Isaca CRISC Dumps

 The most important consideration when selecting an external service provider for outsourcing the payroll function is the internal controls to ensure data privacy. The payroll function involves processing and storing sensitive personal and financial information of the employees, such as salaries, taxes, benefits, bank accounts, etc. This information needs to be protected from unauthorized access, disclosure, modification, or loss, as it may result in legal, regulatory, reputational, or financial consequences for the organization and the employees. Therefore, the external service provider should have adequate internal controls, such as encryption, access control, backup, logging, monitoring, etc., to ensure data privacy and compliance with the organization’s policies and standards. Disaster recovery plan, right to audit, and transparency of KPIs are also important considerations when selecting an external service provider, but they are not as important as internal controls to ensure data privacy. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.2, page 2461

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 648.

The most important consideration when identifying stakeholders to review risk scenarios developed by a risk analyst is that the reviewers are accountable for the affected processes. This is because the reviewers need to have a clear understanding of the business processes that are exposed to the risks, and the potential impact and consequences of the risk scenarios. The reviewers also need to have the authority and responsibility to implement the risk responses and monitor the risk performance. By involving the stakeholders who are accountable for the affected processes, the risk analyst can ensure that the risk scenarios are realistic, relevant, and comprehensive, and that the risk management process is aligned with the business objectives and expectations. The other options are not as important as the accountability for the affected processes, because they do not guarantee that the reviewers have the necessary knowledge, experience, and involvement in the risk management process, as explained below:

B. Members of senior management are not the most important consideration, because they may not have the detailed or operational knowledge of the business processes that are exposed to the risks, or the technical or practical aspects of the risk scenarios. Senior management may also have different or conflicting priorities or perspectives on the risk management process, which may affect the quality and validity of the review.

C. Authorized to select risk mitigation options are not the most important consideration, because they may not have the direct or regular involvement in the business processes that are exposed to the risks, or the specific or contextual understanding of the risk scenarios. The authority to select risk mitigation options may also depend on other factors, such as the risk appetite, the budget, or the organizational structure, which may limit or influence the review.

D. Independent from the business operations are not the most important consideration, because they may not have the sufficient or relevant knowledge of the business processes that are exposed to the risks, or the potential or actual impact and consequences of the risk scenarios. The independence from the business operations may also create a gap or disconnect between the risk management process and the business objectives and expectations, which may affect the effectiveness and efficiency of the review. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 45. A Stakeholder Approach to Risk Management, Module 2. Project risk management: stakeholders’ risks and the project manager’s role, What Is Risk Management Scenario Analysis?

 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 business process owner is the stakeholder who is responsible for the business process that is supported by the IT system, such as the CRM system. The business process owner has the authority and accountability to manage the risk and its response associated with the business process and the IT system. The business process owner should own the risk of customer data leakage caused by insufficient IT security controls for the new system, as it directly affects the performance, functionality, and compliance of the business process. The other options are not the correct answer, as they involve different roles or responsibilities in the risk management process:

The chief information security officer is the senior executive who oversees the enterprise-wide information security program, and provides guidance and direction to the information security managers and practitioners. The chief information security officer may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk.

The chief risk officer is the senior executive who oversees the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provides guidance and direction to the risk managers and practitioners. The chief risk officer may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk.

The IT controls manager is the person who designs, implements, and monitors the IT controls that mitigate the IT risks, such as the IT security controls for the new system. The IT controls manager may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.1, pp. 95-96.

 First-hand direct observation of the controls in operation is the best way to confirm the existence and operating effectiveness of information systems controls because it provides the most reliable and persuasive evidence. Direct observation involves inspecting the physical and logical aspects of the controls, such as the hardware, software, network, data, procedures, and personnel involved in the information systems. Direct observation also allows the auditor to verify that the controls are functioning as intended, and to identify any deviations or weaknesses that may affect the reliability of the information systems. Direct observation can be performed by using various techniques, such as walkthroughs, inquiries, inspections, reperformance, and analytical procedures1. References = Auditing Standard No. 13, The Auditor’s Responses to the Risks of Material Misstatement, PCAOB, 2010

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 of implementing encryption. The risk tolerance is the acceptable variation between the risk thresholds and the business 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

 A common risk taxonomy is a framework that defines and categorizes the sources, types, and impacts of risks within an organization1. It helps to establish a consistent and shared understanding of risk across the organization, and to facilitate effective risk identification, assessment, reporting, and communication2. A common risk taxonomy also enables comparison and aggregation of risks at different levels and domains, and supports alignment of risk management with business objectives and strategies3. Using key performance indicators (KPIs) and key risk indicators (KRIs) are important for measuring and monitoring risk and performance, but they are not the most important factor when discussing risk within an organization. KPIs and KRIs should be derived from the common risk taxonomy and aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance4. Creating a risk communication policy is also important for ensuring that risk information is communicated to the right stakeholders at the right time and in the right format, but it is not the most important factor either. A risk communication policy should be based on the common risk taxonomy and the risk roles and responsibilities within the organization5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: Risk Taxonomy, pp. 25-29.

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

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

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

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

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

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a measurable value that demonstrates how effectively an organization is achieving its key objectives. A KPI should be relevant, specific, measurable, achievable, and time-bound. The number of identified system vulnerabilities is a KPI that measures the security posture and performance of the organization’s information systems. It also helps to identify the areas that need improvement or remediation. The number of identified system vulnerabilities is relevant to the organization’s objective of protecting its information assets, specific to the system level, measurable by using tools or methods, achievable by implementing security controls or practices, and time-bound by setting a target or threshold. Aggregate risk of the organization, number of exception requests processed in the past 90 days, and number of attacks against the organization’s website are not KPIs, as they are either too broad, not relevant, or not measurable. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.1.1, page 1741

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 647.

A risk management program is a set of processes, policies, and tools that enable an enterprise to identify, analyze, evaluate, treat, monitor, and communicate its risks. The maturity level of a risk management program indicates how well the program is integrated, standardized, and aligned with the enterprise’s objectives, culture, and values. The best indication that an organization’s risk management program has not reached the desired maturity level is large fluctuations in risk ratings between assessments. Risk ratings are the measures of the impact and likelihood of the risks, and they should be consistent and comparable across the enterprise and over time. Large fluctuations in risk ratings between assessments suggest that the risk management program is not stable, reliable, or effective, and that the risk identification and analysis methods are not robust, accurate, or transparent. The other options are not as indicative of the maturity level of the risk management program, as they involve different aspects or outcomes of the risk management program:

Significant increases in risk mitigation budgets means that the enterprise is spending more resources on implementing risk responses, such as controls, policies, or procedures. This may indicate that the enterprise is facing more or higher risks, or that the risk responses are more costly or complex, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the enterprise’s risk appetite, tolerance, and strategy.

A steady increase in the time to recover from incidents means that the enterprise is taking longer to restore its normal operations after a disruption or a loss. This may indicate that the enterprise is not prepared or resilient enough to deal with the incidents, or that the incidents are more frequent or severe, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the nature and source of the incidents, or the availability and effectiveness of the recovery plans.

A large number of control exceptions means that the enterprise is deviating from the established controls, policies, or procedures, either intentionally or unintentionally. This may indicate that the enterprise is not complying with the risk management program, or that the controls are not adequate or appropriate for the enterprise’s needs, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the reasons and justifications for the exceptions, or the approval and monitoring processes for the exceptions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.3.1, pp. 14-15.

Defining risk response options is performed after a risk assessment is completed. A risk assessment is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that affect the enterprise’s objectives and operations. After a risk assessment is completed, the enterprise needs to define the risk response options, which are the actions that can be taken to address the risks. The risk response options include accepting, avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or exploiting the risks. Defining risk response options helps to select the most appropriate and effective strategy to manage the risks. Defining risk taxonomy, identifying vulnerabilities, and conducting an impact analysis are performed before or during a risk assessment, not after. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.4, page 541

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 644.

The MOST important consideration when developing IT risk scenarios is the potential threats and vulnerabilities that may have an impact on the business, because they are the key elements of a risk scenario that describe the sources and causes of the risk, and the potential consequences and impacts of the risk on the business objectives and processes. The other options are not as important as the potential threats and vulnerabilities, because:

Option A: The impact of controls on the efficiency of the business in delivering services is a secondary consideration that may affect the cost-benefit analysis of the risk response, but it does not directly affect the identification and assessment of the risk scenario.

Option B: Linkage of identified risk scenarios with enterprise risk management is a good practice that ensures the alignment and integration of the IT risk management with the overall enterprise risk management, but it does not directly affect the identification and assessment of the risk scenario.

Option D: Results of network vulnerability scanning and penetration testing are useful sources of information that may reveal some of the threats and vulnerabilities in the IT environment, but they are not the only or the most important consideration when developing IT risk scenarios, as they may not cover all the aspects and dimensions of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 104.

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 security policy exception is a deviation from the established security policy that is granted to an individual or a group for a specific purpose or period of time. A security policy exception may be necessary when the security policy is too restrictive, outdated, or incompatible with the business requirements or objectives. However, a security policy exception also introduces a risk to the organization, as it may weaken the security posture, expose the organization to threats or vulnerabilities, or violate the compliance or regulatory obligations. Therefore, an upward trend in the number of security policy exceptions approved should be of most concern, as it indicates that the security policy is not effective or aligned with the organization’s needs and goals, and that the organization is accepting more risk than desired. The other options are not as concerning as the number of security policy exceptions approved, because they do not imply a direct or immediate risk to the organization, but rather reflect the normal or expected activities of the security management process, as explained below:

A. Number of business change management requests is a metric that measures the volume and frequency of the requests to modify the business processes, systems, or functions. An upward trend in this metric may indicate that the organization is undergoing a transformation, innovation, or improvement, which may have positive or negative impacts on the organization’s performance and security. However, this metric does not necessarily imply a risk to the organization, as the change management requests may be properly assessed, approved, and implemented, following the established change management procedures and controls.

B. Number of revisions to security policy is a metric that measures the amount and extent of the changes made to the security policy over time. An upward trend in this metric may indicate that the security policy is being updated, refined, or enhanced, which may improve or maintain the security posture and compliance of the organization. However, this metric does not necessarily imply a risk to the organization, as the revisions to the security policy may be based on the best practices, standards, and expectations for security management, and may be communicated and enforced effectively across the organization.

D. Number of changes to firewall rules is a metric that measures the number and type of the modifications made to the firewall configuration, which controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules. An upward trend in this metric may indicate that the firewall is being adjusted, optimized, or customized, which may increase or decrease the firewall performance and security. However, this metric does not necessarily imply a risk to the organization, as the changes to the firewall rules may be justified, authorized, and validated, following the established firewall management procedures and controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. Security Policy Exceptions: What Are They and How to Manage Them, Security Policy Exceptions: How to Handle Them in a Secure Manner, Security Policy Exceptions: A Necessary Evil?

 A vulnerability is a system flaw or weakness that can be exploited by a threat actor, potentially leading to a security breach or incident. A vulnerability that has been exploited means that a threat actor has successfully taken advantage of the vulnerability and compromised the system or network. Implementing controls can help reduce the impact of a vulnerability that has been exploited, by limiting or preventing the damage or loss caused by the security breach or incident. Controls are the mechanisms or procedures that ensure the security, reliability, and quality of an IT system or process. Controls can be classified into different types, depending on their purpose and function. The four types of controls mentioned in the question are:

Detective control: A control that monitors and detects the occurrence or attempt of a security breach or incident, and alerts the appropriate personnel or system. For example, a log analysis tool that identifies and reports any unauthorized access or activity on the system or network.

Deterrent control: A control that discourages or prevents a threat actor from exploiting a vulnerability or performing a malicious action, by increasing the perceived difficulty, risk, or cost of doing so. For example, a warning message that informs the user of the legal consequences of unauthorized access or use of the system or network.

Preventive control: A control that blocks or stops a threat actor from exploiting a vulnerability or performing a malicious action, by eliminating or reducing the vulnerability or the opportunity. For example, a firewall that filters and blocks any unwanted or malicious traffic from entering or leaving the system or network.

Corrective control: A control that restores or repairs the system or network to its normal or desired state, after a security breach or incident has occurred, by fixing or removing the vulnerability or the impact. For example, a backup and recovery tool that restores the data or functionality of the system or network that has been corrupted or lost due to the security breach or incident.

The best type of control for reducing the impact of a vulnerability that has been exploited is the corrective control, because it directly addresses the damage or loss caused by the security breach or incident, and restores the system or network to its normal or desired state. Corrective controls can help minimize the negative consequences of a security breach or incident, such as downtime, data loss, reputational harm, legal liability, or regulatory sanctions. Corrective controls can also help prevent or reduce the recurrence of the security breach or incident, by fixing or removing the vulnerability that has been exploited. References = Types of Security Controls, Security Controls: What They Are and Why You Need Them, Security Controls: Definition, Types & Examples.

The first step in assessing the current risk level of data loss is to identify where the sensitive data is stored, such as servers, databases, laptops, mobile devices, etc. This will help to determine the scope and boundaries of the risk assessment, as well as the potential exposure and impact of data loss. Identifying staff members who have access to the data, risk scenarios and owners, and existing controls are important steps, but they should be done after identifying the data locations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.1, page 51.

The primary objective of a risk awareness training program is to enable risk-based decision making, which means making decisions that take into account the potential risks and opportunities associated with each option. A risk awareness training program should aim to develop a common understanding of risk across multiple functions and business units, achieve a better understanding of risk for competitive advantage, and build safeguards against earnings-related surprises1. A risk awareness training program should also cover the basics of risk management, such as the risk management process, the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders, the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and the tools and techniques for identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating risks234. A risk awareness training program should also include practical examples and case studies to illustrate how risk management can be applied in different scenarios and contexts5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.11: Risk Awareness, pp. 34-354

The first factor that should be considered when assessing risk associated with the adoption of emerging technologies is the organizational strategy. The organizational strategy defines the vision, mission, goals, and objectives of the enterprise, and provides the direction and guidance for its activities and decisions. The adoption of emerging technologies should be aligned with the organizational strategy, and support its achievement and performance. The organizational strategy also helps to determine the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise, and the criteria for evaluating the risks and benefits of the emerging technologies. Cost-benefit analysis, control self-assessment, and business requirements are also important factors to consider when assessing risk associated with the adoption of emerging technologies, but they are not the first factor to consider. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1.1, page 181

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 656.

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

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

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

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

The most important input when developing risk scenarios is the business objectives, as they provide the context and scope for the risk identification and analysis process. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the possible causes, events, and consequences of a risk. Risk scenarios help to understand and communicate the nature and impact of the risk, and to support the risk assessment and response planning. The business objectives are the goals and targets that the organization wants to achieve through its processes, functions, and projects. The business objectives define the expected outcomes and performance of the organization, and the criteria for measuring and evaluating the success or failure of the organization. The business objectives also reflect the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, and the needs and expectations of the stakeholders. The other options are not the most important inputs when developing risk scenarios, although they may be useful or relevant information. Key performance indicators are metrics that measure and monitor the progress and achievement of the business objectives, but they do not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. The organization’s risk framework is the set of principles, policies, and processes that guide and support the risk management activities across the organization, but it does not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. Risk appetite is the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or avoid in pursuit of its business objectives, but it does not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 58.

