Pass the Isaca Isaca Certification CRISC Questions and answers with CertsForce

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.

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.

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

Introduction of a New Product Line (Answer D):

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

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

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

A. An incident resulting in data loss:

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

B. Changes in executive management:

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

C. Updates to the information security policy:

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

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

Biased recommendations from AI models pose significant risks to decision-making and organizational ethics. Such biases can propagate systemic issues and impact regulatory compliance, emphasizing the need for robust controls in AI development and deployment underEmerging Technology Risks.

 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

The best recommendation for a risk practitioner when an employee lost a personal mobile device that may contain sensitive corporate information is to initiate a remote data wipe. A remote data wipe is a process of erasing the data stored on a device remotely, using a command sent over anetwork or a wireless connection. A remote data wipe can help to prevent the unauthorized access, use, disclosure, or theft of the sensitive corporate information, and to minimize the potential impact of the loss on the enterprise’s reputation, operations, and compliance. A remote data wipe can also help to comply with the data breach notification laws and regulations, and to reduce the legal liability and penalties. Conducting a risk analysis, invoking the incident response plan, and disabling the user account are not as immediate and effective as initiating a remote data wipe, as they do not address the primary risk of data exposure and loss. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

An intrusion detection system (IDS) is a network security tool that monitors network traffic and devices for known malicious activity, suspicious activity or security policy violations1. An IDS can generate alerts when it detects any potential threats, but not all alerts are accurate or relevant. There are two types of errors that can affect the performance and reliability of an IDS: false positives and false negatives2.

A false positive is when an IDS incorrectly flags a benign or normal activity as malicious or suspicious. For example, an IDS may alert on a legitimate network scan or a harmless software update. False positives can reduce the credibility and efficiency of an IDS, as they can overwhelm the security team with unnecessary alerts, distract them from the real threats, and cause them to ignore or disable the IDS3.

A false negative is when an IDS fails to flag a malicious or suspicious activity as such. For example, an IDS may miss a stealthy or novel attack that does not match any known signatures or patterns. False negatives can compromise the security and integrity of the network, as they can allow attackers to bypass the IDS and cause damage or steal data without being detected4.

The risk practitioner should recommend to analyze the alerts to minimize the false positives, because this is the best way to improve the accuracy and usefulness of the IDS. By analyzing the alerts, the risk practitioner can:

Identify the sources and causes of the false positives, such as misconfigured or outdated IDS rules, network anomalies, or legitimate traffic that resembles malicious traffic5.

Adjust or fine-tune the IDS settings, such as the alert threshold, the sensitivity level, the detection method, or the rule base, to reduce the number of false positives without increasing the risk of false negatives.

Validate or verify the alerts with other sources of information, such as logs, network traffic analysis, or threat intelligence, to confirm or dismiss the alerts as true or false positives.

Prioritize or classify the alerts based on their severity, impact, or likelihood, to focus on the most critical or relevant alerts and avoid alert fatigue.

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

Resetting the alert threshold based on peak traffic is not a reliable or effective way to minimize the false positives, as it may also increase the risk of false negatives. The alert threshold is the level of activity or deviation that triggers an alert from the IDS. If the threshold is set too high, the IDS may miss some malicious or suspicious activity that occurs below the threshold. If the threshold is set too low, the IDS may generate too many alerts for normal or benign activity that exceeds the threshold. The optimal threshold depends on various factors, such as the network size, topology, traffic volume, and baseline. Peak traffic is not a good indicator of the optimal threshold, as it may vary depending on the time, day, or season, and it may not reflect the normal or expected network behavior.

Analyzing the traffic to minimize the false negatives is not the main issue or goal in this scenario, as the problem is the high number of alerts, not the low number of alerts. Analyzing thetraffic can help to identify the malicious or suspicious activity that the IDS may have missed, but it does not address the root cause of the false positives or improve the IDS performance. Moreover, analyzing the traffic can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, especially for large or complex networks, and it may require specialized tools or skills that the risk practitioner may not have.

Sniffing the traffic using a network analyzer is not a suitable or feasible option in this scenario, as it may violate the privacy or security policies of the network or the organization. Sniffing the traffic means capturing and inspecting the network packets that are transmitted or received by the devices on the network. A network analyzer is a tool that can perform this function and display the packet data in a readable format. However, sniffing the traffic can also expose sensitive or confidential information, such as passwords, usernames, or credit card numbers, that may be contained in the packets. Therefore, sniffing the traffic may require authorization or consent from the network owners or users, and it may be restricted or prohibited by law or regulation.

