CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control Question and Answers

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

The best way to ensure that information system controls are effective is to test them periodically. Testing controls periodically helps to verify that the controls are operating as intended, and that they are aligned with the enterprise’s objectives, policies, and standards. Testing controls periodically also helps to identify any gaps, weaknesses, or deficiencies in the controls, and to implement corrective actions or improvements. Responding promptly to control exceptions, implementing compensating controls, and automating manual controls are good practices, but they are not the best way to ensure control effectiveness. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.2, page 1071

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 641.

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

The most important characteristic of an effective risk management program is that risk ownership is assigned. Risk ownership is the accountability and authority to manage a risk1. Assigning risk ownership means identifying and assigning the person or entity who is responsible for evaluating, treating, monitoring, and reporting on a specific risk2. Assigning risk ownership is essential for ensuring that the risk management program works effectively and efficiently, as it helps to:

Clarify the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups involved in risk management and internal control;

Ensure that the risks are managed in accordance with the organization’s objectives, strategies, and risk appetite;

Provide guidance and support to the risk owners in identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks;

Monitor and evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the risk owners and the risk response actions;

Communicate and report on the risk status and issues to the relevant stakeholders and authorities. The other options are not the most important characteristic of an effective risk management program, as they are either less relevant or less specific than assigning risk ownership. Risk response plans are documented. This option is a consequence or outcome of an effective risk management program, not a characteristic of it. Risk response plans are the actions or measures that are taken to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk3. Documenting risk response plans means recording and maintaining the details and outcomes of the risk response actions, such as the objectives, scope, resources, timelines, performance indicators, and results4. Documenting risk response plans can help to improve the consistency and transparency of the risk management process, as well as to support the monitoring and evaluation of the risk response actions. However, documenting risk response plans is not the most important characteristic of an effective risk management program, as it does not address the accountability and authority for managing the risk. Controls are mapped to key risk scenarios. This option is a specific or narrow example of an effective risk management program, not a general or broad characteristic of it. Controls are the measures or actions that are taken to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk, or to increase the likelihood or impact of an opportunity5. Mapping controls to key risk scenarios means linking the controls to the specific situations or events that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance6. Mapping controls to key risk scenarios can help to enhance the design and implementation of the controls, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls in mitigating the risk. However, mapping controls to key risk scenarios is not the most important characteristic of an effective risk management program, as it does not cover the other aspects of risk management, such as risk identification, assessment, treatment, and monitoring. Key risk indicators are defined. This option is a component or element of an effective risk management program, not a characteristic of it. Key risk indicators are the metrics that measure the level and trend of a risk that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance7. Defining key risk indicators means establishing and maintaining the criteria and methods for measuring and reporting on the risk8. Defining key risk indicators can help to enhance the risk identification, assessment, and reporting processes, as well as to support the risk decision making and prioritization. However, defining key risk indicators is not the most important characteristic of an effective risk management program, as it does not indicate the accountability and authority for managing the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 85.

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

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

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

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

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

Facilitate the implementation of corrective actions and risk mitigation strategies

Promote accountability and transparency in the risk management process

Enhance the security awareness and culture within the organization

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

The organization’s risk appetite and tolerance are the most important topics to cover in a risk awareness training for senior management. 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 level of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is prepared to accept. Senior management plays a key role in defining and communicating the risk appetite and tolerance, as well as ensuring that they are aligned with the organization’s strategy, culture, and values. By covering these topics in the training session, the risk practitioner can help senior management understand and articulate the risk preferences and boundaries of the organization, as well as monitor and adjust them as needed. The other options are not the most important topics to cover in a risk awareness training for senior management, although they may be relevant and useful. The organization’s strategic risk management projects are specific initiatives or activities that aim to identify, assess, and treat risks that may affect the organization’s objectives. Senior management roles and responsibilities are the duties and expectations that senior management has in relation to risk management, such as providing leadership, oversight, and support. Senior management allocation of risk management resources is the process of assigning and prioritizing the human, financial, and technical resources that are needed to implement and maintain risk management activities. These topics are more operational and tactical than strategic and may vary depending on the context and scope of the risk management function. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 40-411; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 732

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

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. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the level and impact of risks. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. The failure of the data loss prevention (DLP) system to detect outgoing emails containing credit card data would most impact the residual risk, because it would increase the likelihood and impact of data leakage, data loss, and data exfiltration incidents. These incidents could cause financial, reputational, legal, and regulatory damages to the organization. The failure of the DLP system would also affect the KRIs, as they would show a higher level of risk exposure and a lower level of control effectiveness. However, the KRIs are not the risk itself, but rather the indicators of the risk. The failure of the DLP system would not directly impact the inherent risk or the risk appetite, as they are independent of the controls. The inherent risk would remain the same, as it is based on the nature and value of the data and the threats and vulnerabilities that exist. The risk appetite would also remain the same, as it is based on the organization’s culture, strategy, and stakeholder expectations. Therefore, the most impacted factor would be 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

 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

The primary objective of promoting a risk-aware culture within an organization is enabling risk-based decision making, because this helps the organization to achieve its goals and objectives while managing its risks effectively and efficiently. A risk-aware culture is one where everyone understands the organization’s approach to risk, takes personal responsibility to manage risk in everything they do, and encourages others to follow their example. A risk-aware culture also fosters communication, collaboration, and learning about risk across the organization. By promoting a risk-aware culture, the organization can empower its employees to make informed and balanced decisions that consider both the potential benefits and the potential risks of their actions. This can enhance the organization’s performance, resilience, and competitiveness in a dynamic and uncertain environment. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Top Identity and Access Management Metrics

KPI-driven approach to Identity & Access Management - Elimity

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk Assessment for the Production Process1

2: Risk Assessment for Industrial Equipment2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the next course of action when an organization has determined a risk scenario is outside the defined risk tolerance level is to identify risk responses, which are the actions or measures taken to address the risk. Identifying risk responses helps to:

Reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk to an acceptable level

Align the risk response with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

Optimize the value and benefits of the risk response

Balance the costs and efforts of the risk response with the potential losses or damages caused by the risk

Coordinate and communicate the risk response with the relevant stakeholders

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

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

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

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

Prioritize the threats based on their likelihood and impact

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

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

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

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 important aspect 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The 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

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

A control deficiency is a weakness or flaw in the design or implementation of a control that reduces its effectiveness or efficiency in achieving its intended objective or mitigating the risk that it is designed to address. A control deficiency may be caused by various factors, such as human error, system failure, process inefficiency, resource limitation, etc.

When determining which control deficiencies are most significant, the most useful information would be the risk analysis results, which are the outcomes or outputs of the risk analysis process that measures and compares the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizes them based on their significance and urgency. The risk analysis results can help to determine which control deficiencies are most significant by providing the following information:

The level and priority of the risks that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization if they materialize.

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

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

The other options are not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that the risk analysis results provide, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the organization.

An exception handling policy is a policy that defines and describes the procedures and guidelines for dealing with the situations or circumstances that deviate from the normal or expected operation or functionality of a control, and that may require special or alternative actions or measures to address or resolve them. An exception handling policy can provide useful information on how to handle or manage the control deficiencies, but it is not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the level and priority of the risks that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization.

A vulnerability assessment is an assessment that identifies and evaluates the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A vulnerability assessment can provide useful information on the existence and severity of the control deficiencies, but it is not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the likelihood and impact of the risk scenarios that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization.

