measure the performance and improvement over time. The primary benefit of using a maturity model is that it helps to evaluate the evolution of process improvements, meaning that it can help to track the progress andchanges of the processes, as well as to identify the best practices and standards. A maturity model can also help to compare the processes with the industry benchmarks and competitors, as well as to align the processes with the business strategy and vision. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2.1, p. 118-119

 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.

Risk appetite should be the primary driver for periodically reviewing and adjusting key risk indicators (KRIs), because it reflects the level of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. KRIs should be aligned with the risk appetite and adjusted accordingly when the risk appetite changes due to internal or external factors. The other options are not the primary drivers, although they may also influence the review and adjustment of KRIs. Risk impact, risk likelihood, and control self-assessments (CSAs) are secondary drivers that depend on the risk appetite. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers

To help identify high-risk situations, an organization should continuously monitor the environment, as it can help to detect and respond to any changes or emerging risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and strategy. Continuous monitoring can also provide timely and relevant feedback and information to the decision-makers and stakeholders, and enable them to adjust the risk strategy and response actions accordingly. Continuous monitoring can also help to ensure that the risk management process is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite andtolerance, and supports the achievement of the organization’s goals and value creation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 243. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 243. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 243.

A virus transmitted on a USB thumb drive is a scenario that represents a threat, as it involves a malicious or harmful event that could compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of an information system. A virus is a type of malware that can infect and damage files, programs, or devices by replicating itself and spreading to other systems or networks. A USB thumb drive is a portable storage device that can be used to transfer data between computers or devices. Avirus transmitted on a USB thumb drive can occur when a user inserts an infected USB thumb drive into a computer or device, or when a user downloads or copies an infected file from a USB thumb drive to a computer or device. A virus transmitted on a USB thumb drive can pose a serious risk to the information system, as it can corrupt or delete data, disrupt or degrade performance, steal or leak information, or allow unauthorized access or control.

The other options are not scenarios that represent a threat, but rather vulnerabilities or weaknesses that could increase the likelihood or impact of a threat. Connecting a laptop to a free, open, wireless access point (hotspot) is a vulnerability, as it exposes the laptop to potential eavesdropping, interception, or manipulation by malicious actors on the same network. Visitors not signing in as per policy is a vulnerability, as it creates a gap in the physical security and access control of the premises, and could allow unauthorized or malicious visitors to enter or access sensitive areas or assets. Storing corporate data in unencrypted form on a laptop is a vulnerability, as it reduces the protection and security of the data, and could enable unauthorized or malicious access, disclosure, or modification of the data in case of loss, theft, or compromise of the laptop. References = What is a Computer Virus? | McAfee, What is a USB Flash Drive? | Kingston Technology, Threats, Vulnerabilities, and Exploits – oh my!

User recertification is the most effective control to ensure user access is maintained on a least-privilege basis, as it involves a periodic review and validation of user access rights and privileges by the appropriate authority. User recertification helps to identify and remove any unnecessary, excessive, or obsolete access rights and privileges that may pose a security risk or violate the principle of least privilege. User recertification also helps to ensure that user access rights and privileges are aligned with the current business needs, roles, and responsibilities of the users.

The other options are not the most effective controls to ensure user access is maintained on a least-privilege basis. User authorization is the process of granting or denying access rights and privileges to users based on their identity, role, and credentials, but it does not verify or update the existing access rights and privileges of the users. Change log review is the process of examining and analyzing the records of changes made to the system, configuration, or data, but it does not directly address the user access rights and privileges. Access log monitoring is the process of tracking and auditing the user activities and actions on the system or network, but it does not validate or modify the user access rights and privileges. References = What Is the Principle of Least Privilege and Why is it Important?, Principle of Least Privilege: Definition, Methods & Examples, IT Risk Resources | ISACA

The best indicator of the risk appetite and tolerance level for the risk associated with business interruption caused by IT system failures is the recovery time objective (RTO). The RTO is the maximum acceptable time or duration that a business process or an IT system can be disrupted or interrupted before it causes unacceptable impact or harm to the business. The RTO reflects the risk appetite and tolerance level for thebusiness interruption risk, as it indicates how much disruption or interruption the business can tolerate or accept, and how quickly the business needs to resume or recover the business process or the IT system. The RTO also helps to determine the priorities and requirements for the business continuity and recovery planning, and to select and implement the appropriate continuity and recovery strategies and solutions. Mean time to recover (MTTR), IT system criticality classification, and incident management service level agreement (SLA) are not the best indicators of the risk appetite and tolerance level for the business interruption risk, as they are either the measures or the outcomes of the business continuity and recovery performance, and they do not directly indicate how much disruption or interruption the business can tolerate or accept. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50

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 itsperformance 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 primary objective of a risk identification process is to determine threats and vulnerabilities, which are the sources and causes of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives. Threats are any events or circumstances that have the potential to harm or exploit the organization’s assets, such as people, information, systems, processes, or infrastructure1. Vulnerabilities are any weaknesses or gaps in the organization’s capabilities, controls, or defenses that may increase the likelihood or impact of the threats2. By determining threats and vulnerabilities, the organization can:

Identify and document all possible risks, regardless of whether they are internal or external, current or emerging, or positive or negative3.

Understand the nature and characteristics of the risks, such as their sources, causes, consequences, and interrelationships4.

Provide the basis for further risk analysis and evaluation, such as assessing the probability and severity of the risks, and prioritizing the risks according to their significance and urgency5.

References =

Threat - CIO Wiki

Vulnerability - CIO Wiki

Risk Identification - CIO Wiki

Risk Identification and Analysis - The National Academies Press

Risk Analysis - CIO Wiki

Risk mitigation is a proactive business strategy to identify, assess, and mitigate potential threats or uncertainties that could harm an organization’s objectives, assets, or operations1. It entails specific action plans to reduce the likelihood or impact of these identified risks2.

There are several recognized ways to mitigate risk, such as accepting, avoiding, hedging, transferring, or reducing the risk3. Among the options given, only C is an example of risk reduction, which involvesimplementing controls or safeguards to minimize the negative effects of the risk3. Change and configuration management processes are methods to ensure that changes to the IT systems or infrastructure are properly authorized, documented, tested, and implemented, and that the configuration of the IT assets is consistent and accurate. These processes can help prevent or detect errors, defects, or vulnerabilities that could compromise the IT performance, security, or availability.

The other options are not examples of risk mitigation, but rather risk avoidance (A), risk transfer (B), or risk acceptance (D). Risk avoidance means eliminating the risk entirely by not engaging in the activity that causes the risk3. Not providing capability for employees to work remotely could avoid the risk of data breaches or network issues, but it could also limit the productivity and flexibility of the workforce. Risk transfer means shifting the responsibility or burden of the risk to another party, such as a vendor or an insurer3. Outsourcing the IT activities and infrastructure could transfer the risk of IT failures or incidents to the service provider, but it could also introduce new risks such as vendor dependency or loss of control. Risk acceptance means acknowledging the risk and its consequences without taking any action to address it3. Taking out insurance coverage for IT-related incidents could provide some financial compensation in case of a loss, but it does not reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk itself. References =

5 Key Risk Mitigation Strategies (With Examples) | Indeed.com

10 Risk Mitigation techniques you need to know - Stakeholdermap.com

Risk Mitigation Strategies: Types & Examples (+ Free Template)

[Change and Configuration Management - ISACA]

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 logscan 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

 The risk treatment response that should be reflected in the risk register when an IT department decides to keep the data center in-house instead of outsourcing it to an overseas location is risk avoidance. Risk avoidance is a risk response strategy that involves eliminating the source of the risk, or changing the plan or scope of the activity, to avoid the risk altogether. Risk avoidance can help to reduce the risk exposure and impact to zero, by removing the possibility of the risk occurrence. In this case, the IT department avoids the risk of outsourcing the data center to an overseas location, which could involve various threats, vulnerabilities, and uncertainties, such as data security, legal compliance, service quality, communication, or cultural issues. By keeping the data center in-house, the IT department maintains the control and ownership of the data center, and eliminates the potential risk associated with the outsourcing. Risk mitigation, risk acceptance, and risk transfer are not the correct risk treatment responses, as they do not reflect the actual decision and action taken by the IT department, and they do not eliminate the risk source or occurrence. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 51.