References =

What is an intrusion detection system (IDS)? - IBM

Intrusion detection system - Wikipedia

What Are Intrusion Detection Systems? - MUO

12 Best Intrusion Detection System (IDS) Software 2024 - Comparitech

What is an Intrusion Detection System (IDS)? - Fortinet

[False Positive and False Negative in Intrusion Detection System]

[False Positives and False Negatives in Intrusion Detection Systems]

[How to Reduce False Positives for Your IDS/IPS]

[How to Set the Right Alert Thresholds for Your IDS/IPS]

[Network Traffic Analysis: What It Is and How It Works]

[What is a Network Analyzer? - Definition from Techopedia]

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a root cause analysis is a technique that identifies the underlying causes of an event or a problem. It helps to determine the most effective actions to prevent or mitigate the recurrence of the event or problem. A root cause analysis is the best approach for the risk practitioner to take in this scenario, because it will help to understand why the number of emergency changes has increased substantially and what can be done to address the issue. The other options are not the best approaches, because they do not address the underlying causes of the problem. Temporarily suspending emergency changes may disrupt the business operations and create more risks. Documenting the control deficiency in the risk register is a passive action that does not resolve the problem. Continuing monitoring change management metrics is an ongoing activity that does not provide any insight into the problem. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.4, page 130.

 The data owner is accountable for the confidentiality of the data that is outsourced to a third party with servers located in a foreign country. The data owner is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility to classify, label, and protect the data according to the organization’s policies and standards. The data owner is also responsible for defining the data access rights and privileges, and for ensuring that the data is handled in compliance with the applicable laws and regulations. The data owner retains the accountability for the data even when it is outsourced to a third party, and must monitor and evaluate the security performance and compliance of the service provider. The third-party data custodian, the data custodian, and the regional office executive are not accountable for the confidentiality of the data, as they have different roles and responsibilities in the outsourcing process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.2, page 2461

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 654.

The primary driver for an organization on a multi-year cloud implementation to publish a cloud security policy is to establish minimum cloud security requirements, as they specify the standards and expectations for the protection of the data and systems in the cloud environment, and ensure the alignment and compliance of the cloud security strategy with the organizational objectives and regulations. The other options are not the primary drivers, as they are more related to the evaluation, enforcement, or education of the cloud securitypolicy, respectively, rather than the establishment of the cloud security policy. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

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

When the cost of mitigating a risk exceeds the benefit,organizations may adjust their risk toleranceto accept a higher level of risk. Thus, financial feasibility influences how much risk the organization is willing to accept.

 Implementing controls to bring the risk to a level within appetite and accept the residual risk is the best recommendation to senior management when the results of a risk and control assessment indicate a risk scenario can only be partially mitigated, as it helps to balance the costs and benefits of the risk management and control processes, and to align them with the organizational strategy and objectives. A risk and control assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and controls associated with a specific activity, process, or objective. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could cause harm or loss to the organization or its stakeholders. A risk scenario can only be partially mitigated when the existing or proposed controls are not sufficient or effective to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. A risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. A residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls or risk treatments.

Implementing controls to bring the risk to a level within appetite and accept the residual risk helps to provide the following benefits:

It enables a data-driven and evidence-based approach to risk management and reporting, rather than relying on subjective or qualitative judgments.

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating risk levels and exposure across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the development and implementation of effective and efficient risk response and mitigation strategies and actions that are aligned with the business risk appetite and objectives.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the risk management and control processes, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best recommendations to senior management when the results of a risk and control assessment indicate a risk scenario can only be partially mitigated. Implementing a key performance indicator (KPI) to monitor the existing control performance is a useful method to measure and monitor the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, but it does not address the residual risk or the risk appetite. Accepting the residual risk in its entirety andobtaining executive management approval is a possible option to deal with the risk scenario, but it may expose the organization to excessive or unacceptable risk, and it may not comply with the legal or regulatory obligations or requirements. Separating the risk into multiple components and avoiding the risk components that cannot be mitigated is a possible option to deal with the risk scenario, but it may not be feasible or practical, and it may create new or additional risks or challenges. References = Risk and Control Self-Assessment (RCSA) - Management Study Guide, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Risk Mitigation: What It Is and How to Implement It (Free Templates …

The business manager understands how data loss affects operations, revenue, and compliance — making them best positioned to assess impact.

