Pass the Isaca Isaca Certification CISM Questions and answers with CertsForce

Verified Answer: According to the CISM Review Manual, 15th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1.1, "Recommendations for enterprise investment in security technology should be primarily based on the organization’s risk tolerance."1

The organization’s risk tolerance is the degree of uncertainty that the organization is willing to accept in order to pursue its objectives. It reflects the organization’s appetite for risk and its ability to cope with potential losses or disruptions. The higher the risk tolerance, the more aggressive and innovative the security investments can be, as they can help achieve faster growth or competitive advantage. The lower the risk tolerance, the more conservative and defensive the security investments should be, as they can help protect the organization’s assets and reputation from potential threats.

Risk profile changes are the most appropriate to communicate to senior management regarding information risk because they reflect the current level and nature of the risks that the organization faces and how they may affect its objectives and performance. Senior management needs to be aware of any changes in the risk profile so that they can make informed decisions and allocate resources accordingly. Risk profile changes also help senior management monitor the effectiveness of the risk management process and identify any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed.

References = Communicating Information Security Risk Simply and Effectively, Part 1, CISM Domain 2: Information Risk Management (IRM) [2022 update]

Results from a gap analysis would provide the most useful information for planning purposes when preparing an action plan to achieve compliance with local regulatory requirements by an established deadline. A gap analysis is an assessment of the difference between an organization’s current state of compliance and its desired level or standard. It is a process used to identify potential areas for improvement by comparing actual performance with expected performance. A gap analysis can help to prioritize the actions needed to close the gaps and comply with the regulatory requirements, as well as to estimate the resources and time required for each action1. The other options are not as useful as results from a gap analysis for planning purposes when preparing an action plan to achieve compliance with local regulatory requirements by an established deadline. Deadlines and penalties for noncompliance are important factors to consider, but they do not provide information on how to achieve compliance or what actions are needed2. Results from a business impact analysis (BIA) are useful for identifying the critical processes and assets that need to be protected, but they do not provide information on how to comply with the regulatory requirements or what actions are needed3. An inventory of security controls currently in place is useful for assessing the current state of compliance, but it does not provide information on how to comply with the regulatory requirements or what actions are needed4. References: 3: Business impact analysis (BIA) - Wikipedia 2: Compliance Gap Analysis & Effectiveness Evaluation | SMS 1: What is Gap Analysis in Compliance | Scytale 4: Gap Analysis & Risk Assessment — Riddle Compliance

Organizational units contribute to and agree on priorities is the best way to facilitate effective strategic alignment of security initiatives because it ensures that the security initiatives are aligned with the business goals and objectives, supported by relevant stakeholders, and prioritized based on risk and value. The business strategy is periodically updated is not sufficient to facilitate effective strategic alignment of security initiatives because it does not involve collaboration or communication between different organizational units. Procedures and standards are approved by department heads is not sufficient to facilitate effective strategic alignment of security initiatives because it does not reflect the strategic direction or vision of the organization. Periodic security audits are conducted by a third-party is not sufficient to facilitate effective strategic alignment of security initiatives because it does not address the planning or implementation of security initiatives. References: https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2016/volume-2/how-to-align-security-initiatives-with-business-goals-and-objectives https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2015/volume-1/how-to-measure-the-effectiveness-of-information-security-governance

 Single sign-on (SSO) is a technology that allows users to access multiple applications or services with one set of credentials, such as a username and password. The primary advantage of SSO is that it increases the efficiency of access management, as it reduces the need for users to remember and enter multiple passwords for different applications or services. SSO also simplifies the user experience, as they can log in once and access multiple resources without having to switch between different windows or tabs. SSO can also improve the security of related applications, as it reduces the risk of password compromise or phishing attacks. However, SSO does not strengthen user passwords or support multiple authentication mechanisms by itself. It is a complementary technology that enhances the security and convenience of access management. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, page 991

The primary advantage of single sign-on (SSO) is that it increases the efficiency of access management. With SSO, users only need to remember one set of credentials to access all of their applications, rather than having to remember multiple usernames and passwords for each application. This simplifies the user experience and helps to reduce the amount of time spent managing access to multiple applications. Additionally, SSO can also increase the security of related applications, as users are not sharing the same credentials across multiple applications, and it can also support multiple authentication mechanisms, such as biometric authentication.