A benchmarking assessment is an assessment that compares and contrasts the organization’s performance, practices, or processes with those of other organizations or industry standards, and identifies the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A benchmarking assessment can provide useful information on the best practices or improvement areas for the organization, but it is not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the level and priority of the risks that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 176

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

 The best method to identify unnecessary controls is reviewing system functionalities associated with business processes, because this can help to determine whether the controls are relevant, effective, and efficient for the current business needs and objectives. System functionalities are the capabilities and features of IT systems that support the execution and performance of business processes. Business processes are the set of interrelated activities that transform inputs into outputs to deliver value to customers or stakeholders. By reviewing system functionalities associated with business processes, an organization can assess whether the controls are aligned with the process requirements, expectations, and outcomes, and whether they add value or create waste. The review can also identify any gaps, overlaps, redundancies, or conflicts among the controls, and any changes or improvements that are needed to optimize the controls. The other options are less effective methods to identify unnecessary controls. Evaluating the impact of removing existing controls can help to measure the benefits and costs of the controls, but it does not address the root causes or sources of the unnecessary controls. Evaluating existing controls against audit requirements can help to ensure compliance and assurance, but it does not consider the business context or purpose of the controls. Monitoring existing key risk indicators (KRIs) can help to measure the level and impact of risks, but it does not evaluate the suitability or adequacy of the controls. References = Surveying Staff to Identify Unnecessary Internal Controls - Methodology and Results 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Data Processing - Wikipedia1

2: Data Processing: Definition, Steps, and Types2

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

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

5: Data Custodian - Wikipedia5

6: Data Custodian: Definition, Role & Responsibilities6

: Data Owner - Wikipedia

: Data Owner: Definition, Role & Responsibilities

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IT and business misalignment is the risk that the IT objectives, plans, and activities are not aligned with the business goals, needs, and expectations. This can result in wasted resources, missed opportunities, poor performance, and customer dissatisfaction. One of the best ways to mitigate this risk is to involve the business process owner in IT strategy. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for a specific business process and its outcomes. By involving the business process owner in IT strategy, the organization can ensure that the IT initiatives and solutions are relevant, effective, and beneficial for the business process and its stakeholders. The business process owner can also provide valuable input, feedback, and support for the IT strategy and its implementation. The other options are not the best ways to mitigate the risk associated with IT and business misalignment, although they may be helpful and complementary. Establishing business key performance indicators (KPIs) is a technique to measure and monitor the achievement of business objectives and outcomes. However, KPIs do not necessarily ensure that the IT strategy is aligned with the business strategy or that the IT activities support the business activities. Introducing an established framework for IT architecture is a method to design and implement the IT infrastructure, systems, and services in a consistent and coherent manner. However, an IT architecture framework does not guarantee that the IT architecture is aligned with the business architecture or that the IT capabilities meet the business requirements. Establishing key risk indicators (KRIs) is a tool to monitor and communicate the level of exposure to a given risk or the potential impact of a risk. However, KRIs do not directly address the risk of IT and business misalignment or the actions needed to align them. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 76

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture1

2: Key risk indicator - Wikipedia2

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia3

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva4

5: Regulatory Compliance - Wikipedia5

: Regulatory Compliance Management Software | MetricStream

: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

: Trend Analysis - Investopedia

: Trend Analysis: A Definition and Examples

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

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 those that 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 best recommendation to the control owner when an existing control has deteriorated over time is to discuss risk mitigation options with the risk owner. This is because the risk owner is the person or entity who has the authority and accountability to make decisions and take actions regarding the risk, including the selection and implementation of the risk response strategies. The control owner is the person or entity who is responsible for the design, operation, and maintenance of the control, but not for the overall risk management. By discussing risk mitigation options with the risk owner, the control owner can communicate the current status and performance of the control, and collaborate on finding the most appropriate and effective solution to address the risk and the control deterioration. The other options are not the best recommendation to the control owner, because they do not involve the risk owner, who is the key stakeholder in the risk management process, as explained below:

A. Implement compensating controls to reduce residual risk is not the best recommendation, because it may not be feasible, efficient, or sufficient to address the risk and the control deterioration. Compensating controls are additional or alternative controls that are implemented to mitigate the risk when the primary control is not available, adequate, or effective. However, implementing compensating controls without discussing with the risk owner may result in wasting resources, duplicating efforts, or conflicting objectives, and may not align with the risk appetite or strategy of the organization.

B. Escalate the issue to senior management is not the best recommendation, because it may not be necessary, timely, or appropriate to involve senior management in the risk and control deterioration issue. Senior management is the highest level of authority and oversight in the organization, and may not have the detailed or operational knowledge or involvement in the risk and control management. Escalating the issue to senior management without discussing with the risk owner may create confusion, delay, or misunderstanding, and may not result in the optimal risk mitigation solution.

D. Certify the control after documenting the concern is not the best recommendation, because it may not be accurate, honest, or compliant to certify the control when it has deteriorated over time. Certifying the control is the process of attesting that the control is designed and operating effectively and efficiently, and meets the established criteria and standards. Certifying the control after documenting the concern may not reflect the true status and performance of the control, and may not comply with the internal or external audit or regulatory requirements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. Roles and Responsibilities in Risk Management, Risk Owner vs. Control Owner: What’s the Difference?, Control Deterioration: How to Avoid It and What to Do About It

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

A 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.

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) and reflect 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 a result 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.

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, an acceptable usage policy is a document that defines the rules and guidelines for the appropriate and secure use of IT resources within an organization. It helps to mitigate data leakage risk by establishing the roles and responsibilities of users, the types and purposes of data that can be shared or transmitted, the authorized methods and channels of communication, the security controls and measures to protect data, and the consequences of non-compliance. An acceptable usage policy also educates and raises awareness among users about the potential risks and threats associated with instant messaging and other forms of online communication. Therefore, before implementing instant messaging within an organization using a public solution, an acceptable usage policy should be in place to mitigate data leakage risk. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 237.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The best control to reduce the likelihood of a successful network attack through social engineering is security awareness training. Security awareness training is a program that educates and trains employees on the common types, techniques, and indicators of social engineering attacks, such as phishing, baiting, pretexting, and quid pro quo12. Security awareness training also teaches employees how to protect themselves and the organization from social engineering attacks, such as by verifying the identity and legitimacy of the sender or caller, avoiding clicking on suspicious links or attachments, reporting any suspicious or unusual activity, and following the organization’s security policies and procedures. Security awareness training can help to reduce the likelihood of a successful network attack through social engineering, because it can increase the employees’ knowledge, skills, and confidence in recognizing and responding to social engineering attempts, and it can also foster a culture of security and responsibility among the employees. The other options are not the best control, although they may be useful or complementary to security awareness training. Automated controls are technical or procedural controls that are performed by a system or a device without human intervention, such as firewalls, antivirus software, encryption, and backups. Automated controls can help to protect the network from external or internal threats, but they may not be effective against social engineering attacks, which rely on human interaction and manipulation. Multifactor authentication is a security mechanism that requires users to provide two or more pieces of evidence to verify their identity and access a system or a service, such as a password, a token, a fingerprint, or a facial recognition. Multifactor authentication can help to prevent unauthorized access to the network, but it may not prevent social engineering attacks, which may persuade users to share or compromise their authentication factors. Employee sanctions are disciplinary actions that are taken against employees who violate the organization’s security policies and procedures, such as warnings, fines, suspensions, or terminations. Employee sanctions can help to deter and punish employees who fall victim to or facilitate social engineering attacks, but they may not prevent or reduce the likelihood of social engineering attacks, and they may also create a negative or fearful work environment. References = Avoiding Social Engineering and Phishing Attacks | CISA, What is Social Engineering | Attack Techniques & Prevention Methods …, 10 Types of Social Engineering Attacks - CrowdStrike

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

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

 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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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

According to the Gaining the competitive edge – measuring and assessing an organization’s risk culture 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. One of the main considerations when validating an organization’s risk appetite is the capacity to withstand loss, which is the ability of the organization to absorb the impact of adverse events without jeopardizing its viability or reputation. The capacity to withstand loss depends on various factors, such as the financial strength, the operational resilience, the governance structure, and the stakeholder expectations of the organization. By assessing the capacity to withstand loss, the organization can determine if its risk appetite is realistic and appropriate, or if it needs to be adjusted to match its risk profile and environment. References = Gaining the competitive edge – measuring and assessing an organization’s risk culture

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

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

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

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

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

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

 Anonymizing personal data in non-production environments means replacing the real data with fictitious but realistic data that does not allow identification of the individuals. This is a good way to mitigate the risk of sensitive personal data leakage from a software development environment, as it reduces the exposure of the data to unauthorized access or misuse. Tokenizing personal data only in test environments is not sufficient, as the data may still be exposed in other non-production environments, such as development or staging. Data loss prevention tools (DLP) installed in passive mode may detect and report data leakage incidents, but they do not prevent them from happening. Multi-factor authentication for access to non-production environments may enhance the security of the access, but it does not protect the data from being leaked by authorized users or compromised by other means. References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), page 226; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, question 195.