The MOST important thing to review when determining whether a potential IT service provider’s control environment is effective is an independent audit report, because it provides an objective and reliable assessment of the service provider’s controls and compliance with standards and regulations. The other options are not as important as an independent audit report, because:

Option B: Control self-assessment is a subjective and voluntary process that may not reflect the actual effectiveness of the service provider’s controls.

Option C: This option is incomplete and irrelevant to the question.

Option D: Service level agreements (SLAs) are contractual agreements that specify the expected performance and availability of the service provider, but they do not necessarily indicate the effectiveness of the service provider’s controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 195.

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, their sources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences, as well as the existing and planned controls and responses4. 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 of compliance 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key risk indicator (KRI): A metric that measures the level of risk exposure or the likelihood of a risk event1.

KRI threshold: A predefined value or range that triggers an alert or action when the KRI reaches or exceeds it2.

Loss expectancy: The estimated amount of loss that an organization may incur due to a risk event3.

The most helpful thing in developing KRI thresholds is loss expectancy information. Loss expectancy information provides an estimate of the potential or expected impact of a risk event on the organization’s operations, reputation, or objectives. Loss expectancy information can help an organization to:

Quantify and prioritize the risks that pose the greatest threat to the organization

Determine the acceptable level of risk exposure or tolerance for each risk

Set the appropriate value or range for the KRI threshold that reflects the risk appetite and the risk mitigation strategy

Monitor and measure the performance and effectiveness of the risk management process and controls

Loss expectancy information can be derived from various sources, such as historical data, statistical analysis, expert judgment, or simulation models3.

The other options are not as helpful as loss expectancy information in developing KRI thresholds, because they do not directly address the potential or expected impact of a risk event. Control performance predictions, which are the forecasts or estimates of how well the risk management controls will perform in preventing, detecting, or mitigating risks, may help to evaluate the adequacy and efficiency of the risk management process and controls, but they do not provide a clear and quantifiable measure of the risk impact. IT service level agreements (SLAs), which are the contracts or agreements that define the quality and availability of IT services, may help to establish the standards and expectations for IT service delivery and performance, but they do not provide a comprehensive and current view of the risk exposure or likelihood. Remediation activity progress, which is the status or outcome of the actions taken to address and resolve a risk event, may help to monitor and report the effectiveness and compliance of the risk management process and controls, but it is usually done after the risk event has occurred and resolved, not before.

References = Key Risk Indicators: Definition, Examples, and Best Practices, KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva, Loss Expectancy: Definition, Calculation, and Examples

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the risk register is a tool that records the results of risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment. The risk register should be updated whenever there is a change in the risk profile, such as when a risk response is implemented or a new risk is identified. Updating the risk register allows the organization to monitor the current status of risks and the effectiveness of risk responses. Therefore, the next step for the risk practitioner after identifying a risk with high impact and very low likelihood that is covered by insurance is to update the risk register with the new information. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 191.

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 10

Information Technology & Security, page 4

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 2

The process owner is the stakeholder who is responsible for the business process that will be supported by the new IT solution. The process owner has the best knowledge of the business requirements, objectives, and risks associated with the process. The process owner can provide the most relevant information for analyzing the risk associated with the new IT solution, such as the expected benefits, costs, performance, functionality, security, and compliance of the solution. The process owner can also help to identify and evaluate the potential impact and likelihood of the risk scenarios related to the new IT solution. The other stakeholders may have some information or insights, but they are not as directly involved or affected by the new IT solution as the process owner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1.1, pp. 58-59.

The risk practitioner’s BEST course of action is to validate the transfer of risk and update the register to reflect the change, because outsourcing the backup and recovery procedures to a third-party cloud provider does not eliminate the risk, but rather transfers it to the service provider. The risk practitioner should verify that the service provider has adequate controls and capabilities to handle the backup and recovery procedures, and that the contractual agreement specifies the roles and responsibilities of both parties. The risk practitioner should also update the risk register to reflect the new risk owner and the residual risk level. The other options are not the best course of action, because:

Option A: Accepting the risk and documenting contingency plans for data disruption is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk practitioner is still responsible for the risk, even though it has been transferred to the service provider. Contingency plans are also reactive measures, rather than proactive ones.

Option B: Removing the associated risk scenario from the risk register due to avoidance is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk has been eliminated, which is not the case. The risk still exists, but it has been transferred to the service provider. The risk register should reflect the current risk status and ownership.

Option C: Mitigating the risk with compensating controls enforced by the third-party cloud provider is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk practitioner is still involved in the risk management process, even though the risk has been transferred to the service provider. The risk practitioner should rely on the service provider’s controls and capabilities, and monitor their performance and compliance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 196.

 The primary reason for establishing various threshold levels for a set of key risk indicators (KRIs) is to take appropriate actions in a timely manner. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk or the effectiveness of the controls in place. Threshold levels are predefined values that indicate when the risk level is acceptable, tolerable, or unacceptable. By establishing various threshold levels for a set of KRIs, the enterprise can monitor the risk situation and trigger the necessary responses before the risk becomes too severe or costly to mitigate. The other options are not the primary reasons for establishing various threshold levels, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of doing so. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 189.

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 the risk, evaluate its severity and priority, and recommend suitable controls to mitigate the risk. By including the new risk scenario in the current risk assessment, 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.

An IT risk register is a document that records and tracks the IT risks that have been identified and assessed by the risk practitioner. It contains information such as the risk description, the risk owner, the risk level, the risk response, the risk status, and the risk monitoring and reporting activities. An IT risk register is a dynamic document that needs to be updated regularly to reflect the changes in the IT environment and the risk landscape. When a software upgrade renders an existing key control ineffective, the risk practitioner should update the IT risk register to indicate the new risk level, the new risk response, and the new risk monitoring and reporting activities. This will ensure that the IT risk register remains accurate, relevant, and useful for IT risk management. Updating the IT risk register is more important than updating the audit engagement letter, the risk profile, or the change control documentation, because the IT risk register is the primary source of information and guidance for managing IT risks. The audit engagement letter is a formal agreement between the auditor and the auditee that defines the scope, objectives, and terms of the audit. The risk profile is a summary of the organization’s risk appetite, risk tolerance, and risk exposure. The change control documentation is a record of the changes that have been made to the IT systems and processes. These documents are important for IT risk management, but they are not as critical as the IT risk register for updating when a key control becomes ineffective. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: Risk Register, pp. 69-711

The three lines of defense model is a framework that describes the roles and responsibilities of different functions in an organization for managing risks and controls.

The first line of defense is the operational management, which is responsible for implementing and maintaining effective controls, identifying and assessing risks, and reporting on risk and control performance.

The second line of defense is the risk management and compliance functions, which are responsible for establishing and overseeing the risk management framework, providing guidance and support to the operational management, and monitoring and reporting on risk and compliance issues.

The third line of defense is the internal audit function, which is responsible for providing independent and objective assurance on the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk management and control system, and recommending improvements.

Within the three lines of defense model, the accountability for the system of internal control resides with the chief information officer (CIO). The CIO is the senior executive who oversees the IT function of the organization, and is responsible for ensuring that the IT risks and controls are aligned with the business objectives and strategies, and are integrated with the enterprise risk management and governance processes.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 20

Information Technology & Security, page 14

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 12

 A policy exception is a deviation from the established policies, standards, or procedures of the enterprise, such as the information security policy. A policy exception may be granted by the management when there is a valid business reason or justification for the deviation, and when the risk associated with the deviation is acceptable or mitigated. The best course of action when a business unit has decided to accept the risk of implementing an off-the-shelf, commercial software package that uses weak password controls is to obtain management approval for policy exception. This will ensure that the business unit is aware of the implications and consequences of the policy exception, and that the management agrees with the risk acceptance and approves the policy exception. The other options are not the best course of action, as they involve different risk response strategies or outcomes:

Develop an improved password software routine means that the business unit modifies or enhances the password controls of the software package, such as by increasing the password length, complexity, or expiration. This may not be a feasible or effective way to address the risk of weak password controls, as it may violate the terms and conditions of the software vendor, or may not be compatible or consistent with the software package.

Select another application with strong password controls means that the business unit replaces the software package with another application that has better password controls, such as by using encryption, authentication, or authorization. This may not be a desirable or efficient way to address the risk of weak password controls, as it may incur additional costs, delays, or complexities, or may not meet the business requirements or expectations of the business unit.

Continue the implementation with no changes means that the business unit proceeds with the software package without any modifications or improvements to the password controls, or without any approval or documentation of the policy exception. This may not be a responsible or ethical way to address the risk of weak password controls, as it may expose the enterprise to legal, financial, or reputational risks, or may compromise the security or compliance of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1.1, pp. 121-122.

 The effectiveness of a control monitoring program can be measured by how quickly it can detect and correct any control failures that may compromise the achievement of the organization’s objectives. A shorter time between control failure and failure detection means that the control monitoring program is able to identify and report the issues promptly, and initiate the remediation actions accordingly. This can reduce the impact and likelihood of the risks associated with the control failures, and enhance the performance and reliability of the controls. The other options are not as good indicators of the effectiveness of a control monitoring program, because they do not reflect the timeliness and responsiveness of the program, but rather the scope, effort, or frequency of the program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, page 130.

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, inherent risk is the risk that exists before any controls or mitigating factors are considered. Inherent risk is influenced by the nature and complexity of the business activities, the environment, and the technology involved. A new policy that allows staff members to remotely connect to the organization’s IT systems via personal or public computers is likely to increase the inherent risk of the organization, as it introduces new threats and vulnerabilities that may compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the IT systems and data. For example, personal or public computers may not have adequate security measures, such as antivirus software, firewalls, encryption, or authentication, and may expose the organization to malware, hacking, data leakage, or unauthorized access. Therefore, the answer is B. Inherent risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 97. Remote Work: How to Secure Your Data

Deviation from a mitigation action plan’s completion date should be determined by the risk owner as determined by risk management processes, because the risk owner is the person or entity who has the accountability and authority to manage the risk and its associated mitigation actions. The risk owner should monitor and report the progress and status of the mitigation action plan, and determine if there is any deviation from the expected completion date, based on the risk management processes and criteria. The other options are not the ones who should determine the deviation, because:

Option A: Change management as determined by a change control board is a process that ensures that any changes to the project scope, schedule, cost, or quality are controlled and approved, but it does not determine the deviation from the mitigation action plan’s completion date, which is a risk management activity.

Option B: Benchmarking analysis with similar completed projects is a technique that compares the performance and practices of the current project with those of similar or successful projects, but it does not determine the deviation from the mitigation action plan’s completion date, which is a risk management activity.

Option C: Project governance criteria as determined by the project office is a set of rules and standards that define the roles, responsibilities, and authority of the project stakeholders, but it does not determine the deviation from the mitigation action plan’s completion date, which is a risk management activity. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 122.

 A risk practitioner’s best course of action when a business manager wants to leverage an existing approved vendor solution from another area within the organization is to assess the risk associated with the new use case. This is because the new use case may introduce different or additional risks that were not considered or addressed in the original approval. For example, the new use case may involve different data types, volumes, or sensitivities; different business processes, functions, or objectives; different regulatory or contractual requirements; or different technical or operational dependencies. Therefore, the risk practitioner should perform a vendor risk assessment (VRA) to identify, evaluate, and mitigate the potential risks of the new use case and ensure that the vendor solution meets the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance12. Recommending allowing the new usage based on prior approval is not the best course of action, as it may overlook or underestimate the risks of the new use case and expose the organization to unacceptable levels of risk. Requesting a new third-party review is not the best course of action, as it may be unnecessary or redundant if the vendor solution has already been reviewed and approved for another use case within the organization. Requesting revalidation of the original use case is not the best course of action, as it may not address the specific risks of the new use case and may also delay or disrupt the existing use case. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

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 risk management 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 or recommendations for the access management process and the control objectives. - The model performance and monitoring: The risk practitioner 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

 The FIRST thing that the organization should do to reduce the risk of data exposure when modifying its system to enable acceptance of credit card payments is to conduct a risk assessment, because it is a process that involves identifying and analyzing the potential risks, threats, and vulnerabilities that may affect the system and the data, and their likelihood and impact on the business objectives and processes. A risk assessment can help to determine the current risk level and exposure, and to provide the basis for selecting and implementing the appropriate risk responses and controls. The other options are not the first thing that the organization should do, because:

Option B: Updating the security strategy is a result of conducting a risk assessment, but not the first thing that the organization should do. A security strategy is a plan that defines the security objectives, policies, standards, and procedures for the system and the data, and it should be aligned with the risk assessment results and the business requirements and expectations.

Option C: Implementing additional controls is a response to the risk assessment results, but not the first thing that the organization should do. Controls are the measures that are designed and implemented to prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risks, threats, and vulnerabilities, and to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the system and the data.

Option D: Updating the risk register is a part of the risk assessment process, but not the first thing that the organization should do. A risk register is a tool that documents and tracks the identified risks, their characteristics, their status, and their responses, and it should be updated regularly to reflect the current risk profile and exposure of the system and the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 108.

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk mitigation plans have been implemented. Residual risk reflects the effectiveness of the risk response in reducing the likelihood or impact of the risk. The best evidence that risk mitigation plans have been implemented effectively is the change in the level of residual risk. A change in the level of residual risk can be measured by comparing the risk level before and after the risk mitigation plans have been executed. A change in the level of residual risk can also be evaluated by comparing the actual residual risk with the target or acceptable residual risk. A change in the level of residual risk can demonstrate how well the risk mitigation plans have achieved the risk objectives and met the risk criteria. A change in the level of residual risk can also provide feedback and lessons learned for future risk management activities. References = Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management, Residual Risk: What It Is and How to Manage It, Residual Risk: How to Calculate and Manage It.

