Isaca CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Exam Practice Test

A risk practitioner notices a trend of noncompliance with an IT-related control. This indicates that there is a risk of ineffective or inefficient implementation or operation of the control, which may expose the organization to potential threats or losses.

The best way to assist in making a recommendation to management is to assess the degree to which the control hinders business objectives. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the impact of the control on the performance, productivity, quality, or customer satisfaction of the business processes or functions that are affected by the control.

Assessing the degree to which the control hinders business objectives helps to identify the root causes of noncompliance, the costs and benefits of compliance, and the potential alternatives or improvements for the control. It also helps to communicate the value and importance of the control to the management and the stakeholders, and to obtain their support and commitment for the control compliance.

The other options are not the best ways to assist in making a recommendation to management. They are either secondary or not essential for control compliance.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 19

Information Technology & Security, page 13

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 11

 The first step when developing a business case to drive the adoption of a risk remediation project by senior management is to identify the objectives of the project. The objectives are the specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that the project aims to accomplish. The objectives should be aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, as well as the identified business problem or opportunity. The objectives should also reflect the expected benefits and outcomes of the project, such as reducing the risk exposure, enhancing the security posture, or improving the business performance. Identifying the objectives is the first step because it provides the direction, scope, and justification for the project, and it serves as the basis for evaluating the alternative solutions, estimating the costs and benefits, and communicating the value proposition to the senior management and other stakeholders. The other options are not the first step, although they may be subsequent or concurrent steps in the business case development process. Calculating the cost is a part of the financial analysis, which estimates the total expenditure and funding sources of the project, but it does not define the purpose or the scope of the project. Analyzing cost-effectiveness is a part of the economic analysis, which compares the costs and benefits of the alternative solutions and recommends the optimal one, but it does not specify the goals or the criteria of the project. Determining the stakeholders is a part of the stakeholder analysis, which identifies and assesses the interests, expectations, and influence of the parties involved in or affected by the project, but it does not establish the objectives or the rationale of the project. References = Business case: 7 key steps to build it and use it - Twproject: project …, Guide to developing the Project Business Case - GOV.UK, How to Write a Business Case: Template & Examples | Adobe Workfront

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

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

A risk treatment plan is a document that outlines the actions and resources required to implement the chosen risk response for a specific risk1. A risk response is a strategy or action that is taken or planned tomitigate or eliminate the risk, such as avoiding, transferring, reducing, or accepting the risk2. A risk owner is a person or entity that has the authority and accountability for a risk and its management3. If the implementation of a risk treatment plan will exceed the resources originally allocated for the risk response, the risk owner’s next action should be to escalate to senior management, which is the group of senior leaders who have the authority and accountability for the organization’s performance and governance4. By escalating to senior management, the risk owner can inform and consult them about the situation and the implications, and seek their guidance and approval for the necessary adjustments or alternatives. Escalating to senior management can also help to ensure that the risk treatment plan is aligned with the organization’s strategy, vision, and mission, and that the risk response is consistent with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance5. Performing a risk assessment, accepting the risk of not implementing, and updating the implementation plan are not the best choices for the risk owner’s next action, as they do not provide the same level of communication and consultation as escalating to senior management. Performing a risk assessment is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts on the organization’s objectives and performance6. Performing a risk assessment can help to update and validate the risk information and the risk treatment plan, but it does not address the issue of the resource shortfall or the stakeholder expectations. Acceptingthe risk of not implementing is a decision that involves acknowledging and tolerating the risk or its impact without taking any action to reduce or eliminate it7. Accepting the risk of not implementing can help to avoid the additional cost and effort of the risk treatment plan, but it does not consider the potential consequences or the stakeholder interests. Updating the implementation plan is a process that involves revising and modifying the plan for executing the risk treatment plan, such as the scope,schedule, budget, or quality8. Updating the implementation plan can help to reflect the changes and updates in the risk treatment plan, but it does not resolve the problem of the resource gap or the stakeholder approval. References = 1: Risk Treatment and Response Plans - UNECE2: Risk Response Strategy and Contingency Plans - ProjectManagement.com3: [Risk Ownership - Risk Management] 4: [Senior Management - Definition, Roles and Responsibilities] 5: [Risk Appetite and Tolerance - ISACA] 6: [Risk Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] 7: [Risk Acceptance - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] 8: [Implementation Plan - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Options, pp. 113-115.] : [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.]

The maturity of an IT risk management program is most influenced by the organization’s risk culture, as this reflects the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes that shape how the organization perceives and responds to risk. The risk culture determines the level of awareness, commitment, and involvement of the stakeholders in the IT risk management process, as well as the degree of integration and alignment with the enterprise’s objectives and strategy. A mature IT risk management program requires a strong and positive risk culture that fosters trust, collaboration, and accountability among the stakeholders, and supports continuous improvement and learning. The other options are not the most influential factors for the maturity of an IT risk management program, although they may have some impact or relevance. Benchmarking results against similar organizations can provide useful insights and comparisons, but they do not necessarily reflect the organization’s own risk culture or context. Industry-specific regulatory requirements can impose certain standards and expectations, but they do not guarantee the effectiveness or efficiency of the IT risk management program. Expertise available within the IT department can enhance the technical and operational aspects of the IT risk management program, but it does not ensure the strategic and cultural alignment with the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, page 23.

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 12

Information Technology & Security, page 6

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 4

The 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.

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

The primary reason to update a risk register with risk assessment results is to communicate the level and priority of assessed risk to management, as this enables them to make informed decisions about risk response and allocation of resources. The risk register is a tool for documenting and reporting the current status of risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, and responses. Updating the risk register with risk assessment results ensures that the information is accurate, relevant, and timely. The risk register also helps to monitor and track the progress and effectiveness of risk management activities. The other options are not the primary reasons to update the risk register, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of doing so. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Assessment, page 109.

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.

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.

The organization’s information security manager is responsible for IT security controls that are outsourced to an external service provider. The information security manager is accountable for ensuring that the security policies and standards of the organization are followed by the service provider, and that the security objectives and requirements are met. The information security manager is also responsible for monitoring and evaluating the security performance and compliance of the service provider, and for managing the security risks and incidents that may arise from the outsourcing arrangement. The organization’s risk function, the service provider’s IT management, and the service provider’s information security manager are not responsible for IT security controls that are outsourced, as they have different roles and responsibilities in the outsourcing process. 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 651.

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 control evaluation phase of a risk assessment is the phase where the risk practitioner evaluates the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing or planned controls that mitigate the identified risks. Controls are the actions or measures that reduce the likelihood or impact of the risks to an acceptable level. The control evaluation phase involves testing, reviewing, and auditing the controls, and identifying any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. If the control evaluation phase reveals that multiple controls are ineffective, the risk practitioner’s first course of action should be to determine the root cause of the control failures. The root cause is the underlying or fundamental reason that leads to the problem or issue, such as the controlfailure. By determining the root cause of the control failures, the risk practitioner can understand why the controls are not working as intended, and what factors or variables are influencing the control performance. This will help the risk practitioner to identify and implement the most appropriate and effective risk response strategy and actions, such as recommending risk remediation, comparing the residual risk, or escalating the control failures. The other options are not the first course of action, as they involve different steps or outcomes of the risk management process:

Recommend risk remediation of the ineffective controls means that the risk practitioner suggests the actions or measures that can improve or restore the effectiveness of the controls, such as by modifying, replacing, or adding the controls. This may be a useful step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not address the root cause of the control failures, or may not be feasible or efficient for the enterprise’s needs.

Compare the residual risk to the current risk appetite means that the risk practitioner evaluates the level of risk that remains after considering the existing or planned controls, and compares it with the amount and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. This may be a helpful step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not reflect the true or current level of risk exposure, or may not account for the uncertainties or complexities of the risks or the controls.

Escalate the control failures to senior management means that the risk practitioner communicates the control failures to the senior leaders of the enterprise, who oversee the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provide guidance and direction to the risk owners and practitioners. This may be a necessary step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not provide sufficient or timely information or action to address the control failures, or may not reflect the urgency or priority of the control failures. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3.1, pp. 62-63.

 The chief information officer (CIO) is the most likely person to be responsible for the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, because the CIO is the senior executive who oversees the information technology (IT) function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy, objectives, and operations. The CIO is also responsible for ensuring that the IT function delivers value, supports innovation, and manages IT risks effectively and efficiently. The CIO can coordinate the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy by communicating and collaborating with other business leaders, establishing and implementing IT governance frameworks and policies, and monitoring and reporting on IT performance and risk indicators. The other options are not as likely as the CIO to be responsible for the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, because they have different or limited roles and responsibilities in relation to IT and business risk management, as explained below:

A. Chief financial officer (CFO) is the senior executive who oversees the financial function and manages the financial risks of the organization. The CFO may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to budgeting, funding, or reporting on IT-related projects and initiatives, but the CFO is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives.

B. Information security director is the senior manager who oversees the information security function and manages the information security risks of the organization. The information security director may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information assets and systems, but the information security director is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives.

C. Internal audit director is the senior manager who oversees the internal audit function and provides independent assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes. The internal audit director may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to auditing, reviewing, or testing the IT-related processes and controls, but the internal audit director is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.1, page 7. The Strategic CIO: Balancing Business and IT Priorities, Technology’s Role in Enterprise Risk Management, Aligning Enterprise Cyber Risk and Business Strategy

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.

Recovery time objectives (RTOs) are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the critical functions and processes after a disruption1. RTOs are derived from the business impact analysis (BIA) andreflect the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives2. Risk tolerance is the level of risk a company is willing to tolerate, and it is affected by a number of factors, including how much uncertainty or financial loss can be tolerated and where those losses will impact operations3. Risk tolerance is used to measure if the risk exposure is within the risk appetite and to implement controls to reduce the residual risk to an acceptable level2. If the majority of core IT application RTOs have exceeded the maximum time defined by the business application owners, it means that the organization is not meeting its risk appetite and is exposed to more risk than it can accept. Therefore, the most likely change as a result is to adjust the risk tolerance to reflect the current reality and to take actions to improve the recovery capabilities and reduce the risk exposure4. Risk forecasting is the process of estimating the potential outcomes and impacts of future events that may affect the organization’s objectives5. Risk forecasting may change as aresult of the RTOs exceeding the maximum time, but it is not the most likely change, as it does not directly address the gap between the risk appetite and the risk exposure. Risk likelihood is the probability of a risk event occurring5. Risk likelihood may change as a result of the RTOs exceeding the maximum time, but it is not the most likely change, as it does not directly measure the impact of the risk event on the organization’s objectives. Risk appetite is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives2. Risk appetite may change as a result of the RTOs exceeding the maximum time, but it is not the most likely change, as it is a strategic decision that reflects the organization’s vision and mission, and not a tactical response to a specific risk event. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.3: Business Continuity Planning, pp. 227-238.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Some of the best practices for data classification are3:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Risk appetite is defined as "the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, before action is deemed necessary to reduce the risk."1 It represents a balance between the potential benefits of innovation and the threats that change inevitably brings. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk attitude and its willingness to accept risk in specific scenarios, with a governance model in place for risk oversight. Risk appetite helps to guide the organization’s approach to risk and risk management, and to align its risk decisions with its business objectives and context. The other options are not the best descriptions of risk appetite, as they are either too vague (the effective management of risk and internal control environments), too narrow (acceptable variation between risk thresholds and business objectives), or confusing (the acceptable variation relative to the achievement of objectives). References = Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference?

According to the CRISC 351-400 topic3 Flashcards, the administrative access represents a segregation of duties conflict, which should be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner. Segregation of duties is a principle that aims to prevent fraud, errors, or abuse of power by ensuring that no single person can perform incompatible functions, such as development, testing, and production. By having administrative access to a production application, a software developer can potentially modify the code, bypass the testing and approval process, and deploy the changes without proper authorization or documentation. This can compromise the integrity, availability, and security of the application, and expose the organization to operational, financial, legal, or reputational risks. Therefore, the answer is D. The administrative access represents a segregation of duties conflict. *References

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]

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, data selection is the process of choosing the appropriate data sources and variables for data analysis. Data selection is the most critical step in data analytics, as it determines the quality and validity of the results and insights derived from the analysis. Incorrect data selection is the greatest risk associated with the use of data analytics, as it can lead to inaccurate, incomplete, irrelevant, or biased outcomes that can adversely affect the decision making and performance of the organization. Incorrect data selection can also cause legal, regulatory, ethical, or reputational issues for the organization, if the data used for analysis is not authorized, reliable, or compliant. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 255.