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

The most important factor when developing risk scenarios is obtaining input from key stakeholders. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could affect the enterprise’s objectives, processes, or resources. Obtaining input from key stakeholders, such as business owners, process owners, subject matter experts, or external parties, helps to ensure that the risk scenarios are realistic, relevant, and comprehensive. It also helps to identify the sources, drivers, indicators, likelihood, impact, and responses of the risk scenarios, and to align them with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. Obtaining input from key stakeholders also fosters a collaborative and participatory approach to risk management, and enhances the risk awareness and ownership among the stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.3, page 621

The best recommendation to address an organization’s need to secure multiple systems with limited IT resources is to perform a vulnerability analysis. A vulnerability analysis is a process of identifying, assessing, and prioritizing the weaknesses or flaws in the systems that could be exploited by threats or risks. A vulnerability analysis helps to determine the level and nature of the exposure and impact of the systems, and to select and implement the appropriate security controls or mitigations. Performing a vulnerability analysis is the best recommendation, as it helps to optimize the use of the limited IT resources, by focusing on the most critical or significant vulnerabilities, and by applying the most effective or efficient security solutions. Performing a vulnerability analysis also helps to improve the security posture and performance of the systems, and to reduce the likelihood and consequences of security incidents or breaches. Applying available security patches, scheduling a penetration test, and conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) are not the best recommendations, as they are either the outputs or the inputs of the vulnerability analysis process, and they do not address the primary need of securing the systems with limited IT resources. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

7: Security Guard - Wikipedia7

8: Security Guard Services - Allied Universal8

: Security Camera - Wikipedia

: Security Camera Systems - The Home Depot

: Access Badge - Wikipedia

: Access Control Systems - HID Global

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A technical vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in the design or implementation of an information system or resource that can be exploited or compromised by a threat or source of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A technical vulnerability may be caused by various factors, such as human error, system failure, process inefficiency, resource limitation, etc.

A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the technical vulnerabilities that exist or may arise in the organization’s information systems or resources, and determining their severity and impact. A vulnerability assessment can help the organization to assess and prioritize the risks, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the risks.

The best response to the scenario of a recently discovered technical vulnerability being actively exploited is to conduct a vulnerability assessment, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:

What is the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how does it affect the functionality or security of the information system or resource?

How is the technical vulnerability being exploited or compromised, and by whom or what?

What are the potential consequences or impacts of the exploitation or compromise of the technical vulnerability for the organization and its stakeholders?

How can the technical vulnerability be detected and reported, and what are the available or feasible options or solutions to address or correct it?

Conducting a vulnerability assessment can help the organization to improve and optimize the information system or resource quality and performance, and to reduce or eliminate the technical vulnerability. It can also help the organization to align the information system or resource with the organization’s objectives and requirements, and to comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the best responses to the scenario of a recently discovered technical vulnerability being actively exploited, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of conducting a vulnerability assessment, which is to identify and evaluate the technical vulnerability, and to determine its severity and impact.

Assessing the vulnerability management process is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the process that is used to identify, analyze, evaluate, and communicate the technical vulnerabilities, and to align them with the organization’s objectives and requirements. Assessing the vulnerability management process can help the organization to improve and optimize the process, and to reduce or eliminate the gaps or weaknesses in the process, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders.

Conducting a control self-assessment is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls that are intended to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the information systems and resources, using the input and feedback from the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the information systems activities or functions. Conducting a control self-assessment can help the organization to identify and document the control deficiencies, and to align them with the organization’s objectives and requirements, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders.

Reassessing the inherent risk of the target is a process of reevaluating and recalculating the amount and type of risk that exists in the absence of any controls, and that is inherent to the nature or characteristics of the target, which is the information system or resource that is affected by the technical vulnerability. Reassessing the inherent risk of the target can help the organization to understand and document the risk exposure or level, and to align it with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 195

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

Contain and isolate the incident and prevent further damage or loss

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

Eradicate and eliminate the incident and restore normal operations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: IT Scenario Analysis in Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA2

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

3: Business Risk - Investopedia3

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

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

7: Executive Risk Council - ISACA5

8: Executive Risk Council: A Guide to Success6

9: IT System Downtime - ISACA7

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

: IT Risk Education - ISACA9

: IT Risk Education: A Guide to Success

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 and communicating 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 the request, 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: The Control Process | Principles of Management4

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

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

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

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

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

Why did the application code require rework?

What were the errors or defects in the application code?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan should be that the risk response reduces risk to an acceptable level. A risk response action plan is a document that describes the actions or measures that are taken or planned to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk1. Validating a risk response action plan means verifying whether the plan is feasible, effective, and efficient in addressing the risk2. The main objective of validating a risk response action plan is to ensure that the risk response reduces risk to an acceptable level, which is the level of risk that the organization is willing to tolerate or bear, based on its risk appetite and risk criteria3. Reducing risk to an acceptable level means that the risk response actions can lower the likelihood or impact of the risk to a point where the risk does not pose a significant threat or challenge to the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance. Reducing risk to an acceptable level also means that the risk response actions can balance the benefits and costs of the risk response, and that they can provide a reasonable assurance of the risk management effectiveness and efficiency4. The other options are not the primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as they are either less relevant or less specific than reducing risk to an acceptable level. Quantifying risk impact is a component or element of validating a risk response action plan, not a focus of it. Quantifying risk impact means measuring or estimating the potential effects or consequences of the risk on the organization5. Quantifying risk impact can help to evaluate the severity and priority of the risk, as well as to compare the risk against the risk criteria and the risk appetite. However, quantifying risk impact is not the primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not address the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. Aligning with business strategy is a secondary or incidental benefit of validating a risk response action plan, not a primary or essential focus of it. Aligning with business strategy means ensuring that the risk response actions are consistent and coherent with the organization’s goals and values6. Aligning with business strategy can help to integrate the risk response actions with the organization’s culture and governance, as well as to support and enable the achievement of the organization’s mission and vision. However, aligning with business strategy is not the main focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not indicate the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. Advancing business objectives is a tertiary or indirect outcome of validating a risk response action plan, not a primary or direct focus of it. Advancing business objectives means contributing to the improvement and enhancement of the organization’s performance and results7. Advancing business objectives can help to create value and deliver benefits for the organization and its stakeholders, as well as to optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities. However, advancing business objectives is not the main focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not address the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 Strong authentication is the most effective measure against external threats to an organization’s confidential information. Confidential information is any data or information that is sensitive, proprietary, or valuable to the organization, and that should not be disclosed to unauthorized parties1. External threats are malicious actors outside the organization who attempt to gain unauthorized access to the organization’s networks, systems, and data, using various methods such as malware, hacking, or social engineering2. Strong authentication is a method of verifying the identity and legitimacy of a user or device before granting access to the organization’s resources or data3. Strong authentication typically involves the use of multiple factors or methods of authentication, such as passwords, tokens, biometrics, or certificates4. Strong authentication can prevent or reduce the risk of external threats to the organization’s confidential information, by making it more difficult and costly for the attackers to compromise the credentials or devices of the authorized users, and by limiting the access to the data or resources that are relevant and necessary for the users’ roles and responsibilities5. The other options are not the most effective measures against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as they are either less secure or less relevant than strong authentication. Single sign-on is a method of allowing a user to access multiple systems or applications with a single set of credentials, without having to log in separately for each system or application6. Single sign-on can improve the user experience and convenience, as well as reduce the administrative burden and cost of managing multiple accounts and passwords. However, single sign-on is not the most effective measure against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it can also increase the risk of credential compromise or misuse, and create a single point of failure or attack for the attackers to access multiple systems or data. Data integrity checking is a method of ensuring that the data or information is accurate, complete, and consistent, and that it has not been altered or corrupted by unauthorized parties or processes. Data integrity checking can involve the use of techniques such as checksums, hashes, digital signatures, or encryption. Data integrity checking can enhance the quality and reliability of the data or information, as well as detect and prevent any unauthorized or malicious changes or tampering. However, data integrity checking is not the most effective measure against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it does not prevent or reduce the risk of data theft or leakage, and it does not verify the identity or legitimacy of the users or devices accessing the data. Intrusion detection system is a system that monitors the network or system activities and events, and detects and alerts any suspicious or malicious behaviors or anomalies that may indicate an attempted or successful breach or attack. Intrusion detection system can help to identify and respond to external threats to the organization’s networks, systems, and data, by providing visibility and awareness of the network or system status and activities, and by enabling timely and appropriate actions or countermeasures. However, intrusion detection system is not the most effective measure against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it is a reactive or passive system that does not prevent or block the attacks, and it may generate false positives or negatives that can affect its accuracy and efficiency. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, Page 189.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