Data confidentiality risk is the risk that the data may be accessed, disclosed, or modified by unauthorized parties, resulting in breaches of privacy, trust, or compliance1. Platform as a Service (PaaS) is a cloud computing model that provides a platform for developing, testing, and deploying applications, without requiring the users to manage the underlying infrastructure2. An internally developed payroll application is an application that is created and maintained by the organization itself, rather than by a third-party vendor, and that is used to process and manage the payroll data of the organization’s employees3. The owner of the data confidentiality risk is the person or entity that has the authority and accountability for the data and its protection, and that is responsible for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risk. The owner of the data confidentiality risk related to an internally developed payroll application that leverages PaaS infrastructure from the cloud is the human resources head, as they are the person who oversees the human resources function and the payroll data of the organization. The human resources head has the best understanding of the sensitivity, value, and usage of the payroll data, and the potential impacts and implications of a data confidentiality breach. The human resources head also has the ability and responsibility to define and implement the policies, procedures, and controls that are necessary to protect the payroll data, and to monitor and report on the performance and compliance of the data confidentiality risk management. The IT infrastructure head, the supplier management head, and the application development head are not the best choices for owning the data confidentiality risk related to an internally developed payroll application that leverages PaaS infrastructure from the cloud, as they do not have the same level of authority and accountability as the human resources head. The IT infrastructure head is the person who oversees the IT infrastructure function and the PaaS infrastructure of the organization. The IT infrastructure head may be involved in providing input and feedback to the human resources head on the data confidentiality risk management, especially those related to the PaaS infrastructure, but they do not have the final say or the overall responsibility for the payroll data and its protection. The supplier management head is the person who oversees the supplier management function and the relationship with the cloud service provider that provides the PaaS infrastructure. The supplier management head may be involved in negotiating and enforcing the service level agreements and the security requirements with the cloud service provider, but they do not have the authority or the expertise to manage the data confidentiality risk of the payroll data. The application development head is the person who oversees the application development function and the development, testing, and deployment of the payroll application. The application development head may be involved in designing and implementing the security features and controls of the payroll application, but they do not have the perspective or the influence to manage the data confidentiality risk of the payroll data. References = 3: Payroll Software: What Is It & How Does It Work? | QuickBooks2: What is Platform as a Service (PaaS)? | IBM1: Data Confidentiality: Identifying and Protecting Assets Against Data … : [Risk Ownership - Risk Management] : [Human Resources and Payroll Security Policy - University of …] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Concepts, pp. 17-19.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

 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 testing requirements. 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 data protection in vulnerable non-production environments …; Data masking secures sensitive data in non-production environments …; CRISC EXAM TOPIC 2 LONG Flashcards | Quizlet

According to the 1.9 Ownership & Accountability - CRISC, risk ownership is best established by mapping risk to specific business process owners. Details of the risk owner should be documented in the risk register. Results of the risk monitoring should be discussed and communicated with the risk owner as they own the risk and are accountable for maintaining the risk within acceptable levels. To ensure effective risk ownership, it is most important that risk owners have decision-making authority, as this enables them to take timely and appropriate actions to manage the risk and ensure that it is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Without decision-making authority, risk owners may not be able to implement the necessary risk responses or escalate the issues to the relevant stakeholders. Therefore, the answer is D. risk owners have decision-making authority. References = 1.9 Ownership & Accountability - CRISC, The Importance of Effective Risk Governance in the C-suite - Aon

The MOST important stakeholders to include during the initial risk identification process for a business application are the business process owners, because they are the ones who have the authority and responsibility for the business processes that are supported or enabled by the business application. The business process owners can provide valuable input and feedback on the business objectives, requirements, and expectations of the business application, as well as the potential risks, impacts, and opportunities that may affect the business processes and outcomes. The other options are not as important as the business process owners, because:

Option B: Business process consumers are the ones who use or benefit from the business processes that are supported or enabled by the business application, such as customers, employees, or partners. They can provide useful information and perspectives on the user needs, preferences, and satisfaction of the business application, but they are not as important as the business process owners, who have the ultimate accountability and authority for the business processes and outcomes.

Option C: Application architecture team is the one who designs and develops the technical architecture and components of the business application, such as the hardware, software, network, and data. They can provide technical expertise and guidance on the feasibility, functionality, and security of the business application, but they are not as important as the business process owners, who have the primary stake and interest in the business application and its alignment with the business processes and objectives.

Option D: Internal audit is the one who provides independent assurance and consulting services on the governance, risk management, and control processes of the organization, including the business application. They can provide objective and impartial evaluation and recommendation on the effectiveness and efficiency of the business application and its compliance with the internal and external standards and regulations, but they are not as important as the business process owners, who have the direct involvement and influence on the business application and its performance and value. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 103.

 The effectiveness of an employee deprovisioning process can be measured by the number of days taken to remove access after staff separation dates, as this indicates how quickly and completely the organisation can revoke the privileges of former employees and reduce the risk of unauthorized access or data leakage. The number of days taken for IT to remove access after receipt of HR instructions is a measure of the efficiency of the IT department, but not the overall process. The number of termination requests processed per reporting period is a measure of the volume of the process, but not the quality or timeliness. The number of days taken for HR to provide instructions to IT after staff separation dates is a measure of the performance of the HR department, but not the entire process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 152.

 According to the 10 Tips for Secure Online Transactions - SmartAsset article, multi-factor authentication is a security measure that requires users to provide more than one piece of evidence to verify their identity when logging in to an online account. For example, users may need to enter a password and a code sent to their phone or email, or use a biometric feature such as a fingerprint or a face scan. Multi-factor authentication can help secure online financial transactions from improper users, as it makes it harder for hackers to access the account even if they have the password. Multi-factor authentication can also alert users to any suspicious login attempts and prevent unauthorized transactions. References = 10 Tips for Secure Online Transactions - SmartAsset

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given operational risk1. KRIs have upper and lower acceptable risk limits (warning thresholds) that trigger actions when exceeded2. These thresholds are based on the organization’s risk appetite or tolerance, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives3. Therefore, changes in risk appetite or tolerance would prompt changes in KRI thresholds, as the organization would need to adjust its risk monitoring and response accordingly. The other options are not the primary factors that would prompt changes in KRI thresholds, although they may have some influence on the risk management process. References = Risk IT Framework; IT Risk Resources; ISACA Risk Starter Kit; Key Risk Indicators; Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, authorizing user access requests is the process of granting or denying access to IT resources based on the user’s role, responsibilities, and business needs. Authorizing user access requests is a key control accountability that should be retained within the organization, as it helps to ensure that the principle of least privilege is applied, and that the access rights are aligned with the organization’s policies, standards, and risk appetite. Authorizing user access requests also helps to prevent unauthorized access, data leakage, fraud, and other potential risks associated with user access provisioning and termination. Therefore, the best control accountability to retain within the organization when a third-party vendor offers to perform user access provisioning and termination is authorizing user access requests. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 240.

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

Commitment to controls is the degree to which the organization and its stakeholders support and adhere to the controls that are designed and implemented to manage or mitigate the risks1. Commitment to controls is essential for ensuring the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, as well as the achievement of the organization’s objectives and strategies2. The best way to promote commitment to controls is to assign control ownership, which is the process of identifying and assigning the person or entity that has the authority and accountability for a control and its management3. By assigning control ownership, the organization can ensure that the controls are properly and promptly designed, implemented, monitored, and maintained, and that the issues or gaps in the controls are identified and resolved4. Assigning control ownership also helps to establish and communicate the roles and responsibilities of the control owners and the other stakeholders, and to enforce the accountability and performance of the control owners5. Assigning appropriate resources, assigning a quality control review, and performing regular independent control reviews are not the best ways to promote commitment to controls, as they do not provide the same level of authority and accountability as assigning control ownership. Assigning appropriate resources is the process of allocating and providing the necessary funds, staff, equipment, or technology that are required to support or enable the controls. Assigning appropriate resources can enhance the quality and performance of the controls, but it does not ensure that the controls are managed or maintained by a specific person or entity. Assigning a quality control review is the process of conducting and documenting a systematic and objective examination and evaluation of the controls, to ensure that they meet the established standards and requirements. Assigning a quality control review can improve the reliability and compliance of the controls, but it does not ensure that the controls are owned or operated by a specific person or entity. Performing regular independent control reviews is the process of performing and reporting an independent and impartial assessment and verification of the controls, to provide assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls. Performing regular independent control reviews can provide feedback and recommendations for the controls, but it does not ensure that the controls are implemented or improved by a specific person or entity. References = 1: Commitment Controls - IMF2: 17 COSO Principles of Effective Internal Control | Weaver3: [Control Ownership - ISACA] 4: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] 5: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : Resource Allocation - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : Quality Control Review - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : IT Risk Resources | ISACA : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

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

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.

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

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

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 the expected risk level, assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk mitigation controls, and identifying any residual or emerging risks3. Documenting project lessons learned, validating the project completion, and confirming the project budget are important aspects of a PIR, but they are not the primary objective for a risk practitioner, as they do not directly measure the impact of the project on the risk level4. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.4: Post-Implementation Review, pp. 239-241.

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

 Scenario analysis is a technique that helps to identify significant events that could impact an organization by creating and exploring plausible alternative futures. Scenario analysis can help anticipate and prepare for potential changes, opportunities, or threats in the internal or external environment, such as technological, economic, social, political, legal, or environmental factors. Scenario analysis can also help evaluate the impact and likelihood of different risk scenarios, and test the effectiveness and robustness of various risk response strategies. Scenario analysis can provide a comprehensive and holistic view of risks and their interrelationships, and support the decision making and planning process for risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Scenarios, p. 49-50.

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

 Risk assessment is the process of analyzing and evaluating the likelihood and consequences of the identified risks, and comparing them with the risk criteria and appetite. Risk assessment results can provide valuable information to support risk decisions, such as selecting and implementing the appropriate risk response strategies. The best way to provide executive management with the best information to make risk decisions as a result of a risk assessment is to present a comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state. The desired state is the optimal level of risk exposure that the organization wants to achieve, based on its risk objectives, goals, and strategy. A comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state can help executive management understand the current and potential gap between the actual and target risk levels, and prioritize the most critical and relevant risks that need attention and action. A comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state can also help executive management evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing risk response, and identify the opportunities and challenges for improvement. A comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state can also help communicate and justify the risk decisions to other stakeholders, and obtain their feedback and approval. References = Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA, Risk Management Essentials: How to Develop a Risk Profile (TRN2-J07), Risk Response Strategies: Avoid, Transfer, Mitigate, Accept.

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

 A benchmark analysis is a process of comparing the organization’s performance, practices, and processes with those of other organizations in the same industry or sector. A benchmark analysis can provide the most useful information when determining the frequency of risk assessments, because it can help the organization to identify the best practices, standards, and expectations for security risk management in its industry. A benchmark analysis can also help the organization to assess its current level of maturity, capability, and compliance in relation to security risk management, and to determine the gaps and areas for improvement. By conducting a benchmark analysis, the organization can establish a realistic and appropriate frequency of risk assessments that aligns with its industry norms and its own risk profile. The other options are not as useful as a benchmark analysis, because they do not provide a comprehensive and relevant view of the security risk management landscape, but rather focus on specific or partial aspects of the organization’s situation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 18.

Ineffective control implementation can result in increased risk exposure, reduced compliance, and diminished performance for the organization. Therefore, the most relevant information for stakeholders is the impact of ineffective control implementation on the business objectives, processes, and outcomes. The impact on business can include financial losses, reputational damage, operational inefficiencies, customer dissatisfaction, and legal liabilities. The other options are not as relevant as the impact on business, because they do not directly link the control effectiveness to the business value. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 128.

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

The best answer is D. Escalation triggers. Escalation triggers are predefined thresholds or conditions that indicate when a key risk indicator (KRI) has reached a critical level that requires immediate attention or action. Escalation triggers can be based on quantitative or qualitative measures, such as percentages, scores, ratings, or colors. Escalation triggers can help to ensure appropriate action is taken to mitigate risk, because they provide clear and timely signals that alert the risk owners, managers, and other stakeholders of the need to review and revise the risk response plan, or to implement additional or alternative controls. Escalation triggers can also help to communicate and report the risk status and the risk response actions to the senior management and the board, and to obtain their support and approval, if needed. The other options are not the best answer, although they may be related or influential to the KRI and the risk mitigation. Management intervention is a part of the risk response process, which involves the actions and decisions taken by the management to address the risk, such as approving, implementing, or monitoring the controls. Management intervention can help to mitigate risk, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a consequence or a result of the escalation triggers. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite can help to define and align the KRI and the escalation triggers with the organizational strategy and culture, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a factor or a driver of the KRI. Board commentary is a part of the risk reporting process, which involves the feedback and guidance provided by the board on the risk management process and performance. Board commentary can help to improve and enhance the KRI and the risk mitigation, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a source or a resource of the KRI. References = Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture, KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva

Code review could BEST detect an in-house developer inserting malicious functions into a web-based application, because it is a process that involves examining and verifying the source code of the application for any errors, vulnerabilities, or malicious functions. Code review can help to identify and remove any unauthorized or harmful code that the developer may have inserted, either intentionally or unintentionally, and to ensure that the application meets the quality and security standards and requirements. The other options are not as effective as code review, because:

Option A: Segregation of duties is a control that involves separating the roles and responsibilities of the developer from those of the tester, the approver, and the deployer, to prevent any conflict of interest or misuse of authority. Segregation of duties can help to reduce the risk of the developer inserting malicious functions into the web-based application, but it does not detect them.

Option C: Change management is a process that involves controlling and documenting any changes to the web-based application, such as new features, enhancements, or bug fixes, to ensure that they are authorized, tested, and approved. Change management can help to track and monitor the changes that the developer may have made to the web-based application, but it does not detect the malicious functions.

Option D: Audit modules are components that are embedded in the web-based application to record and report the activities and transactions that occur within the application, such as user login, data input, or data output. Audit modules can help to audit and review the performance and functionality of the web-based application, but they do not detect the malicious functions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 214.

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

A vulnerability management process is a process that identifies, analyzes, prioritizes, and remediates the vulnerabilities in the IT systems and applications. The effectiveness of a vulnerability management process can be measured by the key performance indicators (KPIs) that reflect the achievement of the process objectives and the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. The best KPI to measure the effectiveness of a vulnerability management process is the percentage of vulnerabilities remediated within the agreed service level. This KPI indicates how well the process is able to address the vulnerabilities in a timely and efficient manner, and reduce the exposure and impact of the risks associated with the vulnerabilities. The other options are not as good as the percentage of vulnerabilities remediated within the agreed service level, as they may not reflect the quality or timeliness of the remediation actions, or the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2.1, pp. 171-172.

 A business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects of a disaster on the critical functions and processes of an organization1. A BIA helps to forecast the operational, financial, legal, and reputational impacts of a disaster, as well as the recovery priorities and resources needed to resume normal operations2. A BIA also helps to determine the recovery time objectives (RTO), which are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the critical functions and processes after a disaster3. Therefore, developing a BIA is the most important step for an organization to forecast the effects of a disaster and plan for its recovery. Defining RTOs is a part of the BIA process, not a separate activity. Analyzing capability maturity model gaps is a method to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s processes and practices, but it does not directly forecast the effects of a disaster4. Simulating a disaster recovery is a way to test and validate the recovery plans and procedures, but it does not forecast the effects of a disaster either5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.3: Business Continuity Planning, pp. 227-238.

 The main benefit of involving stakeholders in the selection of key risk indicators (KRIs) is improving risk awareness, as it helps to communicate the risk exposure, appetite, and tolerance of the organization to the relevant parties. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given operational risk1. By involving stakeholders in the selection of KRIs, the risk practitioner can ensure that the KRIs are aligned with the stakeholder expectations, needs, and objectives, and that they reflect the most significant risks that affect the organization. This also helps to foster a risk culture and a shared understanding of risk among the stakeholders, which can enhance the risk management process and performance. The other options are not the main benefit of involving stakeholders in the selection of KRIs, although they may be some of the outcomes or advantages of doing so. Obtaining buy-in from risk owners, leveraging existing metrics, and optimizing risk treatment decisions are all important aspects of risk management, but they are not the primary reason for involving stakeholders in the selection of KRIs. References = Key Risk Indicators; Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide; The 10 Types of Stakeholders That You Meet in Business; What are Stakeholders? Stakeholder Definition | ASQ

The most important factor when assessing the risk of allowing users to access company data from their personal devices is the classification of the data, as it indicates the level of sensitivity, confidentiality, and criticality of the data. Data classification helps to determine the appropriate level of protection and controls that are needed to prevent unauthorized access, disclosure, modification, or loss of the data. Data classification also helps to define the roles and responsibilities of the data owners, custodians, and users, and the acceptable use of the data. The other options are not the most important factors, although they may be relevant or influential in the risk assessment. The type of device may affect the security features and vulnerabilities of the device, but it does not determine the value or impact of the data. The remote management capabilities may affect the ability to monitor, control, or wipe the device in case of theft or loss, but they do not reflect the nature or purpose of the data. The volume of data may affect the storage capacity or performance of the device, but it does not indicate the importance or significance of the data. References = What is BYOD (Bring-Your-Own-Device) - CrowdStrike; Understanding BYOD Policy - Get Certified Get Ahead; Addressing cyber security concerns on employees’ personal devices; Personal Devices at Work – Nonprofit Risk Management Center; 10 Keys to an Effective BYOD and Remote Access Policy

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

Read rights: The permission to view or access the content of a file or a folder1.