ISACA guidance:

“Business process owners or business managers are responsible for identifying and assessing business impacts resulting from data loss or system unavailability.”

Technical roles may estimate likelihood or technical details, but impact assessment is a business responsibility.

Hence, C is correct.

CRISC Reference: Domain 2 – IT Risk Assessment, Topic: Business Impact Assessment.

A risk map is the best method to ensure that the risk is measurable against the organization’s risk appetite, as it is a graphical tool that displays the level and priority of risks based on their likelihood and impact, as well as other factors such as velocity, persistence, and urgency. A risk map can help to compare and communicate the risk levels across different business units, processes, and projects, and to align them with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. A risk map can also help to identify the gaps and overlaps in risk management, and to support the decision making and resource allocation for risk response. A cause-and-effect diagram is a tool that helps to identify and analyze the root causes and consequences of a risk or a problem, but it does not measure the risk against the organization’s risk appetite. A maturity model is a tool that helps to assess and improve the capability and performance of a process or a function, but it does not measure the risk against the organization’s risk appetite. A technology strategy plan is a document that outlines the vision, goals, and objectives of the organization’s use of information and technology, but it does not measure the risk against the organization’s risk appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Assessment, page 97.

Prioritizing risk responses helps to balance the costs and benefits of managing IT risk by ensuring that the most significant risks are addressed first and that the resources allocated to risk management are used efficiently and effectively. Evaluating risk based on frequency and probability is a part of risk analysis, not risk response. Considering risk factors that can be quantified is also a part of risk analysis, and it does not necessarily capture all the relevant aspects of risk. Managing the risk by using controls is a possible risk response, but it does not guarantee that the costs and benefits of risk management are balanced, as some controls may be too expensive or ineffective for the level of risk they mitigate. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 145.

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

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

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

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

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

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

 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 theenterprise, 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.

The most effective way to incorporate stakeholder concerns when developing risk scenarios is to evaluate the risk impact. Risk impact is the extent of the potential consequences or losses that may result from arisk event. Evaluating the risk impact involves considering the stakeholder concerns, expectations, and perspectives, as they may have different views on the value of the assets, the severity of the threats, and the acceptability of the outcomes. Evaluating the risk impact can help to ensure that the risk scenarios reflect the stakeholder interests and priorities, and that the risk responses are aligned with the stakeholder objectives. Establishing key performance indicators (KPIs), conducting internal audits, and creating quarterly risk reports are not as effective as evaluating the risk impact, as they are not directly related to the development of risk scenarios, and may not capture the stakeholder concerns adequately. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

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

Service level agreements (SLA) are contracts that define the expected level of performance and quality of service that an IT service provider will deliver to its customers. SLA are the best indicators that an organization has implemented IT performance requirements, as they specifythe measurable and verifiable criteria that the IT service provider must meet or exceed, such as availability, reliability, security, and responsiveness. SLA also establish the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved, the methods of monitoring and reporting the service performance, and the consequences of non-compliance or breach of the agreement. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 232. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 232. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 232.

The best indication that key risk indicators (KRIs) should be revised is a decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk. Risk thresholds are the predefined values or ranges that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable level of risk exposure. Critical assets are the assets that are essential or vital for the achievement of the objectives or the continuity of the operations. A decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds means that the KRIs are not capturing or reflecting the current and relevant risk exposure of the organization, and that they may not provide sufficient or accurate information for risk management decisions. Therefore, the KRIs should be revised to ensure that they cover all the critical assets and their risk thresholds.The other options are not as indicative as a decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds, as they are related to the outcomes, impacts, or activities of the KRIs, not thescope or quality of the KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

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 metricsthat 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

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

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

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

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

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

 A cost-benefit analysis of the control versus probable legal action is the best way to inform decision-makers about the value of a notice and consent control for the collection of personal information, as it quantifies the potential benefits and costs of implementing the control and compares them with the potential consequences of not implementing the control. This helps the decision-makers to evaluate the trade-offs and the return on investment of the control.

A comparison of the costs of notice and consent control options is not sufficient to inform decision-makers about the value of the control, as it does not consider the benefits or the risks of the control.