The greatest concern associated with the transmission of healthcare data across the internet is unencrypted data, as this exposes the data to unauthorized access, interception, modification, or disclosure, which may compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data. Healthcare data is sensitive and personal information that may include medical records, diagnoses, treatments, prescriptions, insurance claims, and biometric data. Healthcare data is subject to various legal and regulatory requirements, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States, that mandate the protection and privacy of the data. Encryption is a method of transforming the data into an unreadable format that can only be accessed or restored by authorized parties who have the decryption key. Encryption helps to prevent or reduce the risk of data breaches, identity theft, fraud, or other malicious attacks. The other options are not the greatest concerns associated with the transmission of healthcare data across the internet, although they may pose some challenges or issues. Lack of redundant circuits is a concern for the reliability and continuity of the data transmission, but it does notaffect the security or privacy of the data. Low bandwidth connections is a concern for the speed andefficiency of the data transmission, but it does not affect the security or privacy of the data. Data integrity is a concern for the accuracy and completeness of the data, but it does not necessarily depend on the encryption of the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 156.

 When reporting risk assessment results to senior management, the most important information to include to enable risk-based decision making is the potential losses compared to treatment cost. This information helps to quantify the impact and likelihood of the risks, and to evaluate the cost and benefit of the risk responses. This information also helps to prioritize and allocate resources for the risk management program, and to align the risk management program with the enterprise’s objectives, strategy, and risk appetite. The other options are not as important as the potential losses compared to treatment cost, as they provide different types of information for the risk management process:

Risk action plans and associated owners are the documents that specify the actions to be taken to address the identified risks, the resources required, the timelines, the owners, and the expected outcomes. This information helps to implement and monitor the risk management program, and to assign the authority and accountability for the risk management activities.

Recent audit and self-assessment results are the outcomes of the independent and objective examination of the risk management program, such as by internal or external auditors, or by the risk owners or practitioners themselves. This information helps to provide assurance and feedback on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management program, and to identify the gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed.

A list of assets exposed to the highest risk are the resources that have the most value for the enterprise, such as hardware, software, data, or services, and that are affected by or contribute to the highest risks. This information helps to identify and protect the critical assets of the enterprise, and to reduce the exposure and impact of the risks to the assets. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1.1, pp. 58-59.

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

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

 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.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

The stakeholders who are PRIMARILY responsible for determining enterprise IT risk appetite are the executive management and the board of directors, because they are the ones who set thestrategic direction and objectives of the enterprise, and who define the acceptable level of risk exposure and tolerance for achieving those objectives. The other options are not the primary stakeholders, because:

Option A: Audit and compliance management are responsible for providing assurance and oversight on the effectiveness of the risk management process and the compliance with internal and external requirements, but they do not determine the enterprise IT risk appetite.

Option B: The CIO and the CFO are responsible for managing the IT resources and the financial resources of the enterprise, respectively, but they do not determine the enterprise IT risk appetite.

Option C: Enterprise risk management and business process owners are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks that affect their domains, but they do not determine the enterprise IT risk appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 83.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks.

The most important factor to the effective monitoring of KRIs is determining threshold levels. This means that the acceptable or unacceptable values or ranges of the KRIs are defined and agreed upon by the relevant stakeholders.

Determining threshold levels helps to evaluate the actual performance and impact of the risks, compare them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identify any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and report them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.

The other options are not the most important factors to the effective monitoring of KRIs. They are either secondary or not essential for KRIs.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

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

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

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

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

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

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

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. Whilethis 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 risk response for an identified high probability risk scenario involving a critical, proprietary business function with an annualized cost of control higher than the annual loss expectancy is to accept the risk. Accepting the risk means acknowledging the risk but choosing not to take any specific action to address it. This strategy is suitable when the cost of implementing controls exceeds the potential loss, as in this scenario. The organization recognizes the risk, but the cost-benefit analysis suggests that the potential loss is acceptable given the higher cost of control. The other options are not the best risk responses, as they may not befeasible, practical, or cost-effective in this scenario. Mitigating the risk means reducing the risk by implementing controls or measures to minimize its potential impact, but this would increase the cost of control, which is already higher than the annual loss expectancy. Transferring the risk means shifting the risk to another party, typically through insurance or contracts, but this may not be possible or advisable for a critical, proprietary business function, and it may also increase the overall cost burden. Avoiding the risk means eliminating the risk entirely by not engaging in the activity that poses the risk, but this may disrupt essential business operations and potentially result in other adverse consequences. References = CRISC Exam: Best Risk Response for High Probability Risk Scenario; Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips; Chapter 19: Summarizing Risk Management Concepts

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

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 24

Information Technology & Security, page 18

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 16

Mitigating technology risk to acceptable levels means that the organization implements and maintains appropriate controls to reduce the likelihood and impact of potential threats or losses that may arise from the use of technology, such as IT systems, applications, networks, devices, etc.

The primary factor that should guide the mitigation of technology risk is the organizational risk appetite. This means that the organization defines and communicates the amount and type of risk that it is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives and strategy.

The organizational risk appetite helps to determine the risk tolerance and thresholds for different risk categories and scenarios, prioritize the risks, select the most suitable risk responses, allocate the resources and budget for risk management, and monitor and report the risk performance and outcomes.

The other options are not the primary factors that should guide the mitigation of technology risk. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 25

Information Technology & Security, page 19

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 17

A project sponsor is the person or group who provides the financial, political, or organizational support for a project, and who has the authority to approve or reject the project’s objectives, scope, budget, schedule, and deliverables.

The primary recipient of reports showing the progress of a current IT risk mitigation project should be the project sponsor, because they are ultimately responsible for the success or failure of the project, and they need to be informed of the project’s status, issues, risks, and achievements on a regular basis.

The other options are not the primary recipients of reports showing the progress of a current IT risk mitigation project. They are either secondary or not essential for project reporting.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 21

Information Technology & Security, page 15

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 13

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the business owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the achievement of the business objectives and the management of the associated risks. The business owner is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the IT services and solutions support the business needs and goals, and for accepting or rejecting the residual risks after the implementation of risk responses. Therefore, the business owner should own the risk associated with calculation errors, as they are the ones who will be affected by the potential impact of the errors on the financial data and decisions. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 194.

Zero-day malware is malware that exploits unknown and unprotected vulnerabilities. This novel malware is difficult to detect and defend against, making zero-day attacks a significant threat to enterprise cybersecurity1. The best way to detect zero-day malware on an end user’s workstation is to use file integrity monitoring, which is a technique that monitors and alerts on changes to files and directories that may indicate a malware infection or compromise2. By using file integrity monitoring, the end user can detect zero-day malware that may alter or damage the files or directories on their workstation, and take appropriate actions to remove or isolate the malware. File integrity monitoring can also help to prevent the spread of zero-day malware to other systems or networks, and to restore the integrity and availability of the affected files or directories. Antivirus program, database activity monitoring, and firewall log monitoring are not the best ways to detect zero-day malware on an end user’s workstation, as they are not as effective or reliable as file integrity monitoring. Antivirus program is a software that scans and removes known malware from a system or network3. Antivirus program can help to protect the end user’s workstation from common or known malware, but it may not be able to detect zero-day malware that does not have a signature or a pattern that matches the antivirus program’s database. Database activity monitoring is a technique that monitors and audits the activities and transactions on a database, such as queries, updates, or deletions4. Database activity monitoring can help to protect the end user’s database from unauthorized or malicious access or modification, but it may not be able to detect zero-day malware that does not target or affect the database. Firewall log monitoring is a technique that monitors and analyzes the logs generated by a firewall, which is a device or software that filters and controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules. Firewall log monitoring can help to protect the enduser’s workstation from external or internal network attacks, but it may not be able to detect zero-day malwarethat bypasses or evades the firewall rules or that originates from the workstation itself. References = 1: What is Zero Day Malware? - Check Point Software2: File Integrity Monitoring - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics3: Antivirus Software - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics4: Database Activity Monitoring - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : [Firewall Log Analysis - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] : [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.] : [Zero-day attack detection: a systematic literature review | Artificial Intelligence Review] : [Zero-day Attacks Detection and Prevention Methods | Apriorit] 

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, a risk action plan is a document that defines the specific actions, resources, responsibilities, and timelines for implementing the risk responses. A risk action plan should be developed after the results of a vulnerability assessment are shared with the relevant stakeholders, such as the business manager, to address the identified vulnerabilities and mitigate the associated risks. Developing a risk action plan is the next step in the risk management process, as it helps to ensure that the risk responses are executed effectively and efficiently, and that the residual risks are within the acceptable levels. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 201.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are measurable values that demonstrate how effectively an organization is achieving its key objectives. KPIs can be used to evaluate the progress and performance of a risk management program, as well as to identify the areas for improvement and alignment with the organization’s strategy. KPIs can provide the most useful information when determining a risk management program’s maturity level, because they can reflect the extent to which the program is integrated, consistent, proactive, and value-adding. KPIs can also be compared with industry benchmarks or best practices to assess the program’s maturity level relative to other organizations. The other options are not as useful as KPIs, because they do not provide a clear and comprehensive picture of the risk management program’s maturity level, but rather focus on specific aspects or outputs of the program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 18.

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

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

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 serviceperformance, 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, KeyClauses To Understand and Evaluate in SaaS Contracts, SaaS Reseller Agreement: Everything You Need to Know

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

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

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

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

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, a third-party audit is an independent and objective examination of an organization’s security controls by an external auditor or organization. A third-party audit provides the most objective assessment of the effectiveness of an organization’s security controls, as it helps to avoid any conflicts of interest, biases, or assumptions that may affect the internal audit, review, or testing. A third-party audit also helps to ensure that the security controls comply with the relevant standards, regulations, and best practices, and that they meet the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders, such as customers, partners, or regulators. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 224.

 A detective control is a type of internal control that seeks to uncover problems in a company’s processes once they have occurred. Examples of detective controls include physical inventory checks, reviews of account reports and reconciliations, as well as assessments of current controls1. A periodic access review is a detective control that involves verifying the access rights and privileges of users to ensure that they are appropriate and authorized. A periodic access review can help to detect any unauthorized or inappropriate access, such as excessive or redundant permissions, segregation of duties violations, or dormant ororphaned accounts23. The other options are not detective controls, but rather preventive controls, which are designed to prevent errors or fraud from occurring in the first place. A limit check is a preventive control that validates the input data against a predefined range or limit, and rejects any data that falls outside the acceptable range4. Access control software is a preventive control that restricts the access to information systems or resources based on the identity, role, or credentials of the user5. Rerun procedures are preventive controls that ensure the accuracy and completeness of data processing by repeating the same process and comparing the results6. References = Detective Control: Definition, Examples, Vs. Preventive Control; Detective Control - What Is It, Examples, Vs Preventive Control; Limit Check - an overview |ScienceDirect Topics; Access Control Software - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics; Rerun Procedures - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

The risk associated with the loss of company data stored on personal devices is that the data may be accessed, disclosed, or modified by unauthorized parties, resulting in confidentiality, integrity, or availability breaches1. The most effective way to mitigate this risk is to enforce authentication and data encryption on the personal devices that store company data. Authentication is a process that verifies the identity of the user or device that is accessing the data, and prevents unauthorized access by requiring a password, a code, a biometric factor, or a combination of these2. Data encryption is a technique that transforms the data into an unreadable format, and requires a key to decrypt and restore the data to its original format3. By enforcing authentication and data encryption on the personal devices, the organization can ensure that only authorized users or devices can access the company data, and that the data is protected from unauthorized disclosure or modification even if the device is lost or stolen4. An acceptable use policy for personal devices, required user log-on before synchronizing data, and security awareness training and testing are not the most effective ways to mitigate the risk associated with the loss of company data stored on personal devices, as they do not provide the same level of protection as authentication and data encryption. An acceptable use policy for personal devices is a document that defines the rules and guidelines for using personal devices for work purposes, such as the types of devices, data, and applications that are allowed, the security measures that are required,and the responsibilities and liabilities of the users and the organization5. An acceptable use policy for personal devices can help to establish acommon understanding and expectation for the use of personal devices, but it does not enforce or guarantee the compliance or effectiveness of the security measures. Required user log-on before synchronizing data is a technique that requires the user to enter their credentials before they can transfer or update the data between their personal device and the company network or system6. Required user log-on before synchronizing data can help to prevent unauthorized synchronization of data, but it does not protect the data that is already stored on the personal device. Security awareness training and testing is a process that educates and evaluates the users on the security risks and best practices for using personal devices for work purposes, such as the importance of using strong passwords, updating software, avoiding phishing emails, and reporting incidents7. Security awareness training and testing can help to increase the knowledge and behavior of the users, but it does not ensure or monitor the implementation or performance of the security measures. References = 1: BYOD security: What are the risks and how can they be mitigated?2: What is Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA)? | Duo Security3: [What is Data Encryption? | Definition and FAQs] 4: How to mitigate the risks of using personal devices in the workplace5: BYOD Policy Template - GetFree Sample6: How to Sync Your Phone With Windows 10 | PCMag7: Security Awareness Training: What Is It and Why Is It Important?