The key to controlling escalating costs when an organization is having new software implemented under contract is change management, which is the process of identifying, evaluating, approving, and implementing changes to the project scope, schedule, budget, or quality1. Change management can help to control escalating costs by:

Establishing a clear and agreed-upon baseline for the project deliverables, requirements, and expectations, and ensuring that they are aligned with the contract terms and conditions2.

Defining and enforcing a formal and consistent change control process, which includes the roles and responsibilities, the criteria and methods, and the documentation and communication of the changes3.

Assessing and prioritizing the proposed changes, and determining their impact and feasibility, and their alignment with the project objectives and constraints4.

Obtaining the approval and authorization of the relevant stakeholders, such as the project sponsor, the project manager, the contractor, or the customer, before implementing the changes5.

Monitoring and measuring the performance and outcome of the changes, and ensuring that they are delivered within the agreed scope, schedule, budget, and quality6.

References =

Change Management - CIO Wiki

Project Scope Management - CIO Wiki

Change Control - CIO Wiki

Change Impact Analysis - CIO Wiki

Change Approval - CIO Wiki

Change Evaluation - CIO Wiki

According to the CRISC Review Manual, recovery time objectives (RTOs) are the maximum acceptable time that an IT system can be inoperable without causing significant damage to the business operations and objectives. RTOs are determined by the business impact analysis (BIA) and are used to define the recovery strategies and priorities. Therefore, if the RTOs do not meet the business requirements, it would be themost significant deficiency in the BCP, as it would imply that the recovery plan is not aligned with the business needs and expectations. The other options are not the most significant deficiencies, as they do not directly affect the recovery time and the business continuity. BCP testing is not necessarily done in conjunction with the DRP, as they have different scopes and objectives. BCP testing can use different methods, such as walk-through, simulation, or full interruption, depending on the purpose and scope of the test. Each business location can have separate BCPs, as long as they are consistent with the enterprise-wide BCP and the business requirements. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.2, page 240.

Classifying IT assets during a risk assessment is a process of assigning values to the IT assets based on their importance, sensitivity, and criticality to the enterprise. The best reason to classify IT assets is todetermine the appropriate level of protection that each IT asset requires, based on its value and the potential impact of its loss or compromise. This helps the enterprise to allocate resources and implement controls that are proportional to the risk exposure of the IT assets, and to optimize the cost and benefit of risk mitigation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 233. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 233. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 233.

 Accepting residual risk is the most important responsibility of a risk owner, as it implies that the risk owner is accountable for the risk and its impact on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. 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. The risk owner is responsible for implementing the risk response strategies and monitoring the risk status and outcomes, as well as for reporting and escalating the risk issues and incidents. Testing control design, establishing business information criteria, and establishing the risk register are not the most important responsibilities of a risk owner, but rather the tasks or activities that the risk owner may performor delegate as part of the risk management process. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question218; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 218.

 An analysis of the security logs that illustrate the sequence of events is the most important information for the person responsible for managing the incident, as it can help to identify the source, scope, and impact of the security breach, and to determine the appropriate response actions. An analysis of the security logs can also provide evidence for forensic investigation and legal action, and help to prevent or mitigate future incidents by identifying the root causes and vulnerabilities. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 235. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 235. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 235.

 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 thebusiness 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.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the greatest benefit of analyzing logs collected from different systems is to detect developing threats earlier, because it helps to identify and correlate the patterns, trends, and anomalies that may indicate a potential attack or compromise. Log analysis is the process of examining and interpreting the log data generated by various systems, such as firewalls, servers, routers, and applications. Log analysis can provide valuable insights into the activities and events that occur on the systems, and can enable the timely detection and response to the emerging threats. The other options are not the greatest benefits of analyzing logs, as they are less proactive or less strategic than detecting developing threats earlier. Maintaining a record of incidents is a benefit of logging, but not of analyzing logs, as it involves storing and preserving the log data for future reference. Facilitating forensic investigations is a benefit of analyzing logs, but it is a reactive and tactical activity that occurs after an incident has happened. Identifying security violations is a benefit of analyzing logs, but it is a specific and operational activity that focuses on the compliance and enforcement of the security policies and standards. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 263.

The best course of action in responding to the internal audit inquiry is to provide justification for the lower risk rating. This would demonstrate that the risk record was updated based on a valid and documented rationale, such as changes in the risk environment, risk drivers, risk indicators, or risk responses. Providing justification would also help to maintain the transparency and accountability of the risk management process, and ensure that the internal audit is satisfied with the risk assessment outcome. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.3, page 184.

An IT risk register is a document that records and tracks the significant IT risks that an organization faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. An IT risk register can help to provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the organization’s IT risk profile, and to support the decision making and reporting of the IT risk management function1.

One of the data that must be updated to maintain an IT risk register is the expected frequency and potential impact of each IT risk. The expected frequency is the probability or likelihood of the IT risk occurring, based on historical data, statistical analysis, expert judgment, or other methods. The potential impact is the magnitude or severity of the consequences or outcomes of the IT risk, measured in terms of cost, time, quality, reputation, or other criteria2.

Updating the expected frequency and potential impact of each IT risk is essential for maintaining an IT risk register, because it can help to:

Evaluate and prioritize the IT risks based on their risk level, which is calculated by multiplying the frequency and impact

Monitor and track the changes or trends in the IT risk exposure and performance over time

Identify and implement the appropriate risk response strategies and controls, based on the risk level and the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization

Report and communicate the IT risk status and progress to the stakeholders, using risk indicators, dashboards, or matrices3

The other options are not the data that must be updated to maintain an IT risk register, but rather the data that are used as inputs or outputs of the IT risk management process. Risk tolerance is the acceptable variation in the outcomes related to specific objectives or risks. Risk tolerance is used to measure the IT risk analysis and to guide the IT risk response. Enterprise-wide IT risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the IT risks across theorganization. Enterprise-wide IT risk assessment is used topopulate the IT risk register and to inform the IT risk response. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite is used to guide the IT risk analysis and to align the IT risk response. References =

Risk Register - ISACA

Risk Analysis - ISACA

Risk Register 2021-2022 - UNECE

[How To Conduct Business Impact Analysis in 8 Easy Steps - G2]

[Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance - ISACA]

[Enterprise Risk Assessment - ISACA]

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The data privacy officer is the best person to notify in case of a new malware that has severely impacted industry peers with data loss. The data privacy officer is responsible for ensuring that the enterprise complies with the applicable privacy laws and regulations, and that the personal data of the customers, employees, and other stakeholders are protected from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, or destruction. The data privacy officer can assess the potential impact of the malware on the enterprise’s data privacy obligations and risks, and coordinate the appropriate response and remediation actions. The customer database manager, the customer data custodian, and the audit committee are not the best persons to notify, as they do not have the same level of authority, responsibility, and expertise as the data privacy officer in dealing with data privacy issues. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 191.

A RACI matrix is a tool that assigns the roles and responsibilities for each risk, such as who is responsible, accountable, consulted, and informed. A RACI matrix helps to clarify the expectations and accountabilities for each risk owner and stakeholder, and to ensure that the risk is managed and monitored effectively and efficiently.

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their likelihood, impact, and mitigation strategies. A risk register does not assign the accountability for each risk, but rather the ownership and response.

A risk catalog is a collection of risks that have been identified and categorized based on common attributes, such as source, type, or impact. A risk catalog does not assign the accountability for each risk, but rather the classification and description.

A risk scenario is a technique that simulates the possible outcomes of different risk events and assesses their impact on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. A risk scenario does not assign the accountability for each risk, but rather the analysis and evaluation.

