CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Questions and Answers

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures the level and trend of a risk that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance1. A KRI threshold is a predefined value or range that indicates the acceptable or tolerable level of risk for the organization2. The organization’s risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that it is willing to take in order to meet its strategic goals3. Therefore, the most likely reason for senior management’s response is that the KRI threshold needs to be revised to better align with the organization’s risk appetite. This means that the current threshold is either too low or too high, resulting in false alarms or missed signals. By adjusting the threshold to reflect the organization’s risk appetite, senior management can ensure that the KRI provides relevant and actionable information for risk management and decision making. The other options are not the most likely reasons for senior management’s response, as they imply that the KRI is faulty, irrelevant, or misunderstood. The underlying data source for the KRI is using inaccurate data and needs to be corrected. This option assumes that the KRI is based on erroneous or unreliable data, which would affect its validity and reliability. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to verify the data quality and accuracy before using the KRI for risk monitoring and reporting. The KRI is not providing useful information and should be removed from the KRI inventory. This option assumes that the KRI is not aligned with the organization’s objectives, strategies, or risk profile, which would affect its usefulness and value. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to review and update the KRI inventory periodically to ensure that the KRIs are relevant and meaningful for risk management. Senior management does not understand the KRI and should undergo risk training. This option assumes that senior management lacks the knowledge or skills to interpret and use the KRI for risk management, which would affect their competence and confidence. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to have sufficient risk awareness and education to understand and apply the KRI for risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.4, Page 53.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

Detailed Explanation:Thelatest security assessmentprovides a detailed evaluation of the control’s performance and identifies gaps or weaknesses. This is critical for determining the effectiveness of a system security control in mitigating threats.

Mean time between failures (MTBF) is a key performance indicator (KPI) that measures the average time that a system or component operates without interruption or failure. MTBF is a common metric for reliability and availability of IT services. A higher MTBF indicates a lower frequency of failures and a higher ability to deliver uninterrupted IT services. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, MTBF is one of the KPIs for IT service delivery1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, MTBF is the correct answer to this question2.

Mean time to recover (MTTR), planned downtime, and unplanned downtime are not the best KPIs to measure the ability to deliver uninterrupted IT services. MTTR measures the average time that it takes to restore a system or component to normal operation after a failure. Planned downtime measures the scheduled time that a system or component is not available for use due to maintenance or upgrades. Unplanned downtime measures the unscheduled time that a system or component is not available for use due to failures or incidents. These KPIs are useful for measuring the impact and duration of service interruptions, but they do not directly reflect the ability to prevent or avoid service interruptions.

A critical patch is a software update that fixes a security vulnerability or a bug that may affect the performance, functionality, or reliability of a system or a network. A critical patch implementation is a process that applies the software update to the system or network in a timely and effective manner. The failure of a critical patch implementation is a situation where the software update is not applied or not applied correctly, which may expose the system or network to various threats, such as data theft, data corruption, data leakage, or denial of service. The failure of a critical patch implementation would be reflected in an organization’s risk profile by increasing the residual risk. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response, which means the risk that is not avoided, transferred, or mitigated by the existing controls or measures. The failure of a critical patch implementation would increase the residual risk, as it would reduce the effectiveness or efficiency of the existing controls or measures that are supposed to address the security vulnerability or the bug. The failure of a critical patch implementation would also increase the likelihood or impact of the potential threats, as well as the exposure or consequences of the system or network. The other options are not the correct changes that would be reflected in an organization’s risk profile after the failure of a critical patch implementation, although they may be affected or related. Risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is not willing to accept. Risk tolerance may be decreased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the organization may become more cautious or conservative in accepting the risk, but it is not a direct or immediate change in the risk profile. Inherent risk is the risk that exists in the absence of any controls or measures, which means the risk that is inherent to the system or network or the environment. Inherent risk may be increased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the system or network may become more vulnerable or susceptible to the threats, but it is not a change in the risk profile, as the risk profile considers the existing controls or measures. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite may be decreasedby the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the organization may become less willing orable to accept the risk, but it is not a change in the risk profile, as the risk profile reflects the actual or current risk level, not the desired or expected risk level. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 972; What is a Critical Patch? - Definition from Techopedia3; What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia4

Artificial intelligence (AI) solutions can offer significant benefits to an organization, such as improved efficiency, accuracy, and innovation. However, AI also poses new challenges and risks that need to be considered and addressed by senior management. Some of these risks include:

Ethical and social risks: AI solutions may have unintended or undesirable impacts on human values, rights, and behaviors, such as privacy, fairness, accountability, and transparency. For example, AI systems may exhibit bias, discrimination, or manipulation, or may infringe on personal data or autonomy.

Technical and operational risks: AI solutions may have vulnerabilities, errors, or failures that affect their performance, reliability, or security. For example, AI systems may be subject to hacking, tampering, or misuse, or may malfunction or produce inaccurate or harmful outcomes.

Legal and regulatory risks: AI solutions may have unclear or conflicting legal or regulatory implications or obligations, such as liability, compliance, or governance. For example, AI systems may raise questions about ownership, responsibility, or accountability, or may violate existing laws or regulations, or create new ones.

Therefore, a risk practitioner should communicate to senior management that AI potentially introduces new types of risk that need to be identified, assessed, and managed in alignment with the organization’s objectives, values, and risk appetite. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 113.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: The Control Process | Principles of Management4

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Providing actionable recommendations and solutions to address the identified risks

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

References =

The Importance of Integrating Risk Management with Strategy

Four steps for managing risk at the CEO level

5 Key Principles of Successful Risk Management

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a root cause analysis is a technique that identifies the underlying causes of an event or a problem. It helps to determine the most effective actions to prevent or mitigate the recurrence of the event or problem. A root cause analysis is the best approach for the risk practitioner to take in this scenario, because it will help to understand why the number of emergency changes has increased substantially and what can be done to address the issue. The other options are not the best approaches, because they do not address the underlying causes of the problem. Temporarily suspending emergency changes may disrupt the business operations and create more risks. Documenting the control deficiency in the risk register is a passive action that does not resolve the problem. Continuing monitoring change management metrics is an ongoing activity that does not provide any insight into the problem. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.4, page 130.

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

A heat map is a graphical representation of the organization’s risk profile that shows the relative level of risk for each risk category or event. A heat map uses colors, shapes, or symbols to indicate the magnitude and likelihood of each risk, as well as its trend and status. A heat map offers the simplest overview of changes in the organization’s risk profile, as it allows the risk decision-makers to quickly identify the most significant risks, theareas of improvement or deterioration, and the gaps or overlaps in risk management. A heat map can also be used to communicate the risk profile to senior management and other stakeholders in a clear and concise manner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Risk Assessment Methods and Techniques, Page 77; Future Risks: How organizations see changes in risk management - Aon.

 The primary role of a data custodian in the risk management process is to ensure that data is protected according to the classification. A data custodian is a person or entity that has the responsibility for implementing and maintaining the security controls for the data, such as access rights, encryption, backup, or disposal. A data custodian acts as an agent of the data owner, who is the person or entity that has the authority and accountability for the data. A data custodian should ensure that data is protected according to the classification, which is the process of assigning a level of sensitivity and criticality to the data, based on the impact of its loss, disclosure, or modification. Data classification helps to determine the appropriate security controls and risk responses for the data, and to comply with the relevant laws, regulations, or contractual obligations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 1271

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

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

A three lines of defense structure is a model that defines the roles and responsibilities of different functions and levels within an organization for risk management and control. The first line of defense is the operational management, which is responsible for owning and managing the risks. The second line of defense is the risk management and compliance functions, which are responsible for overseeing and supporting the risk management processes. The third line of defense is the internal audit function, which is responsible for providing independent assurance on the effectiveness of the risk management and control systems. The greatest benefit of a three lines of defense structure is that it provides clear accountability for risk management processes, as it clarifies who is responsible for what, and how they interact and communicate with each other. This can help to avoid duplication, confusion, or gaps in the risk management activities, and ensure that the risks are properly identified, assessed, treated, monitored, and reported. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 107.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 User Access Management:

Effective user access management ensures that accounts are properly created, managed, and disabled to prevent unauthorized access.

Monitoring the percentage of accounts disabled within the SLA helps ensure that the organization responds promptly to changes in user status, reducing the risk of unauthorized access.

 Importance of KPI:

This KPI measures the efficiency and effectiveness of the user access management process by tracking how quickly accounts are disabled when no longer needed.

A high percentage indicates timely action, reducing the risk of orphaned accounts being exploited.

 Comparing Other KPIs:

Proportion of End Users Having More Than One Account:Useful but not directly related to the timeliness of disabling accounts.

Proportion of Privileged to Non-Privileged Accounts:Important for monitoring privilege distribution but does not measure process efficiency.

Percentage of Accounts Not Activated:Indicates potential inefficiencies but does not address the risk of active accounts.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual highlights the importance of timely account management to mitigate access risks (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.3 User Access Management)​​.

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

A consolidated view into the organization’s risk profile is a comprehensive and integrated representation of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

The most helpful material to provide a consolidated view into the organization’s risk profile is the IT risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the IT-related risks, their sources, impacts, likelihoods, responses, owners, and statuses within the organization34.

The IT risk register is the most helpful material because it provides a complete and consistent overview of the IT risk landscape, and enables the identification, analysis, evaluation, treatment, monitoring, and communication of IT risks across the organization34.

The IT risk register is also the most helpful material because it supports the project prioritization and resource allocation decisions, by highlighting the most significant and relevant IT risks, and by showing the alignment of the IT risk responses with the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, and objectives34.

The other options are not the most helpful materials, but rather possible inputs or outputs of the IT risk register. For example:

A list of key risk indicators (KRIs) is a set of metrics that measure the occurrence or status of IT risks, and provide timely and relevant information and feedback to the organization56. However, a list of KRIs is not the most helpful material because it does not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a snapshot or a trend of selected IT risks56.

Internal audit reports are documents that present the findings and recommendations of the internal audit function, which evaluates the adequacy and effectiveness of the IT risk management and control processes within the organization78. However, internal audit reports are not the most helpful material because they do not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a periodic and independent assessment of specific IT risk areas78.

A list of approved projects is a document that records and tracks the IT projects that have been authorized and funded by the organization, and their objectives, scope, schedule, budget, and status . However, a list of approved projects is not the most helpful material because it does not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a summary of the IT project portfolio . References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: IT Risk Register Template, ISACA, 2019

4: IT Risk Register Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

5: KPIs for Security Operations & Incident Response, SecurityScorecard Blog, June 7, 2021

6: Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Security Operations and Incident Response, DFLabs White Paper, 2018

7: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

8: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

IT Project Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

IT Project Management Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2018

A 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.

References: CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question216; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 216.

The greatest concern of maintaining independent departmental risk registers that are not automatically aggregated is that management may be unable to accurately evaluate the risk profile. The risk profile is the overall view of the risks that the organization faces and their impact on the organization’s objectives. It helps management to prioritize and allocate resources for risk management and to align the risk appetite and strategy. If the departmental risk registers are not aggregated, management may not have a complete and consistent picture of the risks across the organization. They may miss some important risks, overestimate or underestimate some risks, or have conflicting or redundant risk information. This may lead to poor risk management decisions and outcomes. The other options are also concerns, but they are not as critical as the inability to evaluate the risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2: IT Risk Analysis, page 63.