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

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

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

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

A compliance-based CSA focuses on ensuring that the business unit follows the policies and procedures established by the enterprise, regardless of the actual risk level or impact of the controls.

A risk-based CSA focuses on identifying and evaluating the risks that may affect the business unit’s objectives, and designing and implementing controls that are appropriate to mitigate those risks.

A compliance-based CSA may not capture all the high-risk issues that exist in a business unit, especially if they are not aligned with the enterprise’s standards or expectations.

A risk-based CSA may identify more high-risk issues than a compliance-based CSA, because it considers both internal and external factors that may affect the business unit’s performance or security.

Therefore, a difference in results between a previous control self-assessment (CSA) and an audit indicates that either one of them was not risk-based, but rather compliance-based.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 9

Information Technology & Security, page 3

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 1

Annual loss expectancy (ALE) is a method to assign a monetary value to risk by multiplying the probability of a risk event by the potential loss associated with that event1. ALE can be used to compare the costs and benefits of different risk mitigation options and to determine the optimal level of investment in riskmanagement2. Business impact analysis (BIA) is a process to identify and evaluate the potential effects of a disruption on the critical functions and processes of an organization3. BIA can help to forecast the impacts of a risk event, but it does not assign a monetary value to the risk itself. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is a technique to compare the costs and benefits of a project, decision, or action4. CBA can help to evaluate the feasibility and profitability of a risk mitigation option, but it does not assign a monetary value to the risk itself. Inherent vulnerabilities are the weaknesses or flaws in a system, process, or asset that expose it to potential threats5. Inherent vulnerabilities can increase the likelihood or impact of a risk event, but they do not assign a monetary value to the risk itself. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2: Risk Analysis, pp. 77-81.

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

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.

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

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

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

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 notdetermine 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.

Evaluating risk scenarios and assessing current controls is the most helpful in identifying gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment, because it allows the risk practitioner to compare the actual and expected outcomes of the IT processes and activities under different situations. A risk scenario is a hypothetical situation that describes a possible event or sequence of events that may affect the IT objectives and performance. A risk scenario can be based on various factors, such as the sources of risk, the risk drivers, the risk events, the risk impacts, and the risk responses. A risk scenario can also include the likelihood and severity of the risk, as well as the assumptions and uncertainties involved. Evaluating risk scenarios helps the risk practitioner to understand the nature and extent of the IT risks, as well as the potential consequences and opportunities that may arise from them. Assessing current controls is the process of examining and testing the existing controls that are implemented to manage the IT risks. A control is a measure or action that reduces the likelihood or impact of a risk, or enhances the benefits or opportunities of a risk. Assessing current controls helps the risk practitioner to determine the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, as well as their alignment with the IT objectives and requirements. By evaluating risk scenarios and assessing current controls, the risk practitioner can identify the gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment. The gaps can be related to the following aspects: - The IT objectives and performance: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and expected results of the IT processes and activities, as well as the deviation from the IT goals and targets. - The IT risk exposure and appetite: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actualand acceptable level of risk that the organization faces or is willing to take in pursuit of the IT objectives. - The IT risk management process and practices: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and expected performance of the IT risk management process, as well as the compliance with the IT risk management policies and standards. - The IT risk culture and awareness: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and desired level of risk awareness,understanding, and communication among the IT stakeholders, as well as the alignment with the organizational values and culture. Identifying the gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment is important for the risk practitioner, as it can help to prioritize and address the IT risks, as well as to improve and optimize the IT risk management process and practices. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Risk Scenarios, pp. 63-681

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

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

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

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

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 governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) solution is an integrated system that supports the management of governance, risk, and compliance activities across the enterprise. A GRC solution can provide benefits such as improved efficiency, consistency, transparency, and accountability. The best justification to invest in the development of a GRC solution is to facilitate risk-aware decision making by stakeholders. By providing a holistic view of the enterprise’s risk profile, a GRC solution can enable stakeholders to make informed decisions that are aligned with the enterprise’s objectives, risk appetite, and tolerance. A GRC solution can also help to monitor and report on the performance and outcomes of the risk management program, and provide feedback and assurance to the board of directors and senior management. The other options are not as compelling as the facilitation of risk-aware decision making, as they may not directly contribute to the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives or the management of its risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.2.1, pp. 12-13.

An IT policy is a document that defines the rules, standards, and procedures for the use, management, and security of IT resources within an organization. An IT policy should be aligned to the business requirements, which are the needs, expectations, and objectives of the business stakeholders, such as customers, employees, managers, partners, regulators, etc. An IT policy that is aligned to the business requirements can help support the business strategy, improve the business performance, and enhance the business value. A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that measures the achievement of a specific goal or objective. A KPI should be relevant, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound. The best KPI for determining how well an IT policy is aligned to the business requirements is the number of exceptions to the policy. An exception to the policy is a deviation or violation of the policy rules, standards, or procedures, which may be intentional or unintentional, authorized or unauthorized, justified or unjustified. The number of exceptions to the policy can indicate how well the policy is understood, communicated, implemented, and enforced within the organization. The number of exceptions to the policy can also indicate how well the policy reflects the current and future business needs and expectations, and how flexible and adaptable the policy is to the changing business environment. A low number of exceptions to the policy can suggest that the policy is well aligned to the business requirements, while a high number of exceptions to the policy can suggest that the policy is misaligned or outdated, and may need to be reviewed or revised. References = Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Definition, Types, andExamples, Business KPIs: 5 important characteristics to be effective, What is a KPI? How To Choose the Best KPIs for Your Business - HubSpot Blog.

The primary focus of an independent review of a risk management process is to evaluate the maturity of the process, which means the extent to which the process is aligned with the organization’s objectives, culture, and governance, and how well it is integrated, implemented, and monitored across the organization. A mature risk management process is one that is consistent, effective, efficient, and adaptable to changing circumstances and environments. A maturity assessment can help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the risk management process, as well as the opportunities and challenges for improvement. The other options are not the primary focus, but they may be secondary or tertiary aspects of the review. Accuracy of risk tolerance levels is a measure of how well the organization defines and communicates its risk appetite and risk limits, which are important inputs for the risk management process, but not the main outcome. Consistency of risk process results is a measure of how reliable and repeatable the risk management process is, which reflects the quality and validity of the data, assumptions, methods, and tools used in the process, but not the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the process. Participation of stakeholders is a measure of how well the organization engages and involves its internal and external stakeholders in the risk management process, which enhances the awareness, ownership, andaccountability of the process, but not the alignment and integration of the process. References = Assessing the Risk Management Process, p. 9-10.

Personally identifiable information (PII) is any information that can be used to identify, contact, or locate an individual, such as name, address, phone number, email, social security number, etc1. PII is subject to various laws and regulations that aim to protect the privacy and security of individuals’data1. Organizations that collect, store, process, or transmit PII have a responsibility to safeguard it from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction1.

One of the best practices for protecting PII is to implement access controls, which are mechanisms that restrict access to PII based on the principle of least privilege2. Access controls ensure that only authorized personnel who have a legitimate need to access PII can do so, and that they can only perform the actions that are necessary for their roles and responsibilities2. Access controls can be implemented at different levels, such as network, system, application, or data level, and can use various methods, such as passwords, tokens, biometrics, encryption, etc2.

If an organization’s shared drive contains PII that can be accessed by all personnel, this poses a high risk of data breach, theft, loss, or misuse, which could result in legal, financial, reputational, or operational consequences for the organization and the individuals whose data is compromised3. Therefore, the most effective risk response is to protect the sensitive information with access controls, such as:

Classify the PII according to its sensitivity and impact level, and assign appropriate labels and permissions to the data files and folders2.

Restrict access to the shared drive to only those personnel who have a valid business reason to access the PII, and grant them the minimum level of access required to perform their tasks2.

Implement strong authentication and authorization mechanisms, such as multifactor authentication, role-based access control, or attribute-based access control, to verify the identity and privileges of the users who access the shared drive2.

Encrypt the PII stored on the shared drive, and use secure protocols and channels to transmit the data over the network2.

Monitor and audit the access and activities on the shared drive, and generate logs and reports to detect and respond to any unauthorized or anomalous events2.

The other options are not as effective as access controls, because they do not directly address the root cause of the risk, which is the lack of access restrictions on the shared drive. Implementing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution, which is a tool that monitors and prevents the leakage of sensitive data, may help to detect and block some unauthorized data transfers, but it does not prevent unauthorized access or viewing of the PII on the shared drive4. Re-communicating the data protection policy, which is a document that defines the rules and responsibilities for handling PII, may help to raise awareness and compliance among the personnel, but it does not enforce or verify the actual implementation of the policy. Implementing a data encryption solution, which is a technique that transforms the PII into an unreadable format, may helpto protect the confidentiality of the data, but it does not prevent unauthorized access or modification of the data, and it may introduce additional complexity and overhead to the data management process.

References = Guide to Protecting the Confidentiality of Personally Identifiable Information (PII), Best Practices for Protecting PII, How to Secure Personally Identifiable Information against Loss or Compromise, Data Loss Prevention (DLP) | Microsoft 365 security, [Protecting Personal Information: A Guide for Business], [Encryption - Wikipedia]

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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, a cable lock is a physical security device that attaches a laptop to a fixed object, such as a desk or a wall, to prevent unauthorized removal or theft. A cable lock is the best option to reduce the probability of laptop theft, as it acts as a deterrent and a barrier for potential thieves. A cable lock also helps to protect the confidentiality, integrity, andavailability of the data stored on the laptop, as well as the laptop itself. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 253.

The risk scenario chart shows the initial and residual risk ratings, and the project cost, for four projects named Sierra, Tango, Uniform, and Victor. The initial risk rating is the level of risk before applying any controls or mitigation measures, while the residual risk rating is the level of risk after applying the controls or measures. The project cost is the amount of resources required to implement the project. These three factors can be used to determine the relative positions of the projects on a risk map, which is a graphical tool for displaying the risks based on their impact and likelihood. The risk map can help to prioritize and compare the risks, and to select the most appropriate risk response strategy. The other options are not the best answers, as they are not directly shown or derived from the risk scenario chart. The risk treatment options are the possible actions that can be taken to address the risks, such as accept, avoid, mitigate, or transfer. The capability of enterprise to implement is the ability of the organization to execute the risk response plan,considering the available resources, skills, and constraints. The multiple risk factors addressed by a chosen response are the various elements that contribute to or affect the risk, such as the threat sources, events, vulnerabilities, assets, and impacts. These factors are not explicitly stated or measured in the risk scenario chart, and may require further analysis or information. References = How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA; Identifying the Right Risk Scenarios to Measure with FAIR; How to write good risk scenarios and statements

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

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

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

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

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

Information security risk factors are the sources of uncertainty that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information assets within an organization. Information security risk factors can include threats, vulnerabilities, or impacts that may compromise the security of information assets. Information security risk factors should be mitigated when developing in-house applications, which are software applications that are designed, developed, and maintained by the organization itself, rather than by external vendors or providers. Mitigating information security risk factors when developing in-house applications canhelp prevent or reduce the occurrence or consequences of security incidents, such as data breaches, cyberattacks, unauthorized access, or data loss. The best way to ensure that information security risk factors are mitigated when developing in-house applications is to identify information security controls in the requirements analysis. The requirements analysis is the stage of the system development life cycle (SDLC) where the business needs and expectations of the application are defined and documented. The requirements analysis should include the functional and non-functional requirements of the application, such as the features, functions, performance, quality, reliability, and security of the application. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can help ensure that the security requirements of the application are clearly specified and agreed upon by the stakeholders, and that they are aligned with the organization’s security policies, standards, and regulations. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can also help ensure that the security requirements are integrated into the design, development, testing, and deployment of the application, and that they are verified and validated throughout the SDLC. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can also help ensure that the security requirements are traceable, measurable, and manageable, and that they can be monitored and reviewed for effectiveness and efficiency. References = THE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE (SDLC), p. 2-3, System Development Life Cycle - GeeksforGeeks, 7.3: Systems Development Life Cycle - Engineering LibreTexts, What Is SDLC? 7 Phases of System Development Life Cycle - Intetics.

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.

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.

Configuration management is a process that establishes and maintains the consistency and integrity of the IT systems and applications throughout their lifecycle. Configuration management involves identifying, documenting, controlling, and auditing the configuration items, such as hardware, software, data, or services, that comprise the IT systems and applications. Configuration management also involves establishing and enforcing the configuration baselines, which are the approved and authorized states of the configuration items. Implementing configuration management will best help ensure that systems comply with an established baseline before deployment, as it will enable the enterprise to verify that the systems meet the specified requirements, standards, and policies, and to detect and correct any deviations or discrepancies. The other options are not as effective as configuration management, as they involve different aspects or outcomes of the IT systems and applications:

Vulnerability scanning is a process that identifies and analyzes the weaknesses or gaps in the IT systems and applications that could be exploited by threats. Vulnerability scanning helps to assessthe security and compliance of the systems, but it does not ensure that the systems comply with an established baseline before deployment, as it may not cover all the aspects or components of the systems, or may not reflect the latest changes or updates of the systems.