Scenario analysis and stress testing are the best methods to enable an organization to determine whether external emerging risk factors will impact the organization’s risk profile, as they help to simulate and evaluate the potential outcomes and effects of various risk events and scenarios on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. Scenario analysis and stress testing can help to identify and assess the impact of external emerging risk factors, such as changes in the market, technology, regulation, or environment, and to measure the resilience and preparedness of theenterprise to cope with these factors. Control identification and mitigation, adoption of a compliance-based approach, and prevention and detection techniques are not the best methods to enable an organization to determine whether external emerging risk factors will impact the organization’s risk profile, as they do not help to simulate and evaluate the potential outcomes and effects of various risk events and scenarios, but rather to manage and monitor the existing or known risks. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 223.

A business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that identifies and assesses the effects that accidents, emergencies, disasters, and other unplanned, negative events could have on a business. The BIA (sometimes also called business impact assessment) predicts how a business will be affected by everything from a hurricane to a labor strike1.

One of the data that would be used when performing a BIA is the expected costs for recovering the business. This data can help to estimate the amount of resources and funds that would be needed to restore the normal operations and functions of the business after a disruption. The expected costs for recovering the business can include:

The costs of repairing or replacing damaged or lost assets, such as equipment, inventory, or facilities

The costs of hiring or training additional staff, or outsourcing some tasks or services

The costs of implementing alternative or backup systems or processes, such as cloud computing or manual procedures

The costs of communicating and coordinating with customers, suppliers, partners, regulators, and other stakeholders

The costs of complying with legal or contractual obligations, or paying fines or penalties

The costs of mitigating or preventing further losses or damages, such as insurance premiums or security measures23

The expected costs for recovering the business can help to determine the priority and urgency of the recovery activities, and to allocate the available resources and funds accordingly. The expected costs for recovering the business can also help to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and feasibility of the recovery strategies and options, and to justify the investment in the business continuity planning and management4.

The other options are not the data that would be used when performing a BIA, but rather the data that would be used for other purposes or processes. A cost-benefit analysis of running the current business is a data that would be used to compare the advantages and disadvantages of different business decisions or alternatives, such as launching a new product or service, or expanding to a new market. A cost-benefit analysis can help to assess the profitability and viability of the current business, but it does not measure the impact of a disruption on the business5. A cost of regulatory compliance is a data that would be used toestimate the amount of resources and funds that would be required to meet the rules and standards set by the authorities or agencies that govern the business, such as laws, regulations, or policies. A cost of regulatory compliance can help to ensure the legality and accountability of the business, but it does not measure the impact of a disruption on the business. A projected impact of current business on future business is a data that would be used to forecast the potential outcomes and consequences of the current business activities or strategies on the future business performance and growth, such as sales, revenue, market share, or customer satisfaction. A projected impact of current business on future business can help to plan and optimize the future business, but it does not measure the impact of a disruption on the current business. References =

Business Impact Analysis | Ready.gov

Business Impact Analysis Toolkit | Smartsheet

Business Impact Analysis (BIA): Prepare for Anything [2023] • Asana

How To Conduct Business Impact Analysis in 8 Easy Steps - G2

Cost Benefit Analysis - ISACA

[Regulatory Compliance - ISACA]

[Impact Analysis - ISACA]

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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.

The best way to prevent future occurrences of active network accounts belonging to former employees is to conduct a comprehensive review of access management processes. This review should include verifying that the access rights of all employees are updated regularly, especially when they change roles or leave the organization. The review should also ensure that there are clear policies and procedures for granting, modifying, and revoking access rights, and that these are followed consistently and documented properly. The review should also identify and address any gaps or weaknesses in the access management processes that could lead to unauthorized orinappropriate access. By conducting a comprehensive review of access management processes, the organization can improve its security posture and reduce the risk of data breaches or misuse of resources. References = IT audit: The ultimate guide [with checklist] | Zapier, IT auditing and controls – planning the IT audit [updated 2021]

The number of recurring restore failures is the best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the effectiveness of a backup process, as it helps to evaluate the reliability and quality of the backup data and the backup system. A backup process is a process of creating and storing copies of data or systems to enable recovery in case of data loss, corruption, or disaster. A restore process is a process of retrieving and restoring the backup data or systems to the original or alternative location or state. A restore failure is an event that occurs when the restore process fails to complete successfully or correctly, due to various reasons, such as corrupted or missing backup data, incompatible or outdated backup system, or insufficient or unavailable resources. A recurring restore failure is a restore failure that happens repeatedly or frequently, indicating a persistent or systemic problem with the backup process.

The number of recurring restore failures helps to measure the effectiveness of the backup process by providing the following benefits:

It indicates the extent and magnitude of the backup process performance and quality issues, and the impact and severity of the backup process failures on the data or system availability and integrity.

It identifies and analyzes the root causes and contributing factors of the backup process failures, and the gaps or weaknesses in the backup process design, implementation, operation, or monitoring.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the backup process improvement and enhancement, and guides the development and implementation of corrective or preventive actions.

It communicates and reports the backup process status and results to the relevant stakeholders, and supports the alignment of the backup process with the organizational strategy and objectives.

The other options are not the best key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure the effectiveness of a backup process. The number of resources to monitor backups is a measure of the inputs or costs of the backup process, but it does not indicate the outputs or benefits of the backup process. The number of restoration monitoring reports is a measure of the documentation or communication of the backup process, but it does not reflect the actual or potential performance or quality of the backup process. The number of backup recovery requests is a measure of the demand or frequency of the backup process, but it does not evaluate the reliability or quality of the backup process. References = 12 Process KPIs to Monitor Process Performance in 2024 - AIMultiple, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Mastering RTO and RPO in Backup Strategies: A Key to Data Recovery Success

Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure the performance and effectiveness of the controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks. KCIs can help to monitor the status and health of the controls, as well as to identify any issues or gaps that need to be addressed. The primary reason to adopt KCIs in the risk monitoring and reporting process is to provide assessments of mitigation effectiveness, meaning that they can help to evaluate how well the controls are reducing the risk exposure and achieving the desired outcomes. KCIs can also help to support the risk management decision making and improvement actions, as well as to demonstrate the value and benefits of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1.2, p. 115-116

The most important concern to address when formulating a social media policy to address information leakage is sharing company information on social media. Information leakage is the unauthorized or unintentional disclosure of confidential or sensitive information to unauthorized parties. Social media is a platform that enables the users to create and share content, such as text, images, videos, or links, with other users or the public. Sharing company information on social media is the most important concern, as it could expose the company’s trade secrets, intellectual property, customer data, financial data, or strategic plans to competitors, hackers, or regulators. Sharing company information on social media could also damage the company’s reputation, trust, or credibility, and result in legal or regulatory penalties, fines, or lawsuits. Therefore, a social media policy should clearly define what constitutes company information, and what are the rules and guidelines for sharing or not sharing company information on social media. A social media policy should also specify the roles and responsibilities of the employees, managers, and the social media team, and the consequences and sanctions for violating the policy. Sharing personal information on social media, using social media to maintain contact with business associates, and using social media for personal purposes during working hours are not as important as sharing company information on social media, as they do not directly involve the leakage of company information, and they may not have significant impact or risk on the company. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217

 Continuity planning is the process of developing strategies and plans to ensure the continuity of critical business functions and processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. Continuity planning involves identifying the risks, impacts, and recovery options for various scenarios, as well as testing and updating the plans regularly. The primary advantage of involving end users in continuity planning is that they have a better understanding of specific business needs, such as the operational requirements, the customer expectations, and the dependencies and interdependencies of the business processes. End users can provide valuable input and feedback on the continuity plans, as well as participate in the testing and validation of the plans. End users can also help to ensure the alignment of the continuity plans with the business objectives and priorities, as well as the compliance with the relevant standards and regulations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, p. 204-205

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk taxonomy is the system of classification and categorization of risks based on common characteristics and attributes. Risk taxonomy is necessary to enable an IT risk register to be consolidated with the rest of the organization’s risk register, because it helps to ensure consistency, comparability, and alignment of the risks across the organization. Risk taxonomy also helps to facilitate the communication, reporting, and aggregation of the risks. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not essential for consolidating the risk registers. Risk response is the action taken to address the risk, which may vary depending on the risk level and strategy. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept, which may differ across the organization’s units and functions. Risk ranking is the process of prioritizing the risks based on their impact and likelihood, which may change over time and context. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, page 69.

