Isaca CRISC Dumps

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 30

Information Technology & Security, page 24

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 22

The most effective way for a large and diversified organization to minimize risk associated with unauthorized software on company devices is to scan end points for applications not included in the asset inventory. An asset inventory is a document that records and tracks all the hardware and software assets that are owned, used, or managed by the organization, such as laptops, tablets, smartphones, servers, applications, etc. An asset inventory helps to identify and classify the assets based on their type, model, location, owner, status, etc. An asset inventory also helps to monitor and control the assets, such as enforcing security policies, applying patches and updates, detecting and resolving issues, etc. Scanningend points for applications not included in the asset inventory helps to minimize the risk of unauthorized software, because it helps to discover and remove any software that is not approved, authorized, or licensed by the organization, and that may pose security, legal, or operational risks, such as malware, spyware, pirated software, etc. The other options are not as effective as scanning end points for applications not included in the asset inventory, although they may provide some protection or compliance for the software assets. Prohibiting the use of cloud-based virtual desktop software, conducting frequent reviews of software licenses, and performing frequent internal audits of enterprise IT infrastructure are all examples of preventive or detective controls, which may help to prevent or deter the installation or use of unauthorized software, or to verify or validate the software assets, but they do not necessarily discover or remove the unauthorized software. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 3-11.

Maturity models are tools that help organizations assess and improve their risk management processes and capabilities. They provide a set of criteria or standards that define different levels of maturity, from ad-hoc to innovative. The primary objective of using maturity models in risk management is to enable strategic alignment, which means ensuring that the risk management activities and objectives are consistent with and support the organization’s mission, vision, values, and goals. By using maturity models, organizations can identify their current level of risk management maturity, compare it with their desired level, and plan and implement actions to close the gap. This way, they can align their risk management practices with their strategic direction and priorities, and enhance their performance and value creation. References = How to Use a Maturity Model in Risk Management — RiskOptics - Reciprocity, Using a Maturity Model to Assess Your Risk Management Program, How to Use a Risk Maturity Model to Level Up · Riskonnect

The risk landscape is the set of internal and external factors and conditions that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, and create or influence the risks that the organization faces. The risk landscape is dynamic and complex, and it may change over time due to various drivers or events, such as technological innovations, market trends, regulatory changes, customer preferences, competitor actions, environmental issues, etc.

The best way to identify changes to the risk landscape is threat modeling, which is the process of identifying, analyzing, and prioritizing the potential threats or sources of harm that may exploit the vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems, and cause adverse impacts or consequences for the organization. Threat modeling can help the organization to anticipate and prepare for the changes in the risk landscape, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the threats.

Threat modeling can be performed using various techniques, such as brainstorming, scenario analysis, attack trees, STRIDE, DREAD, etc. Threat modeling can also be integrated with the risk management process, and aligned with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite.

The other options are not the best ways to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they do not provide the same level of proactivity, comprehensiveness, and effectiveness of identifying and addressing the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Internal audit reports are the documents that provide the results and findings of the internal audits that are performed to assess and evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. Internal audit reports can provide useful information and recommendations on the current state and performance of the organization, and identify the issues or gaps that need to be addressed or improved, but they are not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they areusually retrospective and reactive, and they may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Access reviews are the processes of verifying and validating the access rights and privileges that are granted to the users or entities that interact with the organization’s assets, processes, orsystems, and ensuring that they are appropriate and authorized. Access reviews can provide useful information and feedback on the security and compliance of the organization’s access management, and identify and revoke any unauthorized or unnecessary access rights or privileges, but they are not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they are usually periodic and specific, and they may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Root cause analysis is the process of identifying and understanding the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in a problem or incident that has occurred or may occur in the organization. Root cause analysis can provide useful insights and solutions on the origin and nature of the problem or incident, and prevent or reduce its recurrence or impact, but it is not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because it is usually retrospective and reactive, and it may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 167

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

A high-risk vulnerability in an application is a system flaw or weakness in the application’s code that can be exploited by a malicious actor, potentially leading to a security breach. The risk associated with a high-risk vulnerability in an application is the possibility and impact of such a breach occurring. The risk owner of a high-risk vulnerability in an application is the person or entity who has the authority and responsibility for managing the risk. The risk owner should be able to define the risk appetite, assess the risk level, select and implement the risk response, monitor and report the risk status, and ensure the risk alignment with the business objectives and strategy. The risk owner of a high-risk vulnerability in an application is the business unit, which is the organizational unit that operates the application and derives value from it. The businessunit understands the business needs and expectations of the application, and the potential consequences of a security breach. The business unit also has the resources and incentives to address the risk effectively and efficiently. Therefore, the business unit is the most appropriate risk owner of a high-risk vulnerability in an application. References = Why Assigning a Risk Owner is Important and How to Do It Right, CRISC 351-400 topic3, Foundations of Project Management : Week 2.

Identifying and assessing the risk scenarios associated with IT strategic initiatives is the best risk management approach for the strategic IT planning process, because it helps to understand and evaluate the potential or actual threats or opportunities that may affect the achievement or implementation of the IT strategic initiatives, and to determine the appropriate risk responses and controls. A risk scenario is a hypothetical situation or event that describes the source, cause, consequence, and impact of a risk. A risk scenario can be positive or negative, depending on whether it represents an opportunity or a threat. An IT strategic initiative is a project or program that supports or enables the IT strategy, which is a plan that defines how IT supports and aligns with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy. The strategic IT planning process is a process of developing, implementing, and monitoring the IT strategy and its associated IT strategic initiatives. Identifying and assessing the risk scenarios is the best risk management approach, as it helps to anticipate and prepare for the potential or actual outcomes of the IT strategic initiatives, and to optimize the risk-reward balance and the value delivery of IT. Establishing key performance indicators (KPIs) to track IT strategic initiatives, reviewing the IT strategic plan by the chief information security officer (CISO) and enterprise risk management (ERM), and developing the IT strategic plan from the organization-wide risk management plan are all possible risk management approaches for the strategic IT planning process, but they are not the best approach, as they do not directly address the identification and assessment of the risk scenarios associated with IT strategic initiatives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 37

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 thebest 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

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

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

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

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

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

 The most important information to include when reporting the effectiveness of risk management to senior management is the changes in residual risk levels against acceptable levels, as it indicates how well the risk management process and activities have reduced the risk exposure and impact to the level that is aligned with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. The other options are not the most important information, as they are more related to thedrivers,factors, or outcomes of risk management, respectively, rather than the effectiveness or value of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

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

Whose risk tolerance matters most when making a risk decision depends on the context and the perspective of the decision-maker. However, in general, the business process owner of the exposed assets is the most important stakeholder to consider, as they are accountable for the risks and the outcomes of the risk decisions. The business process owner has the authority, responsibility, and knowledge to manage the risks that affect their business objectives, performance, and reputation. The business process owner also has the best understanding of the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and how to align the risk decisions with the organizational strategy and context. The other options are not the most important stakeholders to consider, although they may have some influence or interest in the risk decisions. Customers who would be affected by a breach are external stakeholders who may have different risk preferences and expectations than the organization, and who may not be fully aware of the risk exposure or mitigation options. Auditors, regulators, and standards organizations are alsoexternal stakeholders who may impose some requirements or constraints on the risk decisions, but who may not have the same level of involvement or impact as the business process owner. The information security manager is an internal stakeholder who may provide some technical expertise or guidance on the risk decisions, but who may not have the same level of authority or accountability as the business process owner. References = Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference?; Principles of risk decision-making; Risk Tolerance - Overview, Factors, and Types of Tolerance; Five Factors to Consider When Establishing Risk Tolerance; Risk Tolerance - Overview, Factors, and Types of Tolerance

An IT risk register is a document that is used as a risk management tool to identify, analyze, and track the potential risks related to the use of information technology within an organization. An IT risk register helps management to understand the organizational risk profile, which is a comprehensive and structured representation of the risks that the organization faces. The risk profile helps the organization to understand its risk exposure, appetite, and tolerance, and to align its risk management strategy with its business objectives and context. The risk register is an essential input for creating and updating the risk profile, as it provides the data and analysis ofthe risks that need to be prioritized and addressed12. The other options are not the best answers, as they are either not directly shown or derived from the IT risk register. Aligning IT processes with business objectives is a goal of IT governance, which may be influenced by the IT risk register, but not solely determined by it. Communicating the enterprise risk management policy is a responsibility of the senior management and the board of directors, which may use the IT risk register as a reference, but not as the main source. Staying current with existing control status is a function of IT audit and assurance, which may rely on the IT risk register as a basis, but not as the only evidence. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Complete Guide to IT Risk Management | CompTIA

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

An independent review is typically sought to provide an objective assessment of the IT risk management program, ensuring that it aligns with the organization’s overall strategy andobjectives. The reviewer can identify areas where the program may not be effectively addressing the organization’s strategic goals or where improvements can be made to better manage IT risks.

Cybersecurity incident response procedures are the plans and actions that an organization takes to respond to and recover from a cybersecurity attack. They include identifying the source and scope of the attack, containing and eradicating the threat, restoring normal operations, and analyzing the root cause and lessons learned. Reviewing cybersecurity incident response procedures is the most effective course of action when the probability of a successful cybersecurity attack is increasing and the potential loss could exceed the organization’s risk appetite, as it helps to prepare the organization for minimizing the impact and duration of the attack, as well as improving the resilience and security posture of the organization.

After identifying new risk events during a project, the project manager’s next step should be to record the scenarios into the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, owners, and status. Recording the scenarios into the risk registerhelps to document and communicate the risks to the project team and stakeholders, and to facilitate the subsequent risk analysis and response processes. The other options are not the next steps, but rather the subsequent steps after recording the scenarios into the risk register. Determining if the scenarios need to be accepted or responded to is part of the risk evaluation and treatment process, which requires a prior risk analysis. Continuing with a qualitative or quantitative risk analysis is part of the risk assessment process, which requires a prior risk identification and documentation. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Risk Identification in Project Management; 6.3. The 5 Steps of the Risk Management Process

Data classification is the process of organizing data in groups based on their attributes and characteristics, and then assigning class labels that describe a set of attributes that hold true for the corresponding data sets1. Data classification helps an organization understand the value of its data, determine whether the data is at risk, and implement controls to mitigate risks1. Data classification also helps an organization comply with relevant industry-specific regulatory mandates such as SOX, HIPAA, PCI DSS, and GDPR1.