Least privilege is the best way to reduce the likelihood of an individual performing a potentially harmful action as the result of unnecessary entitlement, because it limits the access and permissions of the individual to the minimum level that is required to perform their role or function, and prevents the individual from accessing or modifying the resources or data that are not relevant or authorized. An entitlement is a right or privilege that grants an individual the ability to access or use a resource or data, such as a file, a system, or an application. An unnecessary entitlement is an entitlement that is not needed or justified for the individual’s role or function, and may pose a risk of unauthorized or inappropriate access or use of the resource or data. A potentially harmful action is an action that may cause harm or damage to the organization or its objectives, such as a data breach, a fraud, or a sabotage. Least privilege is the best way, as it helps to minimize the exposure and impact of the unnecessary entitlement, and to reduce the likelihood and severity of the potentially harmful action. Application monitoring, separation of duty, and nonrepudiation are all possible ways to reduce the likelihoodof an individual performing a potentially harmful action as the result of unnecessary entitlement, but they are not the best way, as they do not directly address the unnecessary entitlement, and may not prevent the potentially harmful action. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 200

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control documents, the risk practitioner should conclude that no action is required as there was no impact. The fact that there have been no interruptions to business operations despite the increasing hardware failure incidents indicates that the built-in redundancy and fault-tolerant architecture are effective in ensuring continuity.

Options A and C are not necessary in this scenario. A root cause analysis (Option A) might be considered if there were actual interruptions or impact on business operations. However, since there were no interruptions, a root cause analysis may not be immediately required. Similarly, upgrading hardware (Option C) may not be necessary if the existing controls are effectively preventing business disruptions.

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual

A data privacy officer is a role that is responsible for ensuring that the organization complies with the applicable laws, regulations, and standards regarding the collection, processing, storage, and disclosure of customer data1. A data privacy officer is also responsible for developing and implementing policies, procedures, and controls to protect the privacy and security of customer data, and to prevent or mitigate the risk of customer data loss2. A data privacy officer is the most helpful role in providing a high-level view of risk related to customer data loss, because:

A data privacy officer has the knowledge and expertise of the legal and ethical requirements and best practices for customer data protection, and can identify and assess the potential threats and vulnerabilities that may compromise customer data3.

A data privacy officer has the authority and accountability to oversee and monitor the customer data lifecycle, and to ensure that the organization follows the principles of data minimization, purpose limitation, accuracy, integrity, confidentiality, and accountability4.

A data privacy officer has the visibility and communication skills to report and advise the management and other stakeholders on the customer data risk profile, and to recommend and implement appropriate risk responses and improvement actions5.

The other options are not the most helpful roles in providing a high-level view of risk related to customer data loss, because:

A customer database manager is a role that is responsible for designing, developing, maintaining, and optimizing the database systems that store and manage customer data6. A customer database manager may have some technical skills and knowledge to protect the customer data from unauthorized access, modification, or deletion, but may not have the comprehensive or holistic view of the customer data risk, as they may focus only on the database level, and not on the organizational or regulatory level.

A customer data custodian is a role that is responsible for handling, processing, and storing customer data according to the instructions and permissions of the data owner7. A customer data custodian may have some operational duties and responsibilities to safeguard the customer data from accidental or intentional loss, damage, or disclosure, but may not have the strategic or analyticalview of the customer data risk, as they may follow only the predefined rules and procedures, and not the risk management principles and practices.

An audit committee is a group of independent directors or members that is responsible for overseeing and evaluating the organization’s financial reporting, internal control, and audit functions. An audit committee may have some oversight and assurance roles and responsibilities to review and verify the organization’s compliance and performance regarding customer data protection, but may not have the direct or proactive view of the customer data risk, as they may rely only on the audit reports and findings, and not on the risk assessment and analysis.

References =

Data Privacy Officer - CIO Wiki

What is a Data Protection Officer (DPO)? - Definition from Techopedia

Data Privacy Officer: Roles and Responsibilities - ISACA

Data Protection Principles - CIO Wiki

Data Privacy Officer: How to Be One and Why You Need One - ISACA

Database Manager - CIO Wiki

Data Custodian - CIO Wiki

[Audit Committee - CIO Wiki]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk Assessment for the Production Process1

2: Risk Assessment for Industrial Equipment2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

The ultimate objective of utilizing key control indicators (KCIs) in the risk management process is to provide early warning signs of a potential change in risk level, as they indicate the performance and adequacy of the controls, and alert the stakeholders to any control gaps or deficiencies that may affect the risk exposure and impact. The other options are not the ultimate objectives, as they are more related to the insight, basis, or benchmark of the risk management process, respectively, rather than the early warning sign of the risk management process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

A RACI matrix clearly defines roles and responsibilities, making it the primary reference for identifying accountability. This aligns withRisk Governance Practicesfor clarifying ownership.

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.

References:

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

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the percentage of systems with long recovery target times has decreased is the information that would have the most impact on the overall recovery profile, as it indicates that the organization has improved its ability to restore its critical systems and processes within the acceptable time frames after a disaster. The recovery target time, also known as the recovery time objective (RTO), is the maximum acceptable time that an application, computer, network, or system can be down after an unexpected disaster, failure, or comparable event takes place. The recovery profile, also known as the recovery point objective (RPO), is the maximum acceptable amount of data loss measured in time. A lower percentage of systems with long recovery target times means that the organization has:

Reduced the gap between the business requirements and the IT capabilities for disaster recovery

Enhanced the resilience and availability of its critical systems and processes

Minimized the potential losses and damages caused by prolonged downtime

Increased the confidence and satisfaction of its stakeholders and customers

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

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

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

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

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

Implement compensating controls until the preferred action can be completed, because it helps to reduce the residual risk to an acceptable level, while allowing the preferred action to be delayed or postponed. A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions and resources required to implement the chosen risk response strategy for a specific risk. A risk response strategy is a course of action that is selected to address a risk, such as avoid, transfer, mitigate, or accept. A compensating control is a control that provides an alternative or additional measure of protection or assurance, when the primary or preferred control is not feasible or effective. Implementing compensating controls is the best approach, as it helps to maintain the risk management process and objectives, and to avoid or minimize the negative consequences of the delay or postponement of the preferred action.

Developing additional key risk indicators (KRIs), replacing the action owner with a more experienced individual, and changing the risk response strategy of the relevant risk to risk avoidance are all possible approaches when a risk treatment plan cannot be completed on time, but they are not the best approach, as they may not address the residual risk level, and they may introduce new risks or issues.

 The most important factor to ensure when reviewing an organization’s risk register is that the risk ownership is recorded, as it indicates the authority and responsibility for managing the risk and its associated controls, and facilitates the communication and accountability of the risk management process and activities. The other options are not the most important factors, as they are more related to theidentification, classification, or measurement of the risk, respectively, rather than the management of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

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.

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

The risk practitioner’s first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls should be A. Determine whether the impact is outside the risk appetite1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk culture, strategy, and values2

When an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, it means that the controls are not providing the expected level of protection or assurance for the information assets or processes. This may result in increased exposure or vulnerability to threats, or reduced ability to achieve objectives. Therefore, the risk practitioner should first determine whether the impact of the ineffective controls is outside the risk appetite, as this would indicate the need for urgent action or escalation3

The other options are not the first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, because:

•B. Requesting a formal acceptance of risk from senior management may be appropriate if the impact of the ineffective controls is within the risk appetite, and the organization decides to accept the risk as it is. However, this should not be the first course of action, as it may not address the root cause of the ineffective controls, or the potential consequences or opportunities for improvement4

•C. Reporting the ineffective control for inclusion in the next audit report may be part of the risk communication and reporting process, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may delay the resolution or mitigation of the issue, or the implementation of corrective actions. Moreover, the next audit report may not be timely or relevant for the decision-makers or stakeholders who need to be informed of the ineffective controls5

•D. Deploying a compensating control to address the identified deficiencies may be a possible risk response option, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may require further analysis, evaluation, and approval. Moreover, deploying a compensating control may not be the most effective or efficient solution, as it may introduce additional complexity, cost, or risk.

1: CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 100003 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 28 3: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 223 4: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 224 5: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 225 : CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 226

The most important objective of an enterprise risk management (ERM) program is to create a comprehensive view of critical risk to the organization, as it enables the organization to identify, assess, and prioritize the key risks that may affect its objectives and strategy, and to implement appropriate risk responses and controls. A comprehensive view of critical risk also helps the organization to align its risk appetite and tolerance with its business goals and value creation, and to enhance its risk culture and governance. A comprehensive view of critical risk can be achieved by integrating risk management across all levels and functions of the organization, and by using consistent and reliable risk information and reporting. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 242. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 242. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 242.

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

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

There is no definitive answer to this question, as different factors may be more or less important depending on the context and the nature of the risk. However, based on some web search results, one possible factor that could be considered essential for managing risk in a highly dynamic environment is D. Implementing detection and response measures.

Detection and response measures are the practices and procedures that enable an organization to identify and mitigate any potential or actual cybersecurity events that could compromise its network, systems, data, or assets. Detection and response measures can help an organization to reduce the impact and duration of a cyberattack, as well as to learn from the incident and improve its security posture and resilience. Detection and response measures can also help an organization to comply with regulatory and legal requirements, as well as to maintain its reputation and trust among its stakeholders.

Some examples of detection and response measures include:

•Using threat intelligence, user behavior analytics, and attacker behavior analytics to monitor and analyze the network activity and identify any anomalies or signs of compromise 12

•Implementing security continuous monitoring, intrusion detection and prevention systems, and antivirus and antimalware software to detect and block malicious traffic and malware 3

•Establishing incident response plans, teams, and tools to contain, eradicate, and recover from a cyberattack, as well as to communicate and coordinate with internal and external parties 45

•Conducting regular audits, assessments, and tests to evaluate the effectiveness of the detection and response measures and to identify any gaps or weaknesses 6

Therefore, implementing detection and response measures could be seen as an essential factor for managing risk in a highly dynamic environment, as it can help an organization to protect its critical assets and functions, and to respond quickly and effectively to any emerging or evolving threats.

 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 The primary purpose of a business impact analysis (BIA) is to evaluate the priority of business operations in case of disruption. A BIA is a process that identifies and analyzes the potential effects of various types of disruptions on the enterprise’s critical business functions and processes. A BIA helps to determine the recovery objectives, such as the recovery time objective (RTO) and the recovery point objective (RPO), for each business operation, based on the impact of disruption on the enterprise’s objectives, reputation, compliance, and stakeholders. A BIA also helps to identify the dependencies, resources, and interdependencies of the business operations, and to rank them according to their importance and urgency. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 671

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Control Self Assessments - PwC1

2: Control self-assessment - Wikipedia2

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

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

5: Residual Risk - Definition and Examples5

6: Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management6

7: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

 The primary consideration when implementing controls for monitoring user activity logs is ensuring that the control is proportional to the risk, because this helps to optimize the balance between the benefits and costs of the control, and to avoid over- or under-controlling the risk. User activity logs are records of the actions or events performed by users on IT systems, networks, or resources, such as accessing, modifying, or transferring data or files. Monitoring user activity logs can help to detect and prevent potential threats, such as unauthorized access, data leakage, or malicious activity, and to support the investigation and remediation of incidents. However, monitoring user activity logs also involves certain costs and challenges, such as collecting, storing, analyzing, and reporting large amounts of log data, ensuring the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of the log data, protecting the privacy and security of the log data, and complying with the relevant laws and regulations. Therefore, when implementing controls for monitoring user activity logs, the organization should consider the level and impact of the risk that the control is intended to address, and the value and effectiveness of the control in reducing the risk exposure and impact. The organization should also consider the costs and feasibility of implementing and maintaining the control, and the potential negative consequences or side effects of the control, such as performance degradation, user dissatisfaction, or legal liability. By ensuring that the control is proportional to the risk, the organization can achieve the optimal level of risk management, and avoid wasting resources or creating new risks. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 151

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 greatest concern with the situation of combining the second and third lines of defense in a new department that reports to a recently appointed C-level executive is that the independence of the internal third line of defense may be compromised. The second line of defense is the function that oversees and supports the risk management activities of the first line of defense, which is the function that owns and manages the risks. The third line of defense is the function that provides independent assurance of the risk management activities, such as the internal audit function. Combining the second and third lines of defense in a new department may compromise the independence of the internal third line of defense, as it may create a conflict of interest, bias, or influence among the functions, and impair the objectivity, credibility, and quality of the assurance activities. The independence of the internal third line of defense is essential for ensuring that the risk management activities are performed in a consistent and effective manner, and that the issues and gaps are identified and reported without fear or favor. The risk governanceapproach of the second and third lines of defense may differ, cost reductions may negatively impact the productivity of other departments, and the new structure may not be aligned to the organization’s internal control framework are also concerns, but they are not as great as the compromise of the independence of the internal third line of defense, as they do not directly affect the assurance and accountability of the risk management activities. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