The greatest challenge when implementing a corporate risk framework for a global organization is the management support. A corporate risk framework is a set of principles, policies, standards, and processes that guide and govern the risk management activities across the organization. Acorporate risk framework helps to establish a consistent and integrated approach to risk management, and to align the risk management objectives and strategies with the business goals and values. Implementing a corporate risk framework for a global organization requires the management support, which is the commitment, involvement, and endorsement of the senior management and the board. Management support is essential for providing the vision, direction, and resources for the risk management initiatives, and for ensuring the accountability, responsibility, and ownership of the risk management roles and functions. Management support is also critical for creating and sustaining a risk-aware culture, and for promoting the risk management awareness and communication among the stakeholders. Management support can be challenging to obtain and maintain, especially for a global organization, as it may face various barriers, such as different expectations, priorities, preferences, or perspectives of the management, lack of trust or confidence in the risk management value or performance, resistance to change or innovation, or competing interests or agendas. Privacy risk controls, business continuity, and risk taxonomy are not as challenging as management support, as they are the components or outcomes of the corporate risk framework, andthey can be addressed or improved by applying the appropriate methods, techniques, or tools. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 35.

An intrusion detection system (IDS) is a network security tool that monitors network traffic and devices for known malicious activity, suspicious activity or security policy violations1. An IDS can generate alerts when it detects any potential threats, but not all alerts are accurate or relevant. There are two types of errors that can affect the performance and reliability of an IDS: false positives and false negatives2.

A false positive is when an IDS incorrectly flags a benign or normal activity as malicious or suspicious. For example, an IDS may alert on a legitimate network scan or a harmless software update. False positives can reduce the credibility and efficiency of an IDS, as they can overwhelm the security team with unnecessary alerts, distract them from the real threats, and cause them to ignore or disable the IDS3.

A false negative is when an IDS fails to flag a malicious or suspicious activity as such. For example, an IDS may miss a stealthy or novel attack that does not match any known signatures or patterns. False negatives can compromise the security and integrity of the network, as they can allow attackers to bypass the IDS and cause damage or steal data without being detected4.

The risk practitioner should recommend to analyze the alerts to minimize the false positives, because this is the best way to improve the accuracy and usefulness of the IDS. By analyzing the alerts, the risk practitioner can:

Identify the sources and causes of the false positives, such as misconfigured or outdated IDS rules, network anomalies, or legitimate traffic that resembles malicious traffic5.

Adjust or fine-tune the IDS settings, such as the alert threshold, the sensitivity level, the detection method, or the rule base, to reduce the number of false positives without increasing the risk of false negatives.

Validate or verify the alerts with other sources of information, such as logs, network traffic analysis, or threat intelligence, to confirm or dismiss the alerts as true or false positives.

Prioritize or classify the alerts based on their severity, impact, or likelihood, to focus on the most critical or relevant alerts and avoid alert fatigue.

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

Resetting the alert threshold based on peak traffic is not a reliable or effective way to minimize the false positives, as it may also increase the risk of false negatives. The alert threshold is the level of activity or deviation that triggers an alert from the IDS. If the threshold is set too high, the IDS may miss some malicious or suspicious activity that occurs below the threshold. If the threshold is set too low, the IDS may generate too many alerts for normal or benign activity that exceeds the threshold. The optimal threshold depends on various factors, such as the network size, topology, traffic volume, and baseline. Peak traffic is not a good indicator of the optimal threshold, as it may vary depending on the time, day, or season, and it may not reflect the normal or expected network behavior.

Analyzing the traffic to minimize the false negatives is not the main issue or goal in this scenario, as the problem is the high number of alerts, not the low number of alerts. Analyzing thetraffic can help to identify the malicious or suspicious activity that the IDS may have missed, but it does not address the root cause of the false positives or improve the IDS performance. Moreover, analyzing the traffic can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, especially for large or complex networks, and it may require specialized tools or skills that the risk practitioner may not have.

Sniffing the traffic using a network analyzer is not a suitable or feasible option in this scenario, as it may violate the privacy or security policies of the network or the organization. Sniffing the traffic means capturing and inspecting the network packets that are transmitted or received by the devices on the network. A network analyzer is a tool that can perform this function and display the packet data in a readable format. However, sniffing the traffic can also expose sensitive or confidential information, such as passwords, usernames, or credit card numbers, that may be contained in the packets. Therefore, sniffing the traffic may require authorization or consent from the network owners or users, and it may be restricted or prohibited by law or regulation.

References =

What is an intrusion detection system (IDS)? - IBM

Intrusion detection system - Wikipedia

What Are Intrusion Detection Systems? - MUO

12 Best Intrusion Detection System (IDS) Software 2024 - Comparitech

What is an Intrusion Detection System (IDS)? - Fortinet

[False Positive and False Negative in Intrusion Detection System]

[False Positives and False Negatives in Intrusion Detection Systems]

[How to Reduce False Positives for Your IDS/IPS]

[How to Set the Right Alert Thresholds for Your IDS/IPS]

[Network Traffic Analysis: What It Is and How It Works]

[What is a Network Analyzer? - Definition from Techopedia]

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

User accounts provisioning is the process of creating, managing, and modifying user accounts within a system or an application, based on the user’s roles, responsibilities, and requirements. User accounts provisioning is an essential part of identity and access management (IAM), which aims to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the system or the application, and the information or resources that it handles or supports1.

The best key performance indicator (KPI) for monitoring adherence to an organization’s user accounts provisioning practices is the percentage of accounts without documented approval, because it can help to measure how well the organization follows the policies, standards, and procedures for user accounts provisioning, and how effectively the organization controls andaudits the user accounts provisioning activities. The percentage of accounts without documented approval can indicate:

The level of compliance and accountability of the user accounts provisioning process, and the extent to which the user accounts provisioning requests and actions are authorized and verified by the appropriate parties, such as managers, IT staff, or security officers

The level of risk and exposure of the user accounts provisioning process, and the likelihood and impact of unauthorized or inappropriate user accounts provisioning, such as granting excessive or unnecessary access privileges, creating duplicate or fraudulent accounts, or violating legal or regulatory requirements

The level of quality and efficiency of the user accounts provisioning process, and the ability and capacity of the organization to manage and maintain the user accounts provisioning records and documents, such as forms, logs, or reports23

The other options are not the best KPIs for monitoring adherence to an organization’s user accounts provisioning practices, but rather some of the factors or outcomes of it. User accounts with default passwords are user accounts that have not changed their passwords from the initial or default values that are assigned by the system or the application. User accounts with default passwords are a factor that can increase the risk of unauthorized or malicious access to the system or the application, as the default passwords may be easily guessed or compromised by attackers. Active accounts belonging to former personnel are user accounts that have not been deactivated or deleted after the users have left the organization. Active accounts belonging to former personnel are an outcome of ineffective or inefficient user accounts deprovisioning, which is the process of revoking or removing the user accounts and access privileges when they are no longer needed or valid. Accounts with dormant activity are user accounts that have not been used or accessed for a long period of time. Accounts with dormant activity are an outcome of poor or inconsistent user accounts management, which is the process of updating or modifying the user accounts and access privileges according to the changes or needs of the users or the organization4. References =

User Provisioning for SaaS Apps: Top 10 Best Practices | Resmo

Top Identity and Access Management Metrics

KPI-driven approach to Identity & Access Management - Elimity

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

 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 afailure 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 areexamples 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

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 theKRI 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

The most important thing to include in a risk assessment of an emerging technology is the impact and likelihood ratings of the risks associated with the technology. Impact and likelihood ratings are the measures of the potential consequences and probabilities of the risk events that could affect the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives. Impact and likelihood ratings can help to evaluate the level andnature of the risk exposure, and to prioritize the risks for further analysis and response. Impact and likelihood ratings can also help to communicate the risk profile and appetite of the enterprise, and to support the risk-based decision making. Risk response plans, risk and control ownership, and key controls are not as important as impact and likelihood ratings, as they are the outputs or outcomes of the risk assessment process, and not the inputs or components of the risk assessment process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

 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]

Low-probability, high-impact events are those that have a low chance of occurring but would cause significant harm if they do. These events are often difficult to predict and quantify, but they can have a major impact on the organization’s objectives, reputation, or operations. By including these events in a risk assessment, the organization can develop understandable and realistic risk scenarios that reflect the potential consequences of different outcomes1. This can help the organization to prioritize its risk management activities and allocate its resources accordingly.