The most important criteria to consider when developing a data classification scheme are the business criticality and sensitivity of the data2. Business criticality refers to the impact of data loss or compromise on the organization’s operations, reputation, and objectives2. Sensitivityrefers to the level of confidentiality, integrity, and availability required for the data2. Data that is highly critical and sensitive should be classified and protected accordingly, as it poses the highest risk to the organization if mishandled or breached2.

Some of the best practices for data classification are3:

Inventory your data: Identify all data assets within your organization.

Define data categories: Create a classification scheme that suits your organization’s needs.

Assign responsibility: Designate individuals or teams responsible for data classification.

Implement classification tools: Invest in tools and technologies that facilitate data classification.

Educate and train: Raise awareness and provide guidance on data classification policies and procedures.

Review and audit: Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and compliance of data classification.

References = What is Data Classification? | Best Practices & Data Types | Imperva, What Is Data Classification? The 5 Step Process & Best Practices for Classifying Data | Splunk, Top 10 Best Practices for Securing Your Database - 2023

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.

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

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

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

IT Risk Resources | ISACA

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

Cross Site Scripting Prevention Cheat Sheet - OWASP

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

Difference Between XSS and SQL Injection - GeeksforGeeks

The best way to resolve the concern where a control process has been implemented in response to a new regulatory requirement, but has significantly reduced productivity, is to escalate the issue to senior management. Senior management is the highest level of authority and responsibility in the organization, and they are responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization. Senior management should also oversee the risk management process, and ensure that the controls are aligned with the organization’s goals and values. Escalating the issue to senior management can help to find a balance between complying with the regulatory requirement and maintaining the productivity of the organization. The other options are not as effective or desirable as escalating the issue to senior management, because they either ignore the problem, violate the regulation, or compromise the control.

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

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

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 projectis 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 risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and status. A risk register can help manage and communicate risks throughout the risk management process. A risk register should be updated regularly to reflect the current state of risks and their responses. Due to a change in business processes, an identified risk scenario may no longer require mitigation, as the risk level may have decreased or the risk may have been eliminated. However, the risk should remain in the risk register, as the most important reason is to monitor for potential changes to the risk scenario. This means keeping track of the internal and external factors that may affect the risk scenario, such as new threats, vulnerabilities, opportunities, or controls. Monitoring for potential changes to the risk scenario can help identify and respond to any emerging or reoccurring risks, and ensure that therisk register is accurate and complete. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: Risk Register, p. 41-43.

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the control owners in the IT department should determine whether risk responses still effectively address risk after a restructuring and outsourcing of certain functions. This is because the restructuring and outsourcing may have changed the risk profile, the control environment, and the control activities of the IT department. The control owners should review the existing risk responses and evaluate if they are still appropriate, adequate, and efficient in mitigating the risks associated with the outsourced functions. The control owners should also monitor the performance and compliance of the service providers and ensure that the contractual obligations and service level agreements are met12

1: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Study Guide, 4th Edition, page 33 2: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Handbook, 1st Edition, page 25

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

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 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

The control owner is the person who is responsible for designing, implementing, monitoring, and maintaining a control. The control owner is best suited to determine whether a new control properly mitigates data loss risk within a system, as they have the most knowledge and authority over the control. The control owner should also evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the control and report any issues or gaps to the risk owner.

The other options are not the best suited to determine whether a new control properly mitigates data loss risk within a system. The data owner is the person who has the accountability and authority over the data and its classification. The data owner may not have the technical expertise or access to evaluate the new control. The risk owner is the person who has the accountability and authority to manage a specific risk. The risk owner may not have the detailed knowledge orinvolvement in the new control. The system owner is the person who has the accountability and authority over the system and its operation. The system owner may not have the direct responsibility or oversight of the new control. References = CRISC TOPIC 3 EXAM SHORT Flashcards, CRISC-1-50 topic3 Flashcards, CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question609

Qualitative measures are methods of expressing risk levels using descriptive terms, such as high, medium, or low, based on subjective criteria, such as likelihood, impact, or severity. Qualitative measures are often used to identify and prioritize risks, and to communicate risk information to stakeholders1.

Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the risk response has been implemented. Residual risk reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response, and the need for further action or monitoring2.

Emerging threats are new or evolving sources or causes of risk that have the potential to adversely affect the organization’s objectives, assets, or operations. Emerging threats are oftencharacterized by uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity, and may require innovative or adaptive risk responses3.

The best reason to use qualitative measures to express residual risk levels related to emerging threats is that qualitative measures are better able to incorporate expert judgment. Expert judgment is the opinion or advice of a person or a group of people who have specialized knowledge, skills, or experience in a particular domain or field. Expert judgment can help to:

Provide insights and perspectives on the nature and characteristics of the emerging threats, and their possible causes and consequences

Assess the likelihood and impact of the emerging threats, and their interactions and dependencies with other risks

Evaluate the suitability and effectiveness of the risk responses, and their alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

Identify and recommend the best practices and lessons learned for managing the emerging threats, and for improving the risk management process45

Qualitative measures are better able to incorporate expert judgment than quantitative measures, which are methods of expressing risk levels using numerical or measurable values, such as percentages, probabilities, or monetary amounts. Quantitative measures are often used to estimate and analyze risks, and to support risk decision making1. However, quantitative measures may not be suitable or feasible for expressing residual risk levels related to emerging threats, because:

Quantitative measures require reliable and sufficient data and information, which may not be available or accessible for the emerging threats

Quantitative measures rely on mathematical models and techniques, which may not be able to capture or reflect the complexity and uncertainty of the emerging threats

Quantitative measures may create a false sense of precision or accuracy, which may not be justified or warranted for the emerging threats

Quantitative measures may be influenced or manipulated by biases or assumptions, which may not be valid or appropriate for the emerging threats67

Therefore, qualitative measures are better able to incorporate expert judgment, which can enhance the understanding and management of the residual risk levels related to emerging threats.

The other options are not the best reasons to use qualitative measures to express residual risk levels related to emerging threats, but rather some of the advantages or disadvantages of qualitative measures. Qualitative measures require less ongoing monitoring than quantitative measures, because they are simpler and easier to apply and update. However, this does not mean that qualitative measures can eliminate or reduce the need for monitoring, which is an essential part of the risk management process. Qualitative measures are better aligned to regulatory requirements than quantitative measures, because they are more consistent and comparable across different domains and contexts. However, this does not mean that qualitative measures can satisfy or comply with all the regulatory requirements, which may vary depending on theindustry or sector. Qualitative measures are easier to update than quantitative measures, because they do not depend on complex calculations or formulas. However, this does not mean that qualitative measures can always reflect the current or accurate risk levels, which may change over time or due to external factors. References =

Qualitative Risk Analysis vs. Quantitative Risk Analysis - ISACA

Residual Risk - ISACA

Emerging Threats - ISACA

Expert Judgment - ISACA

Expert Judgment in Project Management: Narrowing the Theory-Practice Gap

Quantitative Risk Analysis - ISACA

Quantitative Risk Analysis: A Critical Review

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

Risk culture encompasses the values, beliefs, and attitudes towards risk within an organization. It significantly influences how risk appetite is defined and communicated. Understanding the organization's risk culture ensures that the established risk appetite aligns with stakeholder expectations and supports effective risk management practices.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics used by organizations to monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their objectives and performance. KRIs also provide early warning signals that help organizations identify, analyze, and address risks before they escalate into significant issues1. Effective KRIs are thosethat are relevant, measurable, predictable, comparable, and informational2. The most important factor for developing effective KRIs is including input from risk and business unit management, as they are the persons who have the best understanding of the risk environment, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the risk factors and impacts of the organization. By including input from risk and business unit management, the organization can ensure that the KRIs are aligned with the organization’s strategy, vision, and mission, and that they reflect the current and emerging risks and their potential consequences. Engaging sponsorship by senior management, utilizing data and resources internal to the organization, and developing in collaboration with internal audit are not the most important factors for developing effective KRIs, as they do not provide the same level of insight and relevance as including input from risk and business unit management. Engaging sponsorship by senior management is a factor that involves obtaining the support and approval of the senior leaders who have the authority and accountability for the organization’s performance and governance. Engaging sponsorship by senior management can help to promote the importance and value of KRIs, and to ensure their communication and implementation across the organization, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are appropriate and accurate for the organization’s risk profile. Utilizing data and resources internal to the organization is a factor that involves using the information and assets that are available within the organization to support or enable the development of KRIs. Utilizing data and resources internal to the organization can help to enhance the quality and reliability of KRIs, and to reduce the cost and complexity of obtaining external data and resources, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are comprehensive and consistent with the organization’s risk environment. Developing in collaboration with internal audit is a factor that involves working with the internal audit function that provides independent and objective assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s risk management. Developing in collaboration with internal audit can help to improve the validity and compliance of KRIs, and to provide feedback and recommendations for improvement, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are relevant and realistic for the organization’s risk objectives and strategies. References = 1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture2: KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva3: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Key Risk Indicators, pp. 181-185.]

Penetration test resultsprovide direct evidence of the vendor’s technical security posture and ability to defend against real-world attacks. This is more effective than reviewing contracts or benchmarking, which are indirect measures.

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

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

•Educating stakeholders on the concepts and benefits of risk management

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

•Encouraging stakeholder participation and collaboration in risk management processes

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

•Reinforcing risk management roles and responsibilities

•Recognizing and rewarding good risk management practices

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

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

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

The primary consideration for determining recovery priorities in a disaster recovery situation is the impact of business disruption on the organization’s mission, objectives, and stakeholders. Business disruption can result in loss of revenue, reputation, customer satisfaction, market share, and competitive advantage. Therefore, the recovery priorities should be based on the criticality of the business processes and functions that support the organization’s value proposition and strategic goals. Data security (A), recovery costs (B), and recovery resource availability (D) are important factors, but they are secondary to the impact of business disruption. Data security should be ensured throughout the recovery process, but it does not determine the recovery order. Recovery costs should be balanced with the benefits of restoring the business operations, but they do not reflect the urgency of the recovery. Recovery resource availability should be assessed and allocated according to the recovery priorities, but it does not define the recovery sequence. (Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 5th Edition, page 982)

Scalable infrastructure ensures the system can handle increased load without failure, thus minimizing the risk of downtime or degraded performance during traffic spikes.