Application files: The files that contain the code, data, or resources of an application or a program2.

Controlled server environment: A server environment that is managed and secured by a set of policies, procedures, and tools3.

Business process owner: The person who is responsible for the design, execution, and performance of a business process.

Read rights to application files in a controlled server environment should be approved by the business process owner. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the business process that uses or depends on the application files. The business process owner should approve the read rights to application files in a controlled server environment to:

Ensure that the read rights are aligned with the business needs and objectives

Prevent unauthorized or unnecessary access to the application files

Protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the application files

Comply with the relevant laws and regulations that govern the access to the application files

The other options are not the best choices for approving the read rights to application files in a controlled server environment, because they do not have the same level of authority, responsibility, or knowledge as the business process owner. The database administrator, who is the person who manages and maintains the database systems and data, may have the technical skills and access to grant the read rights to application files, but they may not have the business insight or approval to do so. The chief information officer, who is the person who oversees the IT strategy and operations of the organization, may have the executive power and oversight to approve the read rights to application files, but they may not have the specific or detailed knowledge of the business process or the application files. The systems administrator, who is the person who configures and maintains the server systems and networks, may have the administrative privileges and tools to grant the read rights to application files, but they may not have the business understanding or authorization to do so.

References = Read Permission - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics, What is an Application File? - Definition from Techopedia, What is a Server Environment? - Definition from Techopedia, [Business Process Owner: Definition, Roles, and Responsibilities]

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

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

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

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

The risk practitioner should verify the cost-benefit of the new controls being implemented to ensure that they are aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and strategy, and that they provide value to the business. The other options are not as important as verifying the cost-benefit of the new controls, because:

Option A: Updating the risk register is a good practice, but it does not provide assurance that the new controls are effective and efficient.

Option B: Ensuring risk monitoring for the project is initiated is also a good practice, but it is not as urgent as verifying the cost-benefit of the new controls, which should be done before the project is closed.

Option C: Conducting and documenting a BIA is not relevant to the scenario, as the project is already completed and the new controls are implemented. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 184.

The GREATEST concern associated with business end users developing their own applications on end user spreadsheets and database programs is:

B. Controls are not applied to the applications.

When end users create their own applications, there is often a lack of formal controls that would typically be applied in a structured development environment. This can lead to issues with data integrity, security vulnerabilities, and non-compliance with organizational policies and standards.

A service level agreement (SLA) is a contract between a SaaS vendor and a customer that defines the quality and availability of the SaaS service, as well as the responsibilities and obligations of both parties. An SLA is most important to include in a SaaS vendor agreement because it sets the expectations and standards for the SaaS service, provides a mechanism for measuring and monitoring the service performance, and establishes the remedies and penalties for service failures or breaches. An SLA can also help to mitigate the risks and liabilities associated with SaaS delivery, such as data security, privacy, compliance, and disaster recovery. The other options are not the most important to include in a SaaS vendor agreement, although they may be beneficial or desirable depending on the context and nature of the SaaS service. An annual contract review is a process of evaluating and revising the SaaS vendor agreement to reflect the changing needs and circumstances of the customer and the vendor, but it is not a mandatory or essential element of the agreement. A requirement to adopt an established risk management framework is a way of ensuring that the SaaS vendor follows the best practices and standards for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks related to the SaaS service, but it is not a specific or measurable term of the agreement. A requirement to provide an independent audit report is a way of verifying and validating the SaaS vendor’s compliance with the SLA and other contractual obligations, but it is not a direct or primary component of the agreement. References = SaaS Agreements: Key Contractual Provisions, SaaS Agreement: Everything You Need to Know, Essential checklist for SaaS agreement negotiations, Key Clauses To Understand and Evaluate in SaaS Contracts, SaaS Reseller Agreement: Everything You Need to Know

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, peer reviews are the process of evaluating the quality and validity of risk analysis by independent experts or colleagues. Peer reviews are conducted to ensure that the risk analysis is consistent, objective, and reliable, and that it follows the established standards and methods. The primary reason for conducting peer reviews of risk analysis is to minimize subjectivity of assessments, as peer reviews can help to reduce personal biases, preferences, and assumptions that may affect the risk analysis outcomes. Peer reviews can also help to identify and correct any errors, gaps, or inconsistencies in the risk analysis, and to improve the risk analysis skills and knowledge of the reviewers and the reviewees. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 209.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The most important objective of embedding risk management practices into the initiation phase of the project management life cycle is to assess inherent risk. Inherent risk is the risk that exists before any controls or mitigations are applied. By assessing inherent risk in the initiation phase, the project team can identify the potential sources, causes, and impacts of risk that may affect the project objectives, scope, and deliverables. Assessing inherent risk in the initiation phase also helps to prioritize the risks, determine the risk appetite and tolerance, and plan the risk responses. Delivering projects on time and on budget, including project risk in the enterprise-wide IT risk profile, and assessing risk throughout the project are important objectives of risk management, but they are not the most important objective of embedding risk management practices into the initiation phase. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.1, page 511

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 658.

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and owners. A decentralized risk register is maintained by each business unit or function, while a consolidated risk register is maintained at the enterprise level. The greatest concern with maintaining decentralized risk registers instead of a consolidated risk register is that the aggregated risk may exceed the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, while risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation around the objectives. If the risk registers are not consolidated, the enterprise may not have a holistic view of its risk profile and may not be able to prioritize and allocate resources effectively. The other options are also concerns, but they are not as significant as the potential misalignment between the aggregated risk and the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2.2, pp. 21-22.

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

The effectiveness of risk response options is the best criteria when selecting a risk response, because it reflects the degree to which the response can reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk, or enhance the benefit or opportunity of the risk. The effectiveness of risk response options can be evaluated by considering factors such as cost, feasibility, timeliness, and alignment with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite. The other options are not as good as the effectiveness of risk response options, because they do not measure the outcome or value of the response, but rather focus on the input or process of the response, as explained below:

A. Capability to implement the response is a criteria that considers the availability and adequacy of the resources, skills, and knowledge required to execute the response. While this is an important factor to consider, it does not indicate how well the response can address the risk or achieve the desired result.

B. Importance of IT risk within the enterprise is a criteria that considers the significance and priority of the risk in relation to the organization’s strategy, objectives, and operations. While this is an important factor to consider, it does not indicate how well the response can address the risk or achieve the desired result.

D. Alignment of response to industry standards is a criteria that considers the compliance and conformity of the response with the best practices, norms, and expectations of the industry or sector. While this is an important factor to consider, it does not indicate how well the response can address the risk or achieve the desired result. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 40. How to Select Your Risk Responses - Rebel’s Guide to Project Management, Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips, Risk Responses - options for managing risk - Stakeholdermap.com

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

First-hand direct observation of the controls in operation is the best way to confirm the existence and operating effectiveness of information systems controls because it provides the auditor with the most reliable and persuasive evidence. Direct observation involves inspecting the physical and logical aspects of the controls, such as the hardware, software, network, data, procedures, and personnel involved in the information systems. Direct observation also allows the auditor to verify that the controls are functioning as intended, and to identify any deviations or weaknesses that may affect the reliability of the information systems. Direct observation can be performed by using various techniques, such as walkthroughs, inquiries, inspections, reperformance, and analytical procedures1. References = Auditing Standard No. 13, The Auditor’s Responses to the Risks of Material Misstatement, PCAOB, 20101

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4: Risk Register Examples for Cybersecurity Leaders4

5: Risk Scenarios Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

6: Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, ISACA, 2019

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

8: Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) Calculator6

: Project Budgeting: How to Estimate Costs and Manage Budgets7

: Project Budget Template - Download Free Excel Template8

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), a vulnerability is a flaw or weakness in an asset’s design, implementation, or operation and management that could be exploited by a threat. A delayed removal of employee access is a vulnerability, as it allows former employees to retain access to the organization’s IT assets and processes, which could lead to unauthorized disclosure, modification, or destruction of data or resources. A delayed removal of employee access could be caused by poor personnel management, lack of security awareness, or inadequate access control policies and procedures.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 32-331

The risk associated with the leakage of confidential data is the possibility and impact of unauthorized disclosure, access, or use of sensitive information that may harm the organization or its stakeholders12.

The first step in managing the risk associated with the leakage of confidential data is to define and implement a data classification policy, which is a document that establishes the criteria, categories, roles, and responsibilities for identifying, labeling, and handling different types of data according to their sensitivity, value, and protection needs34.

Defining and implementing a data classification policy is the first step because it provides the foundation and framework for the data protection strategy, and enables the organization to prioritize and allocate the appropriate resources and controls for the most critical and confidential data34.

Defining and implementing a data classification policy is also the first step because it supports the compliance with the relevant laws and regulations, such as GDPR, HIPAA, or PCI-DSS, that require the organization to classify and protect the personal or financial data of its customers or clients34.

The other options are not the first step, but rather possible subsequent steps that may depend on or follow the data classification policy. For example:

Maintaining and reviewing the classified data inventory is a step that involves creating and updating a record of the data assets that have been classified, and verifying their accuracy and completeness over time34. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the data classification policy to provide the guidance and standards for the data inventory process34.

Implementing mandatory encryption on data is a step that involves applying a cryptographic technique that transforms the data into an unreadable format, and requires a key or a password to decrypt and access the data56. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the data classification policy to determine which data needs to be encrypted, and what level of encryption is appropriate56.

Conducting an awareness program for data owners and users is a step that involves educating and training the people who are responsible for or have access to the data, and informing them of their roles, obligations, and best practices for data protection78. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the data classification policy to define the data ownership and user rights, and the data protection policies and procedures78. References =

1: Top Four Damaging Consequences of Data Leakage | ZeroFox1

2: 8 Data Leak Prevention Strategies for 2023 | UpGuard2

3: Data Classification: What It Is, Why You Need It, and How to Do It3

4: Data Classification Policy Template - IT Governance USA4

5: Encryption: What It Is, How It Works, and Why You Need It5

6: Encryption Policy Template - IT Governance USA6

7: What Is Security Awareness Training and Why Is It Important? - Kaspersky7

8: Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US8

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

Detailed Explanation:A cost-benefit analysis evaluates 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.

The risk practitioner’s primary focus when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk should be the level of residual risk, because this indicates the amount and type of risk that remains after applying the controls, and whether it is acceptable or not. Residual risk is the risk that is left over after the risk response actions have been taken, such as implementing or improving controls. Controls are the measures or actions that are designed and performed to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of a risk event, or to exploit the opportunities that a risk event may create. The adequacy of controls to mitigate risk depends on how well they address the root causes or sources of the risk, and how effectively and efficiently they reduce the risk exposure and value. The level of residual risk reflects the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it shows the gap between the inherent risk and the actual risk, and whether it is within the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. The risk practitioner should focus on the level of residual risk when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk, as it helps to evaluate and compare the benefits and costs of the controls, and to decide on the best risk response strategy, such as accepting, avoiding, transferring, or further reducing the risk. The other options are less important or relevant to focus on when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk. Sensitivity analysis is a technique that measures how the risk value changes when one or more input variables are changed, such as the probability, impact, or control effectiveness. Sensitivity analysis can help to identify and prioritize the most influential or critical variables that affect the risk value, and to test the robustness or reliability of the risk assessment. However, sensitivity analysis does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the risk acceptance criteria. Cost-benefit analysis is a technique that compares the expected benefits and costs of a control or a risk response action, and determines whether it is worthwhile or not. Cost-benefit analysis can help to justify and optimize the investment or resource allocation for the control or the risk response action, and to ensure that it is aligned with the organization’s objectives and value. However, cost-benefit analysis does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the risk acceptance criteria. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite can help to define and communicate the organization’s risk preferences and boundaries, and to guide the risk decision-making and behavior. However, risk appetite does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the actual risk performance. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the percentage of successful changes is the most effective key performance indicator (KPI) for change management, as it measures the quality and effectiveness of the change management process and its alignment with the organization’s objectives and requirements. The percentage of successful changes helps to:

Evaluate the extent to which the changes have met the expected outcomes and benefits

Identify and analyze the root causes of any failed or problematic changes and implement corrective actions or improvement measures

Monitor and report the performance and progress of the change management process and its impact on the organization

Enhance the confidence and satisfaction of the stakeholders and customers with the change management process and its results

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Scenarios, pp. 107-1081

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

An IT risk management framework is a set of principles, processes, and practices that guide and support the identification, analysis, evaluation, treatment, monitoring, and communication of IT-related risks within an organization12.

The primary advantage of implementing an IT risk management framework is the establishment of a reliable basis for risk-aware decision making, which enables the organization to balance the potential benefits and adverse effects of using IT, and to allocate resources and prioritize actions accordingly12.

A reliable basis for risk-aware decision making consists of the following elements12:

A common language and understanding of IT risk, its sources, impacts, and responses

A consistent and structured approach to IT risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment

A clear and transparent governance structure and accountability for IT risk management

A comprehensive and up-to-date IT risk register and profile that reflects the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

A regular and effective IT risk monitoring and reporting process that provides relevant and timely information to stakeholders

A continuous and proactive IT risk improvement process that incorporates feedback and lessons learned

The other options are not the primary advantage, but rather possible outcomes or benefits of implementing an IT risk management framework. For example:

Compliance with relevant legal and regulatory requirements is an outcome of implementing an IT risk management framework that ensures the organization meets its obligations and avoids penalties or sanctions12.

Improvement of controls within the organization and minimized losses is a benefit of implementing an IT risk management framework that reduces the likelihood and impact of IT-related incidents and events12.

Alignment of business goals with IT objectives is a benefit of implementing an IT risk management framework that ensures the IT strategy and activities support the organization’s mission and vision12. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

Detailed Explanation:SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) is used in the risk identification phase to comprehensively analyze the organization's internal and external environments. By understanding strengths and weaknesses, internal risks can be identified, while opportunities and threats help to identify external risks. This method provides a foundation for proactive risk management.