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

Independent Assessment:

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

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

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

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

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

Best Practices:

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

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

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

References:

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

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

Assessing the impact of applying the patches on the production environment is the most important task to be performed prior to implementation, because it helps to identify and mitigate any potential risks or issues that may arise from the patching process. Patching is a process of applying updates or fixes to software or hardware to address vulnerabilities, bugs, or performance issues. Patching is essential for maintaining the security and functionality of IT systems, but it also introduces the risk of introducing new problems or breaking existing features. Therefore, before applying patches, the organization should assess the impact of the patches on the production environment, such as compatibility, performance, availability, functionality, and security. Surveying other enterprises regarding their experiences with applying these patches, seeking information from the software vendor to enable effective application of the patches, and determining in advance an off-peak period to apply the patches are all helpful tasks to be performed prior to implementation, but they are not the most important task, as they do not directly address the impact of the patches on the production environment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.2, page 211

 The global organization has adopted risk acceptance as the risk response with regard to privacy requirements, as it has decided to continue with the implementation of the application that does not address all privacy requirements across multiple jurisdictions, and bear the potential consequences of noncompliance. Risk avoidance, risk transfer, and risk mitigation are not the risk responses adopted by the organization, as they would involve avoiding, sharing, or reducing the risk of noncompliance with privacy requirements, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 173

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The best recommendation for a risk practitioner when an employee lost a personal mobile device that may contain sensitive corporate information is to initiate a remote data wipe. A remote data wipe is a process of erasing the data stored on a device remotely, using a command sent over a network or a wireless connection. A remote data wipe can help to prevent the unauthorized access, use, disclosure, or theft of the sensitive corporate information, and to minimize the potential impact of the loss on the enterprise’s reputation, operations, and compliance. A remote data wipe can also help to comply with the data breach notification laws and regulations, and to reduce the legal liability and penalties. Conducting a risk analysis, invoking the incident response plan, and disabling the user account are not as immediate and effective as initiating a remote data wipe, as they do not address the primary risk of data exposure and loss. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 201

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 The analysis of logs and system events will best help validate whether suspicious network activity is malicious, because they provide detailed and timely information about the source, destination, content, and context of the network traffic. Logs and system events can be collected from various sources, such as firewalls, routers, switches, servers, applications, and endpoints, and can be correlated and analyzed using tools such as security information and event management (SIEM) systems. By analyzing logs and system events, an organization can identify anomalies, patterns, trends, and indicators of compromise (IOCs) that may signal malicious network activity, such as unauthorized access, data exfiltration, malware infection, denial-of-service attack, or lateral movement. Logs and system events can also help determine the scope, impact, and root cause of the malicious network activity, and support the incident response and remediation process. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 221

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

An effective risk management program is a systematic and consistent process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and communicating risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives12.

The best indication of an effective risk management program is that the residual risk, which is the risk remaining after risk treatment, is within the organizational risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives12.

This indicates that the organization has successfully implemented appropriate risk responses that align with its risk strategy and criteria, and that the organization is able to balance the potential benefits and costs of taking risks12.

The other options are not the best indication, but rather components or outcomes of an effective risk management program. For example:

Risk action plans are approved by senior management is an outcome of an effective risk management program that demonstrates the commitment and accountability of the leadership for risk management12.

Mitigating controls are designed and implemented is a component of an effective risk management program that involves reducing the likelihood or impact of a risk event12.

Risk is recorded and tracked in the risk register is a component of an effective risk management program that involves documenting and updating the risk information and status12. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA1

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

5: Risk and control self-assessment - KPMG Global3

6: Control Self Assessments - PwC4

7: Transaction Log - Wikipedia5

8: Transaction Logging - IBM6

Benchmarking - Wikipedia7

Benchmarking: Definition, Types, Process, Advantages & Examples

Developing a risk treatment plan is the best way to facilitate the mitigation of identified gaps between current and desired risk environment states. A risk treatment plan is a document that outlines the actions and resources needed to implement the chosen risk response strategy for each risk scenario. A risk treatment plan should include the following elements:

Risk scenario description and risk ID

Risk owner and other stakeholders

Risk response strategy and objectives

Risk response actions and tasks

Resources, costs, and benefits

Roles and responsibilities

Timeline and milestones

Performance indicators and monitoring mechanisms

Contingency plans and triggers

A risk treatment plan helps to close the gaps between the current and desired risk environment states by providing a clear and comprehensive roadmap for risk mitigation. It also helps to ensure that the risk response actions are aligned with the organizational risk appetite, objectives, and priorities. A risk treatment plan also facilitates the communication, coordination, and collaboration among the risk owners and other stakeholders involved in the risk mitigation process.

The other options are not the best ways to facilitate the mitigation of identified gaps between current and desired risk environment states. Validating organizational risk appetite is an important step in establishing the risk criteria and thresholds for the risk assessment process, but it does not directly address the gaps between the current and desired risk environment states. Reviewing results of prior risk assessments can provide useful insights and lessons learned for the current risk assessment process, but it does not necessarily lead to the development and implementation of effective risk response actions. Including the current and desired states in the risk register can help to document and monitor the risk scenarios and their status, but it does not provide the details and guidance for risk mitigation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4: Risk Response, Section 4.2: Risk Treatment, p. 189-191.

 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

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 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

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

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

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

IT control status reporting is the process of collecting and analyzing data about the effectiveness and efficiency of IT controls. IT controls are the policies, procedures, and practices that ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of IT resources and information. IT control status reporting helps to monitor the performance of IT controls against the predefined objectives and criteria, and to identify any gaps or issues that need to be addressed. IT control status reporting also provides information to the stakeholders about the current status and progress of IT control implementation and improvement.

The primary purpose of IT control status reporting is to facilitate the comparison of the current and desired states of IT controls. This means that IT control status reporting helps to evaluate the gap between the actual and expected performance of IT controls, and to determine the actions and resources needed to close the gap. IT control status reporting also helps to align the IT controls with the business goals and strategies, and to ensure that the IT controls are delivering value to the organization. By comparing the current and desired states of IT controls, IT control status reporting enables continuous improvement and optimization of IT control processes and outcomes.

The other options are not the primary purpose of IT control status reporting, but rather some of the benefits or outcomes of it. IT control status reporting can help to ensure compliance with IT governance strategy,but it is not the main reason for doing it. IT governance is the framework that defines the roles, responsibilities, and relationships among the stakeholders involved in IT decision making and oversight. IT control status reporting can support IT governance by providing relevant and reliable information to the stakeholders, and by demonstrating the accountability and transparency of IT control activities. However, IT control status reporting is not the same as IT governance, and it is not the only way to ensure compliance with IT governance strategy.

IT control status reporting can also assist internal audit in evaluating and initiating remediation efforts, but it is not the main objective of it. Internal audit is an independent and objective assurance and consulting activity that evaluates the adequacy and effectiveness of IT controls, and provides recommendations for improvement. IT control status reporting can provide input and evidence to the internal audit process, and help to identify the areas of IT control that need further review or testing. IT control status reporting can also help to monitor and track the implementation of the audit findings and recommendations, and to verify the results of the remediation efforts. However, IT control status reporting is not the same as internal audit, and it is not the only source of information for internal audit.

Finally, IT control status reporting can benchmark IT controls with industry standards, but it is not the main goal of it. Industry standards are the best practices or guidelines that define the minimum requirements or expectations for IT control performance and quality. IT control status reporting can help to compare the IT controls with the industry standards, and to identify the areas of IT control that need to be enhanced or updated. IT control status reporting can also help to demonstrate the compliance or conformance of IT controls with the industry standards, and to provide assurance to the external parties or regulators. However, IT control status reporting is not the same as industry standards, and it is not the only way to benchmark IT controls. References =

Service Reporting in ITIL: Process, Objectives and Examples - KnowledgeHut

Anatomy of an effective status report - Project Management Institute

How to Create a Project Status Report [Template & Examples]

Communicating Document Control Progress on a Project

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The control owner is the person who is accountable for ensuring that a control is designed, implemented, and operated effectively to mitigate risk. The control owner is also responsible for monitoring the performance of the control and reporting any issues or deficiencies. The risk manager is the person who oversees the risk management process and ensures that risks are identified, assessed, and treated appropriately. The control operator is the person who executes the control activities on a day-to-day basis. The risk treatment owner is the person who is accountable for implementing the risk response strategy and ensuring that the residual risk is within the acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, p. 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 and Information Systems Control – Question221; ISACACertified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 221.

The legal and regulatory risk associated with business conducted over the Internet is driven by the laws and regulations of each individual country. Legal and regulatory risk is the risk of non-compliance or violation of the applicable laws and regulations that govern the business activities, operations, or transactions. Business conducted over the Internet involves the use of the global network of interconnected computers and devices to exchange information, goods, or services across the geographic boundaries. Business conducted over the Internet may expose the enterprise to various legal and regulatory risks, such as data protection, privacy, security, intellectual property, consumer protection, taxation, or jurisdiction issues. The legal and regulatory risk associated with business conducted over the Internet is driven by the laws and regulations of each individual country, as each country may have different or conflicting laws and regulations that apply to the business conducted over the Internet, and that may change or vary over time. The laws and regulations of each individual country may also impose different or additional obligations, requirements, or restrictions on the enterprise, and may subject the enterprise to different or multiple enforcement actions, penalties, or disputes. The jurisdiction in which an organization has its principal headquarters, international law and a uniform set of regulations, and international standard-setting bodies are not the drivers of the legal and regulatory risk associated with business conducted over the Internet, as they do not reflect the diversity and complexity of the legal and regulatory landscape that the enterprise may face when conducting business over the Internet. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

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

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

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

Balanced Scorecard Basics - Balanced Scorecard Institute

Using the Balanced Scorecard to Measure and Manage IT Risk

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Overview

Internal Audit Planning: The Basics - The IIA

[Control Self-Assessment - ISACA]

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 by middle-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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Projected Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Risk Treatment Plan - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

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

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Control - CIO Wiki

Benchmarking - CIO Wiki

[Risk Treatment - CIO Wiki]

 The 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

Being the first to market is a competitive advantage that can help an organization gain market share, customer loyalty, and brand recognition. However, this advantage can be lost if the project is delayed and the competitors catch up or surpass the organization. Therefore, the project delivery time is of greatest concern to senior management, as it directly affects the strategic objective of the project. The other options are less critical, as they can be managed or mitigated by the project team. More time for testing can improve the quality and reliability of the product, a new project manager can bring fresh ideas and perspectives, and the cost overrun can be justified by the expected benefits and revenues of the product. References = Project Initiation: The First Step to Project Management [2023] • Asana, 12 Steps to Initiate and Plan a Successful Project

A critical threshold value for a key control indicator (KCI) is the value that indicates that the control is no longer performing its intended function of mitigating a risk. If the KCI reaches or exceeds this value, it means that the control effectiveness has failed and corrective actions are needed. The other options are not the best representations of a critical threshold value for a KCI, because they do not reflect the actual performance or outcome of the control. Thresholds benchmarked to peer organizations, a typical operational value, and a value that represents the intended control state are examples of target or acceptable values for a KCI, not critical or unacceptable values. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

 Implementing controls to bring the risk to a level within appetite and accept the residual risk is the best recommendation to senior management when the results of a risk and control assessment indicate a risk scenario can only be partially mitigated, as it helps to balance the costs and benefits of the risk management and control processes, and to align them with the organizational strategy and objectives. A risk and control assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and controls associated with a specific activity, process, or objective. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could cause harm or loss to the organization or its stakeholders. A risk scenario can only be partially mitigated when the existing or proposed controls are not sufficient or effective to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. A risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. A residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls or risk treatments.