When using a third party to perform penetration testing, the most important control to minimize operational impact is to clearly define the project scope. This means specifying the objectives, boundaries, methods, and deliverables of the testing, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved. A clear project scope helps to avoid misunderstandings, conflicts, and disruptions that could compromise the security, availability, or integrity of the systems under test. It also helps to ensure that the testing is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and compliance requirements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3.2, Page 137.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Top Four Damaging Consequences of Data Leakage | ZeroFox1

2: 8 Data Leak Prevention Strategies for 2023 | UpGuard2

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

4: Data Classification Policy Template - IT Governance USA4

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

6: Encryption Policy Template - IT Governance USA6

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

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

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

Software as a Service (SaaS) is a cloud computing model that provides software applications over the internet, without requiring the users to install or maintain them on their own devices. SaaS vendors are responsible for hosting, managing, and updating the software applications, and providing technical support and security to the users. The key performance indicator (KPI) that would best measure the risk of a service outage when using a SaaS vendor is the frequency and duration of unplanned downtime, which is the amount and length of time that the software applications are unavailable or inaccessible due to unexpected events, such as network failures, server crashes, power outages, cyberattacks, etc. The frequency and duration of unplanned downtime indicate the reliability and availability of the SaaS vendor, and the potential impact of the service outage on the users’ business operations and productivity. References = 3

 The most important consideration when communicating the risk associated with technology end-of-life to business owners is the cost and benefit of the risk response options. Technology end-of-life is the situation when a technology product or service is no longer supported by the vendor or manufacturer, and may pose security, compatibility, or performance issues. The risk practitioner should communicate the cost and benefit of the possible risk responses, such as replacing, upgrading, or maintaining the technology, to the business owners, and help them to make informed and rational decisions. Security and availability, maintainability and reliability, and performance and productivity are other possible considerations, but they are not as important as the cost and benefit. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

It is most important that security controls for a new system be documented in the system requirements. The system requirements define the functional and non-functional specifications of the system, including the security controls that are needed to protect the system and its data. Documenting the security controls in the system requirements can help ensure that they are designed, developed, tested, and implemented as part of the system development life cycle. Testing requirements, the implementation plan, and the security policy are other documents that may include security controls, but they are not as important as the system requirements. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 5; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 212.

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

The most important factor to the effectiveness of key performance indicators (KPIs) is relevance. KPIs are metrics that measure the achievement of the objectives or the performance of the processes. Relevance means that the KPIs are aligned with and support the strategic goals and priorities of the organization, and that they reflect the current and desired state of the outcomes or outputs. Relevance also means that the KPIs are meaningful and useful for the decision makers and stakeholders, and that they provide clear and actionable information for improvement or optimization. The other options are not as important as relevance, as they are related to the approval, review, or automation of the KPIs, not the quality or value of the KPIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the application owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the achievement of the application objectives and the management of the associated risks. The application owner is responsible for defining the level of resiliency needed for the application, which is the ability of the application to recover from disruptions and continue to operate. The application owner is also responsible for accepting or rejecting the residual risks after the implementation of the disaster recovery controls, which are the measures to restore the application functionality and data in the event of a disaster. Therefore, the risk owner in this scenario is the application owner, as they are the ones who will be affected by the potential impact of the disaster on the application and its objectives. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 194.

The risk practitioner should report that the associated risk has been deferred, as this means that the risk response has been postponed or delayed due to lack of resources or other constraints. Deferring a risk response implies that the risk owner acknowledges the risk and intends to implement the risk mitigation action plan at a later stage, when the resources or conditions are available. The other options are not correct, as they do not reflect the actual status of the risk response. Mitigating a risk means that the risk response has been implemented and the risk level has been reduced. Accepting a risk means that the risk response has been rejected or waived, and the risk level has been accepted as it is. Avoiding a risk means that the risk response has been implemented and the risk level has been eliminated or transferred. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 146.

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 new control, 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.

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

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

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

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

The primary concern for an organization planning to transfer and store its customer data with an offshore cloud service provider is data privacy. Data privacy is the protection of personal information from unauthorized or unlawful access, use, disclosure, or transfer. Data privacy is governed by various laws, regulations, and standards that vary across different jurisdictions and sectors. An organization that transfers and stores its customer data with an offshore cloud service provider should ensure that the data privacy rights and obligations of the customers, the organization, and the cloud service provider are clearly defined and agreed upon, and that the data is protected according to the applicable data privacy requirements. An organization should also conduct due diligence and risk assessment on the offshore cloud service provider, and monitor and audit its performance and compliance on a regular basis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 127123

A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing is the best option to inform stakeholders risk decision-making, as it provides an accurate and timely assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s control environment. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing is a document that summarizes the results of the testing activities performed on the organization’s internal controls, such as design, implementation, operation, and monitoring. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing should include the following elements:

The scope, objectives, and methodology of the controls testing

The criteria and standards used to evaluate the controls

The findings and observations of the testing process

The root causes and impacts of the identified deficiencies

The recommendations and action plans to address the deficiencies

The roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders involved in the remediation process

A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing helps to inform stakeholders risk decision-making by providing them with relevant and reliable information on the current state of the organization’s control environment. It also helps to identify and prioritize the areas for improvement and enhancement of the control environment. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing also facilitates the communication, collaboration, and accountability among the stakeholders involved in the risk management and control processes.

The other options are not the best options to inform stakeholders risk decision-making. The audit plan for the upcoming period is a document that outlines the scope, objectives, and methodology of the planned audit activities, but it does not provide any information on the actual performance of the organization’s control environment. Spend to date on mitigating control implementation is a measure of the resources and costs incurred to implement the risk response actions, but it does not indicate the effectiveness or efficiency of the control environment. A status report of control deployment is a document that tracks and monitors the progress and performance of the control implementation process, but it does not evaluate the quality or adequacy of the control environment. References = Internal Control Deficiencies: Identification, Reporting and Communication, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Internal Control Testing: Techniques, Types, and Examples

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Business Impact Analysis | Ready.gov

Business Impact Analysis Toolkit | Smartsheet

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

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

Cost Benefit Analysis - ISACA

[Regulatory Compliance - ISACA]

[Impact Analysis - ISACA]

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

 The control owner should be responsible for evaluating the residual risk after a compensating control has been implemented. A compensating control is a control that provides an alternative or additional measure of protection when the primary or preferred control is not feasible or effective. A residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response or mitigation has been applied. The control owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for designing, implementing, and monitoring the controls that enforce the policy. The control owner can assess the impact and effectiveness of the compensating control on the residual risk, and report the results and recommendations to the risk owner or the risk practitioner. The other options are not as responsible as the control owner, as they are related to the compliance, ownership, or management of the risk, not the evaluation of the control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

 In order to efficiently execute a risk response action plan, it is most important for the emergency response team members to understand their defined roles and responsibilities. This can help to ensure that the team members know what they are expected to do, how they should coordinate and communicate with each other, and how they should report the progress and outcome of the risk response. The system architecture in target areas, IT management policies and procedures, and business objectives of the organization are other important factors, but they are not as important as the defined roles and responsibilities. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The best way to reduce the risk associated with the theft of a laptop containing sensitive information is to use data encryption. Data encryption is a process that transforms the data into an unreadable or unintelligible format, using a secret key or algorithm, to protect the data from unauthorized access or disclosure. Data encryption helps to reduce the risk of data theft, because even if the laptop is stolen, the data on the laptop cannot be accessed or used by the thief without the proper key or algorithm. Data encryption also helps to comply with the relevant laws, regulations, standards, and contracts that may require the protection of sensitive data. The other options are not as effective as data encryption, although they may provide some protection for the laptop or the data. A cable lock, a periodic backup, and a biometrics access control are all examples of physical or logical controls, which may help to prevent or deter the theft of the laptop, or to recover or restore the data on the laptop, but they do not necessarily protect the data from unauthorized access or disclosure if the laptop is stolen. References = 8

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

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

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

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

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

 The greatest concern for the risk practitioner when the potential vendor has offered to perform quarterly self-audits of its controls instead of having annual independent audits is that the controls may not be properly tested. Self-audits are audits that are performed by the vendor itself, without the involvement of an external or independent party. Self-audits may not be reliable, objective, or consistent, as the vendor may have biases, conflicts of interest, or lack of expertise in auditing its own controls. Self-audits may also not follow the same standards, criteria, or methodologies as independent audits, and may not provide sufficient assurance or evidence of the effectiveness of the controls. The other options are not as concerning as the possibility of improper testing of the controls, as they are related to the outcomes, expectations, or approaches of the controls, not the quality or validity of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 6

This can help to:

Ensure that the implemented measures are effective and efficient in reducing the risk level to an acceptable level, and that they are aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization2.

Identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may arise from the deviation from the approved risk action plan, and recommend and implement appropriate improvement actions or contingency plans3.

Communicate and report the results and outcomes of the validation to the relevant stakeholders, such as the risk owner, the risk committee, or the chief risk officer, and obtain their feedback and approval4.

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

Reporting the observation to the chief risk officer (CRO) is not the best course of action, as it may not provide sufficient information or evidence to support the deviation from the approved risk action plan. The CRO may not be able to evaluate or approve the implemented risk mitigation measures without knowing their adequacy or impact on the risk level5.

Updating the risk register with the implemented risk mitigation actions is not the best course of action, as it may not reflect the current or accurate risk status or performance. The risk register is a document that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses6. Updating the risk register without validating the adequacy of the implemented risk mitigation measures may create inconsistencies or inaccuracies in the risk register.

Reverting the implemented mitigation measures until approval is obtained is not the best course of action, as it may expose the organization to higher or unacceptable levels of risk. Reverting the implemented mitigation measures may undo or negate the benefits or outcomes of the risk mitigation, and may increase the likelihood or impact of the risk events7.

References =

ISACA Risk Starter Kit provides risk management templates and policies

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Risk Reporting - CIO Wiki

Chief Risk Officer - CIO Wiki

Risk Register - CIO Wiki

Risk Mitigation - CIO Wiki

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

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

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

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

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

The risk practitioner’s best course of action when the residual risk is now within the organization’s defined appetite and tolerance levels is to verify the adequacy of risk monitoring plans. Risk monitoring is the process of tracking and reviewing the risk status and performance, and ensuring that the risk responses are effective and efficient1. Risk monitoring plans are the documents that specify the objectives, scope, methods, roles, and responsibilities for the risk monitoring activities2. By verifying the adequacy of risk monitoring plans, the risk practitioner can:

Ensure that the risk monitoring plans are aligned with the organization’s risk strategy, objectives, and policies, and that they comply with the relevant standards and regulations3.

Evaluate whether the risk monitoring plans are comprehensive and consistent, and that they cover all the key aspects and indicators of the risks and the risk responses4.

Identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may affect the implementation or outcome of the risk monitoring plans, and recommend and implement appropriate improvement actions5.

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

Identifying new risk entries to include in ERM is not a relevant or necessary course of action, as it is not directly related to the residual risk or the risk responses. ERM is the process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and managing the risks that may affect the organization’s strategic, operational, financial, or reputational objectives6. Identifying new risk entries is a part of the risk identification process, which is the first step in ERM. It should be performed periodically or when there are significant changes in the internal or external environment, not when the residual risk is within the appetite and tolerance levels7.

Removing the risk entries from the ERM register is not a valid or advisable course of action, as it may create a false sense of security or complacency. The ERM register is a tool that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses. Removing the risk entries from the ERM register may imply that the risks no longer exist or matter, which is not true. The risks may still occur or change, and the risk responses may still fail or become obsolete. Therefore, the risk entries should be kept and updated in the ERM register, unless the risks are completely eliminated or transferred.

Re-performing the risk assessment to confirm results is not an efficient or effective course of action, as it may be redundant or unnecessary. Risk assessment is the process of estimating the probability and impact of the risks, and prioritizing the risks based on their significance and urgency. Re-performing the risk assessment may not provide any new or useful information or insights, and may waste time and resources. Instead, the risk practitioner should verify and validate the risk assessment results, and ensure that they are accurate and reliable.

References =

Risk Monitoring - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring Plan - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring and Reporting - ISACA

Risk Monitoring and Control - Project Management Institute

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Enterprise Risk Management - CIO Wiki

Risk Identification - CIO Wiki

[Risk Register - CIO Wiki]

[Risk Register: How to Use It in Project Management - ProjectManager.com]

[Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

[Risk Assessment Process - ISACA]

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. For measuring the effectiveness of an antivirus program, a possible goal is to ensure that all IT assets are protected from malware infections. A KPI that can measure this goal is the percentage of IT assets with current malware definitions, which indicates how well the antivirus program can detect and prevent the latest malware threats. The higher the percentage, the more effective the antivirus program is. Therefore, this is the best KPI among the given options. References =

Cybersecurity KPIs to Track + Examples — RiskOptics - Reciprocity

Which of the following is the BEST key performance indicator (KPI) to …

Indicators - Program Evaluation - CDC

 Risk monitoring is the process of tracking and evaluating the performance and effectiveness of the risk management process and controls, and identifying any changes or emerging risks that may affect the enterprise’s objectives and strategy. The primary benefit of risk monitoring is that it facilitates risk-aware decision making, as it provides timely and relevant information and feedback to the decision-makers and stakeholders, and enables them to adjust the risk strategy and response actions accordingly. Risk monitoring also helps to ensure that the risk management process is aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance, and supports the achievement of the enterprise’s goals and value creation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 239. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 239. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 239.

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 includes ensuring 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 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. References = Getting risk ownership right 1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA1

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

5: Risk and control self-assessment - KPMG Global3

6: Control Self Assessments - PwC4

7: Transaction Log - Wikipedia5

8: Transaction Logging - IBM6

: Benchmarking - Wikipedia7

: Benchmarking: Definition, Types, Process, Advantages & Examples

Risk responses are the actions or strategies that are taken to address the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation12.

The most effective way to increase the likelihood that risk responses will be implemented is to assign ownership, which is the process of identifying and appointing the individuals or groups who are responsible and accountable for the execution and monitoring of the risk responses34.

Assigning ownership is the most effective way because it ensures the clarity and commitment of the roles and responsibilities for the risk responses, and avoids the confusion or ambiguity that may arise from the lack of ownership34.

Assigning ownership is also the most effective way because it enhances the communication and collaboration among the stakeholders involved in the risk responses, and provides the feedback and input that are necessary for the improvement and optimization of the risk responses34.

The other options are not the most effective way, but rather possible steps or tools that may support or complement the assignment of ownership. For example:

Creating an action plan is a step that involves defining and documenting the specific tasks, resources, timelines, and deliverables for the risk responses34. However, this step is not the most effective way because it does not guarantee the implementation of the risk responses, especially if there is no clear or agreed ownership for the action plan34.

Reviewing progress reports is a tool that involves collecting and analyzing the information and data on the status and performance of the risk responses, and identifying the issues or gaps that need to be addressed34. However, this tool is not the most effective way because it does not ensure the implementation of the risk responses, especially if there is no ownership for the progress reports or the corrective actions34.

Performing regular audits is a tool that involves conducting an independent and objective assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk responses, and providing the findings and recommendations for improvement56. However, this tool is not the most effective way because it does not ensure the implementation of the risk responses, especially if there is no ownership for the audit results or the follow-up actions56. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

4: ProjectManagement.com - How to Implement Risk Responses2

5: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

6: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

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

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

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

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

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that helps organizations monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their operations, objectives, or performance. A good KRI should have certain characteristics that make it effective for risk management. One of these characteristics is repeatability, which means that the KRI can be measured consistently over time and across different situations. A repeatable KRI ensures that the risk data is reliable, comparable, and meaningful, and that the risk trends and patterns can be identified and analyzed. A repeatable KRI also supports the decision-making process by providing timely and accurate information on the risk level and status. Therefore, repeatability is the most important attribute of a KRI. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 441

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

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

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

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

Continuous monitoring can be performed using various techniques, such as automated tools, dashboards, indicators, metrics, logs, audits, reviews, etc. Continuous monitoring can also be integrated with the risk management process, and aligned with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite.

The other options are not the best methods for assessing control effectiveness, because they do not provide the same level of timeliness, accuracy, and completeness of information on the performance and outcome of the controls.