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

The greatest benefit to an organization when updates to the risk register are made promptly after the completion of a risk assessment is optimized risk treatment decisions. Risk treatment decisions are the choices made by the organization on how to respond to the identified risks, such as avoiding, transferring,mitigating, or accepting them. Optimized risk treatment decisions are those that align with the organizational risk appetite and objectives, and provide the best balance between the costs and benefits of the risk response actions.

Updating the risk register promptly after the completion of a risk assessment helps to optimize risk treatment decisions by providing the most current and accurate information on the risk exposure and control environment. By updating the risk register, the organization can ensure that the risk scenarios, risk levels, risk owners, risk responses, and risk indicators are consistent with the risk assessment results and reflect the changes in the internal and external environment. Updating the risk register also helps to prioritize the risks and allocate the resources more effectively and efficiently for risk treatment. Updating the risk register also facilitates the communication, collaboration, and accountability among the stakeholders involved in the risk management and control processes.

The other options are not the greatest benefits to an organization when updates to the risk register are made promptly after the completion of a risk assessment. Improved senior management communication is a benefit of updating the risk register, as it helps to inform and involve the senior management in the risk management and control processes, but it is not the greatest benefit. Enhanced awareness of risk management is a benefit of updating the risk register, as it helps to educate and engage the staff and other stakeholders in the risk management and control processes, but it is not the greatest benefit. Improved collaboration among risk professionals is a benefit of updating the risk register, as it helps to coordinate and integrate the efforts andexpertise of the risk professionals, but it is not the greatest benefit. References = Risk Register: Examples, Benefits, and Best Practices, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Discover 10 major benefits for keeping a risk register

 The best person to own the unmitigated risk of the technology is the IT system owner. The IT system owner is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility for the acquisition, development, maintenance, and operation of the IT system. The IT system owner is also responsible for ensuring that the IT system meets the business requirements, security standards, and compliance obligations of the enterprise. The IT system owner should own the unmitigated risk of the technology, as they are in the best position to understand the nature and impact of the risk, and to implement the appropriate risk responses to reduce the risk exposure to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 251234

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

A gap analysis is the best approach to identify information systems control deficiencies, as it helps to compare and evaluate the current and desired states of the information systems and their controls, and to identify and prioritize the gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. A gap analysis is a process of assessing and measuring the difference between the actual and expected performance or outcomes of a system or a process, such as an information system or a control process. A gap analysis can help to identify information systems control deficiencies by providing the following benefits:

It enables a data-driven and evidence-based approach to information systems control assessment and improvement, rather than relying on subjective or qualitative judgments.

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating information systems control performance and quality across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the alignment of information systems and their controls with the organizational strategy and objectives, and helps to evaluate the achievement of the desired outcomes.

It helps to identify and prioritize the root causes and contributing factors of information systems control deficiencies, and to develop and implement appropriate strategies and actions to address them.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the information systems and their controls, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best approaches to identify information systems control deficiencies. Countermeasures analysis is a method of identifying and evaluating the potential countermeasures or solutions to mitigate or eliminate a specific threat or risk, but it does not directly address the information systems control deficiencies. Best practice assessment is a method of comparing and benchmarking the information systems and their controls against the industry standards or best practices, but it does not provide a comprehensive or customized analysis of the information systems control deficiencies. Risk assessment is a method of identifying and analyzing the potential risks and their impacts on the information systems and their objectives, but it does not measure or evaluate the information systems control performance or quality. References = Gap Analysis: A Practical Guide | Smartsheet, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, How to Perform a Gap Analysis: Step-By-Step Guide & Template

A conflict of interest is a situation where a person’s personal or professional interests may interfere with their ability to act in the best interest of the organization or the project1. A conflict of interest can compromise the integrity, objectivity, and impartiality of the person, and create ethical or legal issues for the organization or the project2. In the context of due diligence, a conflict of interest can affect the quality and reliability of the information and analysis, and jeopardize the success and confidentiality of the acquisition3.

The best course of action for a member of the due diligence team who realizes a close acquaintance is a high-ranking IT professional at a subsidiary of the company about to be acquired is to disclose potential conflicts of interest. This means that the team member should inform the due diligence leader and the organization’s management about the relationship with the acquaintance, and explain how it may affect their role or responsibility in the due diligence process. By disclosing potential conflicts of interest, the team member can:

Demonstrate honesty and transparency, and uphold the ethical standards and values of the organization and the project4.

Enable the due diligence leader and the organization’s management to assess the situation and decide the appropriate course of action, such as reassigning the team member, implementing additional controls or safeguards, or obtaining consent or approval from the relevant parties5.

Avoid or minimize the negative consequences or risks that may arise from the conflict of interest, such as legal liability, reputational damage, or loss of trust and credibility6.

References =

Conflict of Interest - CIO Wiki

What is a Conflict of Interest? Give Me Some Examples - The Balance Careers

How to Avoid Conflicts of Interest in M&A Transactions - DealRoom

How to Handle Conflicts of Interest - Harvard Business Review

Conflict of Interest Policy - ISACA

Managing Conflicts of Interest in the Public Sector Toolkit - OECD

An incident is an unplanned event that disrupts or degrades the normal operation or performance of an IT service, system, or network1. An incident can cause various negative impacts, such as service outages, data losses, security breaches, or customer dissatisfaction2. An incident can recur if the underlying cause or problem of the incident is not properly identified and resolved3.

The best course of action to help reduce the probability of an incident recurring is to perform root cause analysis. Root cause analysis is a systematic process of finding and eliminating the fundamental cause or problem that led to the incident4. Root cause analysis can help to:

Prevent or minimize the recurrence of the incident by addressing the source of the problem, not just the symptoms or effects

Identify and implement corrective or preventive actions that can effectively resolve or mitigate the problem

Learn from the incident and improve the IT service, system, or network quality and reliability

Enhance the incident management and problem management processes and capabilities5

References = What is an Incident?, Incident Management - Wikipedia, Problem Management - Wikipedia, Root Cause Analysis - Wikipedia, Root Cause Analysis: A Guide for Business Leaders

The best practice to mitigate risk related to enterprise-wide ethical decision making in a multi-national organization is to provide ongoing awareness training to support a common risk culture. A common risk culture is a set of shared values, beliefs, and behaviors that influence how the organization identifies, analyzes, responds to, and monitors risks. Ongoing awareness training can help to promote a common risk culture by educating the employees about the enterprise’s risk management objectives, policies, procedures, roles, and responsibilities, as well as the ethical standards and expectations that apply to their work. Ongoing awareness training can also help to reinforce the benefits of ethical decision making and the consequences of unethical behavior. Customized regional training on local laws and regulations, policies requiring central reporting of potential procedure exceptions, and zero-tolerance policies for risk taking bymiddle-level managers are also useful practices, but they are not as effective as ongoing awareness training to support a common risk culture. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 37.