Implementing controls to bring the risk to a level within appetite and accept the residual risk helps to provide the following benefits:

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

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating risk levels and exposure across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the development and implementation of effective and efficient risk response and mitigation strategies and actions that are aligned with the business risk appetite and objectives.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the risk management and control processes, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best recommendations to senior management when the results of a risk and control assessment indicate a risk scenario can only be partially mitigated. Implementing a key performance indicator (KPI) to monitor the existing control performance is a useful method to measure and monitor the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, but it does not address the residual risk or the risk appetite. Accepting the residual risk in its entirety and obtaining executive management approval is a possible option to deal with the risk scenario, but it may expose the organization to excessive or unacceptable risk, and it may not comply with the legal or regulatory obligations or requirements. Separating the risk into multiple components and avoiding the risk components that cannot be mitigated is a possible option to deal with the risk scenario, but it may not be feasible or practical, and it may create new or additional risks or challenges. References = Risk and Control Self-Assessment (RCSA) - Management Study Guide, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Risk Mitigation: What It Is and How to Implement It (Free Templates …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The risk associated with an asset before controls are applied is also known as the inherent risk. It is the level of risk that exists in the absence of any mitigating actions or measures. To express the inherent risk, one needs to consider two factors: the likelihood and the impact of a potential threat. The likelihood is the probability or frequency of a threat occurring, while the impact is the magnitude or severity of the consequences if the threat materializes. The inherent risk can be calculated by multiplying the likelihood and the impact, or by using a risk matrix that assigns a risk rating based on the combination of these two factors. The other options are not correct ways of expressing the inherent risk, as they do not account for both the likelihood and the impact of a threat. The magnitude of an impact is only one component of the risk, and it does not reflect how likely the threat is to happen. The function of the cost and effectiveness of control is related to the residual risk, which is the risk that remains after controls are applied. The likelihood of a given threat is also only one component of the risk, and it does not indicate how severe the impact would be if the threat occurs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, Page 47.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

Enhance the security awareness and resilience of the organization

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Business Continuity Plan (BCP) Definition1

2: Business Continuity Planning - Ready.gov2

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

4: Comprehensive Guide to Business Continuity Testing | Agility5

5: How to Conduct a Tabletop Exercise for Business Continuity3

6: Tabletop Exercises: A Guide to Success6

7: How to Conduct Testing of a Business Continuity Plan7

8: Business Continuity Plan Testing: Interviewing Techniques8

Disaster Recovery Testing: A Step-by-Step Guide

Disaster Recovery Testing Scenarios: A Guide to Success

Functional Exercises: A Guide to Success

Functional Exercise Toolkit

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

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

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

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

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

The most helpful activity for a risk practitioner when ensuring that mitigated risk remains within acceptable limits is to implement a process for ongoing monitoring of control effectiveness. This would enable the risk practitioner to track the performance of the controls, identify any deviations or gaps, and take corrective actions as needed. Ongoing monitoring of control effectiveness would also provide assurance that the risk responses are working as intended, and that the residual risk is aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 188.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Reviewing changes to edit checks is a technique that involves examining and evaluating the modifications or updates to the edit checks, which are rules or validations that are applied to the data on the database to ensure their accuracy, completeness, andconsistency9 . However, this technique is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the edit checks are bypassed or disabled9 . References =

1: Database Security: Attacks and Solutions | SpringerLink2

2: Unauthorised Modification of Data With Intent to Cause Impairment3

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia4

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva5

5: Database Access Control - Wikipedia6

6: Database Access Control: Best Practices for Database Security7

7: Data Reconciliation - Wikipedia8

8: Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection9

9: Edit Check - Wikipedia

Edit Checks: A Data Quality Tool

Information systems control deficiencies are the weaknesses or flaws in the design or implementation of the controls that are intended to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the information systems and resources. Information systems control deficiencies may reduce the effectiveness or efficiency of the controls, and expose the organization to various risks, such as unauthorized access, data loss, system failure, etc.

Reviewing results from control self-assessment (CSA) is the best way to identify information systems control deficiencies, because CSA is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the information systems controls, using the input and feedback from the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the information systems activities or functions. CSA can help the organization to identify and document the information systems control deficiencies, and to align them with the organization’s information systems objectives and requirements.

CSA can be performed using various techniques, such as questionnaires, surveys, interviews, workshops, etc. CSA can also be integrated with the organization’s governance, risk management, and compliance functions, and aligned with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the best ways to identify information systems control deficiencies, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that CSA provides, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the organization.

Vulnerability and threat analysis is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems that can be exploited or compromised by the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. Vulnerability and threat analysis can help the organization to assess and prioritize the risks, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the risks, but it is not the best way to identify information systems control deficiencies, because it does not indicate whether the existing information systems controls are adequate and effective, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

Control remediation planning is a process of selecting and implementing the actions or plans to address or correct the information systems control deficiencies that have been identified, analyzed, and evaluated. Control remediation planning involves choosing one ofthe following types of control responses: mitigate, transfer, avoid, or accept. Control remediation planning can help the organization to improve and optimize the information systems controls, and to reduce or eliminate the information systems control deficiencies, but it is not the best way to identify information systems control deficiencies, because it is a subsequent or follow-up process that depends on the prior identification of the information systems control deficiencies.

User acceptance testing (UAT) is a process of verifying and validating the functionality and usability of the information systems and resources, using the input and feedback from the end users or customers that interact with the information systems and resources. UAT can help the organization to ensure that the information systems and resources meet the user or customer expectations and requirements, and to identify and resolve any issues or defects that may affect the user or customer satisfaction, but it is not the best way to identify information systems control deficiencies, because it does not focus on the information systems controls, and it may not cover all the relevant or significant information systems control deficiencies that may exist or arise. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 186

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the first course of action when a risk practitioner discovers several key documents detailing the design of a product currently in development have been posted on the Internet is to invoke the established incident response plan, which is a set of policies, procedures, and resources that enable the organization to respond to and recover from an incident that affects the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of its IT assets and processes. Invoking the incident response plan helps to:

Contain and isolate the incident and prevent further damage or loss

Identify and analyze the source, cause, and impact of the incident

Eradicate and eliminate the incident and restore normal operations

Communicate and coordinate the incident response activities and roles with the relevant stakeholders, such as the business owner, the risk owner, the senior management, and the external parties

Learn and improve from the incident and update the incident response plan and the risk register

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 219-2201

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

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

The next step to determine the risk exposure after a vulnerability assessment of a web-facing application is to perform a penetration test. A penetration test is a simulated attack on the application to exploit the identified vulnerabilities and measure the potential impact and likelihood of a successful breach. A penetration test can help to quantify and prioritize the risks associated with the web-facing application. Code review, gap assessment, and business impact analysis (BIA) are other possible steps, but they are not as effective as a penetration test. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

Assigning a data owner would best facilitate the implementation of data classification requirements. A data owner is responsible for defining the classification of the data, ensuring that the data is properly labeled, and approving access requests. Implementing technical control over the assets, implementing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution, and scheduling periodic audits are important activities, but they are not as effective as assigning a data owner. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

The best way to enable a risk practitioner to understand management’s approach to organizational risk is to know the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the organization. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take in order to achieve its objectives. Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in relation to specific performance measures, such as availability, reliability, or security. Risk appetite and risk tolerance reflect the management’s attitude, preferences, and expectations towards risk, and guide the risk management process, such as risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring. The other options are not as effective as knowing the risk appetite and risk tolerance, although they may provide some input or context for understanding the management’s approach to organizational risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

The best course of action for a risk practitioner when senior management is deciding whether to share confidential data with the organization’s business partners is to submit a report to senior management containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans. A risk practitioner is a professional who is responsible for identifying, assessing, and managing the risks that could affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A risk practitioner should provide senior management with the information and guidance they need to make informed and effective decisions regarding the sharing of confidential data. A risk practitioner should submit a report that outlines the possible risk scenarios, such as data loss, theft, or compromise, and their likelihood and impact. A risk practitioner should also suggest mitigation plans, such as encryption, access control, monitoring, or contractual agreements, that could reduce or transfer the risk. The other options are not as effective as submitting a report containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans, although they may be part of or derived from the report. Designing controls to encrypt the data to be shared, developing a project plan for classification of the data, and summarizing the data protection and privacy legislation are all activities or outcomes that could be included or referenced in thereport, but they are not the best course of action for a risk practitioner. References = CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 2-23

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

The greatest challenge to assigning of the associated risk entries when an organization has used generic risk scenarios to populate its risk register is that the risk scenarios are not applicable. Generic risk scenarios are risk scenarios that are based on common or typical situations that may affect many organizations or industries. They are useful for providing a general overview or reference of the potential risks, but they may not be relevant, specific, or realistic for a particular organization or context. Therefore, using generic risk scenarios may result in inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading risk entries that do not reflect the actual risk profile or appetite of the organization. The other options are not as challenging as the risk scenarios being not applicable, as they are related to the quantity, quality, or aggregation of the risk scenarios, not the suitability or validity of the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: SWOT Analysis - ISACA1

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

5: Standard Operating Procedure - Wikipedia3

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

7: Benchmarking - Wikipedia5

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

Control Gap Analysis - ISACA7

Control Gap Analysis: A Step-by-Step Guide8

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

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

Optimizing resource utilization is the main reason for prioritizing IT risk responses, as it helps to allocate resources to the most critical and urgent risks. The other options are not the main reasons for prioritizing IT risk responses, although they may be related to the process.

The asset owner is the best suited to assist a risk practitioner in developing a relevant set of risk scenarios. The asset owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for the IT assets that support the business processes. The asset owner can provide valuable information on the business objectives, requirements, and expectations that the IT assets should meet. The asset owner can also help identify the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts that may affect the IT assets and the business processes. The asset owner can also suggest possible risk responses and mitigation strategies to address the risk scenarios. The other options are not as relevant as the asset owner, as they may not have the same level of knowledge, interest, or involvement in the IT assets and the business processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide early warning signals of potential risk events or changes in the risk profile of an organization. They help to monitor the risk exposure and performance of the organization against its risk appetite and tolerance. They also enable timely and proactive risk responses and mitigation actions. Establishing KRIs is the most helpful in preventing risk events from materializing, as they can alert the organization of emerging risks and trigger preventive measures before the risks become significant or materialize. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, p. 114-115

The data owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility to classify, label, and protect the information assets of the organization. The data owner is accountable for the risk of potential loss of confidential information, as they are the ones who determine the level of protection and access required for the data. The risk manager is responsible for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks that may affect the organization, but they are not accountable for the data itself. The end user is the person who uses the information assets for their operational tasks, but they are not accountable for the data protection or classification. The IT department is responsible for providing the technical support and infrastructure for the information assets, but they are not accountable for the data ownership or risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Data Classification, p. 69-70.

 IT asset inventory is the process of tracking and managing the financial, physical, licensing, and contractual aspects of IT assets throughout their life cycle1. IT assets include hardware, software, and network components that an organization values and uses to achieve its objectives2. A complete and accurate IT asset inventory can help an organization to optimize its IT budget, reduce security risks, ensure compliance, and improve performance3.

One of the best controls to enable an organization to ensure a complete and accurate IT asset inventory is performing network scanning for unknown devices. Network scanning is the process of identifying and collecting information about the devices connected to a network, such as their IP addresses, operating systems, open ports, services, and vulnerabilities4. Network scanning can help an organization to:

Discover and inventory all the IT assets on the network, including those that are unauthorized, unmanaged, or hidden

Detect and remove any rogue or malicious devices that may pose a threat to the network security or performance

Update and verify the asset inventory data regularly and automatically, and alert on any changes or discrepancies

Support the asset lifecycle management and maintenance activities, such as patching, upgrading, or retiring assets5

References = IT Asset Valuation, Risk Assessment and Control Implementation Model, ITAM: The ultimate guide to IT asset management, Navigating Security Threats with IT Inventory Management, Network Scanning - Wikipedia, 8 Best IT Asset Management Software (2024)

The first step in risk assessment is asset identification, which is the process of identifying and documenting the assets that are relevant and valuable to the organization, such as people, information, systems, processes, or infrastructure1. Asset identification can help to:

Establish the scope and boundaries of the risk assessment, and ensure that all the assets within the scope are considered and covered2.