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the main reason to continuously monitor IT-related risk is to ensure risk levels are within acceptable limits of the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, while the risk tolerance is the acceptable variation in outcomes related to specific performance measures linked to objectives. Continuous monitoring is a process that tracks the security state of an information system on an ongoing basis and maintains the security authorization for the system over time. Continuous monitoring helps to:

Provide ongoing assurance that the implemented security controls are operating effectively and efficiently

Detect changes in the risk profile of the information system and the environment of operation

Identify new or emerging threats and vulnerabilities that may affect the information system

Support risk-based decisions by providing timely and relevant risk information to stakeholders

Facilitate the implementation of corrective actions and risk mitigation strategies

Promote accountability and transparency in the risk management process

Enhance the security awareness and culture within the organization

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 213-2141

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the organization’s culture is the most important factor affecting risk management in an organization, as it influences the risk awareness, risk attitude, risk behavior and risk communication of all stakeholders. The organization’s culture is defined as the shared values, beliefs, norms and expectations that guide the actions and interactions of the members of the organization. The organization’s culture affects how risk management is perceived, supported, implemented and integrated within the organization. A strong risk culture is one that:

Aligns with the organization’s vision, mission, strategy and objectives

Promotes a common understanding of risk and its implications for the organization

Encourages the identification, assessment, response and monitoring of risks at all levels

Fosters a proactive, collaborative and transparent approach to risk management

Empowers and rewards the stakeholders for taking ownership and accountability of risks

Enables continuous learning and improvement of risk management capabilities and maturity

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Culture, pp. 23-251

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the sources, causes, and consequences of IT-related risks, and the potential impacts on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

A corporate risk register is a document that records and tracks the significant risks that the organization faces, and the responses and actions that are taken to address them34.

The greatest benefit of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register is that exposure is integrated into the organization’s risk profile, which is a comprehensive and integrated representation of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation56.

Exposure is integrated into the organization’s risk profile means that the organization has a complete and consistent view of the IT risk landscape, and the potential impacts and interdependencies of IT risks on other types of risks, such as financial, operational, strategic, or reputational risks56.

Exposure is integrated into the organization’s risk profile also means that the organization can make informed and balanced decisions on the risk responses and actions, and allocate the appropriate resources and priorities to the IT risk management and control processes56.

The other options are not the greatest benefit, but rather possible outcomes or consequences of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register. For example:

Corporate incident escalation protocols are established is an outcome of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register that indicates the organization has defined and implemented the procedures and mechanisms for reporting and resolving IT-related incidents, and for escalating them to the appropriate authorities or levels when necessary78. However, this outcome does not measure or reflect the exposure or the risk profile of the organization, which may depend on other factors such as the frequency, severity, or complexity of the incidents78.

Risk appetite cascades to business unit management is a consequence of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register that indicates the organization has communicated and aligned the risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue, to the business unit management, who are responsible for executing the risk strategy and objectives at the operational level . However, this consequence does not indicate or imply the exposure or the risk profile of the organization, which may vary depending on the context, environment, or stakeholder expectations .

The organization-wide control budget is expanded is an outcome of incorporating IT risk scenarios into the corporate risk register that indicates the organization has increased the amount of resources and funds that are allocated to the control processes, which are the procedures and activities that aim to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s operations, the reliability of its information, and the compliance with its policies and regulations . However, this outcome does not affect or determine the exposure or the risk profile of the organization, which is independent of the control budget . References =

1: IT Risk Scenarios - Morland-Austin3

2: Risk Scenarios Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

3: Risk Register Template and Examples | Prioritize and Manage Risk1

4: Risk Register Examples for Cybersecurity Leaders4

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

8: Security Incident Reporting and Response, ISACA, 2019

: Risk Appetite: Linking Strategy, Risk and Performance, ISACA, 2012

: Risk Appetite and Tolerance, ISACA Journal, Volume 4, 2013

: The Control Process | Principles of Management2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture1

2: Key risk indicator - Wikipedia2

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia3

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva4

5: Regulatory Compliance - Wikipedia5

: Regulatory Compliance Management Software | MetricStream

: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

: Trend Analysis - Investopedia

: Trend Analysis: A Definition and Examples

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), threat analysis would be the most helpful when estimating the likelihood of negative events, as it involves identifying and evaluating the sources and causes of potential harm or loss to the IT assets and processes. Threat analysis helps to:

Determine the frequency and probability of occurrence of different types of threats, such as natural disasters, human errors, malicious attacks, system failures, etc.

Assess the impact and severity of the threats on the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the IT assets and processes

Prioritize the threats based on their likelihood and impact

Develop appropriate risk response strategies to prevent, mitigate, transfer or accept the threats

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 35-361

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

Detailed Explanation:Real-time monitoring is a detective control, as it is designed to identify and report suspicious or unauthorized activities as they occur. Detective controls provide feedback to mitigate ongoing risks and serve as an integral part of incident response plans.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), a contract associated with a cloud service provider must include ownership of responsibilities, as this defines the roles and obligations of both the cloud provider and the customer in relation to the cloud services. The contract should specify who is responsible for:

Service delivery and performance

Data security and privacy

Compliance with regulations and standards

Incident management and reporting

Business continuity and disaster recovery

Change management and configuration control

Intellectual property rights and licensing

Termination and data egress

The contract should also include service level agreements (SLAs) that measure and monitor the quality and availability of the cloud services, as well as remedies and penalties for non-compliance. The contract should also address pricing and payment terms, dispute resolution mechanisms, and liability and indemnification clauses.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 173-1741

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

A disaster recovery test is a simulation of a disaster scenario that evaluates the effectiveness and readiness of the disaster recovery plan. The main purpose of a disaster recovery test is to ensure that the organization can resume its normal operations as quickly as possible after a disaster, with minimal or no data loss. Therefore, the most important objective of a disaster recovery test from a business perspective is to verify that all critical data can be recovered within the RTOs, which are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the data and systems after a disaster. If the RTOs are not met, the organization may face significant financial, operational, and reputational losses. The other options are not the most important objectives of a disaster recovery test, although they may be beneficial outcomes. Gaining assurance that the organization can recover from a disaster is a subjective and qualitative goal, while recovering data within RTOs is a measurable and quantitative goal. Discovering errors in the disaster recovery process is a valuable result of a disaster recovery test, but it is not the primary objective. The objective is to correct the errors and improve the process, not just to find them. Testing all business critical systems is a necessary step in a disaster recovery test, but it is not the ultimate goal. The goal is to ensure that the systems can be restored and function properly within the RTOs. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 197-1981; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 572

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: IT Risk Register Template, ISACA, 2019

4: IT Risk Register Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

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

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

7: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

8: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

: IT Project Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

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

An IT risk profile is a document that summarizes the IT-related risks that an organization faces, as well as the information and actions related to those risks, such as the risk description, assessment, response, status, and owner. An IT risk profile is a valuable tool for managing and communicating IT risks and their impact on the organization’s objectives and operations. The best description of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions is that it helps assess the effects of IT decisions on risk exposure. This means that the IT risk profile can help to evaluate the potential consequences and implications of different IT choices or actions on the level and nature of the IT risks that the organization faces. The IT risk profile can also help to identify and address the gaps or opportunities for improvement in the IT risk management process and performance. The other options are not the best descriptions of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions, although they may be related or beneficial. Comparing performance levels of IT assets to value delivered is a technique to measure and optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of the IT resources and activities that support the organization’s goals and needs. However, this technique does not necessarily involve the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the output and outcome of the IT assets, not the input and impact of the IT risks. Facilitating the alignment of strategic IT objectives to business objectives is a technique to ensure that the IT strategy and plans are consistent and compatible with the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, and objectives. However, this technique does not depend on the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the direction and purpose of the IT objectives, not the probability and threat of the IT risks. Providing input to business managers when preparing a business case for new IT projects is a technique to support and justify the initiation and implementation of new IT initiatives that can create value or solve problems for the organization. However, this technique does not require the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the cost and benefit of the IT projects, not the risk and response of the IT risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 962; IT Risk Management Guide for 2022 | CIO Insight3; IT Risk Management Process, Frameworks & Templates4

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 The most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization is clearly defined roles and responsibilities. The three lines of defense model is a framework that outlines the roles and responsibilities of different functions or groups within the organization in relation to risk management and internal control1. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense, which consists of the operational management and staff who own and manage the risks associated with their activities and processes. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks, as well as designing, implementing, and operating the controls.

The second line of defense, which consists of the specialized functions or units that provide oversight, guidance, and support to the first line of defense in managing the risks and controls. They are responsible for developing and maintaining the risk management framework, policies, and standards, as well as monitoring and reporting on the risk and control performance.

The third line of defense, which consists of the internal audit function that provides independent and objective assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and internal control system. They are responsible for evaluating and testing the design and operation of the risks and controls, as well as reporting and recommending improvements to the senior management and the board. Clearly defined roles and responsibilities are essential for ensuring that the three lines of defense model works effectively and efficiently. They help to avoid confusion, duplication, or gaps in the risk management and internal control activities, as well as to ensure accountability, coordination, and communication among the different functions or groups. They also help to establish the appropriate level of independence, authority, and competence for each line of defense, as well as to align the risk management and internal control objectives and strategies with the organization’s goals and values2. The other options are not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as they are either less relevant or less specific than clearly defined roles and responsibilities. A robust risk aggregation tool set is a set of methods or techniques that enable the organization to collect, consolidate, and analyze the risk data and information from different sources, levels, or perspectives. A robust risk aggregation tool set can help to enhance the risk identification, assessment, and reporting processes, as well as to support the risk decision making and prioritization. However, a robust risk aggregation tool set is not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as it does not address the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups in relation to risk management and internal control. A well-established risk management committee is a group of senior executives or managers who are responsible for overseeing and directing the risk management activities and performance of the organization. A well-established risk management committee can help to ensure the alignment and integration of the risk management objectives and strategies with the organization’s goals and values, as well as to provide guidance and support to the different functions or groups involved in risk management and internal control. However, a well-established risk management committee is not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as it does not cover the roles and responsibilities of the operational management and staff, the specialized functions or units, or the internal audit function. Well-documented and communicated escalation procedures are the steps or actions that are taken to report and resolve any issues or incidents that may affect the risk management and internal control activities or performance of the organization. Well-documented and communicated escalation procedures can help to ensure the timely and appropriate response and resolution of the issues or incidents, as well as to inform and involve the relevant stakeholders and authorities. However, well-documented and communicated escalation procedures are not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as they do not define the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups in relation to risk management and internal control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 85.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: ISO - ISO 31000 — Risk management1

2: Risk Management Standards2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

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

Optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities

Enhance the value and performance of the organization

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

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

A third-party security assessment report is the most helpful to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider, because it provides an independent and objective evaluation of the cloud provider’s security posture, policies, and practices. A third-party security assessment report can help to verify and validate the cloud provider’s compliance with the relevant standards, regulations, and best practices, such as ISO 27001, PCI DSS, NIST, or CSA. A third-party security assessment report can also help to identify and address any gaps, weaknesses, or vulnerabilities in the cloud provider’s security controls, and to provide recommendations and guidance for improvement. A third-party security assessment report can also help to increase the trust and confidence of the cloud customers, and to facilitate the due diligence and risk management processes. The other options are less helpful to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider. A control self-assessment is a process that enables the cloud provider to assess its own security controls, using a predefined framework or questionnaire. However, a control self-assessment may not be as reliable or comprehensive as a third-party security assessment report, as it may be biased, incomplete, or inaccurate, and it may not cover all the aspects or dimensions of security. Internal audit reports from the vendor are documents that provide the results and findings of the internal audits conducted by the cloud provider’s own auditors, to verify and validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the security controls. However, internal audit reports from the vendor may not be as credible or trustworthy as a third-party security assessment report, as they may be influenced by the cloud provider’s interests, objectives, or agenda, and they may not follow the same standards or criteria as the external auditors. Service level agreement monitoring is a process that measures and evaluates the performance and availability of the cloud services, based on the predefined metrics and targets agreed between the cloud provider and the cloud customer. However, service level agreement monitoring may not be sufficient or relevant to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider, as it may not address the security aspects or requirements of the cloud services, such as confidentiality, integrity, or accountability, and it may not reflect the actual security risks or incidents that may occur in the cloud environment. References = Cloud Security Controls: Key Elements and 4 Control Frameworks 1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 199

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

6: Security Incident Reporting and Response, ISACA, 2019

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

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

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

: System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, ISACA, 2019

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

: User Access Management and Control, ISACA, 2019

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

The risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk and its associated controls. The risk owner is also responsible for ensuring that the risk is within the acceptable level and that the risk response is effective and efficient. In this case, the risk owner is also the owner of the business service that depends on the managed hosting service. Therefore, the risk owner should be notified of the new information about the flood risk first, as they have the most interest and influence on the risk and its impact on the business objectives. The risk owner can then decide on the appropriate actions to take, such as reviewing the contract terms, requesting additional controls, or changing the service provider. The other options are not the correct answers because they are not the primary stakeholders of the risk and its consequences. The data center manager is an employee of the managed hosting service provider, not the organization that procured the service. The data center manager may not have the authority or the incentive to address the flood risk or inform the organization. The site manager is also an employee of the managed hosting service provider, and their role is to conduct annual risk assessments under the contract. The site manager may not be aware of the new information or have the responsibility to communicate it to the organization. The CIO is the senior executive who oversees the IT strategy and operations of the organization. The CIO may have a general interest in the managed hosting service and its risks, but they are not the direct owner or manager of the specific risk or the business service that relies on the service. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 702

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

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

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

Control effectiveness is the degree to which a control achieves its intended objective and mitigates the risk that it is designed to address. It is measured by comparing the actual performance and outcome of the control with the expected or desired performance and outcome.

The best method for assessing control effectiveness is continuous monitoring, which is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the performance and outcome of the controls on an ongoing basis. Continuous monitoring provides timely and accurate information on the status and results of the controls, and enables the identification and correction of any issues or gaps in the control environment.

Continuous monitoring can be performed using various techniques, such as automated tools, dashboards, indicators, metrics, logs, audits, reviews, etc. Continuous monitoring 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 methods for assessing control effectiveness, because they do not provide the same level of timeliness, accuracy, and completeness of information on the performance and outcome of the controls.

Ad hoc control reporting is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the performance and outcome of the controls on an irregular or occasional basis. Ad hoc control reporting may be triggered by specific events, requests, or incidents, and it may not cover all the relevant or critical controls. Ad hoc control reporting may not provide sufficient or consistent information on the control effectiveness, and it may not enable the timely and proactive identification and correction of any issues or gaps in the control environment.

Control self-assessment is the process of allowing the control owners or operators to evaluate and report on the performance and outcome of their own controls. Control self-assessment can provide useful insights and feedback from the control owners or operators, and it can enhance their awareness and accountability for the control effectiveness. However, control self-assessment may not be objective, reliable, or independent, and it may not cover all the relevant or critical controls. Control self-assessment may not provide sufficient or consistent information on the control effectiveness, and it may not enable the timely and proactive identification and correction of any issues or gaps in the control environment.