The risk likelihood is the element of the risk register that should be updated to reflect the change of implementing encryption on all databases that host customer data. The risk likelihood is the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring, and it is one of the factors that determine the risk level and priority. By implementing encryption, the organization reduces the risk likelihood of unauthorized access, disclosure, or breach of the customer data, as encryption protects the data from being read or modified by anyone who does not have the decryption key. Therefore, the risk likelihood should be updated to reflect the lower probability of the risk event after applying the encryption control. The other options are not the elements that should be updated, as they are either not affected by or not related to the change of implementing encryption. The inherent risk is the level of risk before applying any controls or mitigation measures, and it does not change after implementing encryption. The risk appetite is the amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, and it is not influenced by the change ofimplementing encryption. The risk tolerance is the acceptable variation between the risk thresholds and thebusiness objectives, and it is not determined by the change of implementing encryption. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Risk Assessment in Project Management | PMI; Risk Assessment Process: Definition, Steps, and Examples; Risk Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Senior management involvement is foundational to an effective risk management framework. Lack of engagement signals inadequate oversight, strategic alignment, and resource commitment, impairing the program's success. This is supported by CRISC's focus on governance and leadership alignment to ensure enterprise risk management objectives are met.

A post-implementation review (PIR) is a process to evaluate whether the objectives of the project were met and whether the project delivered the expected benefits and outcomes1. The primary objective of a risk practitioner performing a PIR of an IT risk mitigation project is to verify that the risk level has been lowered as a result of the project implementation2. This can be done by comparing the actual risk level with theexpected risk level, assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk mitigation controls, and identifying any residual or emergingrisks3. Documenting project lessons learned, validating the project completion, and confirming the project budget are important aspects of a PIR, but they are not the primary objective for a risk practitioner, as they do not directly measure the impact of the project on the risk level4. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.4: Post-Implementation Review, pp. 239-241.

The best metric to verify adherence to the policy that requires critical security patches to be deployed in production within three weeks of patch availability is the maximum time gap between patch availability and deployment, as it measures the longest duration that the organization takes to apply the patches, and ensures that it does not exceed the policy limit. The other options are not the best metrics, as they may not reflect the actual or optimal compliance with the policy, or may not be relevant or measurable for the policy, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

 The best way to address the request for IT risk profile reports associated with specific departments would be to use key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given operational risk1. KRIs can help to monitor the changes in risk levels over time, identify emerging risks, and trigger risk response actions when the risk exceeds the acceptable thresholds2. KRIs can also help to allocate resources for risk mitigation by prioritizing the risks that pose the greatest threat to the business objectives and performance of each department. The other options are not the best ways to address the request, as they do not provide the same level of insight and guidance as KRIs. The cost associated with each control may indicate the efficiency of the risk mitigation, but not the effectiveness or the necessity. Historical risk assessments may provide some baseline data, but not the current or future risk trends. Information from the risk register may include too much detail or irrelevant information, and not the key risk factors that need to be monitored and reported. References = Key Risk Indicators; Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide

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

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

The risk owner is the person or entity that has the accountability and authority to manage a risk. The risk owner should be accountable for monitoring the control environment to ensure controls are effective, as they are responsible for implementing, maintaining, and improving the risk controls, and for reporting and communicating the risk status and performance. The risk owner should also ensure that the controls are aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise, and that they support the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives and value creation. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 244.

Automated data indicating that risk has been reduced provides the most tenable evidence that a business process control is effective, because it shows the actual impact and outcome of thecontrol on the risk level. A demonstration that the control is operating as designed, a successful walk-through of the associated risk assessment, and a management attestation that the control is operating effectively are not the most tenable evidence, because they are based on subjective judgments, assumptions, or expectations, not on objective facts or results. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls. It is important for a risk practitioner to verify that the residual risk is within the acceptable levels defined by the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. This ensures that the controls are effective in reducing the risk exposure to an acceptable level and align with the enterprise’s objectives and strategy. References = CRISC Review Manual 27th Edition, page 131. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

A global policy that accommodates country-specific requirements balances consistency and compliance. It establishes a baseline of controls while allowing adaptation to local laws and cultural differences. Uniform application without adaptation risks non-compliance. Country-specific policies alone may lack global coherence. Therefore, accommodating local requirements within a global policy framework is best practice.

Embedding risk management into day-to-day business processes reflects organizational maturity and integration. It ensures employees consider risk in operational decisions and continuously support the risk management framework.

Conducting interviews with senior management is the best method for determining an enterprise’s current appetite for risk, because it helps to obtain the direct and qualitative input and feedback from the senior management on their expectations and preferences regarding thelevel and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept or pursue, in relation to its objectives and strategy. Risk appetite is the amount and nature of risk that an enterprise is willing to take in order to achieve its objectives and create value. Risk appetite is influenced by factors such as the enterprise’s culture, values, vision, mission, and strategy, as well as the externalenvironment and stakeholders. Risk appetite may vary depending on the context and situation, and may change over time. Conducting interviews with senior management is the best method, as it helps to understand and capture the current and explicit risk appetite of the enterprise, and to align the risk management process and activities with the senior management’s risk vision and direction. Conducting comparative analysis of peer companies, reviewing brokerage firm assessments, and performing trend analysis using prior annual reports are all possible methods for determining an enterprise’s current appetite for risk, but they are not the best method, as they may provide only indirect, quantitative, or historical information, and may not reflect the current and specific risk appetite of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 45

Obtaining a holistic view of IT strategy risk is the primary benefit of conducting a risk workshop using a top-down approach instead of a bottom-up approach, because it helps to identify and assess the risks that may affect the alignment and integration of IT with the organization’s objectives and strategy. A risk workshop is a collaborative and interactive method of conducting a risk assessment, where the risk practitioner facilitates a group discussion with the relevant stakeholders to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks and their controls. A top-down approach is a method of conducting a risk workshop that starts from the high-level or strategic perspective, and then drills down to the lower-level or operational details. A bottom-up approach is a methodof conducting a risk workshop that starts from the low-level or operational details, and then aggregates them to the higher-level or strategic perspective. A top-down approach can offer a holistic view of IT strategy risk, as it helps to understand the big picture and the interrelationships of the risks and their impacts across the organization. A bottom-up approach can offer a detailed view of specific project or process risk, as it helps to capture the granular and technical aspects of the risks and their controls. Therefore, obtaining a holistic view of IT strategy risk is the primary benefit of using a top-down approach, as it supports the strategic alignment and integration of IT with the organization. Identifying specific project risk, understanding risk associated with complex processes, and incorporating subject matter expertise are all possible benefits of conducting a risk workshop, but they are not the primary benefit of using a top-down approach, as they are more suitable for a bottom-up approach. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 87

User acceptance testing (UAT) is a type of validation testing that ensures that the product meets the needs and expectations of the end users and the business stakeholders. UAT is usually conducted by the actual or representative users of the product, who perform various scenarios and tasks to verify that the product functions correctly and satisfies the business requirements. UAT is an important step in the software development life cycle, as it helps to identify and resolve any issues or gaps between the product and the requirements before the product is released.

If UAT is not conducted when implementing a new application, the greatest concern is that the application could fail to meet the defined business requirements, which could result in user dissatisfaction, loss of trust,reduced productivity, increased costs, and missed opportunities. The application may have technical defects, security vulnerabilities, or redundant processes, but these are not the primary purpose of UAT. UAT is focused on validating the business value and usability of the product, not the technical quality or security of the product. Therefore, the lack ofUAT could have a significant impact on the alignment of the product with the business objectives and user needs.

The most important thing for mitigating ethical risk when establishing accountability for control ownership is to ensure that the performance metrics balance business goals with risk appetite. Performance metrics are the measures that evaluate the achievement of the objectives or the performance of the processes or controls. Business goals are the desired or expected outcomes or results of the business activities or processes. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing and able to take. Ethical risk is the risk that arises from the violation or breach of the ethical principles or standards of the organization or the profession. To mitigate ethical risk, the performance metrics should balance business goals with risk appetite, meaning that they should not encourage or reward excessive or inappropriate risk-taking or unethical behavior, but rather promote and support responsible and ethical risk management and decision making. The other options are not as important as ensuring performance metrics balance business goals with risk appetite, as they are related to the documentation, communication, or monitoring of the processes or controls, not the evaluation or alignment of the performance metrics. 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 risk practitioner’s primary consideration when participating in development of a new IT risk strategy should be the risk culture of the organization. Risk culture is the set of values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors that shape how the organization perceives, manages, and responds to risks. Risk culture influences the organization’s risk appetite, risk objectives, risk policies, risk processes, and risk performance. The risk practitioner should consider the risk culture whendeveloping a new IT risk strategy, because it helps to align the IT risk strategy with the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and to ensure that the IT risk strategy is supported and accepted by the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, employees, customers, regulators, etc. The risk practitioner should also consider the risk culture when developing a new IT risk strategy, because it helps to identify and addressany gaps, issues, or challenges that may affect the implementation and effectiveness of the IT risk strategy, such as lack of awareness, communication, coordination, or accountability. The other options are not the primary consideration for the risk practitioner, although they may be related to the IT risk strategy. Scale of technology, risk indicators, and proposed risk budget are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the IT risk strategy, but they do not necessarily reflector influence the organization’s risk culture. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-9.

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

Risk Acceptance Framework:

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

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

Importance of Authorized Individuals:

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

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

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

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

The risk practitioner’s best course of action is to review the design of the machine learning model against the control objectives, because this will help to evaluate the suitability, effectiveness, and reliability of the model as a control measure. A machine learning model is a type of artificial intelligence that can learn from data and make predictions or decisions based on the data. A machine learning model can be used to automate or enhance the access management process, such as by identifying excessive access privileges, detecting unauthorized access, or recommending access rights. However, a machine learning model also introduces new risks and challenges, such as data quality, model accuracy, model bias, model explainability, model security, and model governance. Therefore, the risk practitioner should review the design of the machine learning model against the control objectives, which are the specific goals or outcomes that the control is intended to achieve. The control objectives can be derived from the IT riskmanagement strategy, the IT governance framework, the IT policies and standards, and the regulatory requirements. The review of the machine learning model should cover the following aspects: - The data sources and inputs: The risk practitioner should verify that the data used to train and test the machine learning model is relevant, complete, accurate, consistent, and representative of the access management process and the access rights. The risk practitioner should also check that the data is collected, stored, processed, and transmitted in a secure and compliant manner, and that the data privacy and confidentiality are protected. - The model algorithms and outputs: The risk practitioner should validate that the model algorithms are appropriate, robust, and transparent for the access management process and the control objectives. The risk practitioner should also evaluate that the model outputs are accurate, reliable, and interpretable, and that they provide meaningful and actionable insights orrecommendations for the access management process and the control objectives. - The model performance and monitoring: The riskpractitioner should measure and monitor the model performance and effectiveness against the control objectives and the predefined metrics and indicators. The risk practitioner should also ensure that the model is updated and maintained regularly to reflect the changes in the access management process and the access rights, and that the model is audited and reviewed periodically to ensure its compliance and quality. By reviewing the design of the machine learning model against the control objectives, the risk practitioner can ensure that the model is fit for purpose and adds value to the access management process and the control objectives. The risk practitioner can also identify and mitigate any potential risks or issues that may arise from the use of the machine learning model as a control measure. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.3: Control Design and Implementation, pp. 124-1271, Manage roles in your workspace - Azure Machine Learning2, Dataset Inference: Ownership Resolution in Machine Learning3

Mapping granular scenarios to high-level register items ensures consistency and alignment across different levels of risk management. This approach supportsIntegrated Risk Management Frameworks.