Determine the criticality and priority of the assets, and assign them appropriate values or ratings based on their importance and contribution to the organization’s objectives3.

Identify the potential threats and vulnerabilities that may affect the assets, and assess their likelihood and impact on the assets4.

The other options are not the first step in risk assessment, because:

Review risk governance is not the first step, but rather a prerequisite or a foundation for risk assessment. Risk governance is the system of principles, policies, roles, and responsibilities that guide and oversee the risk management activities and initiatives of the organization5. Reviewing risk governance can help to ensure that the risk assessment is aligned with the organization’s riskstrategy, culture, and appetite, and that the risk assessment process is consistent, effective, and efficient6.

Identify risk factors is not the first step, but rather a subsequent or a parallel step to asset identification. Risk factors are the elements or conditions that influence or contribute to the occurrence or outcome of a risk event7. Identifying risk factors can help to understand the causes and sources of the risks, and to analyze and evaluate the risks based on their probability and severity.

Inherent risk identification is not the first step, but rather a later or a dependent step on asset identification and risk factor identification. Inherent risk is the level of risk that exists before the implementation of risk responses. Identifying inherent risk can help to measure the exposure or uncertainty of the assets, and to determine the need and extent of the risk responses.

References =

Risk Governance - CIO Wiki

Risk Governance Framework - CIO Wiki

Asset Identification - CIO Wiki

Asset Identification and Valuation - ISACA

Asset Criticality - CIO Wiki

Threat and Vulnerability Assessment - CIO Wiki

Risk Factor - CIO Wiki

[Risk Factor Analysis - CIO Wiki]

[Inherent Risk - CIO Wiki]

[Inherent Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

[Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

Performing risk prioritization would best help to improve the risk register, which is a document that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses1. Risk prioritization is the process of ranking the risks according to their significance and urgency, based on their probability and impact2. By performing risk prioritization, the organization can:

Reduce the complexity and volume of the risk register, and focus on the most important and relevant risks that require immediate attention and action3.

Enhance the communication and understanding of the risks among the senior management and other stakeholders, and facilitate the decision-making and resource allocation for the risk responses4.

Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the risk management process, and ensure that the risk register is aligned with the organization’s risk strategy, objectives, and appetite5.

The other options are not the best ways to improve the risk register, because:

Analyzing the residual risk components is not the best way, as it may not address the issue of the large volume of risk scenarios. Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses6. Analyzing the residual risk components can help to measure the exposure or uncertainty of the assets, and to determine the need and extent of the risk responses. However, it may not reduce the complexity or volume of the risk register, as it may add more information or data to the risk register.

Validating the risk appetite level is not the best way, as it may not address the issue of the overwhelming risk scenarios. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives7. Validating the risk appetite level can help to ensure that the risk register is consistent and proportional to the risk level, and that the risk responses are suitable and feasible. However, it may not reduce the complexity or volume of the risk register, as it may require more information or data to validate the risk appetite level.

Conducting a risk assessment is not the best way, as it may not address the issue of the existing risk scenarios. Risk assessment is the process of estimating the probability and impact of the risks, and prioritizing the risks based on their significance and urgency. Conducting a risk assessment can help to identify and analyze new or emerging risks, and to update or revise the risk register accordingly. However, it may not reduce the complexity or volume of the risk register, as it may introduce more information or data to the risk register.

References =

Risk Register - CIO Wiki

Risk Prioritization - CIO Wiki

Risk Prioritization: A Guide for Project Managers - ProjectManager.com

Risk Prioritization: How to Prioritize Risks in Project Management - Clarizen

Risk Prioritization: A Key Step in Risk Management - ISACA

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

[Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

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

Potential theft of personal information should be of greatest concern for an organization that has detected unauthorized logins to its client database servers, as it poses a serious threat to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the client data and the reputation and trust of the organization. Potential theft of personal information is a scenario that involves the unauthorized access, disclosure, or use of the client data by malicious actors, such as hackers, competitors, or insiders. Potential theft of personal information can have significant impacts and consequences for the organization and its clients, such as:

It can compromise the privacy and security of the client data, and expose the clients to identity theft, fraud, or blackmail.

It can violate the legal and regulatory obligations and requirements of the organization, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), or the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS), and result in fines, penalties, or lawsuits.

It can damage the reputation and credibility of the organization, and erode the confidence and loyalty of the clients, and lead to loss of business or market share.

The other options are not the greatest concerns for an organization that has detected unauthorized logins to its client database servers. Potential increase in regulatory scrutiny is a possible consequence of the unauthorized logins, as it may trigger audits, investigations, or sanctions by the relevant authorities, but it is not the most critical or immediate concern. Potential system downtime is a possible consequence of the unauthorized logins, as it may disrupt or degrade the performance or availability of the database servers or the applications that depend on them, but it is not the most severe or lasting concern. Potential legal risk is a possible consequence of the unauthorized logins, as it may expose the organization to litigation or liability claims by the affected clients or parties, but it is not the most direct or urgent concern. References = Data Breach Response: A Guide for Business - Federal Trade Commission, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, How to Prevent Unauthorized Access to Your Database - ScaleGrid

 Providing acknowledgments from receiver to sender is a control that helps to ensure that transaction data reaches its destination, as it confirms the successful delivery of the data and allows the sender to resend the data in case of failure. Securing the network from attacks, digitally signing individual messages, and encrypting data-in-transit are controls that help to ensure the integrity and confidentiality of the data, but not the availability or delivery of the data. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 199.

 The control owner is the person who has the authority to approve an exception to a control. A control is a policy, procedure, or technical measure that is implemented to prevent or mitigate a risk. A control owner is responsible for the design, implementation, operation, and maintenance of the control, as well as for monitoring and reporting its performance and effectiveness. A control owner is also accountable for the approval of any changes or exceptions to the control, based on the risk assessment and business justification. An information security manager, a risk owner, and a risk manager are not the best choices, as they do not have the same level of authority, responsibility, and knowledge as the control owner in relation to the control. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 35.

Several network user accounts were recently created without the required management approvals. This indicates that there is a risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction of the network resources or data, which may affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the network.

The best recommendation to address this situation is to investigate the root cause of noncompliance. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the factors or reasons that led to the creation of the network user accounts without the required management approvals, such as human error, negligence, malice, system failure, process flaw, etc.

Investigating the root cause of noncompliance helps to identify and correct the source of the problem, prevent or reduce the recurrence of the problem, and improve the compliance and security of the network user accounts.

The other options are not the best recommendations to address this situation. They are either secondary or not effective for noncompliance.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 31

Information Technology & Security, page 25

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 23

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

Integrating KRIs and KPIs for Effective Technology Risk Management

Key Control Indicator (KCI) - CIO Wiki

Infrastructure Issues: Understanding and Mitigating Risks

Ongoing availability of data is the most important consideration when selecting key risk indicators (KRIs) to monitor risk trends over time, as it ensures that the KRIs can provide timely and reliable information on the current and future risk status and performance. KRIs are metrics that measure the level of risk exposureand the effectiveness of risk response strategies, and they should be aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and objectives. Ongoing availability of data means that the data sources and collection methods for the KRIs are consistent, accessible, and sustainable, and that the data quality and integrity are maintained and verified. Ability to aggregate data, ability to predict trends, and availability of automated reporting systems are not the most important considerations, as they do not affect the validity and usefulness of the KRIs, but rather the presentation and analysis of the KRI data. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question213; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 213.

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

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

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

Optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities

Enhance the value and performance of the organization

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

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

The most important risk consideration when the global company’s business continuity plan (BCP) requires the transfer of its customer information to a cloud computing environment in the event of a disaster is that the cloud computing environment is shared with another company. A cloud computing environment is a service model that provides on-demand access to a shared pool of computing resources, such as servers, storage, networks, and applications. A shared cloud computing environment means that the same computing resources are used by multiple customers or tenants, and that the data and activities of one customer may affect or be affected by the data and activities of another customer. This may pose a significant risk to the security, privacy, and availability of the customer information, as it may be exposed, accessed, modified, or deleted by unauthorized or malicious parties. The other options are not as important as the cloud computing environment being shared with another company, as they are related to the differences, agreements, or cultures of the company or the country, not the environment or the platform of the customer information transfer. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

Employee activity monitoring is the process of tracking and recording the actions and behaviors of employees on company owned IT systems, such as email, internet, applications, etc. The purpose of employee activity monitoring is to ensure compliance with the company’s policies and regulations, prevent data leakage and misuse, detect and deter inappropriate or malicious activities, and improve productivity and performance. The most likely way to deter an employee from engaging in inappropriate use of company owned IT systems is to communicate the employee activity monitoring policy and practice to the employees, and make them aware of the consequences of violating the policy. By doing so, the company can create a deterrent effect and discourage the employees from misusing the IT systems, as they know that their actions are being monitored and recorded, and that they will be held accountable for any misconduct. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 181.

A threat risk assessment will best quantify the risk associated with malicious users in an organization, because it focuses on identifying and evaluating the potential sources of harm or damage to the organization’s assets, such as data, systems, or networks. A malicious user is a person who intentionally and unauthorizedly accesses, modifies, destroys, or steals the organization’s information or resources, for personal gain, revenge, espionage, or sabotage. A threat risk assessment can help the organization to estimate the likelihood and impact of malicious user attacks, based on factors such as the user’s motivation, capability, opportunity, and access level. A threat risk assessment can also help the organization to determine the appropriate risk response strategies, such as prevention, detection, mitigation, or transfer, to reduce the risk exposure and impact of malicious user attacks. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 141

 Check totals are IT controls that verify the accuracy and completeness of data by comparing the sum or count of data records or data fields with a predetermined or expected value. Check totals can help detect and prevent errors, omissions, or alterations in data entry, processing, or transmission. Check totals can also help identify and correct data discrepancies or anomalies. Therefore, check totals are the most useful IT controls in mitigating the risk associated with inaccurate data. The other options are not the best answers because they do not directly address the risk of inaccurate data. Encrypted storage of data is an IT control that protects the confidentiality and integrity of data by preventing unauthorized access or modification. However, encryption does not ensure the accuracy or validity of the data itself. Links to source data are IT controls that provide traceability and transparency of data by allowing users to access or view the original data from which the derived or aggregated data is obtained. However, links to source data do not verify or correct the data quality or consistency. Audit trails for updates and deletions are IT controls that record thehistory and changes of data by capturing the date, time, user, and action performed on the data. Audit trails can help monitor and review the data activities and transactions, but they do not prevent or detect the data errors or inaccuracies. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 164-1651; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 722

Social engineering is a technique that involves manipulating or deceiving people into performing actions or divulging information that may compromise the security of an organization or its data12.

Entry into an organization’s secured physical premises is a form of physical access that allows an unauthorized individual to access, steal, or damage the organization’s assets, such as equipment, documents, or systems34.

The best way to prevent future occurrences of social engineering entry into an organization’s secured physical premises is to conduct security awareness training, which is an educational program that aims to equip the organization’s employees with the knowledge and skills they need to protect the organization’s data and sensitive information from cyber threats, such as hacking, phishing, or other breaches56.

Security awareness training is the best way because it helps the employees to recognize and resist the common and emerging social engineering techniques, such as tailgating, impersonation, or pretexting, that may be used by the attackers to gain physical access to the organization’s premises56.

Security awareness training is also the best way because it fosters a culture of security and responsibility among the employees, and encourages them to follow the best practices and policies for physical security, such as locking the doors, verifying the identity of visitors, or reporting any suspicious activities or incidents56.