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

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 most likely justification for risk acceptance of an exception to a security control is when the business benefits exceed the loss exposure. Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging and tolerating the risk, without taking any action to reduce or transfer the risk. An exception to a security control is a deviation or non-compliance from the established security policy or standard, due to a valid business reason or circumstance. Risk acceptance of an exception to a security control may be justified when the business benefits exceed the loss exposure, which means that the value or advantage of the exception outweighs the potential cost or harm of the risk. For example, an exception to a security control may enable faster or easier access to the system or data, which may improve the productivity, efficiency, or satisfaction of the users or customers, and generate more revenue or profit for the business. The business benefits of the exception may exceed the loss exposure of the risk, which may be low or negligible, or may be mitigated by other controls or factors. Therefore, risk acceptance of an exception to a security control may be a reasonable and rational decision, based on the cost-benefit analysis of the exception and the risk. Automation cannot be applied to the control, the end-user license agreement has expired, and the control is difficult to enforce in practice are not the most likely justifications for risk acceptance of an exception to a security control, as they are either irrelevant or insufficient reasons, and they do not consider the business benefits or the loss exposure of the exception and the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

A risk profile is a summary of the key risks that an organization faces, along with the corresponding risk responses, risk owners, and risk indicators1. A risk profile is a useful tool for communicating and reporting the risk status and performance to the management and other stakeholders2. When developing a risk profile for management approval, the most useful information to include is the residual risk and the risk appetite, because:

Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses3. It indicates the degree of exposure or uncertainty that the organization still faces, and the potential impact or consequences of the risk events. Residual risk helps the management to evaluate the effectiveness and adequacy of the risk responses, and to decide whether to accept, reduce, transfer, or avoid the risk4.

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives5. It reflects the organization’s risk culture, strategy, and priorities, and provides a basis for setting risk thresholds and targets. Risk appetite helps the management to align the risk profile with the organizational goals and values, and to ensure that the risk responses are consistent and proportional to the risk level6.

The other options are not the most useful information when developing a risk profile for management approval, because:

Strength of detective and preventative controls is a measure of how well the controls can identify or prevent the occurrence or impact of the risk events7. It is a part of the risk response information, but it does not provide a comprehensive or holistic view of the risk profile. It does not show the residual risk or the risk appetite, which are more relevant and important for the management approval.

Effectiveness and efficiency of controls is a measure of how well the controls achieve their intended objectives and how well they use the available resources8. It is a part of the risk performance information, but it does not provide a complete or balanced view of the risk profile. It does not show the residual risk or the risk appetite, which are more significant and meaningful for the management approval.

Inherent risk and risk tolerance are related but different concepts from residual risk and risk appetite. Inherent risk is the level of risk that exists before the implementation of risk responses3. Risk tolerance is the acceptable variation or deviation from the risk appetite or the risk objectives5. They are useful for the risk assessment and analysis, but they do not provide the current or desired state of the risk profile. They do not show the residual risk or the risk appetite, which are more critical and valuable for the management approval.

References =

Risk Profile - CIO Wiki

Risk Profile: Definition, Example, and How to Create One

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

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

Preventive and Detective Controls - CIO Wiki

Control Effectiveness and Efficiency - CIO Wiki

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 thedelay 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, Question241. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 241. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 241.

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 best indicator to senior management that IT processes are improving is the changes in the position in the maturity model. A maturity model is a framework that defines the levels of capability and performance of a process, such as IT processes, based on the criteria such as governance, management, control, measurement, and improvement. A maturity model can help to assess the current state and the desired state of the IT processes, and to identify the gaps, strengths, and opportunities for improvement. A maturity model can also help to communicate the progress and the value of the IT processes to the senior management, and to support the strategic alignment and integration of the IT processes with the business objectives. Changes in the position in the maturity model indicate that the IT processes are improving, as they show that the IT processes are moving from a lower level to a higher level of maturity, and that they are achieving higher standards of quality, efficiency, and effectiveness. Changes in the number of intrusions detected, changes in the number of security exceptions, and changes to the structure of the risk register are not as good as changes in the position in the maturity model, as they do not provide a comprehensive and consistent measure of the IT processes improvement, and they may not reflect the actual impact and performance of the IT processes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

The best approach to ensure the effectiveness of risk awareness training is to create modules for targeted audiences. This means that the risk awareness training should be customized and tailored to the specific needs, roles, and responsibilities of different groups of staff, such as business owners, process owners, IT staff, or external parties. Creating modules for targeted audiences helps to ensure that the risk awareness training is relevant, engaging, and applicable to the participants, and that it covers the appropriate level of detail and complexity. It also helps to enhance the learning outcomes and retention of the risk awareness training, and to foster a culture of risk awareness and responsibility within the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 2491

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk. They enable ongoing monitoring of emerging risk by alerting the organization when the risk level exceeds thepredefined threshold or tolerance. By using KRIs, the organization can track the changes in the risk environment and take timely and appropriate actions to mitigate or avoid the risk.

Helping an organization identify emerging threats, benchmarking the organization’s risk profile, and identifying trends in the organization’s vulnerabilities are all possible uses of KRIs, but they are not the primary benefit. The primary benefit is to enable ongoing monitoring of emerging risk, which encompasses all these aspects and more. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, page 27-281

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]

 The most important factor when deciding on a control to mitigate risk exposure is the cost-benefit analysis. This is a process that compares the costs and benefits of implementing a control, and determines whether the control is worth the investment. A cost-benefit analysis helps to ensure that the control is efficient and effective in reducing the risk to an acceptable level, and that it does not introduce new risks or adversely affect other objectives. A cost-benefit analysis also helps to prioritize the controls based on their value and feasibility, and to allocate the resources accordingly. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.5, page 1861

Software as a service (SaaS) is a cloud computing model that provides software applications over the internet, without requiring the customer to install or maintain them on their own devices1. SaaS applicationscan offer many benefits, such as scalability, accessibility, and cost-efficiency, but they also pose security risks, such as data breaches, unauthorized access, and compliance violations2.

One of the best ways to protect an organization against breaches when using a SaaS application is to use data loss prevention (DLP) tools. DLP tools are software solutions that monitor, detect,and prevent the unauthorized transmission or leakage of sensitive data from an organization’s network or devices3. DLP tools can help an organization to:

Identify and classify sensitive data, such as personal information, intellectual property, or financial records, and apply appropriate policies and controls to protect them

Encrypt data in transit and at rest, and use secure protocols and encryption keys to ensure data confidentiality and integrity

Block or alert on suspicious or malicious data transfers, such as unauthorized uploads, downloads, or sharing of data to external sources or devices

Audit and report on data activities and incidents, and provide evidence for compliance with data protection regulations and standards, such as GDPR, HIPAA, or PCI-DSS4

References = What is SaaS?, Top 7 SaaS Security Risks (and How to Fix Them), What is Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?, Data Loss Prevention (DLP) for SaaS Applications

The most effective way to incorporate stakeholder concerns when developing risk scenarios is to evaluate the risk impact. Risk impact is the extent of the potential consequences or losses that may result from arisk event. Evaluating the risk impact involves considering the stakeholder concerns, expectations, and perspectives, as they may have different views on the value of the assets, the severity of the threats, and the acceptability of the outcomes. Evaluating the risk impact can help to ensure that the risk scenarios reflect the stakeholder interests and priorities, and that the risk responses are aligned with the stakeholder objectives. Establishing key performance indicators (KPIs), conducting internal audits, and creating quarterly risk reports are not as effective as evaluating the risk impact, as they are not directly related to the development of risk scenarios, and may not capture the stakeholder concerns adequately. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

The best approach to bring your own device (BYOD) service delivery that provides the best protection from data loss is to enforce strong passwords and data encryption. BYOD is a service delivery model that allows the users to use their own personal devices, such as smartphones, tablets, or laptops, to access the enterprise’s network, applications, or data. BYOD can provide various benefits, such as increased productivity, flexibility, and satisfaction of the users, as well as reduced costs and maintenance of the enterprise. However, BYOD also poses various risks, such as data loss, data breach, malware infection, or unauthorized access, as the personal devices may not have the same level of security and control as the enterprise-owned devices. Enforcing strong passwords and data encryption is the best approach to protect the data on the personal devices, as it helps to prevent or limit the unauthorized access, disclosure, or theft of the data, especially if the devices are lost, stolen, or compromised. Enforcing strong passwords and data encryption also helps to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements for data protection and privacy. Enabling data wipe capabilities, penetration testing and session timeouts, and implementing remote monitoring are also useful approaches, but they are not as effective as enforcing strong passwords and data encryption, as they are either reactive or detective measures, rather than proactive or preventive measures. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

Production data is the data that is used in the actual operation of a system or application, such as customer information, financial records, transactions, etc.