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

The primary concern is the immediate risk of undetected threats due to missing endpoint protection. Addressing this ensures the organization's ability to detect and respond to security incidents, aligning withIncident Detection and Responseprinciples.

Developing a risk response plan is the best action to address the risk scenarios with high impact and low likelihood of occurrence, because it helps to define and implement the appropriate actions to reduce or eliminate the risk, or to prepare for and recover from the potential consequences. A risk response plan is a document that outlines the strategies and tactics for managing the identified risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risk. A risk response plan also assigns the roles and responsibilities for the risk owners and stakeholders, and sets the timelines and budgets for the risk response activities. A risk scenario with high impact and low likelihood of occurrence is a rare but severe event that may cause significant disruption or damage to the organization or its objectives, such as a natural disaster, a cyberattack, or a pandemic. Therefore, developing a risk response plan is the best action to address these scenarios, as it helps to minimize the exposure and impact of the risk, and to enhance the resilience and recovery of the organization. Assembling an incident response team, creating a disaster recovery plan (DRP), and initiating a business impact analysis (BIA) are all important actions to perform as part of the risk response plan, but they are not the best action, as they do not cover the whole spectrum of risk response strategies and activities. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2, page 103

 According to the CRISC Review Manual1, single sign-on (SSO) is a method of authentication that allows a user to access multiple systems or applications with a single set of credentials. SSO can improve user convenience and productivity, but it also introduces some security risks. The greatest concern as a result of a single sign-on implementation is that unauthorized access may be gained to multiple systems, as this can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data and resources stored on those systems. If an attacker obtains the SSO credentials of a user, either by phishing, malware, or other means, they can Laccess all the systems or applications that the user is authorized for, without any additional authentication or verification. This can expose the organization to various threats, such as data leakage, theft, loss, corruption, manipulation, or misuse2345. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 240, 253.

The risk practitioner’s best course of action when an organization has been made aware of a newly discovered critical vulnerability in a regulatory reporting system is to perform an impactassessment, as it involves estimating the potential consequences or damage that the vulnerability may cause to the system and its related business processes, and prioritizing the risk response accordingly. The other options are not the best courses of action, as they may not address the urgency or severity of the vulnerability, or may require the prior knowledge of the impact or risk level, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

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

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

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. Newsystem 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 tojustify 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.

Implementing an emergency change authorization process is the best control for an organization that allows programmers to change production systems in emergency situations, because it helps to ensure that the changes are justified, approved, documented, and tested before they are implemented, and that they are monitored and reviewed after they are implemented. An emergency change is a change that is required to resolve or prevent a critical issue or incident that may affect the availability, performance, or security of the production systems. A production system is a system that is used to support or enable the operational or business functions or processes of the organization. An emergency change authorization process is a process that defines the roles and responsibilities, criteria and procedures, and tools and techniques for managing and controlling the emergency changes. Implementing an emergency change authorization process is the best control, as it helps to minimize the risks and impacts of theemergency changes, and to maintain the integrity and reliability of the production systems. Periodically reviewing operator logs, limiting the number of super users, and reviewing the programmers’ emergency change reports are all possible controls for an organization that allows programmers to change production systems in emergency situations, but they are not the best control, as they do not provide a comprehensive and consistent approach to the emergency change management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 208

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

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

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

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

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 ofverification 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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, senior management support is the commitment and involvement of the top-level executives and leaders in the risk management process. Senior management support is the most important enabler of effective risk management, as it helps to establish and communicate the risk vision, strategy, and culture of the organization. Senior management support also helps to allocate the necessary resources, authority, and accountability for risk management, and to ensure the alignment of the risk management objectives and activities with the organization’s strategy, goals, and values. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 198.

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that management is willing to allow for any particular risk as it pursues its objectives. Risk tolerance provides a helpful reference point when communicating the results of a risk assessment to stakeholders, as it helps to compare the current level of risk exposure with the desired level of risk exposure, and to prioritize and allocate resources for risk response. Risk tolerance also helps to align the risk assessment results with the stakeholder expectations and preferences, and to facilitate risk-based decision making. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 192.

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.

The organization has adopted the risk treatment of transfer, which means that it has shifted some or all of the potential negative consequences of a risk event to another party, such as a vendor, an insurer, or a partner. By including penalties for loss of availability in the contract, the organization has transferred the financial impact of a service disruption to the vendor, who will be liable for compensating the organization for the loss. Transfer does not eliminate the risk, but it reduces the organization’s exposure to the risk.

Quantifying the value of a single asset helps the organization to understand the consequences of risk materializing, as it indicates how much impact or loss the organization would suffer if the asset is compromised, damaged, or destroyed by a threat. The value of an asset can be determined by various methods, such as the cost of acquisition, replacement, or restoration, the market value, the income or revenue generated, or the impact on the business objectives or reputation. The other options are not the best description of what quantifying the value of a single asset helps the organization to understand, as they are either too broad (overall effectiveness of risk management, necessity of developing a risk strategy) or not directly related to the asset value (organization’s risk threshold). References = IT Asset Valuation, Risk Assessment and Control Implementation Model; How to quantify assets?; Asset Valuation - Definition, Methods, and Importance

The best course of action when a new application is added to the environment after testing of the SSO control has been completed is to initiate a retest of the full control, as it may reveal any new issues or gaps that the new application may introduce to the SSO control, and ensure that the control remains effective and adequate. Retesting the control using the new application as the only sample, reviewing the corresponding change control documentation, and re-evaluating the control during the next assessment are not the best courses of action, as they may not provide sufficient assurance, evidence, or timeliness of the control testing, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

Monitoring the percentage of patches deployed within the target time frame is a critical key control indicator for the patch management process. It reflects the organization's ability to apply necessary updates promptly, reducing exposure to known vulnerabilities. Timely patch deployment is essential for maintaining system security and compliance with organizational policies.​

Reporting risk assessment results to senior management is an essential part of risk communication, which is the process of sharing relevant and timely information about the risk exposure and risk management activities with the stakeholders. The most important benefit of reporting risk assessment results to senior management is to facilitate risk-aware decision making, which is the process of incorporating the risk information and analysis into the strategic and operational decisions of the organization. By reporting the risk assessment results, the risk practitioner can provide senior management with the insight and understanding of the current and potential risks, their likelihood and impact, their interrelationships and dependencies, and their alignment with the risk appetite and tolerance. This can help senior management to prioritize the risks, allocate the resources, select the risk responses, monitor the risk performance, and evaluate the risk outcomes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 105.

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.

By aligning risk scenarios with business objectives, risk practitioners can accurately measure the potential loss (materiality) based on business value. This enhances prioritization and allows for risk treatment to be directed toward what impacts the organization’s mission and goals the most.

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

A purchase order approval process is a set of procedures that companies use to authorize the purchase of goods or services from suppliers1. This process typically involves multiple levels of approvals, ensuring that purchases are compliant with company regulations and policies, and within budget limitations1. Sometimes, a department may be granted an exception to bypass the existing approval process for purchase orders, for example, due to urgency, emergency, or special circumstances2. However, such exceptions should not compromise the effectiveness and integrity of the purchase order approval process, and should be properly documented and justified2. Therefore, the risk practitioner should verify that the exception has been approved by senior management, as they are ultimately responsible for setting and overseeing the purchase order approval process, and for ensuring that the exceptions are reasonable and aligned with the company’s objectives and risk appetite3. Internal audit is not the correct answer, as they are not involved in approving the purchase order approval process or its exceptions. Internal audit’s role is to provide independent assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of thepurchase order approval process and its controls, and to report any issues or recommendations for improvement4. Control owner is not the correct answer, as they are not involved in approving the purchase order approval process or its exceptions. Control owner’s role is to design, implement, and operate the controls that support the purchase order approval process, and to monitor and report on the performance and compliance of the controls5. Risk manager is not the correct answer, as they are not involved in approving the purchase order approval process or its exceptions. Risk manager’s role is to identify, assess, and mitigate the risks associated with the purchase order approval process, and to communicate and report on the risk status and issues6. References = 1: A Step-by-Step Guide to a Purchase Order Approval Process2: Purchase Order Exceptions | Fordham3: Purchase Order (PO) Approval Process and Approval Workflow - ProcureDesk4: IT Risk Resources | ISACA5: CRISC Resources [updated 2021] | Infosec6: Riskand Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

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

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

 Understanding KPIs:

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

 Process Inefficiency Despite No Control Issues:

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

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

 Steps for Recalibration:

Review the current KPI and its alignment with process objectives.

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

Validate the recalibrated KPI with historical data to ensure accuracy.

 Comparing Other Actions:

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

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

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

 References:

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

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

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

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

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

The control owner is the person who is responsible for ensuring that the control is designed to effectively address risk. The control owner is also responsible for implementing, operating, monitoring, and maintaining the control. The control owner should ensure that the control is aligned with the risk owner’s risk appetite and tolerance, and that the control is periodically reviewed and updated to reflect changes in the risk environment. The risk manager, the control tester, and the risk owner are not directly responsible for the design of the control, although they may provide input, feedback, or approval. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 1-15.