The other options are not the best way, but rather possible measures or controls that may supplement or enhance the security awareness training. For example:

Employing security guards is a measure that involves hiring or contracting professional personnel who are trained and authorized to monitor, patrol, and protect the organization’s premises from unauthorized access or intrusion78. However, this measure is not the best way because it may not be sufficient or effective to prevent or deter all types of social engineering attacks, especially if the attackers are able to bypass, deceive, or coerce the security guards78.

Installing security cameras is a control that involves using electronic devices that capture and record the visual images of the organization’s premises, and provide evidence or alerts of any unauthorized access or activity . However, this control is not the best way because it is reactive rather than proactive, and may not prevent or stop the social engineering attacks before they cause any harm or damage to the organization .

Requiring security access badges is a control that involves using physical or electronic cards that identify and authenticate the employees or authorized visitors who are allowed to enter the organization’s premises, and restrict or deny the access to anyone else . However, this control is not the best way because it may not be foolproof or reliable to prevent or detect the social engineering attacks, especially if the attackers are able to steal, forge, or clone the security access badges . References =

1: What is Social Engineering? | Types & Examples of Social Engineering Attacks1

2: Social Engineering: What It Is and How to Prevent It | Digital Guardian2

3: What is physical Social Engineering and why is it important? - Integrity3603

4: What Is Tailgating (Piggybacking) In Cyber Security? - Wlan Labs4

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

6: Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US6

7: Security Guard - Wikipedia7

8: Security Guard Services - Allied Universal8

Security Camera - Wikipedia

Security Camera Systems - The Home Depot

Access Badge - Wikipedia

Access Control Systems - HID Global

The most appropriate time for changes to be promoted to production is after they are approved by the business owner, who is the individual or group that is accountable and responsible for the business objectives and requirements that are supported or affected by the changes. The approval by the business owner ensures that the changes are aligned and compatible with the business objectives and requirements, and that they provide the expected or desired outcomes or benefits for the business.

The other options are not the most appropriate times for changes to be promoted to production, because they do not ensure that the changes are aligned and compatible with the business objectives and requirements, and that they provide the expected or desired outcomes or benefits for the business.

Communicating the changes to business management means informing or reporting the changes to the senior management or executives that oversee or direct the business activities or functions. Communicating the changes to business management is important for ensuring the awareness and support of the business management, but it is not the most appropriate time for changes to be promoted to production, because it does not indicatewhether the changes are approved or authorized by the business owner, who is accountable and responsible for the business objectives and requirements.

Testing the changes by business owners means verifying and validating the functionality and usability of the changes, using the input and feedback from the business owners. Testing the changes by business owners is important for ensuring the quality and performance of the changes, but it is not the most appropriate time for changes to be promoted to production, because it does not indicate whether the changes are approved or authorized by the business owner, who is accountable and responsible for the business objectives and requirements.

Initiating the changes by business users means requesting or proposing the changes by the end users or customers that interact with the information systems and resources that are affected by the changes. Initiating the changes by business users is important for ensuring the relevance and appropriateness of the changes, but it is not the most appropriate time for changes to be promoted to production, because it does not indicate whether the changes are approved or authorized by the business owner, who is accountable and responsible for the business objectives and requirements. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 194

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

A decision tree is a technique that can be used during a risk assessment to demonstrate to stakeholders that all known alternatives were evaluated. A decision tree is a graphical tool that shows the possible outcomes and consequences of different choices or actions in a sequential and hierarchical manner. A decision tree can help to compare and contrast the alternatives based on their expected values, costs, benefits, and risks, as well as to identify the optimal or preferred alternative that maximizes the value or minimizes the risk. A decision tree can also help to communicate and explain the rationale and assumptions behind the decision-making process to the stakeholders. The other options are not the best techniques to demonstrate to stakeholders that all known alternatives were evaluated, although they may be useful and complementary. A control chart is a technique that monitors the performance and quality of a process or activity over time by plotting the data points and the control limits. A control chart can help to detect and analyze the variations or deviations from the expected or desired results, as well as to identify and correct the causes or sources of the variations. A sensitivity analysis is a technique that measures the impact ofchanges in one or more variables or parameters on the outcome or result of a model or a system. A sensitivity analysis can help to assess the uncertainty or variability of the outcome or result, as well as to determine the most influential or critical variables or parameters that affect the outcome or result. A trend analysis is a technique that examines the patterns or movements of data or information over time by using statistical or graphical methods. A trend analysis can help to forecast or predict the future behavior or direction of the data or information, as well as to identify and explain the factors or drivers that influence the data or information. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers &Explanations Manual, page 922; Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA3; Risk Assessment: Process, Examples, & Tools | SafetyCulture4

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

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

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

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

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

Encourage the reporting and escalation of risk issues and incidents

Reinforce the benefits and value of effective risk management

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

A cost-benefit analysis is the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan. A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions or measures that are taken or planned to modifythe risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk1. Selecting an appropriate risk treatmentplan means choosing the most suitable and effective option for addressing the risk, based on the organization’s objectives, strategies, and risk criteria2. A cost-benefit analysis is a method of comparing the benefits and costs of different alternatives or options, and selecting the one that maximizes the net benefit or value3. A cost-benefit analysis is the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, because it helps to:

Evaluate the feasibility, effectiveness, and efficiency of the risk treatment options, and compare them against the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance;

Balance the benefits and costs of the risk treatment options, and consider both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the risk and the risk response;

Optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities, and ensure that the risk treatment options are aligned and integrated with the organization’s goals and values;

Support the risk decision making and prioritization, and provide a rational and transparent basis for selecting the best risk treatment option. The other options are not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as they are either less comprehensive or less relevant than a cost-benefit analysis. A risk mitigation budget is a document that allocates the financial resources for implementing and maintaining the risk mitigation actions or measures4. A risk mitigation budget can help to ensure the availability and adequacy of the funds for the risk treatment options, as well as to monitor and control the risk treatment expenditures. However, a risk mitigation budget is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the benefits or value of the risk treatment options, or the suitability or effectiveness of the risk treatment options. A business impact analysis is a method of estimating the potential effects or consequences of a risk on the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance5. A business impact analysis can help to assess the severity and priority of the risk, as well as to identify the critical assets and resources that are involved or impacted by the risk. However, a business impact analysis is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the costs or feasibility of the risk treatment options, or the alternatives or options for the risk treatment. A return on investment is a metric that measures the profitability or efficiency of an investment, project, or activity, by comparing the benefits and costs of the investment, project, or activity6. A return on investment can help to evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the risk treatment options, as well as to compare the risk treatment options with other investments, projects, or activities. However, a return on investment is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the qualitative or intangible aspects of the risk and the risk response, or the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

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

Codes of conduct or ethics

Policies or manuals

Training or awareness programs

Job descriptions or roles and responsibilities

Performance appraisals or incentives

Supervision or oversight

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

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

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

The primary input when designing IT controls should be internal and external risk reports. IT controls are specific activities performed by persons or systems to ensure that business objectives are met, and thatthe confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data and the overall management of the IT function are ensured1. Designing IT controls means creating and implementing the appropriate measures or actions to reduce the likelihood or impact of the IT risks that may affect the organization2. Internal and external risk reports are documents that provide information and analysis on the current and potential IT risks that the organization faces, as well as their sources, drivers, consequences, and responses3. Internal risk reports are generated by the organization itself, such as by the IT risk management function, the internal audit function, or the business units. External risk reports are obtained from external sources, such as regulators, industry associations, or third-party service providers. Internal and external risk reports are the primary input when designing IT controls, because they help to:

Identify and prioritize the IT risks that need to be addressed by the IT controls;

Evaluate the likelihood and impact of the IT risks, and compare them against the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance;

Determine the most suitable and effective IT control objectives and activities to mitigate the IT risks;

Align the IT control design and implementation with the organization’s objectives, strategies, and values;

Monitor and measure the performance and effectiveness of the IT controls in reducing the IT risks. The other options are not the primary input when designing IT controls, as they are either less relevant or less specific than internal and external risk reports. Benchmark of industry standards is a comparison of the organization’s IT control practices and performance with those of other organizations in the same industry or sector4. Benchmark of industry standards can help to improve the quality and consistency of the IT control design and implementation, as well as to identify the best practices and gaps. However, benchmark of industry standards is not the primary input when designing IT controls, as it does not address the specific IT risks that the organization faces, or the IT control objectives and activities that are appropriate and effective for the organization. Recommendations from IT risk experts are the suggestions or advice from the professionals or specialists who have the knowledge and experience in IT risk management and IT control design and implementation5. Recommendations from IT risk experts can help to enhance the IT control design and implementation, as well as to provide guidance and support to the organization. However, recommendations from IT risk experts are not the primary input when designing IT controls, as they are based on the opinions and perceptions of the experts, and may not reflect the actual or objective level and nature of the IT risks, or the IT control objectives and activities that are suitable and efficient for the organization. Outcome of control self-assessments is the result or conclusion of the evaluation and testing of the design and operation of the existing IT controls by the organization itself, such as by the IT control owners, the IT risk management function, or the business units6. Outcome of control self-assessments can help to improve the IT control design and implementation, as well as to detect and correct any issues or deficiencies. However, outcome of control self-assessments is not the primary input when designing IT controls, as it does not cover the new or emerging IT risks that the organization may face, or the IT control objectives and activities that are relevant and necessary for the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, Page 189.

A risk response action plan is a document that outlines the specific tasks, resources, timelines, and deliverables for the risk responses, which are the actions or strategies that are taken to address the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation12.

The most useful tool when measuring the progress of a risk response action plan is an up-to-date risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the significant risks that the organization faces, and the responses and actions that are taken to address them34.

An up-to-date risk register is the most useful tool because it provides a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and the status and performance of the risk responses and actions34.

An up-to-date risk register is also the most useful tool because it enables the monitoring and evaluation of the risk response action plan, and the identification and communication of any issues or gaps that need to be resolved or improved34.

The other options are not the most useful tools, but rather possible metrics or indicators that may be used to measure the progress of a risk response action plan. For example:

Percentage of mitigated risk scenarios is a metric that measures the proportion of risk scenarios that have been reduced or eliminated by the risk responses and actions56. However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not capture the residual or emerging risks that may arise after the risk responses and actions56.

Annual loss expectancy (ALE) changes is a metric that measures the difference between the expected annual losses before and after the risk responses and actions78. However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not reflect the qualitative or intangible impacts of the risks or the risk responses and actions78.

Resource expenditure against budget is a metric that measures the amount of resources and funds that have been spent or allocated for the risk responses and actions, compared to the planned or estimated budget . However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not indicate the effectiveness or efficiency of the risk responses and actions . References =

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

2: How to Create the Ultimate Risk Response Plan | Wrike2

3: Risk Register Template and Examples | Prioritize and Manage Risk3

4: Risk Register Examples for Cybersecurity Leaders4

5: Risk Scenarios Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

6: Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, ISACA, 2019

7: Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) - Definition and Examples5

8: Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) Calculator6

Project Budgeting: How to Estimate Costs and Manage Budgets7

Project Budget Template - Download Free Excel Template8

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

A security incident handling process is a set of procedures and activities that aim to identify, analyze, contain, eradicate, recover from, and learn from security incidents that affect the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information assets12.

The maturity of a security incident handling process is the degree to which the process is defined, managed, measured, controlled, and improved, and the extent to which it meets the organization’s objectives and expectations34.

The best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the maturity of a security incident handling process is the number of recurring security incidents, which is the frequency or rate of security incidents that are repeated or reoccur after being resolved or closed56.

The number of recurring security incidents is the best KPI because it reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the security incident handling process, and the ability of the process to prevent or reduce the recurrence of security incidents through root cause analysis, corrective actions, and continuous improvement56.

The number of recurring security incidents is also the best KPI because it is directly related to the organization’s objectives and expectations, such as minimizing the impact and cost of security incidents, enhancing the security posture and resilience of the organization, and complying with the relevant standards and regulations56.