Initiating incident response is the first course of action for an information security manager when an employee reports the loss of a personal mobile device containing corporate information. This will help to contain the incident, assess the impact, and take appropriate measures to prevent or mitigate further damage. According to ISACA, incident management is one of the key processes for information security governance. Initiating a device reset, disabling remote access, and conducting a risk assessment are possible subsequent actions, but they should be part of the incident response plan. References: 1: Find, lock, or erase a lost Android device - Google Account Help 2: Find, lock, or erase a lost Android device - Android Help 3: Lost or Stolen Mobile Device Procedure - Information Security Office : CISM Practice Quiz | CISM Exam Prep | ISACA : 200 CISM Exam Prep Questions | Free Practice Test | Simplilearn : CISM practice questions to prep for the exam | TechTarget

The business impact analysis (BIA) is the foundational step in disaster recovery planning. The CISM Review Manual states that BIA should be performed first to determine critical business functions, recovery priorities, and the impact of disruptions. Risk assessments and documentation follow after the BIA.

 The most important factor to ensuring information stored by an organization is protected appropriately is assigning information asset ownership. Information asset ownership is the process of identifying and assigning the roles and responsibilities of the individuals or groups who have the authority and accountability for the information assets and their protection. Information asset owners are responsible for defining the business value, classification, and security requirements of the information assets, as well as granting the access rights and privileges to the information users and custodians. Information asset owners are also responsible for monitoring and reviewing the security performance and compliance of the information assets, and reporting and resolving any security issues or incidents. By assigning information asset ownership, the organization can ensure that the information assets are properly identified, categorized, protected, and managed according to their importance, sensitivity, and regulatory obligations.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 1: Information Security Governance, Section: Data Classification, page 331; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, Question 62, page 572.

Social engineering is a technique used by attackers to manipulate individuals into divulging sensitive information or performing actions that can compromise the security of an organization. Multi-factor authentication (MFA) is a security mechanism that requires users to provide at least two forms of authentication to verify their identity. By requiring MFA, even if an attacker successfully obtains a user's credentials through social engineering, they will not be able to access the network without the additional form of authentication.

Senior management engagement is most effectively achieved when information security risks are clearly connected to real, tangible business consequences. A major breach at a competitor (B) provides a credible, industry-relevant example that demonstrates potential financial, operational, reputational, and regulatory impacts in a way executives readily understand. While BIA results (A), audit findings (C), and cost-benefit analyses (D) are important inputs, they are often abstract or internally focused. CISM guidance emphasizes that executive support is strongest when security messaging is business-driven, externally validated, and tied to strategic risk awareness. A peer breach highlights that the threat is realistic, imminent, and applicable to the organization’s context, which increases urgency and executive buy-in for the security strategy.

 The role of the information security manager in finalizing contract negotiations with service providers is to ensure that the outsourcing process is aligned with the organization’s information security policies, standards, and objectives. One of the key aspects of this process is to perform a risk analysis on the outsourcing process, which involves identifying, assessing, and mitigating the potential threats and vulnerabilities that may arise from outsourcing activities. A risk analysis can help the information security manager to determine the appropriate level of security controls and requirements for the outsourced process, as well as to monitor and evaluate its performance and compliance. A risk analysis can also help to avoid or minimize legal, financial, reputational, or operational risks associated with outsourcing1. References =

CISM Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 6: Information Security Program Management

CISM Review Manual (Print Version), Chapter 6: Information Security Program Management

Conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) is the first step when creating an organization’s disaster recovery plan (DRP) because it helps to identify and prioritize the critical business functions or processes that need to be restored after a disruption, and determine their recovery time objectives (RTOs) and recovery point objectives (RPOs)2. Identifying the response and recovery teams is not the first step, but rather a subsequent step that involves assigning roles and responsibilities for executing the DRP. Reviewing the communications plan is not the first step, but rather a subsequent step that involves defining the communication channels and protocols for notifying and updating the stakeholders during and after a disruption. Developing response and recovery strategies is not the first step, but rather a subsequent step that involves selecting and implementing the appropriate solutions and procedures for restoring the critical business functions or processes. References: 2 https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2018/volume-3/business-impact-analysis-bia-and-disaster-recovery-planning-drp

The greatest benefit of incorporating information security governance into the corporate governance framework is D. Management accountability for information security. This is because management accountability for information security means that the senior management and the board of directors are responsible for defining, overseeing, and supporting the information security strategy, policies, and objectives of the organization, and ensuring that they are aligned with the business goals, stakeholder expectations, and regulatory requirements. Management accountability for information security also means that the senior management and the board of directors are accountable for the performance, value, and effectiveness of the information security program, and for the management and mitigation of the information security risks and incidents. Management accountability for information security can help to foster a culture of security awareness and responsibility, and to enhance the trust and confidence of the customers, partners, and regulators in the organization’s information security capabilities.