The most effective way to mitigate the risk of unintentional data disclosure through the use of social media sites is to conduct user awareness training. User awareness training is a process of educating and informing the users about the security policies, procedures, and practices that are relevant and applicable to their roles and responsibilities. User awareness training can help to increase the knowledge, understanding, and compliance of the users regarding the data protection and privacy requirements, and the potential risks and consequences of data disclosure through social media sites. User awareness training can also help to influence the behavior, attitude, and culture of the users toward data security and privacy. The other options are not as effective as conducting user awareness training, as they are related to the technical, procedural, or contractual measures to mitigate the risk, not the human or behavioral measures to mitigate the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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

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

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

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

The 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 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

According to the ISACA CRISC Review Manual, an enterprise risk management (ERM) process is a holistic approach to identifying, analyzing, responding to, and monitoring all types of risk that affect the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives. The ERM process should consider all types of risk, including strategic, operational, financial, compliance, and reputational risks. Among these, strategic risks are the most important, as they have the potential to affect the enterprise’s mission, vision, and goals. Therefore, risk with strategic impact should be includedin the ERM process. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 17.

A payroll manager discovers that fields in certain payroll reports have been modified without authorization. This indicates that there is a risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction of sensitive data, such as employee information, payroll records, tax returns, etc.

A control weakness that could have contributed most to this problem is that the programmer had access to the production programs. This means that the programmer could potentially alter the source code or configuration of the payroll software without proper authorization or approval.

The other options are not control weaknesses that could have contributed most to this problem. They are either irrelevant or less likely to cause unauthorized changes in the payroll software.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 12

Information Technology & Security, page 6

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 4

 The most important thing for an organization to have in place when developing a risk management framework is a strategic approach to risk including an established risk appetite, as this provides the direction, scope, and objectives of the risk management process, and defines the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or avoid in pursuit of its goals. A strategic approach to risk aligns the risk management framework with the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, and ensures that the risk management activities support the achievement of the desired outcomes. An established risk appetite sets the boundaries and criteria for risk decision making, and guides the selection and implementation of risk responses. The other options are not the most important things for an organization to have in place when developing a risk management framework, although they may be useful or necessary components of it. A risk-based internal audit plan is a tool that helps to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of the risk management framework, but it does not define or drive the risk management process. A control function within the risk management team is a role that helps to implement and monitor the risk controls, but it does not determine or influence the risk strategy or appetite. An organization-wide risk awareness training program is a method that helps to enhance the risk culture and competence of the organization, but it does not establish or communicate the risk approach or appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, page 23.

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

New regulatory requirements impacting IT are those that impose new obligations, restrictions, or standards on how an organization uses, manages, or secures its IT systems, data, or services1. Examples of such regulations include the GDPR, the CCPA, the HIPAA, or the PCI-DSS2. New regulatory requirements impacting IT can pose significant challenges and risks for an organization, such as:

Compliance costs and efforts, such as updating policies, procedures, and systems, training staff, or hiring experts

Noncompliance penalties and consequences, such as fines, lawsuits, sanctions, or reputational damages

Operational disruptions or inefficiencies, such as system changes, data migrations, or service interruptions

Competitive disadvantages or opportunities, such as losing or gaining customers, partners, or markets3

The first step that should be done when a company is made aware of new regulatory requirements impacting IT is to review the risk tolerance and appetite. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that an organization is willing to accept around its risk appetite. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to take in order to meet its strategic objectives. By reviewing the risk tolerance and appetite, the company can:

Establish a clear and consistent understanding of the organization’s goals, values, and expectations regarding the new regulatory requirements impacting IT

Assess the current and potential impacts of the new regulatory requirements impacting IT on the organization’s performance, operations, or assets

Determine the level of risk exposure and acceptance that the organization is comfortable with, and identify the risk thresholds or limits that should not be exceeded

Align the risk management strategies and actions with the organization’s risk tolerance and appetite, and prioritize the most critical and urgent risks to be addressed

Communicate and report the risk tolerance and appetite to the stakeholders and regulators, and ensure transparency and accountability

References = Regulating emerging technology | Deloitte Insights, Ten Key Regulatory Challenges of 2024 - kpmg.com, The Risks of Non-Compliance with Data Protection Laws, [Risk Tolerance - COSO], [Risk Appetite - COSO], [Risk Appetite and Tolerance - IRM]

Updating a risk register with assessment results for a key project must primarily capture action plans to address risk scenarios requiring treatment.

Risk Register Purpose:

Documentation of Risks:The risk register is a central repository for all identified risks and their respective treatment plans. It ensures that all risks are documented, tracked, and managed throughout the project lifecycle.

Action Plans:It is crucial to document action plans for risks that require treatment. This ensures that there are clear strategies in place to mitigate or manage these risks.

Importance of Action Plans:

Mitigation and Management:Action plans detail the steps necessary to mitigate identified risks, providing a clear path for risk management. This is vital for ensuring that risks do not negatively impact the project.

Accountability and Tracking:Including action plans in the risk register assigns responsibility and timelines for risk treatment, which is essential for accountability and tracking progress.

The greatest security risk in this scenario is that data may be commingled with other tenants’ data on the public cloud infrastructure. Data commingling occurs when data from different sources or customers are mixed together without proper segregation or encryption. This may result in data leakage, unauthorized access, or loss of confidentiality and integrity. Data commingling is a common challenge in public cloud environments, where multiple customers share the same physical resources and network. System downtime, infrastructure management, and cloud provider certification are also potential risks in this scenario, butthey are not as great as data commingling. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.1, page 2451

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 638.

A treatment plan status is a report that shows the current status and progress of the risk mitigation actions and activities that are implemented to reduce the risk exposure of the organization. A treatment plan status would provide the most useful information to a risk owner when reviewing the progress of risk mitigation, as it can help to monitor and evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the risk controls, and to identify and address any issues or gaps that may arise during the implementation. A treatment plan status can also provide feedback and information to the risk owners and stakeholders, and enable them to adjust the risk strategy and response actions accordingly. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 257. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 257. ISACACertified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 257. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

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.

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

When evaluating enterprise IT risk management, it is most important to confirm the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to take in order to meet its strategic objectives3. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that an organization is willing to accept around its risk appetite4. By confirming the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, the evaluation can:

Ensure that the enterprise IT risk management is consistent and compatible with the organization’s risk culture and vision

Provide clear and measurable criteria and boundaries for assessing and prioritizing the IT risks and their impacts

Guide the selection and implementation of the appropriate risk responses and controls that balance the costs and benefits of risk mitigation

Enable the monitoring and reporting of the IT risk performance and outcomes, and the adjustment of the IT risk strategy and objectives as needed5

References = Enterprise IT Risk Management - ISACA, Enterprise Risk Management - Wikipedia, Risk Appetite - COSO, Risk Tolerance - COSO, Risk Appetite and Tolerance - IRM

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 ofthe 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

The observation from a third-party service provider review that would be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner is that the service level agreements (SLAs) have not been met over the last quarter, as it indicates a significant performance issue or breach that may affect the quality, functionality, or security of the outsourced services, and may require a remediation or escalation action. The other options are not the greatest concerns, as they may not indicate a performance issue or breach, but rather a contractual, personnel, or financial issue, respectively, that may not affect the outsourced services directly or significantly. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

The conditional approval of the CIO’s proposal indicates the organization’s risk appetite. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. By setting a limit for expenditures before final approval, senior management isexpressing their willingness to take a calculated risk with the new technology, but also their desire to control the potential loss or harm. Risk capacity, management capability, and treatment strategy are other possible factors, but they are not as relevant as risk appetite. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97

Thebusiness operational requirementsshould be the central consideration when crafting a risk management strategy. This ensures that risk management aligns with and supports business objectives, a core principle in ISACA’s risk management framework.

===========

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner with the use of a vulnerability scanning tool is the inaccurate reporting of results. A vulnerability scanning tool is a software that scans the network or system for known vulnerabilities and generates a report of the findings. However, the tool may produce false positives (reporting vulnerabilities that do not exist) or false negatives (missing vulnerabilities that do exist). This can lead to incorrect risk assessment, ineffective risk response, and wasted resources. Increased time to remediate vulnerabilities, increased number of vulnerabilities, and network performance degradation are other possible concerns, but they are not as critical as the inaccurate reporting of results. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Change and Configuration Management - ISACA]

The acquisition phase of the system development life cycle (SDLC) is the phase where the organization decides to purchase a new IT system from an external vendor or develop it internally. During this phase, the identified risks will most likely lead to architecture and design trade-offs, as the organization will have to balance the cost, quality, functionality, security, and performance of the new IT system. The organization will have to evaluate the different options and alternatives available, and select the one that best meets the business needs and the risk appetite. The other phases of the SDLC are not as likely to involve architecture and design trade-offs, as they are more focused on implementing, testing, deploying, and maintaining the new ITsystem. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

The risk appetite of an organization is the amount and type of risk that it is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives1. Technology risk is the risk related to the use of information and technology in theorganization2. If an organization has raised its risk appetite for technology risk, it means that it is willing to accept more risk in exchange for more potential benefits from technology initiatives. This would likely result in lower risk management cost, as the organization would spend less on implementing and maintaining controls to mitigate technology risk. The other options are not the most likely results of raising the risk appetite for technology risk. Increased inherent risk is the risk before considering the effect of controls3, and it is not directly affected by the risk appetite. Higher risk management cost would be the opposite of the expected outcome, as the organization would reduce its risk management efforts. Decreased residual risk is the risk after considering the effect of controls3, and it would also be the opposite of the expected outcome, as the organization would accept more risk exposure. References = Organisations must define their IT risk appetite and tolerance; IT Risk Resources; CRISC | What Accurate CRISC Free Download Is

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 180

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The most important characteristic of a key risk indicator (KRI) to enable decision-making is illustrating changes in risk trends, as it provides a clear and timely indication of the direction and magnitude of the risk level and exposure, and enables the stakeholders to take proactive andappropriate actions to address the risk. The other options are not the most important characteristics, as they are more related to the monitoring, measurement, or identification of the risk, respectively, rather than the illustration of the risk trends. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

According to the Hierarchy of Controls, the most effective way to prevent and control hazards is to eliminate them or substitute them with safer alternatives. In this case, the hazard is the potential leakage of customer data by the vendor. Therefore, the most effective control would be to eliminate or substitute the customer data with masked or anonymized data fields. This would prevent the vendor from accessing or disclosing any sensitive or identifiable information about the customers. Masking customer data fields is an example of an engineering control, which reduces or prevents hazards from coming into contact with workers or third parties. References = Hierarchy of Controls, 5 Risk Control Measures In The Workplace

•Risk acceptance is a status quo risk response, where the risk owner acknowledges the risk exists but accepts it with minimal response1. Risk acceptance may be appropriate when the cost of other risk responses exceeds the value that would be gained, or when the risk is below the risk acceptance criteria2.