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 150

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

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

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

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

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

Encourage the reporting and escalation of risk issues and incidents

Reinforce the benefits and value of effective risk management

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

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

Compensating controls are additional or alternative controls that are implemented when the existing controls are found to be ineffective or do not meet the required standards. Compensating controls are designed to reduce the risk exposure to an acceptable level and ensure that the organization can still comply with the relevant regulations and industry best practices. For an organization that processes credit cards, compensating controls may include enhanced encryption, monitoring, auditing, or authentication mechanisms. By having compensating controls in place, the organization can maintain an effective overall control environment despite the deficiencies in the existing controls. The other options are not correct because they do not ensure that the overall control environment is effective. A control mitigation plan is a document that outlines the actions and resources needed to address the control deficiencies, but it does not guarantee that the compensating controls will be implemented or effective. Risk management is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating risks, but it does not directly affect the control environment. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk treatment, and it may or may not be acceptable depending on the risk appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 153-1541; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 632

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 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 primary objective for selecting risk response options is to reduce risk to an acceptable level. Risk response options are the possible actions that can be taken to address the risks that have been identified and analyzed in the risk management process. Risk response options can be classified into four categories: avoid, transfer, mitigate, and accept for negative risks (or threats), and exploit, share, enhance, and accept for positive risks (or opportunities). The selection of the risk response options depends on various factors, such as the risk level, the risk appetite and tolerance, the cost and benefit, and the feasibility and availability of the options. The main goal of selecting the risk response options is to reduce the risk to a level that is acceptable to the organization, which means that the risk exposure is within the boundaries of the risk criteria and the risk appetite. The other options are not the primary objective for selecting risk response options, although they may be related or beneficial. Identifying compensating controls is a technique to implement additional or alternative controls when the existing controls are not effective or sufficient to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Minimizing residual risk is a result of selecting and implementing the risk response options, but it is not the main purpose. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response, and it may or may not be acceptable depending on the risk appetite and tolerance. Reducing risk factors is a method to decrease the likelihood or impact of the risk by addressing the root causes or sources of the risk. However, reducing risk factors does not necessarily mean that the risk is reduced to an acceptable level, as there may be other factors or uncertainties that affect the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 862

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 174

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the risks that may affect a project, as well as the actions that are taken or planned to manage them1. A risk register should include information such as the risk description, category, source, impact, likelihood, severity, owner, status, and response2. Among these, the most important information to capture in the risk register is the action plans to address risk scenarios requiring treatment. This is because the action plans are the specific steps that are taken to reduce, avoid, transfer, or accept the risks, depending on the chosen risk treatment option3. The action plans should be clear, realistic, measurable, and aligned with the project objectives and constraints4. The action plans should also be monitored and updated regularly to ensure that they are effective and appropriate for the changing risk environment5. The action plans are essential for managing the risks and ensuring the successful delivery of the project. The other options are not the most important information to capture in the risk register, as they are either less relevant or less actionable than the action plans. The team that performed the risk assessment is the group of people who identified, analyzed, and evaluated the risks, using various tools and techniques6. While this information may be useful for accountability and communication purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not indicate how the risks are treated or resolved. The assigned risk manager to provide oversight is the person who has the responsibility and authority to oversee the risk management process and ensure that the risks are properly identified, assessed, treated, and reported. While this information may be useful for governance and coordination purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not specify what actions are taken or planned to manage the risks. The methodology used to perform the risk assessment is the approach or framework that is used to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks, based on the project context, scope, and objectives. While this information may be useful for consistency and transparency purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not describe how the risks are addressed or mitigated. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.5, Page 55.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The most important outcome of reviewing the risk management process is assuring that the risk profile supports the IT objectives, because this ensures that the organization is managing its IT-related risks in alignment with its business goals and priorities. The risk profile is a summary of the key risks that the organization faces, their likelihood, impact, and response strategies. The IT objectives are the specific and measurable outcomes that the organization expects to achieve from its IT investments and activities. By reviewing the risk management process, the organization can evaluate whether the risk profile is accurate, complete, and up-to-date, and whether the risk responses are effective, efficient, and consistent with the IT objectives. The review can also identify any gaps, issues, or opportunities for improvement in the risk management process, and provide recommendations for enhancing the process and its outcomes. The review can also help to communicate and report the value and performance of the risk management process to the senior management, the board of directors, and other stakeholders. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

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

 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 to update 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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), monitoring key access control performance indicators is the best way to provide an early warning that network access of terminated employees is not being revoked in accordance with the service level agreement (SLA), as it measures the effectiveness and efficiency of the access control process and its alignment with the SLA objectives and requirements. The SLA is a contract that defines the expectations and responsibilities of the service provider and the service recipient in terms of the quality, availability, and scope of the service. Monitoring key access control performance indicators helps to:

Evaluate the extent to which the access control process has met the SLA targets and standards

Identify and report any deviations, errors, or breaches in the access control process and its compliance with the SLA

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address the issues or findings in the access control process

Communicate and coordinate the monitoring results and recommendations with the relevant stakeholders, such as the service provider, the service recipient, and the senior management

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

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 also helps to avoid or reduce the inconsistencies, discrepancies, or conflicts that may arise from the different perspectives, assumptions, or judgments of the multiple risk practitioners, and to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and validity of the risk register.

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: ISO - ISO 31000 — Risk management1

2: Risk Management Standards2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

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

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

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

Effective risk communication best benefits an organization by helping personnel make better-informed decisions. Risk communication is the process of exchanging information and opinions among stakeholders about the nature, magnitude, significance, or control of a risk. By communicating risk information clearly and consistently, the organization can enhance the understanding and awareness of the risk, and enable the personnel to make decisions that are aligned with the risk appetite and objectives of the organization. Assisting the development of a risk register, improving the effectiveness of IT controls, and increasing participation in the risk assessment process are other possible benefits, but they are not as important as helping personnel make better-informed decisions. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The risk practitioner’s primary consideration when participating in development of a new IT risk strategy should be the risk culture of the organization. Risk culture is the set of values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors that shape how the organization perceives, manages, and responds to risks. Risk culture influences the organization’s risk appetite, risk objectives, risk policies, risk processes, and risk performance. The risk practitioner should consider the risk culture when developing a new IT risk strategy, because it helps to align the IT risk strategy with the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and to ensure that the IT risk strategy is supported and accepted by the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, employees, customers, regulators, etc. The risk practitioner should also consider the risk culture when developing a new IT risk strategy, because it helps to identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may affect the implementation and effectiveness of the IT risk strategy, such as lack of awareness, communication, coordination, or accountability. The other options are not the primary consideration for the risk practitioner, although they may be related to the IT risk strategy. Scale of technology, risk indicators, and proposed risk budget are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the IT risk strategy, but they do not necessarily reflect or influence the organization’s risk culture. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-9.

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

The best way to mitigate the risk to operations caused by severe weather events is to develop a business continuity plan (BCP). A BCP is a document that describes the procedures and resources needed to ensure the continuity of the organization’s critical functions and processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. A BCP helps to identify the recovery objectives, strategies, and priorities, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the recovery team members. A BCP also helps to prepare and test the recovery capabilities and resources, such as alternate locations, backup systems, and communication channels. The other options are not as effective as developing a BCP, although they may be part of the BCP process or outcomes. Preparing a cost-benefit analysis to evaluate relocation, preparing a disaster recovery plan (DRP), and conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) for an alternate location are all activities that can help to develop or implement a BCP, but they are not the best way to mitigate the risk to operations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 5-9.

The strongest evidence to support a risk response decision is a memo indicating risk acceptance. A memo is a formal and written document that can clearly communicate the rationale, criteria, and approval of the risk acceptance decision. Verbal majority acceptance of risk by committee, list of compensating controls, and IT audit follow-up responses are weaker evidence, as they may not be documented, verified, or aligned with the risk response decision. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

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

The three lines of defense model is a framework that describes the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders in the risk management and internal control processes of an organization. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense: the operational management and staff who are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks, as well as implementing and maintaining the controls within their areas of activity.

The second line of defense: the risk management, compliance, and security functions who are responsible for establishing the risk policies and standards, providing guidance and support, monitoring and reporting on the risk performance and compliance, and facilitating the risk management and internal control processes across the organization.