Continuous monitoring and alerting is a process that tracks and reports the performance and status of the IT systems and applications on an ongoing basis. Continuous monitoring and alerting helps to identify and respond to any issues or incidents that affect the availability, integrity, or confidentiality of the systems, but it does not ensure that the systems comply with an established baseline before deployment, as it may not prevent or detect the unauthorized or unintended changes or modifications of the systems, or may not provide sufficient information or evidence to verify the compliance of the systems.

Access controls and active logging are processes that restrict and record the access and activities of the users or entities on the IT systems and applications. Access controls and active logging help to protect and audit the IT systems and applications, but they do not ensure that the systems comply with an established baseline before deployment, as they may not address the configuration or quality issues of the systems, or may not be consistent or comprehensive across the systems. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.1, pp. 156-157.

 Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging the existence and potential impact of a risk, but deciding not to take any action to reduce or eliminate it. Risk acceptance can be appropriate when the cost or effort of implementing a risk response outweighs the benefit, or when there are no feasible or effective risk responses available. An organization has identified that terminated employee accounts are not disabled or deleted within the time required by corporate policy, which poses a security risk to the organization. The organization is unsure of the reason for this issue, and has decided to monitor the situation for three months to obtain more information, rather than taking any immediate action to resolve the issue. As a result of this decision, the risk has been accepted, as the organization has chosen to tolerate the risk exposure for a certain period of time, and has not implemented any controls or measures to prevent or reduce the risk occurrence or impact. References = Risk Response Strategies: Avoid, Transfer, Mitigate, Accept, Risk Response Strategies: What They Are and How to Use Them, Risk Response Strategy: Definition, Types, and Examples.

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

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

An IT license audit is a process that verifies the compliance of the IT software and hardware assets with the licensing agreements and regulations. An IT license audit can reveal the existence of unlicensed copies of software, which can expose the enterprise to legal, financial, and reputational risks. The best course of action in such a situation is to report the issue to management so that appropriate action can be taken. Management can then decide on the most suitable risk response strategy, such as procuring the necessary licenses, uninstalling the unlicensed software, or negotiating with the software vendor. Reporting the issue to management can also help to prevent further violations, identify the root causes, and implement corrective and preventive measures. The other options are not the best course of action, as they may not address the issue effectively, efficiently, or ethically. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.1, pp. 156-157.

The first thing that a risk practitioner should do upon learning that a risk treatment owner has implemented a different control than what was specified in the IT risk action plan is to reassess the risk level associated with the new control. This is because the new control may have a different effect on the likelihood and impact of the risk, and may introduce new risks or modify existing ones. The risk practitioner should evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the newcontrol, and compare the residual risk with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The risk practitioner should also communicate the results of the risk reassessment to the relevant stakeholders, and update the risk register and action plan accordingly. The other options are not the first things that a risk practitioner should do, although they may be necessary or appropriate at a later stage. Seeking approval from the control owner is important, but it does not address the potential changes in the risk level or the alignment with the risk management objectives. Updating the action plan in the risk register is a good practice, but it should be done after the risk reassessment and with the consent of the risk owner. Validating that the control has an established testing method is a part of the control assurance process, but it does not provide information on the risk level or the risk response effectiveness. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 151.

The first course of action for an organization that has received notification that it is a potential victim of a cybercrime that may have compromised sensitive customer data is to invoke the incident response plan. An incident response plan is a set of procedures and guidelines that defines the roles and responsibilities of the incident response team, the communication and escalation channels, the incident identification and classification criteria, the incident containment and eradication strategies, the incident recovery and restoration activities, and the incident documentation and reporting requirements. Invoking the incident response plan as soon as possible is crucial to minimize the damage and disruption caused by the cybercrime, to preserve the evidence and facilitate the investigation, and to comply with the legal andregulatory obligations. The other options are not the first course of action, although they may be subsequent or concurrent steps in the incident response process. Determining the business impact is a part of the incident assessment and prioritization phase, which helps to evaluate the severity and scope of the incident and to allocate the appropriate resources and actions. Conducting a forensic investigation is a part of the incident analysis and evidence collection phase, which helps to identify the source and cause of the incident and to support the legal and disciplinary actions. Invoking the business continuity plan (BCP) is a part of the incident recovery and restoration phase, which helps to resume the normal operations and services and to mitigate the adverse effects of the incident. References = The National Cyber Incident Response Plan (NCIRP), Cyber Incident Response Plan | Cyber.gov.au, [Cyber Incident Response: A Framework for Preparation and Success], [Cyber Incident Response Plan: How to Create One for Your Business]

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks.

Reviewing KRIs is the most helpful way to determine the effectiveness of an organization’s IT risk mitigation efforts. This means that the organization monitors and evaluates the actual results and outcomes of the risk responses, compares them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identifies any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and reports them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.

The other options are not the most helpful ways to determine the effectiveness of an organization’s IT risk mitigation efforts. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

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.

Determining Controls:

Acceptable Risk Level: The level of acceptable risk to the organization is the most important consideration because it directly influences the type and extent of controls implemented. Controls must be designed to keep risk within acceptable levels.

Risk Management Strategy: Aligning controls with the organization's risk appetite ensures that resources are used effectively and that critical information systems are adequately protected.

Comparison with Other Options:

Number of Threats: Important for understanding risk exposure but secondary to determining acceptable risk levels.

Available Budget: Budget constraints are important but should not compromise the implementation of necessary controls.

Number of Vulnerabilities: Identifying vulnerabilities is part of the risk assessment process, but controls are prioritized based on the acceptable risk level.

Best Practices:

Risk Assessment: Conduct thorough risk assessments to understand the potential impact of threats and vulnerabilities.

Control Effectiveness: Implement controls that are both cost-effective and capable of reducing risk to acceptable levels.

Continuous Monitoring: Regularly monitor and review controls to ensure they remain effective and aligned with the organization's risk tolerance.

Reviewing the methodology used to conduct the business impact analysis (BIA) is the first thing that a risk practitioner should do when wanting to identify potential risk events that affect the continuity of a critical business process, because it helps to ensure that the BIA is conducted in a consistent, comprehensive, and reliable manner, and that it covers all the relevant aspects and scenarios of the business process and its continuity. A BIA is a process of analyzing the potential impact of disruption to the critical business functions or processes, and identifying the recovery priorities and requirements. A BIA methodology is a set of principles, standards, and techniques that guide and support the BIA process, such as the scope, objectives, data sources, data collection methods, data analysis methods, and reporting methods. Reviewing the BIA methodology is the first thing to do, as it helps to establish the foundation and framework for the BIA process, and to ensure that the BIA results are valid and useful for identifying the potential risk events and their consequences. Evaluating current risk management alignment with relevant regulations, determining if business continuity proceduresare reviewed and updated on a regular basis, and conducting a benchmarking exercise against industry peers are all possible things to do after reviewing the BIA methodology, but they are not the first thing to do, as they depend on the quality and accuracy of the BIA process and outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 143

Failure to utilize threat modeling during the design phase results in overlooked vulnerabilities. This highlights the importance ofProactive Threat Identificationin secure software development practices.

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the most comprehensive approach to capture the risk scenario of collecting and storing credit card information is event tree analysis (ETA). ETA is a forward, top-down, logical modeling technique that explores the responses and outcomes of a single initiating event, such as a data breach or a cyberattack. ETA can help to identify all possible consequences of the scenario, such as financial losses, reputational damages, legal liabilities, regulatory penalties, and customer dissatisfaction. ETA can also help to assess the probabilities of the outcomes and the effectiveness of the controls and mitigation strategies12

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

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

Risk Register Purpose:

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

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

Importance of Action Plans:

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

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

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

The criticality of the asset is the most important factor to consider when determining the value of an asset during the risk identification process, because it reflects the importance or significance of the asset to the organization’s objectives or functions, and the potential impact or consequence of losing or compromising the asset. An asset is a resource or capability that has value to the organization, such as data, systems, applications, infrastructure, or people. The value of an asset is a measure of the worth or benefit of the asset to the organization, and the cost or loss of the asset to the organization. The risk identification process is a process of systematically identifying the sources and types of risk that an organization faces, and estimating their likelihood and impact. The criticality of the asset is the most important factor, as it helps to prioritize and focus on the assets that have the highest value and impact, and to determine the appropriate level of protection and investment for the assets. The monetary value of the asset, the vulnerability profile of the asset, and the size of the asset’s user base are all possible factors to consider when determining the value of an asset, but they are not the most important factor, as they do not directly reflect the criticality of the asset to the organization’s objectives or functions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 83

Residual risk exceeds acceptable limits, because it indicates that the risk level is higher than the organization’s risk appetite or tolerance, and that the risk responses and controls are insufficient or ineffective. Residual risk is the level of risk remaining in a process or procedure following the implementation of risk controls to limit or remove it. Escalation is a process that increases the awareness and involvement of higher-level stakeholders or authorities in a risk issue or situation. Escalation is appropriate when the risk issue or situation is outside the scope or authority of the current risk owner or manager, and requires the attention or action of the senior management or the board of directors. Residual risk exceeding acceptable limits is the best situation to justify escalation, as it implies that the current risk owner or manager cannot manage the risk within the predefined boundaries or expectations, and that the senior management or the board of directors need to intervene or approve the risk acceptance or transfer.

Residual risk being inadequately recorded, residual risk remaining after controls have been applied, and residual risk equaling current risk are all possible situations that may require escalation, but they are not the best situations, as they do not necessarily indicate that the risk level is higher than the acceptable limits, and that the senior management or the board of directors need to be involved.

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the information owner is the official with statutory or operational authority for specified information and responsibility for establishing the controls for its generation, collection, processing, dissemination, and disposal. The information owner is also responsible for authorizing access to the information within their domain, based on the principle of least privilege and the need toknow. Therefore, the information owner should be accountable for authorizing information system access to internal users12

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

A risk profile is a summary of the risks that an organization faces and their likelihood and impact. Consistently recording risk assessment results in the risk register can help improve the accuracy of risk profiles by providing a reliable and up-to-date source of information on the current risk situation, the risk response actions, and the residual risk levels. A risk register is a tool that captures and documents the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes2. A risk register can also facilitate risk communication, monitoring, and reporting2.

Assessment of organizational risk appetite, compliance with best practice, and accountability for loss events are not the primary benefits of consistently recording risk assessment results in the risk register. These are possible outcomes or objectives of risk management, but they do not directly depend on the risk register.

 Zero Trust Architecture:

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

 Basic Tenets of Zero Trust:

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

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

 Key Components:

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

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

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

 Other Options:

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

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

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

 References:

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

The business unit owner is accountable for authorizing application access in a SaaS environment because they are responsible for aligning access controls with business needs. They determine the roles and permissions needed to ensure operational effectiveness while adhering to the principle ofAccess Managementin the CRISC framework.

Defining recovery time objectives (RTOs) and acceptable data loss thresholds is critical for effective disaster response, ensuring recovery activities are aligned with business priorities. This supportsBusiness Continuity Planning.

 Segmenting the application within the existing network is the most effective control to manage a legacy application that relies on software that has reached the end of extended support, as it isolates the application from the rest of the network and reduces the attack surface and the potential impact of a compromise. Subscribing to threat intelligence, applying patches for a newer version of the application, and increasing the frequency of regular system and data backups are not the most effective controls, as theymay not address the root cause of the risk, or may introduce additional costs or complexities, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 153.

Business Impact Analysis (BIA):

Purpose: A BIA is a systematic process to evaluate the potential effects of an interruption to critical business operations as a result of a disaster, accident, or emergency.

Identification of Consequences: It identifies critical resources and the consequences of their loss, allowing an organization to determine the operational and financial impacts of such losses.

Steps Involved in BIA:

Identify Critical Functions: Determine which business functions and processes are essential to the organization's operations.

Assess Impact: Evaluate the impact of losing these functions on the organization’s ability to operate.

Estimate Downtime Tolerance: Determine the maximum allowable downtime for critical functions before significant harm occurs.

Identify Dependencies: Document dependencies between systems, processes, and resources to understand how disruptions to one part affect the whole.

Comparison with Other Options:

Risk Management Action Plans: These are detailed plans developed to address identified risks but do not specifically focus on the impact of losing critical resources.

What-if Technique: This is a brainstorming technique used to explore potential risks and their impacts but is not as structured as a BIA.

Tabletop Exercise Results: These exercises simulate disaster scenarios to test response plans but do not provide the comprehensive impact analysis that a BIA does.

Best Practices:

Regular Updates: Regularly update the BIA to reflect changes in the business environment and operational dependencies.

Integration with DR/BC Plans: Ensure that findings from the BIA are integrated into disaster recovery (DR) and business continuity (BC) plans to enhance overall preparedness.