•Risk acceptance criteria are the criteria used as a basis for decisions about acceptable risk2. They should be established before conducting a risk assessment, and they may be influenced by factors such as utility, equality, technology, and risk perception2. Different organizations and countries may have different risk acceptance criteria, depending on their context and values3.

•In this scenario, the organization has conducted a risk assessment for regulatory compliance, and has identified only one possible mitigating control. However, the cost of the control is higher than the penalty of noncompliance, which implies that the risk is below the risk acceptancecriteria. Therefore, the best recommendation is to accept the risk with management sign-off, which means that the management agrees to take the risk and is accountable for the consequences.

•Ignoring the risk until the regulatory body conducts a compliance check (option B) is not a good recommendation, as it may expose the organization to legal, financial, or reputational damage. Moreover, ignoring the risk may violate the principle of risk reduction, which states that risks should be reduced wherever practicable2.

•Mitigating the risk with the identified control (option C) is not a good recommendation, as it may not be cost-effective or efficient for the organization. The cost of the control is higher than the penalty ofnoncompliance, which means that the organization would spend more resources than necessary to reduce the risk. Moreover, mitigating the risk may not be aligned with the principle of utility, which states that resources should be used as efficiently as possible for the society as a whole2.

•Transferring the risk by buying insurance (option D) is not a good recommendation, as it may not be feasible or beneficial for the organization. Transferring the risk means that the organization shifts the responsibility or burden of the risk to another party, such as an insurer, a contractor, or a partner1. However, transferring the risk does not eliminate the risk, and it may incur additional costs or complications for the organization. Moreover, transferring the risk may not be possible or acceptable for some types of regulatory compliance risks, such as those related to health, safety, or environmental standards3.

A risk awareness program is a set of activities that aim to educate and inform employees about the organization’s risk culture, policies, and procedures. A risk awareness program can help improve an organization’s risk culture by enhancing the employees’ understanding of risk, their roles and responsibilities in risk management, and the benefits of risk mitigation. A risk awareness program can also foster a culture of openness, trust, and collaboration among employees, managers, and stakeholders, which can improve the organization’s risk performance and resilience.

Maintaining a documented risk register, rewarding employees for reporting security incidents, and allocating resources for risk remediation are also important aspects of risk management, but they do not directly address the organization’s risk culture, which is the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes that influence how risk is perceived and handled within the organization.

A noncompliant control is a control that does not meet the requirements or standards of an audit, regulation, or policy. A noncompliant control can expose the organization to risks such as errors, fraud, or breaches. When a noncompliant control is identified, the service provider and the client should work together to resolve the issue as soon as possible. However, sometimes the resolution may not be feasible or cost-effective, and the client may decide to accept the risk associated with the noncompliant control.

In this case, the service provider’s most appropriate action would be to ask the client to document the formal risk acceptance for the provider. This means that the client should acknowledge the existence and consequences of the noncompliant control, and provide a written justification for accepting the risk. The risk acceptance document should also specify the roles and responsibilities of the service provider and the client, and the duration and conditions of the risk acceptance. The risk acceptance document should be signed by the client’s senior management and the service provider’s management, and kept as part of the audit evidence.

The other options are not appropriate actions for the service provider. Developing a risk remediation plan overriding the client’s decision would be disrespectful and unprofessional, as it would ignore the client’s authority and preference. Making a note for this item in the next audit explaining the situation would be insufficient and misleading, as it would imply that the issue is still unresolved and that the service provider is responsible for it. Insisting that the remediation occur for the benefit of other customers would be unreasonable and impractical, as it woulddisregard the client’s business needs and constraints, and potentially harm the relationship between the service provider and the client. References =

Risk Acceptance - Institute of Internal Auditors

New Guidance on the Evaluation of Non-compliance with the Risk Assessment Standard and its Peer Review Impact - REVISED

The Impact of Non-compliance: Understanding The Risks And Consequences

A denial-of-service (DoS) attack is a type of cyberattack that aims to disrupt or disable the normal functioning of a system or network by overwhelming it with excessive traffic or requests.

The chief technology officer (CTO) has decided to accept the risk associated with the potential loss from a DoS attack. This means that the CTO has determined that the cost or effort of implementing or maintaining controls to prevent or reduce the impact of a DoS attack is not justified by the expected benefits or savings, and that the organization is willing to bear the consequences of a DoS attack if it occurs.

The best course of action for the risk practitioner in this situation is to identify key risk indicators (KRIs) for ongoing monitoring. This means that the risk practitioner should define and measure the metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to the DoS attack risk, such as the frequency, duration, or severity of the attacks, the availability, performance, or security of the systems or networks, the customer satisfaction, reputation, or revenue of the organization, etc.

Identifying KRIs for ongoing monitoring helps to track and evaluate the actual results and outcomes of the risk acceptance decision, compare them with the risk appetite and tolerance ofthe organization, identify any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and report them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

Reviewing the impact to the IT environment is the most important task for a risk practitioner to perform after the announcement of a new IT regulatory requirement, because it helps to identify and assess the gaps and risks that the new requirement may introduce or affect. A regulatory requirement is a rule or standard that an organization must comply with to meet the expectations of a regulator, such as a government agency or an industry body. A new regulatory requirement may impose new obligations, restrictions, or expectations on the organization, especially on its IT environment, which supports the business processes and functions. Therefore,reviewing the impact to the IT environment is the first step to understand the implications and implications of the new requirement, and to plan the appropriate actions to achieve compliance. Preparing an IT risk mitigation strategy, escalating to senior management, and performing a cost-benefit analysis are all important tasks to perform after reviewing the impact to the IT environment, but they are not the most important task, as they depend on the results of the impact review. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 153

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 is a key factor in communicating the risk associated with IT in business terms, because it helps to align the IT risk management with the business strategy and goals. Risk appetite also helps to define the risk tolerance and thresholds, which are the acceptable levels of variation around the objectives. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not essential for communicating the risk associated with IT in business terms. Compliance objectives are the objectives that an organization must achieve to comply with the applicable laws, regulations, standards, andcontracts. Organizational objectives are the objectives that an organization sets to achieve its mission, vision, and values. Inherent and residual risk are the risk levels before and after applying the risk responses, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 66.

 The risk practitioner’s best recommendation is to consider providing additional system resources to this job, as this would help to reduce the likelihood and impact of the risk of delaying financial reporting. Providing additional system resources, such as memory, CPU, disk space, or bandwidth, can improve the performance and efficiency of the application and the scheduled job. This can also help to avoid potential errors, failures, or interruptions that could affect the quality and timeliness of the financial data and reporting.

The other options are not the best recommendations for this situation. Implementing database activity and capacity monitoring is a good practice to identify and analyze the root causes of performance issues, but it does not directly address the risk of delaying financial reporting. Ensuring the business is aware of the risk is an important step to communicate and escalate the risk, but it does not provide a solution or mitigation strategy. Ensuring the enterprise has a process to detect such situations is a preventive measure to avoid or minimize the occurrence ofthe risk, but it does not eliminate or reduce the risk. References = Practical Recommendations for Better Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA, HR Risk Management: A Practitioner’s Guide - AIHR, Isaca CRISC today updated questions - Verified by Isaca Experts

A risk register is a document that is used as a risk management tool to identify and track risks that may affect a project or an organization1. A risk register should be updated regularly to reflect the current status and changes of the risks, as well as the actions taken to mitigate or resolve them2. The most comprehensive information for updating a risk register would come from the results of the latest risk assessment, which is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts3. A risk assessment provides a detailed and systematic overview of the risks, theirsources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences, as well as the existing and planned controls andresponses4. A risk assessment also helps to prioritize the risks based on their level of exposure and urgency, and to align them with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance5. Therefore, the results of the latest risk assessment would provide the most relevant and complete information for updating a risk register and ensuring that it reflects the current risk profile and situation of the project or the organization. Results of a risk forecasting analysis are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a complete picture of the risks and their impacts. A risk forecasting analysis is a technique that uses historical data, trends, and scenarios to estimate the potential outcomes and impacts of future events that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance6. A risk forecasting analysis can help to anticipate and prepare for the risks, but it does not provide specific information on the sources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. A review ofcompliance regulations is not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as it does not cover all the aspects and dimensions of risk management. A review of compliance regulations is a process that involves checking and verifying that the organization’s activities, processes, and systems are in accordance with the applicable laws, rules, and standards7. A review of compliance regulations can help to identify and mitigate the risks related to legal or regulatory violations, but it does not provide specific information on the other types and sources of risks, such as operational, strategic, financial, or reputational risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. Findings of the most recent audit are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a current and holistic view of the risks and their impacts. An audit is an independent examination and evaluation of the organization’s activities, processes, and systems, to provide assurance and advice on their adequacy and effectiveness. An audit can help to identify and report the issues or gaps in the organization’s risk management, but it does not provide specific information on the current status and changes of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

Risk Profile - CIO Wiki

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

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

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

Preventive and Detective Controls - CIO Wiki

Control Effectiveness and Efficiency - CIO Wiki

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

B. maximum tolerable loss of data.

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

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

Conducting a root cause analysis is the best course of action for an IT business owner following an unexpected increase in emergency changes, as it helps to identify and address the underlying cause(s) of the problem and prevent it from recurring in the future. A root cause analysis is a systematic process of finding and resolving the fundamental factors that contribute to a specific issue or event. A root cause analysis can help to improve the quality and reliability of the IT services and processes, reduce the costs and risks associated with emergency changes, and enhance the customer satisfaction and trust.

The other options are not the best courses of action for an IT business owner following an unexpected increase in emergency changes. Evaluating the impact to control objectives is an important step to assess the potential consequences of the emergency changes on the IT governance and risk management, but it does not provide a solution or mitigation strategy for the problem. Validating the adequacy of current processes is a good practice to ensure that the IT processes are aligned with the business needs and objectives, but it does not address the specific cause(s) of the emergency changes. Reconfiguring the IT infrastructure is a possible action to implement the emergency changes, but it does not prevent the occurrence or recurrence of the problem. References = IT Business Owner’s Best Course of Action Following Unexpected Increase …, ITIL Change Types: Standard vs Normal vs Emergency - Freshworks, Emergency Change Management: Please Stop The Drama

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.