Test data is the data that is used in the testing or development of a system or application, such as dummy data, sample data, simulated data, etc.

A risk practitioner has become aware of production data being used in a test environment. This indicates that there is a risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction of the production data, which may affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data.

The primary concern of the risk practitioner in this situation is the sensitivity of the data. This means that the risk practitioner should assess how valuable, critical, or confidential the data is, and what would be the impact or consequence if the data is compromised or lost.

The sensitivity of the data helps to determine the level of protection and control that is needed to safeguard the data, and the priority and urgency of the risk response actions.

The other options are not the primary concerns of the risk practitioner in this situation. They are either secondary or not essential for data protection.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 32

Information Technology & Security, page 26

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 24

 Cross-site scripting (XSS) and SQL injection are two common types of web application attacks that can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data and systems. XSS allows an attacker to inject malicious code into a web page that is viewed by other users, while SQL injection allows an attacker to execute arbitrary commands on a database server by manipulating the input parameters of a web application. Both attacks can result in data theft, unauthorized access, defacement, denial of service, and more.

To mitigate these attacks, the best option is to require the software vendor to remediate the vulnerabilities by applying secure coding practices, such as input validation, output encoding, parameterized queries, and HTML sanitization. These techniques can prevent or limit the impact of XSS and SQL injection by ensuring that user input is not interpreted as code or commands by the web browser or the database server. The software vendor should also provide regular updates and patches to fix any known or newly discovered vulnerabilities.

The other options are not effective or acceptable ways to mitigate these attacks. Monitoring the databases for abnormal activity can help detect and respond to SQL injection attacks, but it does not prevent them from happening or address the root cause of the vulnerability. Approving an exception to allow the software to continue operating can expose the organization to unnecessary risks and liabilities, as well as violate compliance requirements and standards. Accepting the risk and letting the vendor run the software as is can also have serious consequences for the organization, as it implies that the potential impact and likelihood of the attacks are low or acceptable, which may not be the case. References =

IT Risk Resources | ISACA

CRISC Certification | Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control | ISACA

Cross Site Scripting Prevention Cheat Sheet - OWASP

A novel technique to prevent SQL injection and cross-site scripting attacks using Knuth-Morris-Pratt string match algorithm | EURASIP Journal on Information Security | Full Text

Difference Between XSS and SQL Injection - GeeksforGeeks

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the primary objective of providing an aggregated view of IT risk to business management is to enable consistent data on risk to be obtained, because it helps to ensure that the risk information is comparable, reliable, and accurate across the organization. An aggregated view of IT risk is a consolidated and comprehensive representation of the IT risk exposure and impact at the enterprise level, based on the risk identification, analysis, and evaluation processes. Providing an aggregated view of IT risk to business management allows them to understand the overall IT risk profile and performance, and to make informed decisions about the risk management strategies and priorities. The other options are not the primary objective of providing an aggregated view of IT risk, as they are related to other benefits or outcomes of the risk aggregation process. Allowing for proper review of risk tolerance is the objective of establishing the risk context, which defines the scope and boundaries of the risk management activities. Identifying dependencies for reporting risk is the outcome of the risk aggregation process, as it provides a clear and consistent structure and format for the risk communication and reporting. Providing consistent and clear terminology is the objective of developing the risk taxonomy, which is the system of classification and categorization of risks based on common characteristics and attributes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, page 69.

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

 The best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the effectiveness of a disaster recovery test of critical business processes is the percentage of processes recovered within the recovery time and point objectives. Recovery time objective (RTO) is the maximum acceptable time period within which a business process or an IT service must be restored after a disruption. Recovery point objective (RPO) is the maximum acceptable amount of data loss measured in time before the disruption. The percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO indicates how well the disaster recovery test meets the business continuity and recovery requirements and expectations, and how effectively the disaster recovery plan and procedures are executed. The percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO canalso help to identify the gaps, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement in the disaster recovery capabilities. Percentage of job failures identified and resolved during the recovery process, number of current test plans and procedures, and number of issues and action items resolved during the recovery test are not as good as the percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO, as they do not directly measure the achievement of the recovery objectives, and may not reflect the actual impact and performance of the disaster recovery test. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 130.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the primary reason to periodically review key performance indicators (KPIs) is to identify trends, because it helps to monitor the changes and patterns in the performance and effectiveness of the risk management processes and controls. KPIs are metrics that measure the achievement of the objectives and targets of the risk management activities. Periodically reviewing KPIs allows the organization to evaluate the progress and results of the risk management strategies and actions, and to identify any gaps, issues, or opportunities for improvement. The other options are not the primary reason to periodically review KPIs, as they are related to other aspects or outcomes of the risk management process. Ensuring compliance is the reason to review key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the occurrence of risk events.Promoting a risk-aware culture is the reason to review key goal indicators (KGIs), which are metrics that measure the alignment of the risk management with the business goals and values. Optimizing resources needed for controls is the reason to review key control indicators(KCIs), which are metrics that measure the efficiency and adequacy of the risk controls. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 143.

 A risk portfolio is a collection of risks that an organization faces or may face in the future. Analyzing trends in key control indicators (KCIs) best enables a risk practitioner to proactively identify impacts on an organization’s risk portfolio, as KCIs measure and monitor the performance and effectiveness of the risk controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks. By analyzing the trends in KCIs, a risk practitioner can assess the current and potential risk exposure of the organization, and identify any changes or emerging risks that may affect the risk portfolio. Analyzing trends in KCIs can also help to evaluate the cost and benefit of the risk controls, and to determine the need for enhancing, modifying, or implementing new controls. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 246. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 246. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

Determining the impact of the missing threat is the best course of action for a peer review of a risk assessment, as it helps to assess the potential consequences and severity of the threat on the information system and the business objectives. Determining the impact of the missing threat is a process of estimating and quantifying the possible harm or loss that could result from the occurrence of the threat event, such as data breach, system failure, or service disruption. Determining the impact of the missing threat can help to:

Identify and prioritize the critical assets, processes, and functions that could be affected by the threat

Evaluate and measure the extent and magnitude of the damage or disruption caused by the threat

Analyze and compare the current and residual risk levels and control effectiveness

Develop and implement appropriate risk response and mitigation strategies and actions

Communicate and report the risk exposure and status to the relevant stakeholders

Determining the impact of the missing threat is an essential step to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the risk assessment and to improve the quality and reliability of the risk management and control processes.

The other options are not the best courses of action for a peer review of a risk assessment. Asking the business to make a budget request to remediate the problem is a possible action to allocate the resources and costs for the risk mitigation, but it does not address the root cause or the severity of the problem. Building a business case to remediate the fix is a possible action to justify and support the risk mitigation, but it does not provide a clear and comprehensive analysis of the problem. Researching the types of attacks the threat can present is a possible action to understand and anticipate the threat scenarios andtechniques, but it does not evaluate the actual or potential impact of the threat. References = Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Peer Review Assessment Framework

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the organization’s culture is the most critical element to maximize the potential for a successful security implementation, because it influences the behavior, attitude, and perception of the stakeholders towards security. The organization’s culture includes the values, beliefs, norms, and practices that are shared by the members of the organization. A positive and supportive culture can foster the awareness, commitment, and collaboration of the stakeholders in achieving the security objectives and complying with the security policies and standards. The other options are not the most critical elements, as they are less influential or less challenging than the organization’s culture. The organization’s knowledge is the collective understanding and expertise of the organization regardingsecurity, which can be enhanced through training and education. Ease of implementation is the degree of difficulty and complexity of implementing security, which can be reduced by using appropriate methods and tools. Industry-leading security tools are the best-in-class solutions and technologies that can provide effective and efficient security, which can be acquired through market research and evaluation. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 32.