The other options are not the best KPIs, but rather possible metrics that may support or complement the measurement of the maturity of the security incident handling process. For example:

The number of security incidents escalated to senior management is a metric that indicates the severity or complexity of security incidents, and the involvement or awareness of the senior management in the security incident handling process56. However, this metric doesnot measure the effectiveness or efficiency of the process, or the ability of the process to prevent or reduce security incidents56.

The number of resolved security incidents is a metric that indicates the output or outcome of the security incident handling process, and the performance or productivity of the security incident handling team56. However, this metric does not measure the quality or sustainability of the resolution, or the ability of the process to prevent or reduce security incidents56.

The number of newly identified security incidents is a metric that indicates the input or demand of the security incident handling process, and the capability or capacity of the security incident detection and identification mechanisms56. However, this metric does not measure the effectiveness or efficiency of the process, or the ability of the process to prevent or reduce security incidents56. References =

1: Computer Security Incident Handling Guide, NIST Special Publication 800-61, Revision 2, August 2012

2: ISO/IEC 27035:2016 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security incident management

3: Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) for Services, Version 1.3, November 2010

4: COBIT 2019 Framework: Introduction and Methodology, ISACA, 2018

5: KPIs for Security Operations & Incident Response, SecurityScorecard Blog, June 7, 2021

6: Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Security Operations and Incident Response, DFLabs White Paper, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The level of risk in the IT risk profile is the aggregate measure of the likelihood and impact of IT-related risks that may affect the enterprise’s objectives and operations.

The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its goals. It is usually expressed as a range or a threshold, and it is aligned with the enterprise’s strategy and culture.

If the level of risk in the IT risk profile has decreased and is now below management’s risk appetite, it means that the enterprise has more capacity and opportunity to take on additional risks that may offer higher rewards or benefits.

The best recommendation in this situation is to optimize the control environment, which is the set of policies, procedures, standards, and practices that provide the foundation for managing IT risks and controls. Optimizing the control environment means enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of the controls, reducing the costs and complexity of compliance, and aligning the controls with the enterprise’s objectives and values.

Optimizing the control environment can help the enterprise to achieve the optimal balance between risk and return, and to leverage its risk management capabilities to create and protect value.

The other options are not the best recommendations, because they do not address the opportunity to improve the enterprise’s performance and resilience.

Realigning risk appetite to the current risk level may result in missing out on potential gains or advantages that could be obtained by taking more risks within the acceptable range.

Decreasing the number of related risk scenarios may reduce the scope and depth of risk analysis and reporting, and impair the enterprise’s ability to identify and respond to emerging or changing risks.

Reducing the risk management budget may compromise the quality and reliability of the risk management process and activities, and weaken the enterprise’s risk culture and governance. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 145

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the most important time to involve business stakeholders in the development of bottom-up IT risk scenarios is when validating the risk scenarios, as they can provide valuable input on the relevance, completeness, and accuracy of the scenarios and their impact on the business objectives and processes2

1: CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 100001 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 97

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

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that provides information on the level of exposure to a given risk or the potential impact of a risk. KRIs are used to monitor changes in risk levels and alert management when a risk exceeds a predefined threshold or tolerance. KRIs can help provide early warning of a high-risk condition and enable timely response and mitigation actions. A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their likelihood, impact, and status. A risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, andevaluates risks. A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that measures the achievement of a specific goal or objective. References = Risk IT Framework, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Manual, pages 44-452

The primary reason for sharing risk assessment reports with senior stakeholders is to support decision-making for risk response. Risk assessment reports are documents that summarize the results of the risk assessment process, such as the risk sources, causes, impacts, likelihood, and levels. Risk assessment reports also provide recommendations for risk response options, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Sharing risk assessment reports with senior stakeholders helps to inform them of the current risk situation, and to solicit their input, feedback, or approval for the risk response actions. The other options are not the primary reason for sharing risk assessment reports, although they may be secondary reasons or outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

 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 internal management 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)​​.

The best method to ensure a terminated employee’s access to IT systems is revoked upon departure from the organization is to have the human resources (HR) system automatically revoke system access, which is a process that involves integrating the HR system with the IT system, and triggering the removal of access rights for the employee as soon as the termination is recorded in the HR system12.

This method is the best because it provides the most timely, accurate, and consistent way of revoking access, and reduces the risk of human error, oversight, or delay that may occur in manual or semi-automated processes12.

This method is also the best because it enhances the security and compliance of the organization, and prevents the terminated employee from accessing or compromising the IT systems or data after departure12.

The other options are not the best methods, but rather alternative or supplementary methods that may have some limitations or drawbacks. For example:

Login attempts are reconciled to a list of terminated employees is a method that involves monitoring and verifying the login activities of the IT systems, and comparing them with a list of terminated employees to identify and block any unauthorized access attempts34. However, this method is not the best because it is reactive rather than proactive, and may not prevent the terminated employee from accessing the IT systems before the reconciliation is done34.

A list of terminated employees is generated for reconciliation against current IT access is a method that involves creating and maintaining a list of terminated employees, and checking it against the current IT access rights to identify and remove any access that is no longer needed34. However, this method is not the best because it is manual and labor-intensive, and may introduce errors or inconsistencies in the list or the access rights34.

A process to remove employee access during the exit interview is implemented is a method that involves conducting an exit interview with the terminated employee, and revoking the employee’s access to the IT systems during or immediately after the interview34. However, this method is not the best because it depends on the availability and cooperation of the terminated employee, and may not cover all the IT systems or access rights that the employee had34. References =

1: IT Involvement in Employee Termination, A Checklist3

2: Best Practices to Ensure Departing Employees Retain No Access5

3: User Termination Best Practices - IT Security - Spiceworks2

4: IT Security for Employee Termination - Policies, Checklists, Templates - Endsight1

 Using anonymized data in a non-production environment is the best approach for an organization in a heavily regulated industry to comprehensively test application functionality. Anonymized data is data that has been stripped of any personally identifiable information (PII) or other sensitive data, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc. Anonymized data protects the privacy and security of the data, while still preserving the structure and format of the original data. Using anonymized data in a non-production environment allows the organization to test the application functionality without risking data breaches or violating regulations. Using production data, masked data, or test data in either production or non-production environments are not as optimal as using anonymized data, because they may introduce errors, inconsistencies, or vulnerabilities in the data or the application. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

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

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

Data processing is the activity of collecting, organizing, transforming, and analyzing data to produce useful information for decision making or other purposes12.

The role of the internal IT team in this situation is data processors, which are the people or entities that process data on behalf of the data controllers, who are the people or entities that determine the purposes and means of the data processing34.

Data processors are the role of the internal IT team because they are responsible for managing information through the applications that are used by the organization, and they act under the instructions and authority of the organization, which is the data controller34.

Data processors are also the role of the internal IT team because they have to comply with the data protection laws and regulations that apply to the data processing, and they have to ensure the security and confidentiality of the data34.

The other options are not the role of the internal IT team, but rather possible roles or terms that are related to data processing. For example:

Data custodians are the people or entities that have physical or logical control over the data, and they are responsible for implementing and maintaining the technical and administrative safeguards to protect the data56. However, this role is not the role of theinternal IT team because it is a subset or function of the data processor role, and it does not reflect the full scope of the data processing activities that the internal IT team performs56.

Data owners are the people or entities that have legal rights or authority over the data, and they are responsible for defining and enforcing the policies and rules for the data access, use, and quality . However, this role is not the role of the internal IT team because it is a different or separate role from the data processor role, and it does not reflect the relationship or agreement between the organization and the internal IT team . References =

1: Data Processing - Wikipedia1

2: Data Processing: Definition, Steps, and Types2

3: Data Controller vs Data Processor: What’s the Difference?3

4: Data controller vs data processor: What are the differences and responsibilities?4

5: Data Custodian - Wikipedia5

6: Data Custodian: Definition, Role & Responsibilities6

Data Owner - Wikipedia

Data Owner: Definition, Role & Responsibilities

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2: 10 security risks of wearables | CSO Online2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

5: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA3

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

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

Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 197

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

The best way to mitigate the security risk associated with the inappropriate use of enterprise applications on the BYOD devices is to implement BYOD mobile device management (MDM) controls. MDM controls are software tools or services that allow the organization to remotely manage, monitor, and secure the BYOD devices and the enterprise applications and data on them. MDM controls can help to enforce security policies, restrict unauthorized access, encrypt sensitive data, wipe data in case of loss or theft, and update or patch applications. The other options are not as effective as implementing MDM controls, as they are related to the review, awareness, or recovery of the BYOD devices and applications, not the prevention or protection of the security risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: ISO - ISO 31000 — Risk management1

2: Risk Management Standards2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that help organizations monitor and evaluate the level of risk they are exposed to. They provide early warning signals of potential issues that could affect the achievement of organizational goals12.

The most important data source for monitoring KRIs is automated logs collected from different systems, which are records that capture and store the details and history of the transactions or activities that are performed by the organization’s processes, systems, or controls34.

Automated logs collected from different systems are the most important data source because they provide timely and accurate data and information on the performance and status of the organization’s operations, and enable the detection and reporting of any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate a risk event34.

Automated logs collected from different systems are also the most important data source because they support the accountability and auditability of the organization’s operations, and facilitate the investigation and resolution of any risk event34.

The other options are not the most important data sources, but rather possible inputs or factors that may influence or affect the KRIs. For example:

Directives from legal and regulatory authorities are documents that provide the expectations and obligations of the external authorities or bodies that govern or oversee the organization’s activities and operations, such as laws, regulations, standards, or contracts5 . However, these documents are not the most important data source becausethey do not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the criteria or framework for risk compliance5 .

Audit reports from internal information systems audits are documents that provide the findings and recommendations of the independent and objective assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s information systems, processes, and controls . However, these documents are not the most important data source because they do not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the assurance or improvement for risk management .

Trend analysis of external risk factors is a technique that involves analyzing and forecasting the changes and impacts of the external factors that influence the organization’s operations, such as technology, competition, regulation, or customer behavior . However, this technique is not the most important data source because it does not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the insight or prediction for risk identification . References =

1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture1

2: Key risk indicator - Wikipedia2

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia3

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva4

5: Regulatory Compliance - Wikipedia5

Regulatory Compliance Management Software | MetricStream

IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

Trend Analysis - Investopedia

Trend Analysis: A Definition and Examples

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: IT Scenario Analysis in Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA2

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

3: Business Risk - Investopedia3

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

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

7: Executive Risk Council - ISACA5

8: Executive Risk Council: A Guide to Success6

9: IT System Downtime - ISACA7

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

IT Risk Education - ISACA9

IT Risk Education: A Guide to Success

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

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

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

Implement and monitor the cybersecurity controls and processes

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

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

Continuously improve the cybersecurity capabilities and maturity

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

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

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

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual

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

Detailed Explanation:Residual riskrefers to the risk that remains after mitigation measures have been applied. It represents the exposure that an organization decides to accept, transfer, or further address, aligning with its risk appetite and tolerance.

A dashboard summarizing key risk indicators (KRIs) is the best way for a risk practitioner to present an annual risk management update to the board because it provides a concise and visual overview of the current risk status, trends, and performance of the organization. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help the board monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. A summary of risk response plans, a report with control environment assessment results, and a summary of IT risk scenarios are all useful information, but they are too detailed and technical for the board, who needs a high-level and strategic view of the risk management program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

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

 The greatest concern for the risk practitioner when an organization wants to launch a campaign to advertise a new product using data analytics is the purpose limitation. Purpose limitation is a principle that states that personal data should be collected for specified, explicit, and legitimate purposes, and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes. By using data analytics to target potential customers, the organization may violate the purpose limitation principle if the data was collected for a different purpose and the customers did not consent to the new use of their data. Data minimization, accountability, and accuracy are other principles that should be followed, but they are not as concerning as the purpose limitation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

This KPI measures how well the server patch management process meets the agreed-upon standards and expectations for timeliness, quality, and security. It reflects the efficiency and effectiveness of the patch deployment and the compliance with the patch policy. It also helps to identify and address any issues or delays that may affect the patching performance.