 Establishing clear accountability for risk is the best way for an organization to enable risk treatment decisions, as it ensures that the risk owners and stakeholders have the authority and responsibility to manage and mitigate the risks that they are assigned to. Establishing clear accountability for risk also facilitates communication and collaboration among the risk owners and stakeholders, and enables them to monitor and report the risk status and performance. Establishing clear accountability for risk also supports the risk governance and culture of the organization, and aligns the risk management process with the organization’s strategy and objectives. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 250. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 250. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 250. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

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 ControlStudy Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

Identifying risk events is essential for developing realistic and relevant risk scenarios. This step enables the creation of scenarios that reflect actual vulnerabilities and potential disruptions, adhering to the CRISC's focus onRisk Identification.

Residual risk is the level of risk remaining after controls and mitigation are applied. An effective awareness program reduces the likelihood of incidents (e.g., phishing, human error), thereby lowering residual risk. Inherent risk remains unchanged, as it is independent of controls.

The policy has not been approved by the organization’s board should be of most concern, as it indicates a lack of governance and oversight for the organization’s cybersecurity posture. The board is ultimately responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization, and for ensuring that the cybersecurity policy aligns with them. Without the board’s approval, the policy may not reflect the organization’s vision, mission, values, and culture, and may not be communicated, implemented, or enforced effectively. The board’s approval also demonstrates the commitment and support of the senior management for the cybersecurity program, and enhances the accountability and responsibility of the stakeholders involved.

Presenting the impact of IT risks on organizational processes in monetary terms is effective for obtaining management buy-in because it directly relates to the organization's financial health and decision-making. It provides a clear and tangible understanding of the potential financialimplications of risks, making it easier for management to appreciate the need for additional controls.

 Masking data before being transferred to the test environment is the best recommendation to address the situation where sensitive data from the production environment is required for testing purposes in non-production environments. Data masking is a technique that replaces sensitive data elements with realistic but fictitious data, preserving the format, structure, and meaning of the original data. Data masking ensures that the test data is sufficiently anonymized and de-identified, while still maintaining its functionality and validity for testing purposes. Data masking also reduces the risk of data leakage, exposure, or breach in the test environment, which may have lower security controls than the production environment. The other options are not the best recommendations, as they do not adequately protect the sensitive data or meet the testingrequirements. Enabling data encryption in the test environment may protect the data from unauthorized access, but it does not prevent the data from being decrypted by authorized users who may misuse or mishandle it. Implementing equivalent security in the test environment may be costly, complex, or impractical, and it may not be feasible to replicate the same level of security controls as in the production environment. Preventing the use of production data for test purposes may not be possible or desirable, as production data may be required to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and quality of the testing results. References = P = NP: Cloud dataprotection in vulnerable non-production environments …; Data masking secures sensitive data in non-production environments …; CRISC EXAM TOPIC 2 LONG Flashcards | Quizlet

Administrative controls are the best controls to be strengthened by a clear organizational code of ethics, because they are the policies, procedures, standards, and guidelines that define the expected behavior and conduct of the employees and management. A code of ethics is an example of an administrative control that sets the ethical principles and values of the organization and helps to prevent or deter unethical or illegal actions. The other options are not the best controls to be strengthened by a clear organizational code of ethics, because they are not directly related to the ethical culture or governance of the organization. Detective controls are the controls that monitor and report the occurrence of unwanted events or incidents. Technical controls are the controls that use hardware, software, or network devices to protect the information systems and data. Preventive controls are the controls that prevent or avoid the occurrence of unwanted events or incidents. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers

Thefirst stepis toprevent further disseminationof sensitive data to limit the impact of the breach. ISACA emphasizes that containment is the priority in risk response to minimize harm before addressing other aspects like root cause analysis or reputational management.

===========

Risk owner approval ensures accountability and alignment of the changes with the enterprise’s risk management strategy. It reflects adherence to the principles ofRisk Ownership and Governance, critical for maintaining control over mitigation activities.

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

Risk appetite determined by senior management reflects the enterprise's willingness to accept certain levels of risk, including noncompliance. This decision underscores the strategic trade-offs made in risk management, a key element inGovernance and Risk Policy Alignment.

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

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

 Understanding the Question:

The question seeks to identify which source provides the most useful information for evaluating the effectiveness of existing controls.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Previous audit reports:Provide historical data but might not reflect current risks.

B. Control objectives:These are standards to be achieved, not current evaluations.

C. Risk responses in the risk register:Useful but focused on specific responses rather than overall effectiveness.

D. Changes in risk profiles:Reflect current and emerging risks, providing a dynamic view of control effectiveness.



Risk Profiles:Evaluating changes in risk profiles helps understand how effective existing controls are against current threats. If risk levels are increasing, it may indicate that controls are insufficient or need updating.

Proactive Adjustment:By monitoring changes in risk profiles, organizations can proactively adjust their controls to address new or evolving risks.

Automated IT asset management ensures real-time visibility and tracking of software usage, licensing, and compliance. It minimizes human error, improves audit readiness, and proactively addresses noncompliance risks.

The average time between user transfers and access updates is a trend that would cause the greatest concern regarding the effectiveness of an organization’s user access control processes, as it indicates thedelay or inefficiency in updating the user access rights and privileges according to the user’s current role and responsibilities. This can result in unauthorized or excessive access to the organization’s information assets, and increase the risk of data leakage, fraud, or misuse. The user access control processes should ensure that the user access rights and privileges are reviewed and modified regularly, and especially when the user’s role or status changes, such as transfer, promotion, demotion, or termination. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question241. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 241. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 241.

The primary focus of a risk owner once a decision is made to mitigate a risk is to ensure that the control design reduces the risk to an acceptable level. This means that the risk owner shouldverify that the control objectives, specifications, and implementation are aligned with the risk mitigation plan, and that the control is effective in reducing the risk exposure to within the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. The risk owner should also ensure that the control design is consistent with the enterprise’s policies, standards, and procedures, and that it complies with any relevant laws, regulations, or contractual obligations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.4, page 185.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics or measures that provide information on the progress and performance of an organization or a team toward an intended result orobjective. KPIs can help to monitor and evaluate the achievement of strategic, operational, or tactical goals, and to support the decision making and improvement of the organization or the team1.

Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics or measures that provide information on the status and effectiveness of the controls or safeguards that are implemented to manage the risks or threats that an organization or a team faces. KCIs can help to identify and assess the strengths and weaknesses of the controls or safeguards, and to ensure the compliance and accountability of the organization or the team2.

The statement that best illustrates the relationship between KPIs and KCIs is that KPIs and KCIs both contribute to understanding of control effectiveness, because they can help to:

Measure and compare the actual and expected outcomes and impacts of the controls or safeguards, and to determine the gaps or deviations

Analyze and understand the causes and consequences of the gaps or deviations, and to identify the root problems or issues

Evaluate and report the performance and compliance of the controls or safeguards, and to communicate the results and feedback to the stakeholders

Improve and optimize the design and implementation of the controls or safeguards, and to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the risk management process34

The other statements do not illustrate the relationship between KPIs and KCIs accurately, but rather some of the differences or misconceptions between them. KPIs measure manual controls, while KCIs measure automated controls is a difference between KPIs and KCIs, but not a general one. KPIs and KCIs can measure both manual and automated controls, depending on the type and nature of the controls or safeguards.A robust KCI program will replace the need to measure KPIs is a misconception about KPIs and KCIs, as they are not mutually exclusive or substitutable. KPIs and KCIs complement and support each other, as they provide different but related information on the performance and risk management of the organization or the team. KCIs are applied at the operational level while KPIs are at the strategic level is a difference between KPIs and KCIs, but not a universal one. KPIs and KCIs can be applied at different levels of the organization or the team, depending on the scope and purpose of the measurement and evaluation. References =

Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Definition, Types, and Examples

Key Control Indicators - ISACA

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

Key Performance Indicators vs. Key Control Indicators: What’s the Difference?

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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

A new risk scenario without controls means that there is a potential threat or event that could adversely affect the organization’s objectives, and there are no existing measures to prevent or reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk. Therefore, the most appropriate action is to include the new risk scenario in the current risk assessment, so that the risk practitioner can analyze therisk, evaluate its severity and priority, and recommend suitable controls to mitigate the risk. By including the new risk scenario in the current riskassessment, the risk practitioner can ensure that the risk register is updated and reflects the current risk profile of the organization. The other options are not appropriate because they either ignore the new risk scenario, delay the risk assessment process, or remove valuable information from the risk register. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 95.

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

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

The primary objective of automating controls is to facilitate continuous control monitoring. Automation enables real-time or near-real-time oversight of control activities, allowing for prompt detection and response to control failures or anomalies. This continuous monitoring enhances the organization's ability to maintain compliance and manage risks effectively.

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

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

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 ofpotential 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.

The best way to facilitate the identification of appropriate key performance indicators (KPIs) for a risk management program is to evaluate KPIs in accordance with risk appetite. KPIs are metrics that measure the performance and effectiveness of the risk management program, and help monitor and report on the achievement of the risk objectives and outcomes. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. Evaluating KPIs in accordance with risk appetite helps to identify the appropriate KPIs, because it helps to align the KPIs with the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and to ensure that the KPIs reflect the organization’s risk tolerance and threshold. Evaluating KPIs in accordance with risk appetite also helps to communicate and coordinate the KPIs with the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, and business units, and to facilitate the risk decision-making and reporting processes. The other options are not as effective as evaluating KPIs in accordance with risk appetite, although they may be part of or derived from the KPI identification process. Reviewing control objectives, aligning with industry best practices, and consulting risk owners are all activities that can help to define or refine the KPIs, but they are not the best way to facilitate the identification of appropriate KPIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.5.1, page 4-38.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Risk capacity is the amount of risk that an organization can financially afford to take, without jeopardizing its ability to meet its objectives or obligations. Risk capacity is determined by factors such as the organization’s income, assets, liabilities, and cash flow. An organization that has built up its cash reserves has increased its risk capacity, as it has more financial resources and flexibility to support additional risk. This may enable the organization to pursue more opportunities or initiatives that involve higher risk and higher reward.

Risk profile is a summary of the key risks that an organization faces, and their implications for the organization’s objectives and strategy. Risk profile may change due to factors such as new technologies, business initiatives, or external events, but not necessarily due to changes in cash reserves.

Risk indicators are metrics or indicators that help to monitor and evaluate the likelihood or impact of a risk, or the effectiveness or efficiency of a control. Risk indicators may vary depending on the risk sources, scenarios, or responses, but not necessarily due to changes in cash reserves.