The primary concern when IT decides to develop an in-house replacement application for a critical business application is that the business process owner is not an active participant. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for the business process that is supported by the application, and who understands the business requirements, objectives, and expectations of the application. The business process owner should be involved in all stages of the application development lifecycle, from planning, analysis, design, testing, implementation, to maintenance, to ensure that the application meets the business needs and delivers value. Without the active participation of the business process owner, the application development project may face risks such as scope creep, miscommunication, user dissatisfaction, poor quality, or failure.

A risk is the possibility of an event that may have a negative impact on the achievement of an organization’s objectives. A risk can be measured by the probability and impact of the event, which indicate the likelihood and consequence of the event. A risk manager is a person who is responsible for performing risk management activities, such as identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and communicating risks. When an organization retains footage from its data center security camera for 30 days when the policy requires 90-day retention, the risk manager’s best response to the business owner who challenges whether the situation is worth remediating is to evaluate the risk as a measure of probable loss, which means to estimate the potential harm or damage that may result from the non-compliance with the policy. By evaluating the risk as a measure of probable loss, the risk manager can provide the business owner with the rationale and justification for the risk remediation, and help the business owner to understand the cost-benefit analysis of the risk response. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 63.

Testing is completed by IT support users without input from end users should be of most concern to a risk practitioner reviewing the system development life cycle (SDLC). This is because testing without input from end users can result in poor quality, usability, and functionality of the system, as well as increased errors, defects, and rework. Testing without input from end users can also lead to user dissatisfaction, resistance, and non-compliance, as well as misalignment with the business requirements and objectives. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk identification techniques for IT projects is to involve the end users and other relevant parties in the testing process1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, testing without input from end users is the correct answer to this question2.

Testing in phases, overriding segregation of duties controls, and using data anonymization are not the most concerning issues for a risk practitioner reviewing the SDLC. These are possible practices or techniques that can be used in the testing process, but they do not necessarily pose significant risks or problems. Testing in phases can help ensure that the system meets the technical and functional specifications, as well as the user acceptance criteria, at each stage of the development. Overriding segregation of duties controls can be justified and authorized during the testing phases, as long as the controls are restored and verified before the system goes live. Using data anonymization can help protect the privacy and security of the data used in the testing process, as well as comply with the relevant regulations and standards.

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

Risk tolerance is the most useful input when evaluating the appropriateness of risk responses, as it defines the acceptable level of risk for the organization and guides the selection of the optimal risk response. Incident reports, cost-benefit analysis, and control objectives are also useful inputs, but they are not the most useful, as they provide information on the actual or potential impact, cost, and effectiveness of the risk responses, but not the desired level of risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 108.

According to the FIC Article by FSCA, accountable institutions remain fully accountable, responsible and liable for any compliance failures that may result from or be associated with an outsourcing arrangement and as such, liability and/or culpability for non-compliance with the FIC Act obligations cannot be transferred to a third-party service provider2. Therefore, even if a business process is outsourced to a cloud service provider, the organization still has the ultimate responsibility and accountability for the risk associated with the outsourced process. The other options are not correct, as they imply that the cloud service provider can take over the accountability or responsibility for the risk, or that the organization can mitigate the risk by acquiring insurance, which is not the case.

Identifying specific risk events provides the foundational input for creating relevant and actionable risk scenarios. These scenarios form the basis of assessing potential impacts and determining effective controls. This is a key step in theRisk Identification and Assessmentprocess.

The primary reason for a risk practitioner to report changes and trends in the IT risk profile to senior management is to ensure that IT risk is managed within acceptable limits, because it helps to inform and advise the senior management on the current state and direction of IT risk, and to support the risk-based decision making and prioritization. An IT risk profile is a summary of the key IT risks that an organization faces, and their implications for the organization’s objectives and strategy. An IT risk profile may change or evolve over time, due to factors such as new technologies, business initiatives, or external events. Reporting changes and trends in the IT risk profile to senior management is the primary reason, as it helps to ensure that the senior management is aware of and prepared for the IT risk challenges and opportunities, and that the IT risk is managed within the acceptable limits defined by the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. To ensure risk owners understand their responsibilities, to ensure the organization complies with legal requirements, and to ensure the IT risk awareness program is effective are all possible reasons for reporting changes and trends in the IT risk profile, but they are not the primary reason, as they are not directly related to the management of IT risk within acceptable limits. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3, page 91

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

The risk profile is the most important document to update following a change in organizational risk appetite and tolerance, because it summarizes the current and target state of the organization’s risk exposure, as well as the risk response strategies and actions. The risk profile should reflect the alignment of the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance with its strategic objectives and operational capabilities. Updating the risk profile will help the organization to monitor and manage its risks effectively and efficiently.

References

•ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Domain 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2.1: Risk Profile

•Risk Profile - ISACA

•What is a Risk Profile? Definition, Examples, and More

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks for the best guidance for developing relevant risk scenarios.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Based on industry trends:Important but may not always be directly relevant to the specific organization.

B. Mapped to incident response plans:Useful but secondary to ensuring the scenarios are probable.

C. Related to probable events:Ensures the scenarios are realistic and likely, making them more relevant and actionable.

D. Aligned with risk management capabilities:Important for managing risks but not as critical as ensuring scenarios are probable.

 Detailed Explanation:

Probable Events:Developing risk scenarios that are based on probable events ensures that the organization is prepared for the most likely risks. This makes risk management efforts more practical and focused on real threats.

Relevance:By focusing on probable events, the scenarios will be more relevant to the organization's actual risk environment, making it easier to allocate resources and plan responses effectively.

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

Senior management’s role in the RACI model when tasked with reviewing monthly status reports provided by risk owners is accountable, as it means that they have the ultimate authority and responsibility to approve or reject the risk management decisions and actions, and to oversee the risk management performance and outcomes. The other options are not the correct roles, as they imply different levels or types of involvement or participation in the risk management process, such as being informed, responsible, or consulted, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

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

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

Perform a Risk Assessment:

Immediate Action: The first step when discovering a non-compliant implementation is to understand the potential risks it poses to the organization. This involves identifying threats, vulnerabilities, and potential impacts of the non-fungible token (NFT) asset program.

Risk Identification and Evaluation: Assess the new program’s impact on the organization’s risk profile. Determine if it introduces significant security, compliance, or operational risks.

Documentation and Reporting: Document the findings and present them to senior management along with recommendations for mitigation or further action.

Comparison with Other Options:

Report the Infraction: Reporting is necessary but should follow the risk assessment to provide a clear understanding of the implications and necessary mitigations.

Conduct Risk Awareness Training: Training is preventive and should be part of a long-term strategy, not the immediate response to a specific incident.

Discontinue the Process: Discontinuing the process may be a necessary step after assessing the risk, but the assessment must come first to justify such an action.

Best Practices:

Comprehensive Risk Assessment: Ensure that the risk assessment covers all aspects, including financial, reputational, and regulatory risks.

Stakeholder Involvement: Involve relevant stakeholders in the assessment process to gather diverse perspectives and ensure a thorough evaluation.

Actionable Recommendations: Provide clear, actionable recommendations based on the risk assessment findings.

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that provides information on the level of exposure to a given risk. Changes in risk trend data indicate that the likelihood or probability of a risk occurring has changed. Therefore, the frequency of risk occurrence should be updated in the risk register to reflect the current risk profile. The impact, cost, and legal aspects of risk realization are not directly affected by the changes in risk trend data, unless the nature or severity of the risk has also changed. (Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 5th Edition, page 972

 Internal Audit Review:

An internal audit review of control design involves a thorough examination of the control’s structure, implementation, and effectiveness.

Auditors use a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk management, control, and governance processes.

 Steps in Audit Review:

Understand Control Objectives:Auditors ensure that the control is designed to meet specific risk management objectives.

Evaluate Implementation:Check whether the control has been implemented as designed.

Test Effectiveness:Perform tests to verify that the control operates effectively and consistently over time.

 Importance of Audit Review:

Provides independent and objective assurance that the control is appropriately designed and functioning as intended.

Identifies any deficiencies or areas for improvement in the control design.

 Comparing Other Validation Methods:

Senior Management Approval:Indicates support but does not validate effectiveness.

Documentation of Control Objectives:Important for understanding intent but not validation.

Control Owner Attestation:Provides insight but lacks the independence of an audit.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual highlights the role of internal audits in validating control design and ensuring effective risk management (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.9 Control Testing and Effectiveness Evaluation)​​.

Backups are the best control to mitigate the impact of a failed IT system upgrade project that has resulted in the corruption of an organization’s asset inventory database, as they allow the organization to restore the data from a previous state and resume normal operations. Encryption, authentication, and configuration are not the best controls, as they do not address the data corruption issue, but rather the datasecurity, access, and quality issues, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 153.

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

 Importance of a Risk Register:

A risk register is a critical tool for documenting, tracking, and managing risks within an organization. It serves as a central repository for all identified risks, detailing their status, impact, likelihood, and the actions taken to mitigate them.

A regularly updated risk register demonstrates an active and ongoing risk management process, reflecting the organization's commitment to identifying and addressing risks promptly.

 Evidence of Robust Risk Management:

The risk register shows the organization's proactive approach to risk management by continuously monitoring and updating risks.

It provides transparency and accountability, allowing stakeholders to see how risks are being managed and mitigated over time.

Regular updates ensure that new risks are identified and existing risks are reassessed, indicating a dynamic and responsive risk management practice.

 Comparing Other Options:

Management-Approved Risk Dashboard:While useful for summarizing risk information, a dashboard does not provide the detailed, ongoing updates and comprehensive tracking found in a risk register.

Current Control Framework:A control framework outlines the controls in place but does not detail specific risks or their management.

Regularly Updated Risk Management Procedures:Procedures are important but do not provide the same level of detailed risk tracking and management as a risk register.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of a risk register in consolidating and tracking risk data, making it an essential component of robust risk management practices (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.6 Risk Register)​​ .

The primary goal of risk mitigation is to reduce residual risk to an acceptable level. This aligns with the principles ofRisk Treatment, ensuring that the implemented strategies effectively address identified risks without exceeding the organization's risk appetite.

Conducting a risk assessment is a critical process that helps organizations identify, evaluate, and prioritize risks that could impact their objectives. The introduction of a new product line is most likely to trigger the need for a risk assessment due to the following reasons:

Introduction of a New Product Line (Answer D):

Significance: Launching a new product involves significant changes to business processes, technologies, and possibly market dynamics. It introduces new elements that could affect the organization's risk profile.

Complexity and Uncertainty: New products often come with unknown risks and uncertainties. Understanding these risks is crucial to ensure they are managed effectively.

Impact on Operations: A new product can impact various facets of the organization, including production, supply chain, IT infrastructure, and customer support. Assessing risks helps in planning and mitigating potential disruptions.

Compliance and Regulatory Considerations: New products might have to comply with new regulations or standards, necessitating a review of associated risks.

Comparison with Other Options:

A. An incident resulting in data loss:

Purpose: While incidents like data loss are serious and require immediate response and investigation, they typically trigger incident management and post-incident reviews rather than a full risk assessment.

B. Changes in executive management:

Purpose: Changes in leadership can influence the strategic direction and priorities of the organization, but they do not inherently introduce new operational risks that necessitate an immediate risk assessment.

C. Updates to the information security policy:

Purpose: Policy updates are often based on previously identified risks and aim to mitigate them. They are more about adjusting controls rather than reassessing the risk landscape completely.

Performing a threat assessment is the best course of action for a risk practitioner upon learning that regulatory authorities have concerns with an emerging technology that the organization is considering, because it helps to identify and analyze the sources and types of threats that may exploit the vulnerabilities or weaknesses of the technology, and to estimate their likelihood and impact. A threat is a potential event or action that may cause harm or damage to the organization or its objectives, such as a natural disaster, a cyberattack, or a human error. A threat assessment is a process of systematically identifying and assessing the threats that an organization faces, and estimating their probability and severity. An emerging technology is a new or innovative technology that has the potential to disrupt or transform the existing markets, industries, or practices, such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, or biotechnology. An emerging technology may offer benefits such as competitive advantage, efficiency, or creativity, but it may also pose risks such as technical complexity, interoperability issues, regulatory uncertainty, or ethicaldilemmas. Therefore, performing a threat assessment is the best course of action, as it helps to understand and evaluate the threats and their consequences, and to determine the appropriate controls or mitigating factors to reduce or eliminate them. Redesigning key risk indicators (KRIs), updating risk responses, and conducting a SWOT analysis are all possiblecourses of action to perform after performing a threat assessment, but they are not the best course of action, as they depend on the results and recommendations of the threat assessment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 87

The data privacy manager is the best person to an application system used to process employee personal data, because they are responsible for ensuring that the organization complies with the applicable data protection laws and regulations, and that the personal data of employees are collected, stored, processed, and disposed of in a secure and ethical manner. The data privacy manager is also responsible for establishing and maintaining the data privacy policies, procedures, and controls, and for conducting data privacy impact assessments and audits. The compliance manager, the system administrator, and the human resources (HR) manager are all involved in the of the application system, but they are not the best person to it, as they do not have the primary accountability and expertise for data privacy. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

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

The best time to evaluate current control effectiveness when implementing an IT risk management program is during the risk assessment, as it involves measuring and testing the performance and adequacy of the existing controls, and identifying any control gaps ordeficiencies that may affect the risk level and response. Before defining a framework, when evaluating risk response, and when updating the risk register are not the best times, as they are more related to the design, selection, or reporting of the controls, respectively, rather than the evaluation of the control effectiveness. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

The percentage of unpatched systems is best classified as a Key Risk Indicator (KRI). KRIs are metrics used by organizations to provide an early signal of increasing risk exposures in various areas of the business. Here’s a detailed explanation:

Understanding KRIs:

Definition: KRIs are specific metrics that provide insights into the risk level of an organization. They help in identifying potential risks that could impact the business negatively if not addressed promptly.