The third line of defense: the internal audit function who is responsible for providing independent and objective assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and internal control processes, as well as recommending improvements and best practices. The stakeholders who are typically included as part of a line of defense within the three lines of defense model are the legal team, who belong to the second line of defense. The legal team is responsible for ensuring that the organization complies with the relevant laws and regulations, as well as for advising and assisting the organization on the legal aspects and implications of the risk management and internal control processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.1, p. 32-33

The most important thing when implementing an organization’s security policy is to obtain management support. Management support means that the senior management and the board of directors endorse, approve, and fund the security policy and its implementation. Management support also means that the management communicates, promotes, and enforces the security policy across the organization. Management support can help to ensure that the security policy is aligned with the organizational strategy and objectives, and that it is effective, consistent, and sustainable. The other options are not as important as obtaining management support, as they are related to the specific aspects or components of the security policy implementation, not the overall success and acceptance of the security policy implementation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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

The best course of action when an organization wants to reduce likelihood in order to reduce a risk level is to implement preventive measures. Likelihood is the probability or chance of a risk occurring, and risk level is the combination of likelihood and impact of a risk. Preventive measures are controls that are designed to prevent or deter the occurrence of a risk, such as policies, standards, procedures, guidelines, etc. Implementing preventive measures is the best course of action, because it helps to reduce the likelihood of a risk, and consequently, the risk level. Implementing preventive measures also helps to protect and enhance the organization’s objectives, performance, and improvement. The other options are not the best course of action, although they may be related to the risk management process. Monitoring risk controls, implementing detective controls, and transferring the risk are all activities that can help to manage or mitigate the risks, but they do not necessarily reduce the likelihood or the risk level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-21.

The lack of integrity of data is the greatest concern when replication of a critical database used by two business units failed. Data integrity means that the data is accurate, complete, consistent, and reliable. If the replication failed, it means that the data in the primary and secondary databases may not be synchronized and may have discrepancies or errors. This could affect the quality and reliability of the data and the business processes that depend on it. The other options are not as concerning as the lack of integrity of data, as they are related to the efficiency, cost, or confidentiality of the data, which are less critical than the accuracy and reliability of the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

Risk scenario development is a process that involves identifying and describing the potential risk events that can affect an organization’s objectives and operations. Risk scenario development requires the input and participation of various stakeholders, such as the management, the staff, the customers, the suppliers, the regulators, and the competitors. The primary benefit of stakeholder involvement in risk scenario development is that it increases the awareness of emerging business threats, meaning that it helps to identify and anticipate the new or changing sources and impacts of risk that may not be captured by the existing risk assessment methods or tools. Stakeholder involvement can also help to improve the quality and completeness of the risk scenarios, as well as to enhance the communication and collaboration among the stakeholders regarding the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1.1, p. 66-67

The best course of action to address the risk associated with data transfer if the relationship is terminated with the vendor is to ensure the language in the contract explicitly states who is accountable for each step of the data transfer process. This can help to avoid ambiguity, confusion, or disputes over the ownership, responsibility, and liability of the data and the data transfer process. Meeting with the business leaders, collecting requirements, and working with the information security officer are important activities, but they are not as effective as ensuring the contractual agreement is clear and enforceable. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

 The best recommendation to address the situation where personal information from the production environment is required for testing purposes in non-production environments is to de-identify data before being transferred to the test environment. De-identification is the process of removing or modifying any personally identifiable information (PII) or other sensitive data from the data sets, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc., so that the data cannot be traced back to specific individuals. De-identification protects the privacy and confidentiality of the data, while still allowing for testing, analysis, or training purposes. Enabling data encryption, preventing the use of production data, and enforcing multi-factor authentication are also useful measures, but they do not eliminate the risk of data breaches or unauthorized access to PII. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

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

The main benefit of using key risk indicators (KRIs) for an organization is that they provide an early warning that a risk threshold is about to be reached. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. KRIs also help to trigger timely and appropriate risk responses, before the risk becomes unmanageable or unacceptable. The other options are not the main benefit of using KRIs, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes. KRIs signal that a change in the control environment has occurred, provide a basis to set the risk appetite for an organization, and assist in the preparation of the organization’s risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

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

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

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

The most effective way to help ensure accountability for managing risk is to assign process owners to key risk areas. Process owners are the persons or entities that have the authority and responsibility to manage a specific process or a group of related processes. Process owners help to identify, assess, and respond to the risks associated with the process, and to monitor and report on the process performance and improvement. Process owners also help to communicate and coordinate the process management activities with the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Assigning process owners to key risk areas helps to ensure accountability for managing risk, because it helps to define and clarify the roles and responsibilities of the process owners, and to establish and enforce the expectations and standards for the process owners. Assigning process owners to key risk areas also helps to measure and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the process owners, and to identify and address any issues or gaps in the process management activities. The other options are not as effective as assigning process owners to key risk areas, although they may be related to the risk management process. Obtaining independent risk assessments, assigning incident response action plan responsibilities, and creating accurate process narratives are all activities that can help to support or improve the risk management process, but they do not necessarily ensure accountability for managing risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 2-11.

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

The situation that presents the greatest challenge to creating a comprehensive IT risk profile of an organization is having inaccurate documentation of enterprise architecture (EA). EA is the blueprint that describes the structure and operation of an organization, including its business processes, information systems, technology infrastructure, and governance. EA helps to align the IT strategy and objectives with the business strategy and objectives, and to identify and manage the IT risks and opportunities. Having inaccurate documentation of EA could lead to incomplete, inconsistent, or misleading information about the organization’s IT environment, which could affect the quality and reliability of the IT risk profile. The other situations are not as challenging as having inaccurate documentation of EA, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the IT risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 2-12.

The most important factors to consider when evaluating a number of potential controls for treating risk are the residual risk and the cost of control. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of the controls. Cost of control is the amount of resources and efforts required to implement and maintain the controls. By considering the residual risk and the cost of control, the organization can optimize the balance between the risk exposure and the control investment, and choose the most effective and efficient controls. Risk appetite and control efficiency, inherent risk and control effectiveness, and risk tolerance and control complexity are other possible factors, but they are not as important as residual risk and cost of control. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

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

Internal audit reports provide the most useful information to assess the magnitude of identified deficiencies in the IT control environment. Internal audit reports are independent and objective evaluations of the design and operating effectiveness of the IT controls, as well as the compliance with policies, standards, and regulations. Internal audit reports also provide recommendations for improvement and follow-up actions for the control deficiencies. Internal audit reports can help measure the impact and severity of the control deficiencies, and prioritize the remediation efforts. Peer benchmarks, business impact analysis (BIA) results, and threat analysis results are not as directly related to the assessment of the control deficiencies, although they may provide some contextual or comparative information. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.1, page 1-19.

The best way to determine whether system settings are in alignment with control baselines is to perform configuration validation. Configuration validation is the process of verifying that the system settings and parameters are consistent with the predefined standards and requirements, and that they reflect the current and desired state of the system. Configuration validation helps to ensure that the system is configured correctly and securely, and that it complies with the relevant policies, regulations, and best practices. Configuration validation also helps to identify and correct any deviations or errors in the system settings, and to prevent or mitigate any potential risks or issues. The other options are not as effective as configuration validation, although they may provide some input or information for the system alignment. Control attestation, penetration testing, and internal audit review are all activities that can help to assess or evaluate the system alignment, but they do not necessarily determine or validate the system settings. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 3-11.

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

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

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

 The best course of action for the risk practitioner who has identified that the agreed RTO with a SaaS provider is longer than the business expectation is to document the gap in the risk register and report to senior management. The risk register is the document that records the details of all identified risks, including their sources, causes, impacts, likelihood, and responses. The risk register should be updated regularly to reflect any changes in the risk environment or the risk status. Reporting to senior management is also important, because senior management is the highest level of authority and responsibility in the organization, and they are responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization. Senior management should also oversee the risk management process, and ensure that the risks are aligned with the organization’s goals and values. By documenting the gap in the risk register and reporting to senior management, the risk practitioner can communicate the issue clearly and effectively, and seek guidance and support for resolving the problem. Collaborating with the risk owner, including a right to audit clause, or advising the risk owner to accept the risk are not the best courses of action, because they may not be feasible, effective, or desirable in some situations, or they may require senior management approval or involvement. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

The most important factor for successful incident response is the timeliness of attack recognition. Incident response is the process of detecting, analyzing, containing, eradicating, recovering, and reporting on security incidents that could affect the organization’s IT systems or data. The timeliness of attack recognition is the speed and accuracy with which the organization can identify and confirm that an attack has occurred or is in progress. The timeliness of attack recognition is crucial for successful incident response, as it affects the ability and effectiveness of the organization to respond to and mitigate the attack, and to minimize the damage and impact of the attack. The other options are not as important as the timeliness of attack recognition, although they may also contribute to or influence the incident response. The quantity of data logged by the attack control tools, the ability to trace the source of the attack, and the blocking of the attack route immediately are all factors that could help or hinder the incident response, but they are not the most important factor for successful incident response. References = CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 5-32.