Risk tolerance is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept, based on its risk appetite and risk capacity. Risk tolerance is influenced by factors such as the organization’s culture, values, and objectives, as well as the risk environment and expectations. Risk tolerance may change due to changes in cash reserves, but it is not the most likely impact, as it also depends on the organization’s risk appetite and other factors.

The management action that will most likely change the likelihood rating of a risk scenario related to remote network access is implementing multi-factor authentication. Multi-factor authentication is a technique that requires the user to provide two or more pieces of evidence to verify their identity, such as a password, a token, or a biometric factor. Multi-factor authentication can help to reduce the likelihood of unauthorized or malicious access to theremote network, as it adds an extra layer of security and makes it harder for the attackers to compromise the user credentials. The other options are not as likely to change the likelihood rating of the risk scenario, as they are related to the update, creation, or maintenance of the remote network access, not the verification or protection of the remote network access. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The most effective key risk indicator (KRI) for monitoring risk related to a bring your own device (BYOD) program is the number of incidents originating from BYOD devices, as it directly measures the impact and frequency of the potential threats and vulnerabilities associated with the use of personal devices for accessing company data and systems. A BYOD program can pose various risks to an organization, such as data loss or breach, malware infection, unauthorized access, compliance violation, or device theft or loss12. The number of incidents originating from BYOD devices can help to identify and quantify these risks, and to trigger appropriate risk response actions when the incidents exceed the acceptable thresholds. The other options are not the most effective KRIs, as they do not directly measure the risk level or impact of the BYOD program. The number of users who have signed a BYOD acceptable use policy may indicate the awareness and compliance of the users, but not the actual risk exposure or mitigation. The budget allocated to the BYOD program security controls may indicate the investment and efficiency of the risk management, but not the effectiveness or necessity. The number of devices enrolled in the BYOD program may indicate the scope and scale of the risk, but not the severity or likelihood. References = Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide; KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management

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

The result of a significant increase in the motivation of a malicious threat actor would be an increase in risk event likelihood. The likelihood of a risk event is influenced by the factors of threat, vulnerability, and exposure. The motivation of a threat actor is a key component of the threat factor, as it reflects the intent and capability of the actor to exploit a vulnerability. Therefore, a higher motivation would imply a higher probability of an attack. An increase in mitigating control costs, risk event impact, or cybersecurity premium are possible consequences of a risk event, but they are not directly affected by the motivation of the threat actor. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC)Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 6; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 67.

The most important element of an organization’s risk register to update following the commissioning of a new financial reporting system is the risk rating of affected financial processes. A risk rating is a measure of the level and nature of the risk exposure, based on the impact and likelihood of the risk events. A risk rating can help to prioritize and respond to the risks, and to monitor and report the risk status. A new financial reporting system may introduce new or different risks, or change the existing risks, that could affect the financial processes of the organization, such as data quality, accuracy, timeliness, compliance, or security. Therefore, the risk rating of affected financial processes should be updated to reflect the current risk situation and to ensure that the risk register is accurate and complete. Key risk indicators (KRIs), the owner of the financial reporting process, and the list of relevant financial controls are not asimportant as the risk rating of affected financial processes, as they are not directly affected by the commissioning of a new financial reporting system, and they do not measure the risk exposure and impact of the financial processes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 48.

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

The potential loss to the business due to non-performance of the asset is the most helpful information for asset owners when classifying organizational assets for risk assessment, because it reflects the value and criticality of the asset to the business objectives and processes. The potential loss can be measured in terms of financial, operational, reputational, or legal impacts.The known emerging environmental threats are not relevant for asset classification, because they are external factors that affect the risk level, not the asset value. The known vulnerabilities published by the asset developer are not relevant for asset classification, because they are internal factors that affect the risk level, not the asset value. The cost of replacing theasset with a new asset providing similar services is not relevant for asset classification, because it does not reflect the business impact of losing the asset functionality or availability. References = CRISC Sample Questions 2024

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

The most important reason to validate that risk responses have been executed as outlined in the risk response plan is to ensure that the residual risk is at an acceptable level. Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying a risk response. The risk response plan is the document thatdescribes the actions and resources needed to address the risk. Validating the risk response execution is the process of verifying that the risk response actions have been performed as planned, and that they have achieved the desired results. Validating the risk response execution helps to measure and monitor the residual risk, and to ensure that it is within the risk tolerance of the organization and its stakeholders. The other reasons are not as important as ensuring that the residual risk is at an acceptable level, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of validating the risk response execution. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

 IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how IT-related events or incidents could adversely affect an organization’s objectives, assets, or operations. IT risk scenarios can help to identify, analyze, and prioritize IT risks, and to develop appropriate responses and controls1.

An enterprise-wide risk register is a document that records and tracks the significant risks that an organization faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. An enterprise-wide risk register can help to provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the organization’s risk profile, and to support the decision making and reporting of the risk management function2.

The best practice that facilitates the incorporation of IT risk scenarios into the enterprise-wide risk register is to develop IT risk scenarios in the context of organizational objectives. This means that IT risk scenarios should be aligned with and derived from the organization’s strategic goals, mission, vision, and values. IT risk scenarios should also consider the interdependenciesand interactions between IT and other business domains, and the potential impact of IT risks on the organization’s performance and reputation3.

By developing IT risk scenarios in the context of organizational objectives, the organization can ensure that the IT risk scenarios are relevant, realistic, and meaningful for the enterprise-wide risk management. The organization can also ensure that the IT risk scenarios are consistent and comparable with other types of risk scenarios, such as financial, operational, or reputational risk scenarios. This can facilitate the integration and consolidation of IT risk scenarios into the enterprise-wide risk register, and enable a holistic and balanced assessment and reporting of the organization’s risks4.

The other options are not as effective as developing IT risk scenarios in the context of organizational objectives for incorporating IT risk scenarios into the enterprise-wide risk register. Developing key risk indicators (KRIs) for key IT risk scenarios can help to monitor and measure the IT risk exposure and performance, but it does not ensure that the IT risk scenarios are aligned with the organizational objectives or integrated with other risk scenarios. Assessing IT risk scenarios by the enterprise risk management team can help to validate and prioritize the IT risk scenarios, but it does not ensure that the IT risk scenarios are derived from the organizational objectives or consistent with other risk scenarios. Approving risk appetites for IT risk scenarios by key business stakeholders can help to establish the acceptable level of IT risk taking andtolerance, but it does not ensure that the IT risk scenarios are based on the organizational objectives or comparable with other risk scenarios. References =

IT Risk Scenario Development - ISACA

Risk Register - ISACA

Identifying Risks and Scenarios Threatening the Organization as an Enterprise - A New Enterprise Risk Identification Framework

Risk Register 2021-2022 - UNECE

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The effectiveness of a control action plan’s implementation can be measured by the extent to which it achieves the desired risk reduction. A control action plan is a set of actions that are designed to address the root causes of a risk and mitigate its impact or likelihood. The best indicator of the effectiveness of a control action plan’s implementation is the reduced risk level, which means that the risk is either eliminated or brought within the acceptable range. The otheroptions are not the best indicators, because they do not directly reflect the risk reduction. Increased number of controls may not necessarily reduce the risk level, especially if the controls are not aligned with the risk causes, objectives, and priorities. Increased risk appetite may indicate a higher tolerance for risk, but it does not mean that the risk level has been reduced. Stakeholder commitment may facilitate the implementation of the control action plan, but it does not guarantee the effectiveness of the plan. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.2: Control Action Plan, p. 170-171.

Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after applying controls or other risk treatments. A critical patch is a type of control that aims to reduce the risk of a known vulnerability being exploited by attackers. If the patch implementation fails, the control is ineffective and the risk is not reduced. Therefore, the residual risk is increased, as the organization is still exposed to the potential negative consequences of the vulnerability.

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

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

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

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

Multi-factor authentication (MFA)significantly enhances transaction integrity by ensuring that users are who they claim to be. It is a practical, widely adopted control to prevent unauthorized access.

Optimized risk management is achieved when risk is reduced to meet risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the strategic goals and priorities of the organization, as well as its risk culture and tolerance. Reducing risk with strategic initiatives, within resource availability, or below risk appetite are all possible approaches, but they do not necessarily optimize risk management, as they may result in over- or under-investment in risk mitigation, or misalignment with business objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 47

 Performing a post-implementation review is the best way to confirm whether appropriate automated controls are in place within a recently implemented system, as it helps to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the system and its controls after they have been deployed and operationalized. A post-implementation review is a process of assessing and validating the system and its controls against the predefined criteria and objectives, such as functionality, performance, security, compliance, and user satisfaction. A post-implementation review can help to confirm whether appropriate automated controls are in place within a recently implemented system by providing the following benefits:

It verifies that the system and its controls meet the design specifications and standards, and comply with the relevant laws, regulations, and contractual obligations.

It identifies and measures the actual or potential benefits and value of the system and its controls, such as improved efficiency, reliability, or quality.

It detects and analyzes any issues, gaps, or weaknesses in the system and its controls, such as errors, inconsistencies, or vulnerabilities.

It provides recommendations and action plans to address the identified issues, gaps, or weaknesses, and to improve or enhance the system and its controls.

It communicates and reports the results and findings of the review to the relevant stakeholders, and solicits their feedback and suggestions.

The other options are not the best ways to confirm whether appropriate automated controls are in place within a recently implemented system. Conducting user acceptance testing is an important step to ensure that the system and its controls meet the user requirements and expectations, but it is usually performed before the system is implemented and operationalized, and it may not cover all aspects of the system and its controls. Reviewing the key performance indicators (KPIs) is a useful method to measure and monitor the performance of the system and its controls, but it may not provide a comprehensive or objective evaluation of the system and its controls. Interviewing process owners is a possible technique to collect and analyze information on the system and its controls, but it may not provide sufficient or reliable evidence to confirm the appropriateness of the system and its controls. References = Post-Implementation Review: The Key to a Successful Project, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Post Implementation Review (PIR) - Project Management Knowledge

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

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

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

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

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

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

The risk owner is the person who should be accountable for any related losses to the organization, because they are the person who has the authority and responsibility to manage the risk and its associated controls.The risk owner is also the person who accepts the risk and its residual level, and who monitors and reports on the risk status and performance. The IT risk manager, the server administrator, and the risk practitioner are all involved in the riskmanagement process, but they are not the person who should be accountable for the risk and its outcomes, as they do not have the ultimate decision-making power and accountability for therisk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, page 79