References

•Patch Management KPI Metrics - Motadata

•KPI Examples for Patch and Vulnerability Management - Heimdal Security

•Measuring the Effectiveness of Your Patch Management Strategy - Automox

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

A risk register update is a change or modification to the information or status of the risks and their responses in the risk register. It may be triggered by the occurrence or resolution of a risk event, the identification or evaluation of a new or emerging risk, the implementation or completion of a risk response, the monitoring or review of the risk performance, etc.

The most important risk register update for senior management to review is avoiding a risk that was previously accepted, which means that the organization has decided to eliminate or withdraw from the risk exposure or activity that may cause the risk, instead of tolerating or retaining the risk as before. This may indicate a significant change in the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, objectives, or environment, and it may have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value.

The other options are not the most important risk register updates for senior management to review, because they do not indicate a significant change or impact on the organization’s risk profile or performance.

Extending the date of a future action plan by two months means that the organization has postponed the implementation or completion of the planned actions or measures to address the risk, due to some reasons or constraints. This may indicate a delay or deviation from the expected or desired risk outcome, but it may not have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value, unless the risk is very urgent or critical.

Retiring a risk scenario no longer used means that the organization has removed or discarded the risk scenario that is no longer relevant or applicable to the organization’s objectives or operations, due to some changes or developments. This may indicate a reduction or improvement in the organization’s risk exposure or level, but it may not have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value, unless the risk scenario was very significant or influential.

Changing a risk owner means that the organization has assigned or transferred the responsibility and accountability for the risk and its response to a different person or role, due to some reasons or circumstances. This may indicate a change or improvement in the organization’s risk governance or culture, but it may not have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value, unless the risk owner was very ineffective or inappropriate. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 160

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

Why did the application code require rework?

What were the errors or defects in the application code?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The most useful information to determine mitigating controls when a core data center went offline abruptly for several hours affecting many transactions across multiple locations is the root cause analysis. Root cause analysis is a technique that identifies the underlying factors or reasons that caused the problem or incident. Root cause analysis can help to understand the nature, scope, and impact of the problem or incident, and to prevent or reduce the recurrence or severity of the problem or incident in the future. Root cause analysis can also help to identify and prioritize the appropriate mitigating controls that address the root causes of the problem or incident. The other options are not as useful as root cause analysis, as they are related to the investigation, evaluation, or measurement of the problem or incident, not the resolution or prevention of the problem or incident. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

The best indication that key risk indicators (KRIs) should be revised is a decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk. Risk thresholds are the predefined values or ranges that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable level of risk exposure. Critical assets are the assets that are essential or vital for the achievement of the objectives or the continuity of the operations. A decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds means that the KRIs are not capturing or reflecting the current and relevant risk exposure of the organization, and that they may not provide sufficient or accurate information for risk management decisions. Therefore, the KRIs should be revised to ensure that they cover all the critical assets and their risk thresholds. The other options are not as indicative as a decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds, as they are related to the outcomes, impacts, or activities of the KRIs, not thescope or quality of the KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

 The most important step when developing risk scenarios using a list of generic scenarios based on industry best practices is to validate the generic risk scenarios for relevance. The generic risk scenarios may not be applicable or suitable for the specific context, objectives, and environment of the organization. Therefore, the risk practitioner should validate the relevance of the generic risk scenarios by comparing them with the organization’s risk profile, risk appetite, and risk criteria. Assessing generic risk scenarios with business users, selecting the maximum possible risk scenarios from the list, and identifying common threats causing generic risk scenarios are other steps that may be useful, but they are not as important as validating the relevance of the generic risk scenarios. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The result of postponing the assessment and treatment of several risk scenarios is that the risk associated with these new entries has been accepted. Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging the existence of a risk and deciding not to take any action to reduce its likelihood or impact. By postponing the assessment and treatment of the risk scenarios, the organization is implicitly accepting the risk and its consequences. Risk mitigation, deferral, and transfer are other possible risk response strategies, but they are not applicable in this case. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 9; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 137.

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

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

The best way to increase the chances of a successful delivery of a new application and to assure the business management that IT has a plan in place for early identification of potential issues is to include business management on a weekly risk and issues report. A risk and issues report is a document that summarizes the current status, progress, and challenges of the IT project, as well as the actions and resources needed to address them. A risk and issues report helps to communicate and align the expectations and objectives of the IT and business stakeholders, and to facilitate timely and effective decision-making and problem-solving. A risk and issues report also helps to monitor and control the project scope, schedule, budget, and quality, and to ensure that the project delivers the desired value and benefits to the organization. The other options are not as effective as including business management on a weekly risk and issues report, although they may be part of the IT project management process or outcomes. Implementing a release and deployment plan, conducting comprehensive regression testing, and developing enterprise-wide key risk indicators (KRIs) are all activities that can help to ensure the quality and reliability of the new application, but they do not necessarily involve the business management or provide assurance for the early identification of potential issues. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 5-32.

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

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

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

The most helpful source in providing an overview of an organization’s risk management program is the risk management framework. The risk management framework is a set of components that provide the foundations and organizational arrangements for designing, implementing, monitoring, reviewing, and continually improving risk management throughout the organization. The framework includes the risk management principles, policies, processes, procedures, roles, responsibilities, and resources that enable the organization to manage risk effectively. Risk management treatment plan, risk assessment results, and risk register are other sources that may provide some information about the risk management program, but they are not as comprehensive as the risk management framework. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

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

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

When assessing the potential risk exposure of a loss event involving personal data, the most important factor to determine is the composition and number of records in the information asset. The composition refers to the type and sensitivity of the personal data, such as name, address, phone number, email, social security number, health information, financial information, etc. The number of records refers to the quantity and scope of the personal data that is affected by the loss event. The composition and number of records in the information asset determine the severity and impact of the loss event, as they indicate the extent of the harm and damage that can be caused to the data subjects, the organization, and other stakeholders.The composition and number of records in the information asset also influence the cost of the incident response activities, the level of the regulatory fines, and the duration of the incident containment and recovery. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 159.

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

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

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

Data privacy protection is the process of safeguarding the personal information of individuals from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction. Personal information is any information that can be used to identify, locate, or contact an individual, such as name, address, phone number, email, social security number, etc. When there are plans for a business initiative to make use of personal information, the primary consideration related to data privacy protection is to do not collect or retain data that is not needed. This means that the organization should only collect the minimum amount of personal information that is necessary for the purpose of the business initiative, and should only retain the data for as long as it is required by law or business needs. By doing so, the organization can reduce the risk of data breaches, comply with the data protection regulations, respect the data subjects’ rights, and enhance the trust and reputation of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 159.

The organization control environment is most effective when the controls perform as intended. The controls are the mechanisms or measures that are designed and implemented to prevent, detect, or correct the risks that may affect the achievement of the objectives. The controls perform as intended when they provide reasonable assurance that the risks are mitigated or managed to an acceptable level, and that the objectives are met or exceeded. The performance of the controls can be measured and evaluated by using key performance indicators (KPIs) and key risk indicators (KRIs). The other options are not as indicative of the effectiveness of the control environment, as they are related to the review, implementation, or efficiency of the controls, not the performance or assurance of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 69.

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

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

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

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

To ensure that new IT policies address the enterprise’s requirements, it is important to involve the business owners who are the primary stakeholders of the IT services and processes. Business owners can provide valuable input on the business objectives, risks, and expectations that the IT policies should align with and support. By involving business owners in the policy development process, the IT policies will be more relevant, realistic, and acceptable to the business units. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

 The primary reason to report the information about the new risk scenarios identified after the implementation of Internet of Things (IoT) devices to risk owners is to confirm the impact to the risk profile. The risk profile is a summary of the level and nature of the risks that the organization faces or may face in the future. The risk profile reflects the risk appetite, tolerance, and capacity of the organization, and guides the risk management decisions and actions. The implementation of IoT devices may introduce new risks or increase the likelihood or impact of existing risks, such as data privacy, security, or interoperability issues. Therefore, the information about the new risk scenarios should be reported to the risk owners, who have the authority and responsibility for managing the risks and their responses, to confirm the impact to the risk profile and to determine the appropriate risk treatment plans. The other options are not as primary as confirming the impact to the risk profile, as they are related to the reevaluation, mitigation, or recommendation of the IoT devices, not the confirmation or assessment of the risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: IT Risk Register, page 19.

The most relevant source to reference when updating security awareness training materials is the recent security incidents reported by competitors. This can help to illustrate the real-world threats and consequences of poor security practices, and to motivate the employees to follow the security policies and procedures. Risk management framework, risk register, and global security standards are other sources that may be useful, but they are not as relevant as the recent security incidents. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 9; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 214.

 The best course of action for a risk practitioner when a bank recently incorporated Blockchain technology with the potential to impact known risk within the organization is to analyze the risk and update the risk register as needed. Blockchain technology is a new and emerging technology that may introduce new risks or change the existing risks for the bank. Therefore, the risk practitioner should perform a risk analysis to identify, assess, and evaluate the risks associated with the Blockchain technology, and update the risk register accordingly. Determining whether risk responses are still adequate, analyzing and updating control assessments, and conducting testing of the controls are possible actions that may follow the risk analysis, but they are not the best initial course of action. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

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

 To determine if a risk is under-controlled, the risk practitioner will need to understand the risk tolerance. Risk tolerance is the acceptable or allowable level of variation or deviation from the expected or desired outcomes or objectives. Risk tolerance reflects the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing and able to take. A risk is under-controlled when the risk exposure exceeds the risk tolerance, meaning that the organization is taking on more risk than it can handle or afford. Therefore, the risk practitioner will need to understand the risk tolerance to compare it with the risk exposure and identify the gap or difference. The other options are not as relevant as understanding the risk tolerance, as they are related to the monitoring, identification, or determination of the risk or the IT performance, not the comparison or evaluation of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

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

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

The most important objective from a cost perspective for considering aggregated risk responses in an organization is to address more than one risk response. Aggregated risk responses are risk responses that can affect multiple risks or objectives simultaneously. By addressing more than one risk response, the organization can achieve cost efficiency and effectiveness in risk management. Prioritizing risk response options, reducing likelihood, and reducing impact are other possible objectives, but they are not as important from a cost perspective as addressing more than one risk response. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 10; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 140.

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

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

The most critical factor to consider when determining an organization’s risk appetite is the management culture. The management culture reflects the values, beliefs, and attitudes of the senior management and the board of directors toward risk management. The management culture influences how the organization defines, communicates, and implements its risk appetite and tolerance. Fiscal management practices, business maturity, and budget for implementing security are other factors that may affect the risk appetite, but they are not as critical as the management culture. References = ISACA Certified in Risk andInformation Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

 The main purpose of selecting a risk response is to mitigate the residual risk to be within tolerance. Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying a risk response. Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk response is the process of selecting and implementing actions to address risk. The goal of risk response is to reduce the residual risk to a level that is acceptable to the organization and its stakeholders. The other options are not the main purpose of selecting a risk response, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

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

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

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

The most important step to ensure regulatory requirements are adequately addressed within an organization is to develop a policy framework that addresses regulatory requirements. A policy framework is a set of principles, rules, and standards that guide the organization’s actions and decisions. By developing a policy framework that addresses regulatory requirements, the organization can establish a clear and consistent direction, expectation, and accountability for complying with the relevant laws and regulations. Obtaining necessary resources, performing a gap analysis, and employing IT solutions are other possible steps, but they are not as important as developing a policy framework. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

The internal auditor is the best suited to provide objective input when updating residual risk to reflect the results of control effectiveness. The internal auditor is an independent and impartial function that evaluates the adequacy and effectiveness of the internal controls and reports on the findings and recommendations. The internal auditor can provide an unbiased and reliable assessment of the residual risk, which is the risk that remains after the controls are applied. The other options are not as objective as the internal auditor, as they may have vested interests or conflicts of interest in the control environment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

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