Predictive analytics is the process of using statistical techniques and models to analyze historical and current data, and to make predictions or forecasts about future events or outcomes. Predictive analytics can provide useful insights and trends on the potential performance and outcome of the controls, and it can support the decision making and planning for the control effectiveness. However, predictive analytics may not be accurate, valid, or reliable, and it may not reflect the actual or current performance and outcome of the controls. Predictive analytics may not provide sufficient or consistent information on the control effectiveness, and it may not enable the timely and proactive identification and correction of any issues or gaps in the control environment. 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 150

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 The next step after determining that a key control does not meet design expectations is to document the finding in the risk register, because this helps to record and track the information about the identified risk, such as its description, likelihood, impact, response, and status. A key control is a control that addresses a significant risk or supports a critical business process or objective. A control design expectation is a criterion or requirement that defines how the control should operate or perform to achieve its objective. If a key control does not meet its design expectation, it means that there is a gap, weakness, or deficiency in the control that may compromise its effectiveness or efficiency, and increase the risk exposure or impact. By documenting the finding in the risk register, the risk practitioner can communicate and report the risk issue to the relevant stakeholders, such as the risk owner, the management, or the auditor, and initiate the appropriate risk response actions, such as modifying the design of the control, implementing a compensating control, or accepting the risk. The other options are not the best next steps after determining that a key control does not meet design expectations. Invoking the incident response plan is a reactive measure that is triggered when a risk event occurs or is imminent, and requires immediate action to contain, mitigate, or recover from the incident. However, in this case, the risk event has not occurred yet, and there may be time to prevent or reduce it by improving the control design. Re-evaluating key risk indicators is a monitoring activity that measures and evaluates the level and impact of risks, and provides timely signals that something may be going wrong or needs urgent attention. However, in this case, the risk practitioner has already identified the risk issue, and needs to document and address it, rather than re-evaluate it. Modifying the design of the control is a possible risk response action that may be taken to improve the control and reduce the risk, but it is not the next step after determining that the key control does not meet design expectations. The next step is to document the finding in the risk register, and then decide on the best risk response action, which may or may not be modifying the design of the control, depending on the cost-benefit analysis, the risk assessment, and the risk response strategy. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 13

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the next course of action when a risk practitioner finds the IT department’s recovery time objective (RTO) for a key system does not align with the enterprise’s business continuity plan (BCP) is to consult with the IT department to update the RTO. The 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 RTO should be aligned with the BCP, which is a set of policies, procedures, and resources that enable the organization to continue or resume its critical business functions in the event of a disruption. Consulting with the IT department to update the RTO helps to:

Ensure that the RTO reflects the current business requirements and expectations for the availability and recovery of the key system

Evaluate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of achieving the RTO with the existing IT resources and capabilities

Identify and implement the necessary changes or improvements in the IT infrastructure, processes, and controls to meet the RTO

Test and validate the RTO and the IT recovery procedures and verify their compatibility and consistency with the BCP

Communicate and coordinate the RTO and the IT recovery plan with the relevant stakeholders, such as the business owner, the risk owner, and the senior management

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

Detailed Explanation:A review of business processes is crucial for identifying risk owners, as risk ownership is tied to specific processes within the organization. Risk owners are accountable for managing and mitigating risks within their respective areas. This ensures that risks are effectively addressed where they arise and aligns mitigation efforts with business objectives. Properly identifying risk owners supports better governance, accountability, and alignment with the organization's risk management strategy.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The control environment is the set of internal and external factors and conditions that influence and shape the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. It includes the organization’s culture, values, ethics, structure, roles, responsibilities, policies, standards, etc.

Uncontrolled changes are changes or modifications to the control environment that are not planned, authorized, documented, or monitored, and that may have unintended or adverse consequences for the organization. Uncontrolled changes may be caused by various drivers or events, such as technological innovations, market trends, regulatory changes, customer preferences, competitor actions, environmental issues, etc.

The greatest concern when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment is an increase in the level of residual risk, which is the amount and type of risk that remains after the implementation and execution of the risk responses or controls. An increase in the level of residual risk means that the risk responses or controls are not effective or sufficient to mitigate or prevent the risks, and that the organization may face unacceptable or intolerable consequences if the risks materialize.

An increase in the level of residual risk is the greatest concern when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment, because it indicates that the organization’s risk profile and performance have deteriorated, and that the organization may not be able to achieve its objectives or protect its value. It also indicates that the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance have been violated, and that the organization may need to take corrective or compensating actions to restore the balance between risk and return.

The other options are not the greatest concerns when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment, because they do not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the organization.

A decrease in control layering effectiveness means a decrease in the extent or degree to which the organization uses multiple or overlapping controls to address the same or related risks, and to provide redundancy or backup in case of failure or compromise of one or more controls. A decrease in control layering effectiveness may indicate a weakness or gap in the organization’s control design or implementation, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the control layering is required or recommended by the organization’s policies or standards.

An increase in inherent risk means an increase in the amount and type of risk that exists in the absence of any risk responses or controls, and that is inherent to the nature or characteristics of the risk source, event, cause, or impact. An increase in inherent risk may indicate a change or variation in the organization’s risk exposure or level, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the inherent risk exceeds the organization’s risk appetite or tolerance.

An increase in control vulnerabilities means an increase in the number or severity of the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s risk responses or controls that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. An increase in control vulnerabilities may indicate a weakness or gap in the organization’s control design or implementation, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the control vulnerabilities are exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm. 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 174

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Detailed Explanation:A high number of exceptions often indicate misalignment between policies and business needs. Reviewing policies helps determine if they are overly restrictive or need adjustments to reduce exceptions while maintaining security.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Detailed Explanation:Risk transfer involves shifting the responsibility for managing specific risks to a third party. By outsourcing the security function, the organization transfers the associated risk to a vendor specializing in security management.

Outsourcing IT security operations is a common practice that can provide benefits such as cost savings, access to specialized skills, and improved service quality12. However, outsourcing also introduces risks such as loss of control, dependency, contractual issues, and service failures12.

When an organization outsources its IT security operations to a third party, it does not transfer the accountability for the risk associated with the outsourced operations. Accountability is the obligation to answer for the execution of one’s assigned responsibilities34.

The organization’s management is ultimately accountable for the risk associated with the outsourced operations, as they are responsible for defining the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, and objectives, and for ensuring that the organization’s IT security operations are aligned with them34.

The organization’s management is also accountable for selecting, contracting, and overseeing the third party, and for ensuring that the third party meets the agreed service levels, standards, and compliance requirements34.

The organization’s management is also accountable for monitoring and reporting the risk associated with the outsourced operations, and for taking corrective actions when necessary34.

The other options are not ultimately accountable, but rather have different roles and responsibilities in relation to the outsourced operations. For example:

The third party’s management is responsible for delivering the IT security services according to the contract, and for managing the risk within their own organization34. They are accountable to the organization’s management, but not to the organization’s stakeholders.

The control operators at the third party are responsible for implementing and operating the IT security controls according to the service specifications, and for reporting any issues or incidents to the organization’s management34. They are accountable to the third party’s management, but not to the organization’s management or stakeholders.

The organization’s vendor management office is responsible for facilitating the relationship between the organization and the third party, and for supporting the organization’s management in the outsourcing process34. They are accountable to the organization’s management, but not for the risk associated with the outsourced operations. References =

1: Outsourcing IT Security: A Risk Management Perspective, ISACA Journal, Volume 2, 2019

2: The Cyber Security Risks Of Outsourcing, Cybersecurity Intelligence, January 4, 2022

3: Accountability for Information Security Roles and Responsibilities, Part 1, ISACA Journal, Volume 5, 2019

4: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A data loss prevention (DLP) control is a technology that tries to detect and stop sensitive data breaches, or data leakage incidents, in an organization. A DLP control is used to prevent sensitive data, such as credit card numbers, from being disclosed to an unauthorized person, whether it is deliberate or accidental1. The best way to help ensure the effectiveness of a DLP control that has been implemented to prevent the loss of credit card data is to test the transmission of credit card numbers. This is a technique to verify that the DLP control can successfully identify and block the credit card data when it is sent or received through various channels, such as email, messaging, or file transfers. Testing the transmission of credit card numbers can help to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of the DLP control, as well as to identify and correct any false positives or false negatives. The other options are not the best ways to help ensure the effectiveness of a DLP control that has been implemented to prevent the loss of credit card data, although they may be helpful and complementary. Reviewing logs for unauthorized data transfers is a technique to monitor and analyze the DLP control activities and incidents, such as who, what, when, where, and how the data was transferred. However, reviewing logs is a reactive and passive approach, while testing the transmission is a proactive and active approach. Configuring the DLP control to block credit card numbers is a technique to set up the DLP control rules and policies, such as defining the data patterns, the detection methods, and the response actions. However, configuring the DLP control is a prerequisite and a preparation step, while testing the transmission is a validation and a verification step. Testing the DLP rule change control process is a technique to ensure that the DLP control rules and policies are updated and maintained in a controlled and coordinated manner, such as obtaining approval, documenting the changes, testing the changes, and communicating the changes. However, testing the DLP rule change control process is a quality and governance step, while testing the transmission is a performance and functionality step. References = What is Data Loss Prevention (DLP)? | Digital Guardian1; CRISC Review Manual, pages 164-1652; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 833

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: IT Involvement in Employee Termination, A Checklist3

2: Best Practices to Ensure Departing Employees Retain No Access5

3: User Termination Best Practices - IT Security - Spiceworks2

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk and its associated controls1. The risk owner is also responsible for ensuring that the risk is within the acceptable level and that the risk response is effective and efficient2. Therefore, the most appropriate owner for a newly identified IT risk is the individual who has the authority to commit organizational resources to mitigate the risk, as they have the most interest and influence on the risk and its impact on the business objectives. The other options are not the most appropriate owners for a newly identified IT risk, as they may not have the authority or the accountability to manage the risk. The manager responsible for IT operations that will support the risk mitigation efforts may have the operational responsibility or the oversight of the risk management activities, but they may not have the authority to allocate the resources or approve the risk response. A project manager capable of prioritizing the risk remediation efforts may have the project management skills or the knowledge of the risk management process, but they may not have the accountability or the ownership of the risk or its outcomes. The individual with the most IT risk-related subject matter knowledge may have the technical expertise or the understanding of the risk and its causes, but they may not have the decision-making power or the responsibility to manage the risk or its controls. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 822

Authentication is a control that verifies the identity of a user or a system that tries to access a computer system or network. Authentication can be based on something the user or system knows (such as a password or a PIN), something the user or system has (such as a token or a smart card), or something the user or system is (such as a fingerprint or a retina scan). Authentication is a crucial control for preventing unauthorized or malicious access to a system or network, as well as for ensuring the accountability and traceability of the actions performed by the user or system. If the authentication control is compromised, it means that the user or system can bypass or break the verification process and gain access to the system or network without being identified or authorized. This can expose the system or network to various threats, such as data theft, data corruption, data leakage, or denial of service. Therefore, the authentication control has most likely been compromised if a system administrator identifies unusual activity indicating an intruder within a firewall. A firewall is a device or a software that monitors and filters the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules and policies. A firewall can help to protect the system or network from external or internal attacks by blocking or allowing the traffic based on the source, destination, protocol, or content. However, a firewall cannot prevent an intruder from accessing the system or network if the intruder has already authenticated or impersonated a legitimate user or system. The other options are not the most likely controls to be compromised if a system administrator identifies unusual activity indicating an intruder within a firewall, although they may be affected or related. Data validation is a control that checks the accuracy, completeness, and quality of the data that is entered, processed, or stored by a system or a network. Data validation can help to prevent or detect data errors, anomalies, or inconsistencies that may affect the performance, functionality, or reliability of the system or network. However, data validation does not prevent or detect unauthorized or malicious access to the system or network, as it only focuses on the data, not the user or system. Identification is a control that assigns a unique identifier to a user or a system that tries to access a computer system or network. Identification can be based on a username, an email address, a phone number, or a certificate. Identification is a necessary but not sufficient control for preventing unauthorized or malicious access to a system or network, as it only declares who or what the user or system is, but does not prove it. Identification needs to be combined with authentication to verify the identity of the user or system. Data integrity is a control that ensures that the data is accurate, consistent, and complete throughout its lifecycle. Data integrity can be achieved by implementing various controls, such as encryption, hashing, checksum, digital signature, or backup. Data integrity can help to protect the data from unauthorized or accidental modification, deletion, or corruption that may affect the value, meaning, or usability of the data. However, data integrity does not prevent or detect unauthorized or malicious access to the system or network, as it only protects the data, not the user or system. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 164-1651; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 952; What is Authentication? - Definition from Techopedia3; What is a Firewall? - Definition from Techopedia4

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

7: Security Guard - Wikipedia7

8: Security Guard Services - Allied Universal8

: Security Camera - Wikipedia

: Security Camera Systems - The Home Depot

: Access Badge - Wikipedia

: Access Control Systems - HID Global

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Control Self Assessments - PwC1

2: Control self-assessment - Wikipedia2

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

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

5: Residual Risk - Definition and Examples5

6: Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management6

7: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the right to audit the provider is the most important factor to help define the IT risk associated with outsourcing activity to a cloud-based service provider, as it enables the organization to verify the compliance and performance of the provider with the contractual obligations and service level agreements. The right to audit the provider helps to:

Assess the security, availability, confidentiality, integrity, and privacy of the data and processes hosted by the provider

Identify and evaluate the risks and controls related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s infrastructure

Monitor and measure the quality and effectiveness of the cloud-based services and the provider’s governance and management practices

Report and resolve any issues or incidents related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s operations

Ensure the alignment of the cloud-based services and the provider’s policies and standards with the organization’s objectives and requirements

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 176-1771

Detailed Explanation:The next step is to identify risk response options to address the noncompliance and mitigate its impact. This may include corrective actions, implementing controls, or negotiating terms to reduce exposure.

In addition to the risk register, which is a tool to document and monitor the risks that affect the organization, a risk practitioner should review the business objectives of the organization to develop an understanding of its risk profile. The risk profile is a description of the set of risks that the organization faces in relation to its goals and strategies. By reviewing the business objectives, the risk practitioner can identify the sources, drivers, and consequences of the risks, as well as the alignment, prioritization, and tolerance of the risks. The business objectives also provide the context and criteria for evaluating and managing the risks. The other options are not the best choices to review for developing an understanding of the organization’s risk profile, as they do not capture the full scope and nature of the risks. The control catalog is a list of the existing controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks, but it does not reflect the effectiveness, efficiency, or sufficiency of the controls. The asset profile is a description of the resources and capabilities that the organization possesses or relies on, but it does not indicate the value, vulnerability, or interdependency of the assets. The key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the level and trend of the risks, but they do not explain the causes, impacts, or responses to the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, Page 49.

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

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

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

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

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

Enhance the security awareness and resilience of the organization

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

A risk response is the action or plan that is taken to address a specific risk that has been identified, analyzed, and evaluated. It can be one of the following types: mitigate, transfer, avoid, or accept.

The highest priority when developing a risk response is to ensure that it aligns with the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its goals. The risk appetite is usually expressed as a range or a threshold, and it is aligned with the organization’s strategy and culture.

Aligning the risk response with the organization’s risk appetite ensures that the risk response is consistent, appropriate, and proportional to the level and nature of the risk, and that it supports the organization’s objectives and values. It also helps to optimize the balance between risk and return, and to create and protect value for the organization and its stakeholders.

The other options are not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because they do not address the fundamental question of whether the risk response is suitable and acceptable for the organization.