Risk treatment options are the actions or plans that are implemented to modify or reduce the risk exposure of the organization. Risk treatment options receive adequate funding when the organization allocatessufficient resources and budget to support the risk response actions, and to ensure that the risk controls are effective and efficient. This is the best evidence that risk management is driving business decisions in the organization, as it shows that the organizationprioritizes and values the risk management process, and that it aligns its risk strategy and objectives with its business goals and value creation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 245. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 245. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 245.

Reviewing historical risk events is most useful for the risk assessment process within the risk management life cycle. Risk assessment is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that may affect the project or the organization1. Reviewing historical risk events can help to:

Identify the sources, causes, and consequences of past risks and learn from the successes and failures of previous projects or organizations

Analyze the likelihood and impact of potential risks based on historical data and trends, and use statistical methods or models to estimate the probability and severity of risk scenarios

Evaluate the level of risk exposure and compare it with the risk appetite and tolerance of the project or the organization, and prioritize the risks that need further attention or action

Use historical risk events as inputs or examples for risk identification and analysis techniques, such as brainstorming, checklists, interviews, surveys, SWOT analysis, root cause analysis, or Monte Carlo simulation2

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

The risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their analysis, and their responses. It is a useful tool for monitoring and controlling the risks throughout the project lifecycle. However, the risk register is not a static document and it should be updated regularly to reflect the changes in the risk environment and the project status. Therefore, when reviewing the risk register, a risk practitioner should not only look at the risk ratings, but also the assumptions and the rationale behind them. Different business units may have different perspectives, contexts, and data sources for the same risk scenario, which can result in significant variances in inherent risk. Inherent risk is the risk level before considering the existing controls or responses. Therefore, the best course of action is to review the assumptions of both risk scenarios to determine whether the variance is reasonable or not. This can help to identify any errors, inconsistencies, or biases in the risk assessment process, and to ensure that the risk register reflects the current and accurate state of the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, p. 106-107

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 addressthe primary need of improving the quality and reliability of the risk analysis results. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

The primary goal of conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) as part of an overall continuity planning process is to identify critical business processes and the degree of reliance on support services. A BIA is a process of assessing the potential impact and consequences of a disruption or interruption of the business activities, operations, or functions. A continuity planning process is a process of developing, implementing, and maintaining a plan to ensure the continuity and recovery of the business activities, operations, or functions in the event of a disruption or interruption. The primary goal of conducting a BIA is to identify critical business processes and the degree of reliance on support services, which are the business processes that are essential for the survival and success of the business, and the support services that are required to enable or facilitate the critical business processes, such as IT systems, human resources, facilities, or suppliers. Identifying critical business processes and the degree of reliance on support services helps to determine the priorities and requirements for the continuity and recovery of the business activities, operations, or functions, and to select and implement the appropriate continuity andrecovery strategies and solutions. Obtaining the support of executive management, mapping the business processes to supporting IT and other corporate resources, and documenting the disaster recovery process are not the primary goals of conducting a BIA, as they are either the benefits or the outputs of the BIA process, and they do not address the primary need of assessing the impact and consequences of the business disruption or interruption. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how IT-related risks can affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or assets1. IT risk scenarios help to make IT risk more concrete and tangible, and to enable proper risk analysis and assessment2. IT risk scenarios are developed after IT risks are identified, and are used as inputs for risk analysis, where the frequency and impact of the scenarios are estimated3.

The most important factor to the successful development of IT risk scenarios is threat and vulnerability analysis. Threat and vulnerability analysis is the process of identifying and evaluating the potential sources and causes of IT risks, such as malicious actors, natural disasters, human errors, or technical failures4. Threat and vulnerability analysis can help to:

Define the scope and boundaries of the IT risk scenarios, and ensure that they are relevant and realistic

Identify the critical assets, processes, or functions that are exposed or affected by the IT risks, and assess their value and importance to the organization

Determine the likelihood and methods of the threat events, and the existing or potential weaknesses or gaps in the IT control environment

Estimate the potential consequences and impacts of the IT risks, such as financial losses, operational disruptions, reputational damages, or compliance violations5

References = IT Scenario Analysis in Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA, IT Risk Scenarios - Morland-Austin, Threat and Vulnerability Analysis - Wikipedia, Threat and Vulnerability Analysis - ISACA

 The most important consideration when implementing ethical remote work monitoring is to inform the employees of how they are being monitored, because this respects their privacy rights and expectations, and ensures their consent and compliance with the monitoring policy. Informing the employees of how they are being monitored also helps to build trust and transparency between the employer and the employees, and reduces the potential legal or ethical issues that may arise from the monitoring activities. The other options are not the most important considerations, although they may also be relevant for ethical remote work monitoring. Monitoring only during official hours of business, reporting on nonproductive employees to management, and integrating multiple data monitoring sources into security incident response procedures are examples of operational or technical aspects of remote work monitoring, notethical aspects. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

An internal data access policy is a set of rules and guidelines that define who, how, when, and why the users can access, use, share, or modify the data stored in a business application system, based on the data classification, sensitivity, and ownership.

Enforcing an internal data access policy is the most appropriate way to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system. This means that the organization implements and maintains effective controls to ensure that only the authorized users can access the confidential information, and that the access is logged and monitored for compliance and security purposes.

The other options are not the most appropriate ways to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system. They are either secondary or not essential for data access control.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 28

Information Technology & Security, page 22

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 20

The next step for the risk practitioner after identifying risk owners and responses for newly identified risk scenarios is to update the risk register with the results. The risk register is a document that records the details of the risks, such as their sources, causes, consequences, likelihood, impact, and responses. By updating the risk register with the results of the risk workshop, the risk practitioner can ensure that the risk information is current, accurate, and complete, and that the risk owners and responses are clearly defined and communicated. Developing a mechanism for monitoring residual risk, preparing a business case for the response options, and identifying resources for implementing responses are possible steps that may follow the updating of the risk register, but they are not the next step. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

 Understanding vulnerabilities associated with the use of the assets is the primary reason for a risk practitioner to review an organization’s IT asset inventory, as it helps to identify and assess the potential threats and risks to the assets. The other options are not the primary reasons for a risk practitioner to review an organization’s IT asset inventory, although they may be related to the process.

Granting remote access to a system containing sensitive data to an overseas third party poses various risks to the organization, such as data breaches, unauthorized access, data loss, compliance violations, or reputational damage. The greatest concern to management when granting remote access to a third party is the lack of monitoring over vendor activities, meaning that the organization may not be able to control or verify how the third party is accessing, using, storing, or transferring the sensitive data. The lack of monitoring over vendor activities can increase the risk exposure and uncertainty of the organization, as well as reduce the accountability and transparency of the third party. Therefore, the organization should implement appropriate measures to monitor and audit the vendor activities, such as logging, reporting, reviewing, or testing, and to ensure that the vendor complies with the contractual obligations and the security policies and standards of the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2.1, p. 243-244

An IT risk threat analysis is best used to establish risk scenarios. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that may affect the achievement of the IT objectives. A risk scenario consists of three elements: a threat, a vulnerability, and an impact. A threat is a potential cause of an unwanted incident. A vulnerability is a weakness or flaw that can be exploited by a threat. An impact is the consequence or effect of the incident on the IT objectives. An IT risk threat analysis is a technique that identifies and evaluates the threats that may pose a risk to the IT assets and processes. An IT risk threat analysis can help to establish risk scenarios by providing the information and context for the threat element of the risk scenario. The other options are not as directly related to an IT risk threat analysis, as they are related to the outcomes, measures, or responsibilities of the IT risk management process, not the inputs or sources of the IT risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.