Management accountability for information security means that the senior management and the board of directors are responsible for defining, overseeing, and supporting the information security strategy, policies, and objectives of the organization, and ensuring that they are aligned with the business goals, stakeholder expectations, and regulatory requirements. (From CISM Manual or related resources)

References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 181; CISM domain 1: Information security governance [Updated 2022] | Infosec2; Information Security Governance: Guidance for Boards of Directors and Executive Management, 2nd Edition3

 Metrics for an information security program should be aligned with the security objectives and strategy, and should demonstrate how well the program is performing in terms of reducing risk, enhancing security posture, and supporting business goals. Metrics that support major information security initiatives, reflect the corporate risk culture, or reduce information security program spending may be useful, but they are not the best approach for establishing metrics for the entire program.

References = CISM Review Manual 2022, page 3171; CISM Exam Content Outline, Domain 4, Knowledge Statement 4.112

The best indicator that an information security governance framework has been successfully implemented is A. The framework aligns internal and external resources. This is because the framework should ensure that the information security strategy, policies, and objectives are aligned with the business goals, stakeholder expectations, and regulatory requirements. The framework should also enable the effective allocation and coordination of internal and external resources, such as people, processes, technology, and finances, to support the information security program and its activities.

The framework should ensure that the information security strategy, policies, and objectives are aligned with the business goals, stakeholder expectations, and regulatory requirements. The framework should also enable the effective allocation and coordination of internal and external resources, such as people, processes, technology, and finances, to support the information security program and its activities. (From CISM Manual or related resources)

References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 181; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 9th Edition, Question 49, page 14

= Reevaluation of risk is a vital aspect of the risk management process that helps organizations to identify and analyze new or evolving threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts on their assets, and implement the necessary controls to mitigate them. Reevaluation of risk is most critical when there is a change in the threat landscape, which refers to the external and internal factors that influence the likelihood and severity of potential attacks on the organization’s information assets. A change in the threat landscape may be caused by various factors, such as technological innovations, geopolitical events, cybercrime trends, regulatory changes, or organizational changes. A change in the threat landscape may introduce new risks or alter the existing risk profile of the organization, requiring a reassessment of the risk appetite, tolerance, and strategy. Reevaluation of risk helps the organization to adapt to the changing threat landscape and ensure that the information security program remains effective, efficient, and aligned with the business objectives.

References =

CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 1131

CISM Domain 2: Information Risk Management (IRM) [2022 update]2

Reevaluation of Risk | CISM Exam Question Answer | ISACA3

 When developing a categorization method for security incidents, the categories must have agreed-upon definitions. This means that the categories should be clear, consistent, and understandable for all the parties involved in the incident response process, such as the incident handlers, the stakeholders, the management, and the external authorities. Having agreed-upon definitions for the categories can help to ensure that the incidents are classified and reported accurately, that the appropriate actions and resources are allocated, and that the communication and coordination are effective. Aligning with industry standards, creating by the incident handler, and aligning with reporting requirements are not mandatory for developing a categorization method for security incidents, although they may be desirable or beneficial depending on the context and objectives of the organization. Aligning with industry standards can help to adopt best practices and benchmarks for incident response, but it may not be feasible or suitable for all types of incidents or organizations. Creating by the incident handler can allow for flexibility and customization of the categories, but it may also introduce inconsistency and ambiguity if the definitions are not shared or agreed upon by others. Aligning with reporting requirements can help to comply with legal or contractual obligations, but it may not cover all the aspects or dimensions of the incidents that need to be categorized. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, pages 200-2011; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, page 822

When developing a categorization method for security incidents, the categories MUST have agreed-upon definitions. This is because having clear and consistent definitions for each category of incidents will help to ensure a common understanding and communication among the incident response team and other stakeholders. It will also facilitate the accurate and timely identification, classification, reporting and analysis of incidents. Having agreed-upon definitions will also help to avoid confusion, ambiguity and inconsistency in the incident management process