Purpose: KRIs are used to monitor the effectiveness of risk management strategies and to provide an early warning system for emerging risks.

Percentage of Unpatched Systems as a KRI:

Indicator of Vulnerability: The percentage of unpatched systems directly indicates how vulnerable an organization is to cyber threats. Unpatched systems are a common entry point for attackers, making this metric critical for assessing the organization's exposure to cyber risks.

Impact on Security Posture: A high percentage of unpatched systems can significantly increase the likelihood of security incidents, making it a valuable metric for risk management.

Proactive Risk Management: By monitoring this KRI, organizations can take proactive measures to address vulnerabilities before they are exploited.

Comparison with Other Options:

Threat Vector: A threat vector refers to the path or means by which a threat can reach and impact an asset. It is not a metric like the percentage of unpatched systems.

Critical Success Factor (CSF): CSFs are essential elements necessary for an organization to achieve its mission. While important, they are not specific metrics used to measure risk.

Key Performance Indicator (KPI): KPIs measure how effectively an organization is achieving its key business objectives. While related, KPIs focus on performance rather than risk exposure.

 The areas to address first when classifying and prioritizing risk responses are those with high cost effectiveness ratios and high risk levels, as they represent the most optimal and urgent risk responses that can reduce the risk exposure and impact significantly with a reasonable cost. The other options are not the areas to address first, as they may indicate suboptimal or less urgent risk responses that may not align with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

The vendor must host data in a specific geographic location to ensure that the data is protected by the applicable data protection laws of the EU or the country where the data originates. This is especially important for SaaS customers who transfer personal data from the EU to third countries, as they need to comply with the GDPR and the new Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) that regulate such transfers. The vendor must also provide adequate security measures and guarantees to protect the data from unauthorized access, disclosure, or loss. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: IT Risk Mitigation, Section 5.3: IT Risk Mitigation Strategies and Approaches, Page 253; Data Protection – New EU Standard Contractual Clauses - Bodle Law.

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

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

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

The factor that primarily influences an organization’s capability to implement a risk management framework is the maturity of its risk culture, as it reflects the degree of awareness, understanding, and commitment of the organization’s stakeholders towards the risk management objectives, values, and practices, and affects the adoption and integration of the risk management framework across the organization. The other options are not the primary factors, as they are more related to the guidance, competence, or approval of the risk management framework, respectively, rather than the influence of the risk management framework. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

An increase in the number of security incidents is the most significant indicator of the need to perform a penetration test, because it suggests that the organization’s IT systems or networks are vulnerable to attacks and may not have adequate security controls in place. A penetration test is a simulated attack on an IT system or network to identify and exploit its weaknesses and evaluate its security posture. A penetration test can help to discover and remediate the vulnerabilities that may have caused or contributed to the security incidents, and to prevent or reduce the likelihood and impact of future incidents. An increase in the number of high-risk audit findings, an increase in the percentage of turnover in IT personnel, and an increase in the number of infrastructure changes are all possible indicators of the need to perform a penetration test, but they are not the most significant indicator, as they do not directly reflect the actual or potential occurrence of security incidents. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 200

The risk practitioner’s next step after identifying risk owners and responses for newly identified risk scenarios in a recent risk workshop is to update the risk register with the results, as it involves documenting and communicating the risk information and decisions, and maintaining the accuracy and completeness of the risk register. Preparing a business case for the response options, identifying resources for implementing responses, and developing a mechanism for monitoring residual risk are possible steps, but they are not the next step, as they require the prior update of the risk register with the new risk information and decisions. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

A good IT risk scenario must be aligned with a business objective. This alignment ensures that the risk scenario is relevant to the organization’s goals and can be effectively integrated into its risk management processes.

Alignment to Business Objective (Answer C):

Importance: Aligning risk scenarios with business objectives ensures that they are relevant and support the organization’s overall strategy.

Impact: This alignment helps in prioritizing risk management efforts and resources toward areas that directly affect the organization’s success.

Outcome: It leads to more effective risk management by focusing on risks that could impact key business outcomes.

Comparison with Other Options:

A. The scenario is aligned to business control processes:

Purpose: Control processes are important but secondary to business objectives.

B. The scenario is aligned to the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance:

Purpose: Important for overall risk management but not the primary characteristic of a good risk scenario.

D. The scenario is aligned to known vulnerabilities in information technology:

Purpose: While addressing vulnerabilities is important, the primary focus should be on how these vulnerabilities affect business objectives.

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

Formal acceptance of the risk is critical when the risk exposure exceeds the risk appetite, as it ensures accountability and acknowledges the decision at the appropriate level. Documenting acceptance involves communicating the potential impacts and obtaining agreement from senior stakeholders. This process aligns with theRisk Response and Reportingdomain in CRISC, emphasizing clear documentation and communication of risks for decision-making.

Local laws and regulations should be the primary consideration when assessing the risk of using Internet of Things (IoT) devices to collect and process personally identifiable information (PII), because they define the legal and ethical obligations and boundaries for the protection and privacy of PII, and the potential consequences of non-compliance or violation. IoT devices are devices that are connected to the internet and can collect, transmit, or process data, such as smart watches, cameras, sensors, or appliances. PII is information that can be used to identify, locate, or contact an individual, such as name, address, phone number, or email address. PII is considered sensitive and confidential, and may be subject to various laws and regulations that govern how it should be collected, processed, stored, shared, or disposed, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the United States. Therefore, local laws and regulations should be the primary consideration, as they provide the legal and ethical framework and guidance for the use of IoT devices to collect and process PII, and the potential risks and impacts of non-compliance or violation. Costs and benefits, security features and support, and business strategies and needs are all possible considerations when assessing the risk of using IoT devices to collect and process PII, but they are not the primary consideration, as they may vary or conflict depending on the situation or context, and may not override the local laws and regulations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

The greatest benefit of having a mature enterprise architecture (EA) in place is efficient operations, as EA provides a holistic view of the organization’s business processes, information systems, and technology infrastructure, and enables alignment, integration, and optimization of these components. Standards-based policies, audit readiness, and regulatory compliance are also benefits of EA, but they are not the greatest benefit. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 145.

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

Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure the performance of a control in reducing the causes, consequences, or likelihood of a risk. They help to evaluate the adequacy and efficiency of the internal control environment, which is the set of policies, procedures, and practices that support the achievement of organizational objectives and the management of risks. By monitoring KCIs, organizations can identify and address any gaps or weaknesses in their internal controls and ensure that they are operating as intended.

References

•ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Domain 3: Risk Response, Section 3.2.2: Control Design and Implementation

•KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva

•What is the difference between key risk indicators and key control indicators?

The best option to protect against a future recurrence of unauthorized access by a service provider’s administrator is D. Contractual requirements. Data encryption, intrusion prevention system, and two-factor authentication are all technical measures that can enhance the security of the data stored in the Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) model, but they do not prevent the service provider’s administrator from accessing the data if they have the necessary credentials, keys, or permissions. Contractual requirements, on the other hand, are legal obligations that bind the service provider to respect the customer’s privacy and confidentiality, and to limit the access to the data to only authorized and necessary personnel. Contractual requirements can also specify the penalties or remedies for any breach of contract, which can deter the service provider’s administrator from violating the terms of the agreement. Therefore, contractual requirements are the most effective way to protect against a future recurrence of unauthorized access by a service provider’s administrator12

1: What is Data Encryption? | Forcepoint 2: The elements of a contract: understanding contract requirements - Juro

•External sources of emerging threats are sources that provide information about the latest cyberattacks, hacking techniques, malware, and vulnerabilities that can affect an organization’s IT systems and data. Examples of external sources are security blogs, forums, newsletters, reports, and alerts from reputable organizations such as ISACA, Imperva, Aura, and BitSight123.

•The most useful information an organization can obtain from external sources is the indicators for detecting the presence of threats. Indicators are observable signs or patterns that can help identify, prevent, or mitigate cyberattacks. Examples of indicators are IP addresses, domain names, file hashes, network traffic, system logs, and user behavior4.

•Indicators for detecting the presence of threats are more useful than the other options because they can help an organization to:

oMonitor and analyze its IT environment for any suspicious or malicious activity

oRespond quickly and effectively to any potential or actual incidents

oReduce the impact and damage of cyberattacks

oImprove its security posture and resilience

•Solutions for eradicating emerging threats are not the most useful information because they may not be applicable or effective for every organization, depending on its specific context, needs,and resources. Moreover, solutions may not be available or known for some new or sophisticated threats.

•Cost to mitigate the risk resulting from threats is not the most useful information because it does not help an organization to identify or prevent cyberattacks. Cost is only one factor to consider when deciding how to manage IT risk, and it may not reflect the true value or impact of the threats.

•Source and identity of attackers are not the most useful information because they may not be relevant or accurate for every organization. Source and identity of attackers are often difficult to trace or verify, and they may not affect the organization’s risk level or response strategy.

References =

•Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Risk Identification, pp. 83-84

•Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 12 Month Subscription, ISACA, 2020, Question ID: 100000

The second line of defense provides oversight to ensure risks and controls are effectively managed. This includes compliance, risk management policies, and performance monitoring, aligning withRisk Governanceframeworks and enhancing the organization’s risk resilience.

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

The organizational role that should be accountable for ensuring information assets are appropriately classified is the information asset owner, as they have the authority and responsibility to define the classification, retention, and disposal requirements for the information assets they own, and to manage the risk and controls related to the information assets. The other options are not the correct roles, as they have different roles and responsibilities related to the protection, governance, or maintenance of the information assets, respectively, rather than the classification of the information assets. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

Reviewing the risk register change log is the best way for management to validate whether risk response activities have been completed, because it helps to track and monitor the changes and updates that have been made to the risk register, and to verify that the risk response activities have been implemented and closed. A risk register is a document that captures, identifies, assesses and tracks risk as part of the risk management process4. A risk register change log is a record that documents the date, description, and reason for each change or update that is made to the risk register. A risk response activity is an action or task that is performed to implement the chosen risk response strategy for a specific risk, such as avoid, transfer, mitigate, or accept. Reviewing the risk register change log is the best way, as it helps to ensure that the risk register is accurate and current, and that the risk response activities have been completed and reported. Reviewing evidence of risk acceptance, control effectiveness test results, and control design documentation are all possible ways to validate whether risk response activities have been completed, but they are not the best way, as they may not cover all the risk response activities, and they may not reflect the changes or updates in the risk register. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 101

Business impact analysis (BIA) is the most useful analysis for prioritizing risk scenarios associated with loss of IT assets, because it evaluates the potential consequences of disruption tocritical business functions and processes. BIA helps to identify the most significant risks and the most urgent recovery needs. SWOT analysis, cost-benefit analysis, and root cause analysis are all useful tools for different purposes, but they do not directly address the impact of risk scenarios on business continuity and resilience. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 143

 Developing IT Risk Scenarios:

Risk scenarios are hypothetical events that describe potential threats and their impact on business operations. These scenarios are essential for identifying and assessing risks.

 Importance of Potential Impact Events:

Events that could potentially impact the business provide the most useful information for developing risk scenarios because they directly relate to the organization’s objectives and operations.

Understanding these events helps in crafting realistic and relevant risk scenarios that can guide risk assessment and mitigation efforts.

 Components of Risk Scenarios:

Threat Actors:Identify who might exploit vulnerabilities.

Threat Events:Describe the specific events that could impact the business.

Business Impact:Assess how these events would affect business operations, finances, reputation, etc.

 Using Impact Events for Scenario Development:

Focusing on events that could disrupt critical business functions ensures that the scenarios are relevant and actionable.

It enables the risk practitioner to communicate the potential consequences effectively to stakeholders and prioritize mitigation efforts accordingly.

 Comparing Other Information Sources:

Published Vulnerabilities:Useful for understanding specific threats but may not directly relate to business impact.