Examples of regulatory fines incurred by industry peers for noncompliance are not the best way to inform decision-makers about the value of the control, as they are based on historical data and may not reflect the current or future situation of the enterprise.

A report of critical controls showing the importance of notice and consent is not the best way to inform decision-makers about the value of the control, as it does not provide any quantitative or comparative data to support the decision. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, page 140-1411

 Zero Trust Architecture:

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

 Basic Tenets of Zero Trust:

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

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

 Key Components:

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

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

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

 Other Options:

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

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

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

 References:

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual, the average time to grant access privileges is the best indicator of the efficiency of a process for granting access privileges, because it measures how quickly and effectively the process can respond to the access requests and meet the business needs. The average time to grant access privileges can be calculated by dividing the total time spent on granting access privileges by the number of access requests processed. The other options are not the best indicators of the efficiency of the process, because they measure other aspects of the process, such as the quality, the security, or the maintenance. The number of changes in access granted to users measures the quality of the process, as it indicates how wellthe process can align the access rights with the user roles and functions. The average number of access privilege exceptions measures the security of the process, as it indicates how often theprocess deviates from the established policies and standards. The number and type of locked obsolete accounts measures the maintenance of the process, as it indicates how well the process can remove the unnecessary or outdated accounts. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.2, page 163

 Involving business management in evaluating and managing risk is beneficial, as it enables management to have a comprehensive and holistic view of the risk environment and its impact on the organization’s objectives and strategy. By participating in the risk management process, management can make better-informed business decisions, as they can consider the risk factors and implications of their choices, and align their decisions with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Involving business management in evaluating and managing risk can also enhance the risk culture and governance of the organization, and foster a proactive and collaborative approach to risk management. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 253. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 253. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

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

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

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

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

A 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 orvulnerabilities, 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?

The first step for the risk practitioner to address the situation of extended network outages that have exceeded tolerance is to recommend a root cause analysis of the incidents. A root cause analysis is a process of identifying and resolving the underlying causes of a problem or an event. By performing a root cause analysis, the risk practitioner can determine why the network outages occurred, what factors contributed to them, and how they can be prevented or reduced in the future. Recommending additional controls, updating the risk tolerance level, and updating the incident-related risk trend are possible steps that may follow the root cause analysis, but they are not the first step. 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 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 effectiveness of a control monitoring program can be measured by how quickly it can detect and correct any control failures that may compromise the achievement of the organization’s objectives. A shorter time between control failure and failure detection means that the control monitoring program is able to identify and report the issues promptly, and initiate the remediation actions accordingly. This can reduce the impact and likelihood of the risks associated with the control failures, and enhance the performance and reliability of the controls. The other options are not as good indicators of the effectiveness of a control monitoring program, because they do not reflect the timeliness and responsiveness of the program, but rather the scope, effort, or frequency of the program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, page 130.

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

===========

Whenever there is a change in sourcing strategy, such as moving from cloud to internal hosting, the first step is to reassess the effectiveness and completeness of existing risk responses and confirm that they still mitigate the risks appropriately.

CRISC emphasizes:

“When transitioning services or changing control environments, practitioners should reassess risk responses and validate that previously identified risks and vulnerabilities remain properly addressed.”

Only after reassessment should the practitioner proceed to update registers, controls, and audit plans.

Hence, A is the correct answer.

CRISC Reference: Domain 3 – Risk Response and Mitigation, Topic: Managing Control Changes.

The percentage of servers receiving automatic patches is the best key control indicator (KCI) to monitor the effectiveness of patch management, because it measures how well the patch management process is ensuring that the servers are updated with the latest security patches and fixes. A high percentage of servers receiving automatic patches indicates that the patch management process is effective and efficient, and that the servers are protected from known vulnerabilities and threats. The other options are not the best KCIs, because they do not directly measure the effectiveness of patch management. The percentage of legacy servers out of support, the number of unpatched vulnerabilities, and the number of intrusion attempts are examples of risk indicators or consequence indicators that measure the exposure or impact of the lack of patch management, but not the performance or outcome of the patch management process. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers

 The most important reason to revisit a previously accepted risk is to ensure that the risk levels have not changed. A previously accepted risk is a risk that the organization has decided to tolerate or retain without taking any further action, because the risk is either low or unavoidable, or the cost or effort of mitigation outweighs the potential benefit. However, risk acceptance is not a static or permanent decision, as the risk levels may change over time due to various factors, such as new threats, vulnerabilities, impacts, or opportunities. Therefore, it is essential to revisit a previously accepted risk periodically or when there is a significant change in the internal or external environment, to verify that the risk is still within the acceptable range and that the risk acceptance rationale is still valid. If the risk levels have increased or decreased, the organization may need to revise the risk acceptance decision and consider other risk response options, such as avoidance, reduction, sharing, or exploitation. The other options are not the most important reason to revisit a previously accepted risk, although they may be relevant or necessary depending on the context and nature of the risk. Updating risk ownership is a part of the risk governance process, which ensures that the roles and responsibilities for managing the risk are clearly defined and assigned, but it does not affect the risk levels or the risk acceptance decision. Reviewing the risk acceptance with new stakeholders is a part of the risk communication process, which ensures that the risk information and the risk acceptance rationale are shared and understood by the relevant parties, but it does not change the risk levels or the risk acceptance decision. Ensuring that the controls are still operating effectively is a part of the risk monitoring and review process, which ensures that the risk response actions are implemented and maintained properly, but it does not apply to the accepted risks, as they do not have any additionalcontrols. References = Understanding Accepted Risk - SC Dashboard | Tenable®, Risk Acceptance — ENISA, Accepting Risk - Overview, Advantages, Disadvantages, Alternatives

Determining if organizational risk is tolerable requires understanding the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives1. Understanding the organization’s risk appetite can help to:

Define and communicate the risk tolerance, which is the acceptable or unacceptable level of risk for each risk category or scenario2.

Guide and align the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes, and ensure that the risks are consistent and proportional to the risk appetite3.

Measure and monitor the risk performance and outcome, and ensure that the residual risk (the risk that remains after the risk responses) is within the risk appetite, or take corrective actions if needed4.

The other options are not the best ways to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, because:

Mapping residual risk with cost of controls is a useful but not sufficient way to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, as it provides a quantitative analysis of the trade-off between the risk level and the risk response cost5. However, mapping residual risk with cost of controls does not consider the qualitative aspects of the risk, such as the impact on the organization’s strategy, culture, or reputation.

Comparing against regulatory requirements is a necessary but not sufficient way to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, as it ensures that the organization complies with the applicable laws, rules, or standards that govern its activities and operations6. However, comparing against regulatory requirements does not guarantee that the organization meets its own objectives and expectations, which may be higher or lower than the regulatory requirements.

Comparing industry risk appetite with the organization’s risk appetite is a helpful but not sufficient way to determine if organizational risk is tolerable, as it provides a reference or a standard for benchmarking the organization’s risk level and performance with its peers or competitors7. However, comparing industry risk appetite with the organization’s risk appetitedoes not ensure that the organization addresses its specific or unique risks, which may differ from the industry risks.

References =

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

Risk Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Management Process - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring - CIO Wiki

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Regulatory Compliance - CIO Wiki

Benchmarking - CIO Wiki

Risk and Information Systems Control documents and learning resources by ISACA

Data usage exceeding individual consent presents the greatest risk to the organization’s reputation, as it violates the privacy and trust of the customers and exposes the organization to legal and regulatory liabilities. Customers have the right to know and control how their personal data is collected, processed, and shared by the organization, and they expect the organization to respect their preferences and comply with the applicable laws and standards. If the organization uses the data for purposes beyond the scope of the consent, or without obtaining the consent in the first place, it may damage its reputation and lose its customers’ loyalty and confidence. Third-party software used for data analytics, revenue generated from data analytics, and use of a data analytics system are not inherently risky to the organization’s reputation, as long as they are transparent, secure, and ethical. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers - The Knowledge Academy; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 203.

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

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

Residual system access is the risk that the customer service representatives who are transferred to the sales department may still have access to the systems or applications that they used in their previous role, which may not be relevant or authorized for their new role.

The access control manager is the person or function who is responsible for defining, implementing, and maintaining the policies and procedures for granting, modifying, reviewing, and revoking access rights to the systems or applications, based on the principle of least privilege and the segregation of duties.

The access control manager is responsible for mitigating the risk associated with residual system access, by ensuring that the access rights of the customer service representatives are updated or removed according to their new role and responsibilities, and that the access changes are documented and approved by the appropriate authorities.

The other options are not responsible for mitigating the risk associated with residual system access. They are either irrelevant or less effective than the access control manager.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 26

Information Technology & Security, page 20

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 18