The risk response addresses the risk with a holistic view means that the risk response considers the interrelationships and dependencies among the risk sources, events, impacts, and responses, and the potential secondary and residual effects of the risk response. This is important to ensure that the risk response is comprehensive and effective, and that it does not create new or unintended risks, but it is not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because it does not indicate whether the risk response is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The risk response is based on a cost-benefit analysis means that the risk response compares the expected costs and benefits of implementing the risk response, and selects the risk response that provides the most favorable net outcome. This is important to ensure that the risk response is efficient and economical, and that it maximizes the return on investment, but it is not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because it does not indicate whether the risk response is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite.

The risk response is accounted for in the budget means that the risk response is included in the financial plan and allocation of resources for the organization or the project. This is important to ensure that the risk response is feasible and realistic, and that it has the necessary funding and support, but it is not the highest priority when developing a risk response, because it does not indicate whether the risk response is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 147

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

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

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

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

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

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

Encourage the reporting and escalation of risk issues and incidents

Reinforce the benefits and value of effective risk management

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

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

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

Enhanced the resilience and availability of its critical systems and processes

Minimized the potential losses and damages caused by prolonged downtime

Increased the confidence and satisfaction of its stakeholders and customers

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

The most important benefit of key risk indicators (KRIs) is providing an early warning to take proactive actions, because this helps organizations to prevent or mitigate potential risks that may impact their operations, objectives, or performance. KRIs are specific metrics that measure the level and impact of risks, and provide timely signals that something may be going wrong or needs urgent attention. By monitoring and analyzing KRIs, organizations can identify and assess emerging or existing risks, and initiate appropriate risk responses before the risks escalate into significant issues. This can enhance the organization’s resilience, competitiveness, and value creation. The other options are less important benefits of KRIs. Assisting in continually optimizing risk governance is a benefit of KRIs, but it is not the most important one. Risk governance is the framework and process that defines how an organization manages its risks, including the roles, responsibilities, policies, and standards. KRIs can help to evaluate and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of risk governance, but they are not the only factor that influences it. Enabling the documentation and analysis of trends is a benefit of KRIs, but it is not the most important one. Documenting and analyzing trends can help organizations to understand the patterns, causes, and consequences of risks, and to learn from their experiences. However, this benefit is more relevant for historical or retrospective analysis, rather than for proactive action. Ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements is a benefit of KRIs, but it is not the most important one. Compliance is the adherence to the laws, regulations, and standards that apply to an organization’s activities and operations. KRIs can help to monitor and demonstrate compliance, but they are not the only tool or objective for doing so. References = Why Key Risk Indicators Are Important for Risk Management 1

Detailed Explanation:An updated risk register ensures that decision-makers have accurate, timely information about current risks, enabling informed, risk-based decisions that align with organizational priorities and changes in the environment.

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

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

Why did the application code require rework?

What were the errors or defects in the application code?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The most useful information for a risk practitioner when planning response activities after risk identification is the risk priorities. Risk priorities are the order or ranking of the risks based on their level of importance or urgency. Risk priorities help the risk practitioner to focus on the most critical risks, and allocate the resources and efforts accordingly. Risk priorities are usually determined by using a combination of factors, such as the likelihood and impact of the risks, the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and the cost and benefit of the risk responses. The other options are not as useful as the risk priorities, although they may provide some input or context for the risk response planning. The risk register is the document that records the details of all identified risks, but it does not necessarily indicate the risk priorities. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take, but it does not specify the risk priorities. The risk heat maps are graphical tools that display the risk level of each risk based on the likelihood and impact, but they do not show the risk priorities. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

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

The completion of a project for implementing a new control would most likely require a risk practitioner to update the risk register. The risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their analysis, and their responses. The completion of a project for implementing a new control means that a risk response has been executed and a new control has been established. This may affect the likelihood and/or impact of the related risks, and the residual risk level. Therefore, the risk practitioner should update the risk register to reflect the current status and outcome of the risk response and the new control. The other options are not as likely to require a risk practitioner to update the risk register, as they are related to the reporting, planning, or assessment of the risks or the controls, not the implementation or completion of the risk response or the new control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

The best approach for selecting controls to minimize risk is to perform a risk assessment. A risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the risks that could affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A risk assessment helps to determine the likelihood and impact of the risks, and to prioritize them based on their severity and relevance. A risk assessment also helps to select the most appropriate and effective controls to minimize the risks, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risks. A risk assessment is the best approach for selecting controls, because it helps to align the controls with the organization’s risk profile, risk appetite, and risk objectives, and to ensure that the controls are adequate, suitable, and cost-effective. The other options are not the best approach for selecting controls, although they may be part of or derived from the risk assessment. Industry best practice review, cost-benefit analysis, and control-effectiveness evaluation are all activities that can help to support or improve the control selection, but they are not the best approach for selecting controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

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

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

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

Risk strategies are the plans and actions that an organization adopts to manage its risks and to achieve its objectives. Risk strategies should be aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, values, and culture, as well as its internal and external environment. The most important consideration when developing risk strategies is the long-term organizational goals, meaning that the risk strategies should support and enable the organization to pursue and attain its desired future state and outcomes. The long-term organizational goals should guide the risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring processes, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance levels. The long-term organizational goals should also be communicated and cascaded throughout the organization to ensure the risk awareness and engagement of all stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, p. 27-28

The best representation of the desired risk posture for an organization is when the residual risk is lower than the risk tolerance. Residual risk is the remaining risk after the implementation of risk responses or controls. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of risk that the organization is willing to take or bear. The desired risk posture is when the organization has reduced the residual risk to a level that is equal to or lower than the risk tolerance, which means that the organization has achieved its risk objectives and is comfortable with the remaining risk exposure. The other options are not the best representation of the desired risk posture, as they indicate that the organization has not effectively managed its risk. Inherent risk is lower than risk tolerance means that the organization has not identified or assessed its risk properly, as inherent risk is the risk before any controls or responses are applied. Operational risk is higher than risk tolerance means that the organization has not implemented or monitored its risk responses or controls adequately, as operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people, and systems. Accepted risk is higher than risk tolerance means that the organization has not aligned its risk appetite and risk tolerance, as accepted risk is the risk that the organization chooses to retain or take without any further action. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 2-23.

When preparing a risk status report for periodic review by senior management, it is most important to ensure the report includes risk exposure in business terms. Risk exposure is the potential loss or harm that may result from a risk event. Expressing risk exposure in business terms can help senior management to understand the impact and significance of the risk on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value. A detailed view of individual risk exposures, a summary of incidents that have impacted the organization, and recommendations by an independent risk assessor are other possible contents of the report, but they are not as important as risk exposure in business terms. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 10; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 140.

The best recommendation for a risk practitioner upon learning that an employee inadvertently disclosed sensitive data to a vendor is to invoke the incident response plan. An incident response plan is a document that defines the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for detecting, analyzing, containing, eradicating, recovering, and reporting on security incidents that could affect the organization’s IT systems or data. An incident response plan helps to protect and restore the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the organization’s information assets, and to comply with the relevant laws, regulations, standards, and contracts. Invoking the incident response plan is the best recommendation, because it helps to respond to and mitigate the security incident, and to minimize the damage and impact of the data disclosure. Invoking the incident response plan also helps to communicate and coordinate the incident response actions and strategies with the internal and external stakeholders, such as the data owners, users, custodians, and regulators, and to report and disclose the incident as required. The other options are not as effective as invoking the incident response plan, although they may be part of or derived from the incident response plan. Enrolling the employee in additional security training, conducting an internal audit, and instructing the vendor to delete the data are all examples of corrective or preventive actions, which may help to prevent or deter the recurrence of the data disclosure, or to verify or validate the data security, but they do not necessarily address or resolve the current security incident. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 5-32.

The most concerning issue when reviewing the results of an independent control assessment to determine the effectiveness of a vendor’s control environment is that the controls had recurring noncompliance. This indicates that the vendor’s controls are not operating as intended or designed, and that the vendor is not taking corrective actions to address the control deficiencies. This can increase the risk exposure and liability for the organization that outsources the service or function to the vendor. The report being provided directly from the vendor, the risk associated with multiple control gaps being accepted, and the control owners disagreeing with the auditor’s recommendations are other possible issues, but they are not as critical as the recurring noncompliance. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

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

 The best control to minimize the risk associated with scope creep in software development is an established process for project change management. Scope creep is the uncontrolled expansion of the project scope due to changes in requirements, specifications, or expectations. A project change management process can help to prevent or reduce scope creep by defining the procedures for requesting, reviewing, approving, and implementing changes in the project. Retention of test data and results, business management review of functional requirements, and segregation between development, test, and production are other possible controls, but they are not as effective as a project change management process. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

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

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

 Performing a gap analysis is the best recommendation for a risk practitioner upon learning of an updated cybersecurity regulation that could impact the organization. A gap analysis can help identify the current state of compliance, the desired state of compliance, and the actions needed to achieve compliance. Conducting system testing, implementing compensating controls, and updating security policies are possible actions that may result from the gap analysis, but they are not the best initial recommendation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 1; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 143.

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

The best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the effectiveness of the security patching process is the percentage of patches installed successfully within the expected time frame. This KPI can help to evaluate how well the security patching process meets the predefined objectives and standards, and how timely the patches are applied to reduce the risk exposure. The percentage of patches installed by the security administration team, successfully during the first attempt, or without causing an unplanned system outage are other possible KPIs, but they are not as relevant as the percentage of patches installed successfully within the expected time frame. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

The best course of action to determine the root cause of the high number of policy exceptions approved by senior management is to interview the control owner. The control owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for designing, implementing, and monitoring the controls that enforce the policy. The control owner can provide insight into the reasons, circumstances, and impacts of the policy exceptions, and the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls. The control owner can also suggest possible improvements or alternatives to the policy or the controls. The other options are not as useful as interviewing the control owner, as they are related to the review, analysis, or testing of the policy or the controls, not the investigation or understanding of the policy exceptions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

The most 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. Scanning end 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.

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

The primary risk management responsibility of the first line of defense is to implement risk treatment plans. The first line of defense is the operational management and staff who are directly involved in the execution of the business activities and processes. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks that affect their objectives and performance. Implementing risk treatment plans means applying the appropriate risk response strategies and actions to address the identified risks, and monitoring and reporting the results and outcomes of the risk treatment. The other options are not as primary as implementing risk treatment plans, as they are related to the validation, establishment, or review of the risk management process, not the execution of the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Process, page 15.

If preventive controls cannot be implemented due to technology limitations, the first step to reduce risk is to evaluate alternative controls. Alternative controls are those that can achieve the same or similar objectives as the original preventive controls, but using different methods or technologies. For example, if a firewall cannot be installed due to hardware compatibility issues, an alternative control could be a network segmentation or a proxy server. Evaluating alternative controls requires assessing their feasibility, effectiveness, efficiency, and cost-benefit. Redefining the business process, developing a plan to upgrade technology, and defining a process for monitoring risk are also possible actions to reduce risk, but they are not the first step, and they may not be feasible or desirable in some situations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

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

Effective risk communication best benefits an organization by helping personnel make better-informed decisions. Risk communication is the process of exchanging information and opinions among stakeholders about the nature, magnitude, significance, or control of a risk. By communicating risk information clearly and consistently, the organization can enhance the understanding and awareness of the risk, and enable the personnel to make decisions that are aligned with the risk appetite and objectives of the organization. Assisting the development of a risk register, improving the effectiveness of IT controls, and increasing participation in the risk assessment process are other possible benefits, but they are not as important as helping personnel make better-informed decisions. 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 risk practitioner’s most important responsibility in managing risk acceptance that exceeds risk tolerance is to verify authorization by senior management. Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging and agreeing to bear the risk and its potential consequences. Risk tolerance is the acceptable or allowable level of variation or deviation from the expected or desired outcomes or objectives. When the risk acceptance exceeds the risk tolerance, it means that the organization is taking on more risk than it can handle or afford. Therefore, the risk practitioner should verify that the risk acceptance is authorized by senior management, who have the authority and accountability for making risk management decisions and ensuring that they are aligned with the organizational strategy and objectives. The other options are not as important as verifying authorization by senior management, as they are related to the adjustments, conditions, or documentation of the risk acceptance, not the approval or validation of the risk acceptance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

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

The most important input into the assessment of the risk of shadow IT usage is the classification of the data that is being processed, stored, or transmitted by the unauthorized applications or devices. This determines the level of confidentiality, integrity, and availability that is required for the data and the potential impact of a breach or loss. Business benefits of shadow IT, application-related expenses, and volume of data are less important inputs that may affect the risk analysis, but not as much as the data classification. References = Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, page 28; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 98.

 IT risk owners are the most appropriate people to review the completed list of potential key risk indicators (KRIs) and select the ones that should be implemented. IT risk owners are the individuals who have the authority and accountability to manage the IT risks within their scope of responsibility. They are also responsible for defining the risk appetite, tolerance, and thresholds for their IT operations, and for ensuring that the KRIs are aligned with the business objectives and risk management strategy. IT security managers, IT control owners, and IT auditors are also involved in the risk management process, but they do not have the same level of authority and accountability as IT risk owners, and they may have different perspectives and priorities on the selection of KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 1-13.

 The best way to provide information to management about emergency changes that may not be approved is to use key risk indicators (KRIs). KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. KRIs help to provide information to management about emergency changes, because they help to alert and inform management about the potential risks and consequences of the changes, and to support the risk decision-making and reporting processes. KRIs also help to provide information to management about emergency changes, because they help to track and evaluate the effectiveness and performance of the changes, and to identify and address any issues or gaps that may arise from the changes. The other options are not the best way to provide information to management about emergency changes, although they may be part of or derived from the KRIs. Change logs, change management meeting minutes, and key control indicators (KCIs) are all examples of documentation or communication tools, which may help to record or report the details and status of the changes, but they do not necessarily measure or monitor the risks and outcomes of the changes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.5.1, page 4-38.

 Penetration test results are the most helpful resource to a risk practitioner when updating the likelihood rating in the risk register. Penetration testing is a method of simulating real-world attacks on an IT system or network to identify and exploit vulnerabilities and measure the potential impact. Penetration test results provide empirical evidence of the existence and severity of vulnerabilities, as well as the ease and probability of exploitation. These results can help the risk practitioner to update the likelihood rating of the risks associated with the vulnerabilities, and to prioritize the risk response actions. Risk control assessment, audit reports with risk ratings, and business impact analysis (BIA) are also useful resources for risk management, but they are not as directly related to the likelihood rating as penetration test results. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3, page 2-28.

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

The board of directors’ response to identified risk factors is the best indicator of the risk appetite of an organization. The board of directors is the highest governing body of the organization, and it is responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization. The board of directors should also oversee the risk management process, and ensure that the risks are aligned with the organization’s goals and values. The board of directors’ response to identified risk factors reflects how much and what type of risk the organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take in order to achieve its objectives. The regulatory environment, the risk management capability, and the importance assigned to IT are not direct indicators of the risk appetite, although they may influence or constrain it. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

 The business owner is the person who is responsible for approval when a change in an application system is ready for release to production. The business owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the business process or function that is supported by the application system. The business owner should approve the change to ensure that it meets the business requirements, objectives, and expectations, and that it does not introduce any adverse impacts or risks to the business operations. The information security officer, the IT risk manager, and the chief risk officer (CRO) are not responsible for the approval of the change, although they may provide input, feedback, or oversight. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 3-32.