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

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

 The best evidence of an effective internal control environment is the independent audit results. Independent audit results are the outcomes or findings of an external or independent party that evaluates the design, implementation, and operation of the internal controls. Independent audit results can provide an objective, reliable, and consistent assessment of the internal control environment, and identify the strengths, weaknesses, gaps, or issues of the internal controls. Independent audit results can also provide assurance, recommendations, or improvement opportunities for the internal control environment. The other options are not as good as independent audit results, as they are related to the inputs, processes, or outputs of the internal control environment, not the evaluation or verification of the internal control environment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 69.

The most important factor for senior management to review during an acquisition is the risk appetite and tolerance of the target organization. The risk appetite and tolerance reflect the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. By reviewing the risk appetite and tolerance of the target organization, senior management can determine if they are compatible with their own, and if the acquisition will create any significant risk exposure or opportunity for the acquiring organization. Risk framework and methodology, key risk indicator (KRI) thresholds, and risk communication plan are other factors that may be reviewed, but they are not as important as the risk appetite and tolerance. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

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

Documented procedures are the best way to enable effective IT control implementation. Documented procedures are the specific actions or steps that are performed to achieve the IT control objectives and mitigate the IT risks. Documented procedures provide clear guidance, consistency, and accountability for the IT control activities. Documented procedures also help to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the IT controls, and to identify and address any gaps or weaknesses. The other options are not as effective as documented procedures, although they may support or complement the IT control implementation. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of IT risks, but they do not specify how to implement the IT controls. Information security policies and standards are high-level statements that define the IT security goals and requirements, but they do not detail how to implement the IT controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 1-15.

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

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

The best approach to mitigate the risk associated with a control deficiency is to implement compensating controls. A control deficiency is a situation where a control is missing, ineffective, or inefficient, and cannot provide reasonable assurance that the objectives or requirements are met. A compensating control is a control that provides an alternative or additional measure of protection when the primary or preferred control is not feasible or effective. A compensating control can help to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk associated with the control deficiency, and maintain the compliance or performance level. The other options are not as effective as implementing compensating controls, as they are related to the analysis, assessment, or provision of the risk, not the mitigation of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The best indicator of executive management’s support for IT risk mitigation efforts is the number of executives attending IT security awareness training. This shows that the executives are committed to enhancing their knowledge and skills on IT security issues, and that they are setting a positive example for the rest of the organization. The number of stakeholders involved in IT risk identification workshops, the percentage of corporate budget allocated to IT risk activities, and the percentage of incidents presented to the board are other possible indicators, but they are not as strong as the number of executives attending IT security awareness training. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

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

The person who should be accountable for resolving the situation where a root cause analysis indicates a major service disruption due to a lack of competency of newly hired IT system administrators is the chief information officer (CIO). The CIO is the senior executive who is responsible for the overall management and governance of the IT function within the organization, including the IT strategy, objectives, policies, processes, and resources. The CIO is also accountable for the performance and value of the IT services and systems, and for ensuring that they meet the needs and expectations of the business and its stakeholders. The CIO should be accountable for resolving the situation, because it involves a major IT service disruption that could affect the organization’s operations and reputation, and because it is related to the IT staff competency and capability, which are under the CIO’s authority and responsibility. The other options are not as accountable as the CIO, although they may have some roles or involvement in the situation. The HR training director, the business process owner, and the HR recruitment manager are not directly responsible for the IT function or the IT service delivery, and they may not have the authority or the expertise to resolve the situation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 2-3.

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

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

 The control environment is the set of standards, processes, and structures that provide the basis for carrying out internal control across the organization. The control environment is most effective when the controls perform as intended, meaning that they achieve their objectives, mitigate the risks, and comply with the policies and regulations. The other options are desirable attributes of the controls, but they do not necessarily indicate the effectiveness of the control environment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 69.

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

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

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

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

Risk owners based on risk impact are the most important stakeholders to include in the cyber response team, as they are responsible for the business outcomes affected by the cyber attack and can decide on the appropriate response actions. The other options are not the most important stakeholders to include in the cyber response team, although they may be involved in the process.

A risk practitioner is a person who is responsible for performing risk management activities, such as identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and communicating risks. When an organization is implementing a project to automate the purchasing process, including the modification of approval controls, the task that is the responsibility of the risk practitioner is to verify that the existing controls continue to properly mitigate the defined risk. This means that the risk practitioner should ensure that the automation and modification of the approval controls do not introduce new risks or change the existing risk profile, and that the controls are still effective and adequate for the purchasing process. The risk practitioner should also monitor the performance and compliance of the controls, and recommend any improvements or adjustments as needed. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 177.

 Developing and communicating fraud prevention policies is the most effective way to reduce potential losses due to ongoing expense fraud because it creates a culture of integrity and accountability, sets clear expectations and consequences for employees, and deters fraudulent behavior. Implementing user access controls, performing regular internal audits, and conducting fraud prevention awareness training are also important controls, but they are more reactive and detective than preventive. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 4-26.

The best way to ensure data is properly sanitized while in cloud storage is to cryptographically scramble the data. Cryptographic scrambling is the process of transforming data into an unreadable form using a secret key or algorithm. Cryptographic scrambling protects the data from unauthorized access, modification, or deletion, even if the cloud storage provider or a third party gains access to the data. Cryptographic scrambling also ensures that the data can be restored to its original form using the same key or algorithm, if needed. The other options are not as effective as cryptographic scrambling, because they either do not completely remove the data, or they make it impossible to recover the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

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

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

Information asset classification is the process of assigning a level of sensitivity and criticality to an information asset based on its value, importance, and impact to the organization. The major reason to classify information assets is to determine their sensitivity and criticality, which are the measures of how confidential, proprietary, or sensitive the information is, and how essential, urgent, or time-sensitive the information is for the business operations. By determining the sensitivity and criticality of information assets, the organization can prioritize the protection and recovery of the information assets, implement the appropriate security controls and safeguards, comply with the regulatory and contractual requirements, and manage the information lifecycle and disposal. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 74.

 The greatest benefit of identifying appropriate risk owners is that accountability is established for risk treatment decisions. Risk owners are the individuals or groups who are responsible and accountable for managing a specific risk and its associated actions and outcomes. By identifying appropriate risk owners, the organization can ensure that the risk treatment decisions are made by the people who have the authority, knowledge, and interest in the risk. Stakeholders being consulted, risk owners being informed, and responsibility being established are other possible benefits, but they are not as great as accountability being established. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

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

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

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

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

A multinational organization that operates in different countries should be aware of the legal and regulatory requirements of each jurisdiction. Some countries may have strict privacy laws that prohibit or limit the collection and use of personal information of employees, such as their criminal records, credit history, or medical conditions. Therefore, implementing standard background checks for all new employees may violate the laws in some countries and expose the organization to legal risks and reputational damage. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Factors, page 31.

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

The greatest concern when establishing key risk indicators (KRIs) is using ineffective methods to assess risk. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. To establish effective KRIs, the risk assessment methods should be reliable, valid, consistent, and timely. Ineffective methods to assess risk could lead to inaccurate or misleading KRIs, which could result in poor risk management decisions and outcomes. The other options are not as significant as using ineffective methods to assess risk, although they may also affect the quality and usefulness of KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

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

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

The relationship owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for managing the relationship with the service provider. The relationship owner should be accountable for ensuring that risk responses are implemented, as they are the primary point of contact and communication with the service provider. The relationship owner can also monitor and evaluate the performance and compliance of the service provider, and enforce the contractual obligations and service level agreements. The other options are not as accountable as the relationship owner, as they are related to the assessment, security, or legal aspects of the service provider, not the management or oversight of the service provider. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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