Threat Actors:Important for identifying potential sources of risk but not sufficient alone for scenario development.

IT Assets:Relevant for risk assessment but secondary to understanding potential impact events.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the importance of considering events that could impact the business when developing risk scenarios (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4 Risk Scenario Development)​​.

A risk register is a document that contains information about potential cybersecurity risks that could threaten a project’s success, or even the business itself2. Therefore, it is important to protect the confidentiality and integrity of the risk register from unauthorized or inappropriate access, modification, or disclosure. One way to do this is to implement role-based access, which is a method of restricting access to the risk register based on the roles or responsibilities of the users1. This way, only authorized users who need to view or edit the risk register for legitimate purposes can do so, and the access rights can be revoked or modified as needed. This would most effectively reduce the potential for inappropriate exposure of vulnerabilities documented in the risk register. The other options are not as effective or feasible as option C, as they do not address the need to balance the security and availability of the risk register. Option A, limiting access to senior management only, would compromise the availability and usefulness of the risk register, as other stakeholders such as project managers, risk owners, or auditors may need to access therisk register for risk identification, analysis, response, or monitoring purposes3. Option B, encrypting the risk register, would enhance the security of the risk register, but it would not prevent authorized users from exposing the vulnerabilities to unauthorized parties, either intentionally or unintentionally. Encryption also adds complexity and cost to the risk register management process, and may affect the performance or usability of the risk register4. Option D, requiring users to sign a confidentiality agreement, would rely on the compliance and ethics of the users, but it would not prevent or detect any breaches of the agreement. A confidentiality agreement also does not specify the access rights or roles of the users, and may not be legally enforceable in some cases5.

Verifying the deficiency and then notifying the business process owner is the best response when a potential IT control deficiency has been identified. This is because verifying the deficiency can help confirm the existence, nature, and extent of the deficiency, as well as its root causes and impacts. Notifying the business process owner can help ensure that the deficiency is communicated to the person who is responsible for the process and its outcomes, and who has the authority and accountability to take appropriate actions to address the deficiency. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk response techniques is to report the risk to the relevant stakeholders, such as the business process owners1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, verifying the deficiency and then notifying the business process owner is the correct answer to this question2.

Remediating and reporting the deficiency to the enterprise risk committee or senior executive management are not the best responses when a potential IT control deficiency has been identified. These are possible actions that can be taken after the deficiency has been verified and notified to the business process owner, but they are not the first or immediate responses. Remediating the deficiency without verifying it can lead to ineffective or inappropriate solutions, as well as wasted time and resources. Reporting the deficiency to the enterprise risk committee or senior executive management without notifying the business process owner cancreate confusion, conflict, or delay in the risk response process, as well as undermine the ownership and accountability of the business process owner.

Key control indicators are designed to measure the operational effectiveness of controls, specifically their contribution to defense-in-depth strategies. This helps assess if controls are functioning as intended to mitigate identified risks, aligning withControl Effectiveness Monitoring.

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks what the most important update for keeping the risk register current is.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Modifying organizational structures when lines of business merge:Reflects significant changes in the organization that impact risk profiles.

B. Adding new risk assessment results annually:Important but periodic.

C. Retiring risk scenarios that have been avoided:Necessary but not as impactful as major organizational changes.

D. Changing risk owners due to employee turnover:Important but secondary to major structural changes.

 Detailed Explanation:

Organizational Changes:When lines of business merge, it can significantly alter the risk landscape, introducing new risks and changing the impact and likelihood of existing ones. Updating the risk register to reflect these changes is crucial for accurate risk management.

Impact on Risk Profiles:Mergers and acquisitions can affect every aspect of an organization, from operational processes to regulatory compliance, making it essential to update the risk register accordingly.

The data owner should be accountable for ensuring that media containing financial information are adequately destroyed per an organization’s data disposal policy, as they have the authority and responsibility to define the classification, retention, and disposal requirements for the data they own. The compliance manager, the data architect, and the chief information officer (CIO) are not the best choices, as they have different roles and responsibilities related to data governance, design, and strategy, respectively, but they do not own the data. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

The most important factor for management to consider when deciding whether to invest in an IT initiative that exceeds management’s risk appetite is C. Risk tolerance1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that management is willing to allow for any specific risk as the enterprise pursues its objectives. Risk tolerance reflects the degree of uncertainty that an organization is prepared to accept in relation to achieving its goals2

When an IT initiative exceeds management’s risk appetite, it means that the potential benefits of the initiative are outweighed by the potential negative consequences or losses that could result from the initiative. However, management may still decide to invest in the initiative if the level of uncertainty or variation is within the organization’s risk tolerance. For example, management may accept a higher level of risk for a strategic or innovative initiative that could provide a competitive advantage or a significant return on investment3

 Understanding Business Impact Analysis (BIA):

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

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

 Quantifying Loss Impact:

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

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

 Comparing Other Techniques:

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

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

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

 References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The primary objective of aggregating the impact of IT risk scenarios and reflecting the results in the enterprise risk register is to ensure IT risk impact can be compared to the IT risk appetite, as it enables the organization to measure and evaluate the overall level and exposure of the IT risk, and to align and prioritize the IT risk response and strategy with the organizational objectives and regulations. The other options are not the primary objectives, as they are more related to the communication, assignment, or assessment of the IT risk scenarios, respectively, rather than the aggregation or reflection of the IT risk scenarios. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

 The ultimate goal of conducting a privacy impact analysis (PIA) is to identify gaps in data protection controls, as it involves assessing the privacy risks and impacts of collecting, using, storing, and disclosing personally identifiable information (PII), and determining the adequacy and effectiveness of the existing or proposed controls to mitigate those risks and impacts. Developing a customer notification plan, identifying PII, and determining gaps in data identification processes are possible steps or outcomes of conducting a PIA, but they are not the ultimate goal, as they do not address the root cause or solution of the privacy issues. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

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

Physical Destruction:

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

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

Comparison with Other Methods:

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

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

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

Security Best Practices:

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

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

The most important information for the risk practitioner to communicate to senior management for contract negotiation purposes when the organization wants to transfer risk by purchasing cyber insurance is the current annualized loss expectancy report, as it provides an estimate of the potential financial loss or impact that theorganization may incur due to a cyber risk event in a given year, and helps to determine the optimal coverage and premium of the cyber insurance. The other options are not the most important information, as they are more related to the audit, asset, or industry aspects of the cyber risk, respectively, rather than the financial aspect of the cyber risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

According to the CRISC exam content outline2, one of the tasks of a risk practitioner is to “report on risk, in line with organizational reporting requirements, to enable decision making andescalation”. Therefore, the first thing that the risk practitioner should do after discovering a policy violation is to report the incident to the appropriate authority, such as the IT security manager or the risk management committee. This will ensurethat the incident is properly documented, investigated, and resolved, and that any potential impact or consequences are minimized.

The other options are not the first actions that the risk practitioner should take. Planning a security awareness session (B) may be a preventive measure to avoid future incidents, but it does not address the current one. Assessing the new risk © may be part of the risk response process, but it should be done after reporting the incident and gathering more information. Updating the risk register (D) may be a result of the risk assessment and response, but it should not be done before reporting the incident and following the organizational procedures.

Establishing executive management support is the most important success factor when introducing risk management in an organization. This is because executive management support can help ensure that risk management is aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, as well as provide the necessary resources, authority, and accountability for risk management activities. Executive management support can also help foster a risk-aware culture,promote stakeholder engagement, and facilitate risk communication and reporting. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key elements of IT governance is to obtain executive management support and commitment for risk management1. According to the web search results, executive management support is a critical success factor for risk management in various contexts and industries234.

Business Impact Analysis (BIA):

Objective: The primary objective of a BIA is to identify and evaluate the effects of disruptions on business operations. This includes determining the criticality of IT assets that support key business processes.

Risk Mitigation: By identifying critical IT assets, organizations can prioritize risk mitigation efforts to ensure that key business processes remain operational during and after disruptions.

Appropriate IT Risk Mitigation:

Critical Asset Identification: Knowing which IT assets are essential allows for targeted risk mitigation strategies. This ensures resources are allocated efficiently to protect the most important systems.

Impact Assessment: Understanding the impact of potential disruptions on critical IT assets helps in developing effective disaster recovery and continuity plans.

Comparison with Other Options:

Validating Critical IT Risk: While important, this is typically part of a broader BIA process rather than its primary objective.

Assigning Accountability for IT Risk: This is crucial for governance but does not directly enable risk mitigation actions.

Defining IT Risk-aware Culture: Important for overall risk management but does not directly influence specific mitigation actions.

Best Practices:

Detailed Asset Inventory: Maintain an up-to-date inventory of IT assets and their dependencies on business processes.

Regular Updates and Reviews: Continuously update the BIA to reflect changes in the IT environment and business processes.

The most important course of action for a risk practitioner when reviewing the results of control performance monitoring is to validate whether the controls effectively mitigate risk, as it involves verifying and testing the adequacy and performance of the controls, and identifying any control gaps or deficiencies that may affect the risk level and response. The other options are not the most important courses of action, as they are more related to the evaluation, confirmation, or analysis of the risk profile, compliance, or indicators, respectively, rather than the validation of the control effectiveness. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

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

Integrity is the property of data that ensures its accuracy, completeness, and consistency2. If concurrent update transactions to an account are not processed properly, the integrity of the data may be compromised, as it may lead to concurrency problems such as lost update, unrepeatable read, or phantom read3. These problems can cause the data to be incorrect, incomplete, or inconsistent, which may affect the reliability and validity of the data. Therefore, option D is the correct answer, as it reflects the impact of improper concurrent update transactions on the data integrity. The other options are not correct, as they do not directly relate to the effect of concurrent update transactions on the data. Option A, confidentiality, is the property of data that ensures its protection from unauthorized access or disclosure2. Concurrent update transactions do not necessarily affect the confidentiality of the data, as they do not involve exposing the data to unauthorized parties. Option B, accountability, is the property of data that ensures its traceability and auditability2. Concurrent update transactions do not necessarily affect the accountability of the data, as they do not involve losing the records or logs of the data transactions. Option C, availability, is the property of data that ensures its accessibility and usability2. Concurrent update transactions do not necessarily affect the availability of the data, as they do not involve preventing the access or use of the data.

Updating the risk likelihood in the risk register is appropriate when an improved control, such as an automated interface, is implemented. This change affects the probability of the risk occurring, thus reflecting the enhanced control environment.

Availability requirements specify the expected level of service and the consequences of non-compliance. They are essential for ensuring that the SaaS provider can meet the business continuity and disaster recovery needs of the customer. Codifying them in the contract creates a clear and enforceable agreement that protects both parties.

References

•ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Domain 3: Risk Response, Section 3.2.3: Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery

•Guideline for Completing Disaster Recovery Plans for SaaS and PaaS Applications (Yale-MSS-3.1 GD.02)

•How to Build a SaaS Disaster Recovery Plan | Acsense

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the risk register is the most useful component of the review of the overall risk profile from the targeted organization, as it provides a comprehensive and up-to-date record of the identified risks, their likelihood and impact, their risk response actions, and their residual risk levels. The risk register helps to:

Understand the current and potential threats and vulnerabilities that may affect the targeted organization’s objectives and performance

Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management processes and controls implemented by the targeted organization

Identify the gaps or weaknesses in the risk management practices and capabilities of the targeted organization

Assess the compatibility and alignment of the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the targeted organization with the acquiring organization

Estimate the value and benefits of the acquisition and the potential risks and costs involved

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 38-391

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 ownauditors, to verify and validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the securitycontrols. 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The best way to justify the risk mitigation actions recommended in a risk assessment would be to focus on the business drivers, which are the factors that influence the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

Focusing on the business drivers means aligning the risk mitigation actions with the organization’s strategic goals, priorities, and values, and demonstrating how the actions will support or enhance the organization’s capabilities, opportunities, and competitive advantage12.

Focusing on the business drivers also means communicating the benefits, costs, and trade-offs of the risk mitigation actions to the relevant stakeholders, and showing how the actions will address the organization’s risk appetite, tolerance, and exposure12.

The other options are not the best way to justify the risk mitigation actions, but rather possible sources of information or guidance that may support the justification. For example:

Aligning with audit results is a way to validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk mitigation actions, and to identify any gaps or weaknesses that need improvement34. However, audit results may not reflect the organization’s current or future business drivers, and may not capture the full scope or impact of the risk mitigation actions34.

Benchmarking with competitor’s actions is a way to compare the organization’s risk mitigation actions with the best practices or standards of the industry or market, and to identify any areas of improvement or differentiation56. However, competitor’s actions may not be suitable or applicable for the organization’s specific context, needs, or challenges, and may not align with the organization’s business drivers56.