The most helpful input to develop risk scenarios associated with hosting an organization’s key IT applications in a cloud environment is conducting a risk workshop with key stakeholders. A risk workshop is a facilitated session that involves brainstorming, discussing, and analyzing the potential risks and opportunities related to a specific topic or project. A risk workshop helps to identify and prioritize the most relevant and significant risk scenarios, as well as to explore the possible causes, impacts, and responses. A risk workshop also helps to engage and align the key stakeholders, such as the business owners, IT managers, cloud providers, and risk experts, and to leverage their knowledge, experience, and perspectives. The other options are not as helpful as conducting a risk workshop, although they may provide some input or information for the risk scenario development. Reviewing the results of independent audits, performing a site visit to the cloud provider’s data center, and performing a due diligence review are all activities that can help to assess the current state and performance of the cloud environment, but they do not necessarily generate or evaluate the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

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

Data anonymization is the most important control to ensure the privacy of customer information when participating in an industry benchmarking study that involves providing customer transaction records for analysis. Data anonymization is the process of removing or modifying personally identifiable information (PII) from data sets, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc., so that the data cannot be traced back to specific individuals. Data anonymization protects the confidentiality and privacy of customers, while still allowing for meaningful analysis and comparison of data. Nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), data cleansing, and data encryption are also useful controls, but they do not eliminate the risk of data breaches or unauthorized access to PII. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

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

The best way to mitigate an identified risk scenario is to execute a risk response plan. A risk response plan is a document that describes the actions and resources that are needed to address the risk scenario. A risk response plan can include one or more of the following strategies: avoid, transfer, mitigate, accept, or exploit. By executing a risk response plan, the organization can reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk scenario, or take advantage of the opportunities that the risk scenario may present. The other options are not as effective as executing a risk response plan, as they are related to the awareness, assessment, or monitoring of the risk scenario, not the actual treatment of the risk scenario. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

The first thing that should be done by IT governance to support the development of a new risk management plan to specifically address legal and regulatory risk scenarios is to establish IT-specific compliance objectives. Compliance objectives are the goals or targets that the organization sets to ensure that its IT activities and processes comply with the relevant laws, regulations, standards, and contracts. Compliance objectives help to define the scope, criteria, and expectations for the IT compliance program, and to align the IT compliance activities with the organization’s strategy, risk appetite, and performance measures. Compliance objectives also help to communicate and demonstrate the organization’s commitment and accountability for IT compliance to the internal and external stakeholders, such as the board, management, regulators, auditors, and customers. The other options are not the first thing that should be done, although they may be useful or necessary steps or components of the IT compliance program. Requesting a regulatory risk reporting methodology, requiring critical success factors (CSFs) for IT risks, and communicating IT key risk indicators (KRIs) and triggers are all activities that can help to implement and monitor the IT compliance program, but they require the prior definition and agreement of the IT compliance objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.4.1, page 2-37.

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

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

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

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

 A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the information about the identified risks, such as the risk description, category, owner, probability, impact, response strategy, status, and action plan. Reviewing the risk register is the best way to help an organization gain insight into its overall risk profile, which is the summary of the nature and level of risk that the organization faces. By reviewing the risk register, the organization can obtain a comprehensive and holistic view of the sources, causes, and consequences of the risks, their likelihood and impact, their interrelationships and dependencies, and their alignment with the risk appetite and tolerance. The risk register can also help the organization 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 99.

The most important factor for an organization to consider when developing its IT strategy is the organizational goals and objectives. The organizational goals and objectives are the statements that define the purpose, direction, and desired outcomes of the organization. The organizational goals and objectives help to align the IT strategy with the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and to ensure that the IT strategy supports and enables the organization’s performance and improvement. The organizational goals and objectives also help to communicate and coordinate the IT strategy with the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions, and to facilitate the IT decision-making and reporting processes. The other options are not as important as the organizational goals and objectives, although they may be related to the IT strategy. IT goals and objectives, the organization’s risk appetite statement, and legal and regulatory requirements are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the IT strategy, but they do not necessarily reflect or influence the organization’s purpose, direction, and desired outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-9.

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

The best way to ensure the implementation of corrective action plans is to assign accountability to risk owners. Corrective action plans are the plans that describe the actions and resources that are needed to correct or improve the performance or compliance of the processes or controls. Risk owners are the persons who have the authority and responsibility for managing the risks and their responses. By assigning accountability to risk owners, the implementation of corrective action plans can be monitored, evaluated, and enforced, and the results and outcomes can be reported and communicated. The other options are not as effective as assigning accountability to risk owners, as they are related to the training, scheduling, or outsourcing of the corrective action plans, not the oversight or governance of the corrective action plans. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. They help to monitor changes in the level of risk and enable timely actions to mitigate the risk. The most useful information for developing KRIs is the possible causes of materialized risk, which are the factors or events that trigger or contribute to the occurrence of a risk. By identifying the possible causes of materialized risk, an organization can design KRIs that measure the likelihood and impact of the risk, and alert the management when the risk exceeds the acceptable level. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

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

Risk appetite is the broad-based amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in its activities. Risk appetite reflects the level of risk that the organization is prepared to take to achieve its strategic goals, and provides guidance and boundaries for the risk management activities and decisions. The best way to balance the costs and benefits of managing IT risk is to prioritize and address risk in line with risk appetite, which means that the organization should identify, assess, treat, monitor, and communicate the risks that are within or exceed the risk appetite, and allocate the resources and efforts accordingly. By doing so, the organization can optimize its risk-return trade-off, align its risk exposure with its strategic objectives, and enhance its risk culture and performance. References = 5

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

 The primary purpose of using key risk indicators (KRIs) to illustrate changes in the risk profile is to communicate risk trends to stakeholders. KRIs are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. By using KRIs to illustrate changes in the risk profile, the organization can communicate the risk trends to the stakeholders, such as the board, senior management, business units, and external parties, and enable them to take appropriate actions to manage the risk. Assigning ownership of emerging risk scenarios, highlighting noncompliance with the risk policy, and identifying threats to emerging technologies are other possible purposes, but they are not as important as communicating risk trends to stakeholders. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

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

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

The first consideration when establishing a new risk governance program is embedding risk management into the organization. Embedding risk management means integrating risk management principles and practices into the organization’s culture, values, processes, and decision-making. Embedding risk management helps to ensure that risk management is not seen as a separate or isolated activity, but as a part of the organization’s normal operations and strategic objectives. Embedding risk management also helps to create a risk-aware and risk-responsive organization, where risk management is shared and supported by all stakeholders. The other options are not the first consideration, although they may be important steps or components of the risk governance program. Developing an ongoing awareness and training program, creating policies and standards that are easy to comprehend, and completing annual risk assessments on critical resources are all activities that can help to embed risk management into the organization, but they are not the initial or primary consideration. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

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

The best way to prevent technical vulnerabilities from being exploited is to update the software with the latest patches and updates. Patches and updates are software modifications that fix the known bugs, errors, or flaws in the software. They also improve the performance, functionality, and security of the software. By updating the software with the latest patches and updates, the company can reduce the exposure and likelihood of the technical vulnerabilities, and protect the software from potential attacks or exploits. The other options are not as effective as updating the software with the latest patches and updates, as they are related to the quality assurance, legal protection, or error handling of the software, not the prevention or mitigation of the technical vulnerabilities. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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

Risk appetite should be primarily driven by stakeholder requirements. Stakeholder requirements are the needs and expectations of the internal and external parties that have an interest or influence in the organization’s objectives or operations, such as the board, management, employees, customers, regulators, investors, etc. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite should be driven by stakeholder requirements, because they reflect the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and they provide the basis and direction for the organization’s risk management activities. Risk appetite should also be aligned and communicated with stakeholder requirements, because they affect the organization’s performance and reputation, and they require the organization’s accountability and transparency. The other options are not the primary drivers of risk appetite, although they may be considered or influenced by risk appetite. Enterprise security architecture roadmap, legal and regulatory requirements, and business impact analysis (BIA) are all factors that could affect the organization’s risk profile, risk assessment, or risk response, but they do not necessarily determine or reflect the organization’s risk appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 2-23.

 The most likely cause of the situation where the recovery team does not know what steps to take to recover critical data backups following a major flood is the failure to test the disaster recovery plan (DRP). A DRP is a document that describes the procedures and resources needed to restore the normal operations of an organization after a disaster. Testing the DRP is essential to ensure that the plan is feasible, effective, and up-to-date. Testing the DRP also helps to train the recovery team members, identify and resolve any issues or gaps, and improve the confidence and readiness of the organization. The lack of a well-documented business impact analysis (BIA), the lack of annual updates to the DRP, and the significant changes in management personnel are also possible factors that could affect the recovery process, but they are not as likely or as critical as the failure to test the DRP. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, page 5-19.

Cloud computing is a model for enabling ubiquitous, convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction. The cloud computing architecture is the structure and design of the cloud environment, which includes the components, services, interfaces, standards, and configurations. The cloud computing architecture should be used as the primary basis for evaluating the state of an organization’s cloud computing environment against leading practices, as it determines the performance, security, reliability, scalability, and interoperability of the cloud services. By comparing the cloud computing architecture with the best practices and benchmarks in the industry, an organization can identify the gaps and weaknesses in the cloud environment and implement the necessary improvements and controls. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 156.

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

The person or entity who should be primarily responsible for performing user entitlement reviews is the data owner. A user entitlement review is a process that verifies and validates the access rights and privileges of the users to the data and resources in the IT environment. A user entitlement review helps to ensure that the users have the appropriate and necessary access to perform their roles and functions, and to prevent or detect any unauthorized or inappropriate access. A data owner is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility to define, classify, and protect the data and resources in the IT environment. A data owner helps to perform user entitlement reviews, because they help to establish and enforce the access policies and standards for the data and resources, and to approve or revoke the access requests and changes for the users. A data owner also helps to monitor and report on the access performance and compliance for the data and resources, and to identify and address any issues or gaps in the access management activities. The other options are not the primary responsible party for performing user entitlement reviews, although they may be involved in the process. IT security manager, IT personnel, and data custodian are all examples of roles or functions that can help to support or implement the user entitlement reviews, but they do not necessarily have the authority or responsibility to define, classify, or protect the data and resources. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 5-14.

The most helpful factor to align when defining thresholds for control key performance indicators (KPIs) is the control performance with the risk tolerance of business owners. Control KPIs are metrics that measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks. By aligning the control performance with the risk tolerance of business owners, the thresholds for control KPIs can reflect the acceptable level of risk and the desired level of control for the business processes and objectives. Information risk assessments with enterprise risk assessments, key risk indicators (KRIs) with risk appetite of the business, and control KPIs with audit findings are other possible factors to align, but they are not as helpful as control performance with risk tolerance of business owners. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

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

The risk practitioner’s most important action related to the decision to commit to a business activity with the knowledge that the risk exposure is higher than the risk appetite is to document formal acceptance of the risk. Formal acceptance of the risk means that the organization acknowledges and agrees to bear the risk and its potential consequences. Formal acceptance of the risk should be documented and approved by the appropriate authority level, such as senior management or the board of directors. Formal acceptance of the risk should also include the rationale, assumptions, and conditions for accepting the risk, as well as the monitoring and reporting mechanisms for the risk. Formal acceptance of the risk provides evidence and accountability for the risk management decision and helps to avoid disputes or misunderstandings in the future. The other options are not as important as documenting formal acceptance of the risk, as they are related to the alternatives, adjustments, or rejections of the risk, not the actual acceptance of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

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

When performing a risk assessment of a new service to support a core business process, the first step is to identify the conditions that may cause disruptions to the service or the process. This involves identifying the sources and causes of potential risk events, such as natural disasters, cyberattacks, human errors, equipment failures, power outages, etc. that may affect the availability, integrity, or confidentiality of the service or the process. By identifying the conditions that may cause disruptions, the risk practitioner can then analyze the probability and impact of the risk events, evaluate the risk exposure, and determine the appropriate risk responses to ensure the continuity of operations. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 66.

The best approach to mitigate the risk associated with a control deficiency is to implement compensating controls. A control deficiency is a situation where a control is missing, ineffective, or inefficient, and cannot provide reasonable assurance that the objectives or requirements are met. A compensating control is a control that provides an alternative or additional measure of protection when the primary or preferred control is not feasible or effective. A compensating control can help to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk associated with the control deficiency, and maintain the compliance or performance level. The other options are not as effective as implementing compensating controls, as they are related to the analysis, assessment, or provision of the risk, not the mitigation of 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 most important risk consideration when the global company’s business continuity plan (BCP) requires the transfer of its customer information to a cloud computing environment in the event of a disaster is that the cloud computing environment is shared with another company. A cloud computing environment is a service model that provides on-demand access to a shared pool of computing resources, such as servers, storage, networks, and applications. A shared cloud computing environment means that the same computing resources are used by multiple customers or tenants, and that the data and activities of one customer may affect or be affected by the data and activities of another customer. This may pose a significant risk to the security, privacy, and availability of the customer information, as it may be exposed, accessed, modified, or deleted by unauthorized or malicious parties. The other options are not as important as the cloud computing environment being shared with another company, as they are related to the differences, agreements, or cultures of the company or the country, not the environment or the platform of the customer information transfer. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The most reliable evidence of a control’s effectiveness is a system-generated testing report. A system-generated testing report is a document that shows the results of automated tests performed by the system to verify that the control is functioning as intended and producing the expected outcomes. A system-generated testing report is reliable, because it is objective, consistent, accurate, and timely, and because it can provide a high level of assurance and confidence in the control’s effectiveness. The other options are not as reliable as a system-generated testing report, although they may provide some evidence of the control’s effectiveness. A risk and control self-assessment, senior management’s attestation, and a detailed process walk-through are all examples of manual or subjective evidence, which may be prone to errors, biases, or inconsistencies, and which may provide a lower level of assurance and confidence in the control’s effectiveness. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 3-32.

The most effective practice in protecting personally identifiable information (PII) from unauthorized access in a cloud environment is to utilize encryption with logical access controls. Encryption is a technique that transforms the data into an unreadable or unintelligible form, making it inaccessible or unusable by unauthorized parties. Logical access controls are the mechanisms or rules that regulate who can access, view, modify, or delete the data, based on their identity, role, or privilege. By utilizing encryption with logical access controls, the PII can be protected from unauthorized access, disclosure, or theft, both in transit and at rest, in a cloud environment. The other options are not as effective as utilizing encryption with logical access controls, as they are related to the classification, separation, or audit of the data, not the protection or security of the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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

 A heat map is a graphical tool that displays the level of risk severity for various risk scenarios or categories using different colors, shapes, or sizes. A heat map is most helpful in providing a high-level overview of current IT risk severity, as it can show the relative importance and urgency of the risks, and highlight the areas that require attention or action. A heat map can also help to communicate the risk information to the stakeholders, and facilitate the risk prioritization and decision making. References = 5

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