Referencing best practice is a way to adopt the proven or accepted methods or techniques for risk mitigation, and to ensure the quality and consistency of the risk mitigation actions78. However, best practice may not be the most optimal or innovative solution for the organization’s unique situation, and may not address the organization’s business drivers78. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

4: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

5: Benchmarking IT Risk Management Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 4, 2017

6: Benchmarking: A Tool for Improving IT Risk Management, ISACA Now Blog, March 27, 2017

7: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2018

8: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Now Blog, January 9, 2018

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

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

Optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities

Enhance the value and performance of the organization

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

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

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

An IT risk register is a document that records and tracks 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 register is a valuable tool for managing andcommunicating IT risks and their impact on the organization’s objectives and operations. However, an IT risk register may also contain sensitive or confidential information that should not be disclosed or shared with unauthorized or irrelevant parties, as it may compromise the security, privacy, or reputation of the organization or its stakeholders. Therefore, the risk manager’s best approach to the request from the head of a business operations department to review the entire IT risk register is to determine the purpose of the request before sharing the register. This is a technique to understand and evaluate the reason and the need for the request, as well as the scope and the level of access that the requester requires or expects. By determining the purpose of therequest, the risk manager can ensure that the request is legitimate, appropriate, and relevant, and that the requester has a clear and valid interest or stake in the IT risk register. The risk manager can also ensure that the request is aligned with the organization’s policies, procedures, and standards for IT risk management and information sharing. The risk manager can also use the purpose of the request to decide what and how much information to share with the requester, and what conditions or restrictions to apply, such as confidentiality, accuracy, or timeliness. The other options are not the best approaches to the request from the head of a business operations department to review the entire IT risk register, as they may be premature, unnecessary, or ineffective. Escalating to senior management is a technique to involve or inform the higher-level authorities or decision makers about the request, which may be useful or required in some cases, but it may not be the first or the best step to take, as it may delay or complicate the process, or undermine the risk manager’s authority or responsibility. Requiring a nondisclosure agreement is a technique to protect the confidentiality and integrity of the information in the IT risk register by legally binding the requester to not disclose or misuse the information. However, a nondisclosure agreement may not be needed or appropriate in every case, and it may not prevent or address other issues or risks related to the information sharing, such as relevance, accuracy, or timeliness. Sanitizing portions of the register is a technique to remove or redact the sensitive or confidential information from the IT risk register before sharing it with the requester, which may be necessary or prudent in some cases, but it may not be sufficient or satisfactory, as it may affect the completeness, usefulness, or validity of the information, or raise questions or concerns from the requester.

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

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.

An IT risk and control self-assessment (RCSA) is a process that helps organizations identify and evaluate operational risks and assess the effectiveness of their control measures12. It is a structured approach that involves identifying, assessing, mitigating, and monitoring risks across all levels of an organization12.

A report to senior management is a document that summarizes and communicates the results and findings of the RCSA, and provides recommendations and action plans for improving the risk management and control processes34.

The most important aspect of an IT risk and control self-assessment to include in a report to senior management is an increase in residual risk, which is the risk remaining after risk treatment, and represents the exposure or potential impact of the risk on the organization’s objectives56.

An increase in residual risk is the most important aspect because it indicates the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or tolerate, and the gap between the current and desired risk profile56.

An increase in residual risk is also the most important aspect because it requires the attention and decision of the senior management, who are responsible for defining the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, and criteria, and for ensuring that the residual risk is within the acceptable range56.

The other options are not the most important aspects, but rather possible components or outcomes of an IT risk and control self-assessment that may support or complement the report to senior management. For example:

Changes in control design are components of an IT risk and control self-assessment that involve modifying or updating the control measures to address the changes in the risk environment or the organization’s objectives56. However, changes in control design are not the most importantaspect because they do not measure or reflect the residual risk, which is the ultimate goal of the risk treatment56.

A decrease in the number of key controls is an outcome of an IT risk and control self-assessment that indicates the improvement or optimization of the control processes, and the reduction of the complexity or redundancy of the control measures56. However, a decrease in the number of key controls is not the most important aspect because it does not indicate or imply the residual risk, which may depend on other factors such as the effectiveness or efficiency of the controls56.

Changes in control ownership are components of an IT risk and control self-assessment that involve assigning or reassigning the responsibility and accountability for the control processes to the appropriate individuals or groups within the organization56. However,changes in control ownership are not the most important aspect because they do not affect or determine the residual risk, which is independent of the control owners56. References =

1: Risk and control self-assessment - KPMG Global1

2: Control Self Assessments - PwC2

3: How-To Guide: Implementing Risk Control Self-Assessment Steps4

4: RISK MANAGEMENT SELF-ASSESSMENT TEMPLATE - Smartsheet5

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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 andinterdependencies 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

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

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

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 asmart 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 anetwork. 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

 The business application owner should have the authority to accept the associated risk, because they are responsible for the performance and outcomes of the critical application, and they understand the business requirements, expectations, and impact of the application. The business application owner can also evaluate the trade-offs between the potential benefits and costs of the application, and the potential risks and consequences of a disruption or failure of the application. The business application owner can also communicate and justify their risk acceptance decision to the senior management and other stakeholders, and ensure that the risk is monitored and reviewed regularly. The other options are less appropriate to have the authority to accept the associated risk. The business continuity director is responsible for overseeing the planning and execution of the business continuity strategy, which includes ensuring the availability andresilience of the critical business processes and applications. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. The disaster recovery manager is responsible for managing the recovery and restoration of the IT systems and applications in the event of a disaster or disruption. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. The data center manager is responsible for managing the operation and maintenance of the data center infrastructure, which includes providing the physical and environmental security, power, cooling, and network connectivity for the IT systems and applications. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 181

An intrusion detection system (IDS) is a network security tool that monitors and analyzes network traffic for signs of malicious or suspicious activity, such as unauthorized access, data exfiltration, malware infection, or denial-of-service attack. An IDS can detect and alert the organization to potential threats based on predefined rules or signatures, or based on anomalies or deviations from normal network behavior. An IDS can also generate logs that record the details of the network events and incidents, such as the source, destination, content, and context of the network traffic. By analyzing the IDS logs, the organization can identify and validate the suspicious network activity, and determine its scope, impact, and root cause. The organization can also use the IDS logs to support the incident response and remediation process, and to improve the network security and resilience. The other options are less effective ways to ensure that suspicious network activity is identified. Analyzing server logs can provide some information about the network activity, but it may not be sufficient or timely to detect and validate the suspicious or malicious activity, as server logs only capture the events or activities that occur on the server, and not on the entire network. Using a third-party monitoring provider can help to outsource the network monitoring and analysis function, but it may not be the best option, as it may introduce additional risks, such as data privacy, vendor reliability, or service quality issues. Coordinating events with appropriate agencies can help to share information and resources with other organizations or authorities, such as law enforcement, regulators, or industry peers, but it may not be the best option, as it may depend on the availability and cooperation of theagencies, and it may not be feasible or desirable to disclose the network activity to external parties. References = Monitoring for Suspicious Network Activity: Key Tips to Secure Your Network 1

The business process owner should be the risk owner for the risk exposure due to weak technical controls in a newly implemented HR system, because they are responsible for the performance and outcomes of the HR business process, and they understand the business requirements, expectations, and impact of the HR system. The business process owner can also evaluate the trade-offs between the potential benefits and costs of the HR system, and the potential risks and consequences of a failure or breach of the system. The business process owner can also communicate and justify their risk acceptance or mitigation decision to the senior management and other stakeholders, and ensure that the risk is monitored and reviewed regularly. The other options are less appropriate to be the risk owner for this risk exposure. The chief risk officer is responsible for overseeing the enterprise-wide risk management framework and process, which includesensuring the identification, assessment, and reporting of risks. However, they are not the owner of the HR system or the HR business process, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept or mitigate the risk on behalf of the business. The project manager is responsible for managing the implementation of the HR system, which includes ensuring the delivery of the system within the scope, time, and budget constraints. However, they are not the owner of the HR system or the HR business process, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept or mitigate the risk on behalf of the business. The chief information officer is responsible for managing the IT function and resources, which includes providing the technical support and security for the HR system. However, they are not the owner of the HRsystem or the HR business process, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept or mitigate the risk on behalf of the business. References = Getting risk ownership right 1

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2: 10 security risks of wearables | CSO Online2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

5: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA3

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

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

Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US

A risk heat map is a graphical tool that displays the results of a risk analysis in a matrix format, using colors and symbols to indicate the level and priority of the risks. A risk heat map can show the distribution and comparison of the risks based on various criteria, such as likelihood, impact, category, source, etc.

A risk heat map is most commonly used as part of an IT risk analysis to facilitate risk assessment, which is the process of determining the significance and urgency of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Risk assessment involves measuring and comparing the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their magnitude and importance.

A risk heat map can help to facilitate risk assessment by providing a visual and intuitive representation of the risk profile, and highlighting the most critical and relevant risks that need to be addressed or monitored. A risk heat map can also help to communicate and report the riskanalysis results to different stakeholders, and to support the decision making and planning for the risk response and treatment.

The other options are not the most common uses of a risk heat map as part of an IT risk analysis, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of a risk heat map, which is to facilitate risk assessment.

Risk identification is the process of finding and describing the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Risk identification involves defining the risk sources, events, causes, and impacts, and documenting them in a risk register. A risk heat map is not commonly used to facilitate risk identification, because it does not provide the detailed and comprehensive information that is needed to identify and describe the risks, and it may not cover all the relevant or potential risks that may exist or emerge.

Risk treatment is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate actions or plans to address the risks that have been identified, analyzed, and evaluated. Risk treatment involves choosing one of the following types of risk responses: mitigate, transfer, avoid, or accept. A risk heat map is not commonly used to facilitate risk treatment, because it does not provide the specific and feasible information that is needed to select and implement the risk responses, and it may not reflect the cost-benefit or feasibility analysis of the risk responses.

Risk communication is the process of exchanging and sharing the information and knowledge about the risks and their responses among the relevant stakeholders. Risk communication involves informing, consulting, and involving the stakeholders in the risk management process, and ensuring that they understand and agree on the risk objectives, criteria, and outcomes. A risk heat map is not commonly used to facilitate risk communication, because it does not provide the complete and accurate information that is needed to communicate and share the risks and their responses, and it may not address the different needs, expectations, and perspectives of the stakeholders. 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 169

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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 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

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 howefficiently the IAM process prevents or resolves them. References = Top Identity and Access Management Metrics 

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), risk management strategies are primarily adopted to achieve acceptable residual risk levels, which are the remaining risk levels after implementing risk response actions. Residual risk levels should be aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance, which are the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives and the acceptable variation in outcomes related to specific performance measures linked to objectives. Risk management strategies are the approaches or methods used to address risks, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, sharing, or acceptance. Risk management strategies should be based on a cost-benefit analysis of the alternatives available and the value of the assets at risk.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 166-1691

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Detailed Explanation:Real-time monitoring is adetective 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.

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 thephishing 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

 Risk impact is the potential loss or damage that a risk event can cause to an organization. Risk impact can be expressed in qualitative or quantitative terms, such as financial, reputational, operational, or legal. A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the key information about the identified risks, such as their description, likelihood, impact, response, and status. A risk register helps an organization to monitor and manage its risks effectively and efficiently. When there is a change in the external or internal environment that affects the organization’s risks, such as new regulations, the risk register should be updated to reflect this change. The most important element of the risk register to update in this case is the risk impact, because the new regulations have significantly increased the penalties for data breaches, which means that the potential loss or damage that a data breach can cause to the organization has also increased. By updating the risk impact, the organization can reassess the severity and priority of the data breach risk, and adjust its risk response accordingly. The other elements of the risk register are less important toupdate in this case. The risk trend shows the direction and rate of change of the risk over time, which may or may not be affected by the new regulations. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, which is unlikely to change due to the new regulations. The risk likelihood is the probability of a risk event occurring, which is also independent of the new regulations. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

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 criticalsystems 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

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

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

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual

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

An 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 toensure 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

 The results of risk analyses should be presented in quantitative or qualitative terms based primarily on the requirements of management, because they are the intended audience and users of the risk information, and they have the authority and responsibility to make risk-based decisions. The requirements of management may vary depending on the purpose, scope, and context of the risk analysis, and the level of detail, accuracy, and reliability that they need. Quantitative risk analysis uses numerical data and mathematical models to estimate theprobability and impact of risks, and to express the risk exposure and value in monetary or other measurable units. Qualitative risk analysis uses descriptive data and subjective judgments to assess the likelihood and severity of risks, and to rank the risks according to their relative importance or priority. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, and they can be used separately or together, depending on the situation and the availability of data and resources. However, the primary factor that determines the choice of the method is the requirements of management, as they are the ones who will use the risk information to support their objectives, strategies, and actions. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 141

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

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

Detailed Explanation:Risk transferinvolves 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: ISO - ISO 31000 — Risk management1

2: Risk Management Standards2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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