Pass the Isaca Isaca Certification CRISC Questions and answers with CertsForce

The IT control environment is the set of standards, processes, and structures that provide the basis for carrying out IT internal control across the organization1. The IT control environment comprises the IT governance, IT policies and procedures, IT organizational structure, IT roles and responsibilities, IT competencies and training, and IT culture and ethics2. The effectiveness of the IT control environment can be measured by how well it supports the achievement of the organization’s IT objectives, such as IT reliability, security, compliance, and performance3.

One of the best ways to provide the most up-to-date information about the effectiveness of the organization’s overall IT control environment is to perform periodic penetrationtesting. Penetration testing is the process of simulating real-world cyberattacks on the organization’s IT systems, networks, and applications, to identify and exploit any vulnerabilities, weaknesses, or gaps in the IT control environment4. Penetration testing can help to:

Evaluate the current state and maturity of the IT control environment and its alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

Detect and prioritize the most critical and urgent IT risks and threats that may compromise the organization’s IT objectives or assets

Test and validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing IT controls and their ability to prevent, detect, or respond to cyberattacks

Provide recommendations and feedback for improving the IT control environment and enhancing the IT security posture and resilience of the organization

References = COSO – Control Environment - Deloitte, How to use COSO to assess IT controls - Journal of Accountancy, What is Penetration Testing?, [Penetration Testing: A Guide for Business Leaders]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 25

Information Technology & Security, page 19

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 17

The best course of action for a risk practitioner when senior management is deciding whether to share confidential data with the organization’s business partners is to submit a report to senior management containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans. A risk practitioner is a professional who is responsible for identifying, assessing, and managing the risks that could affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A risk practitioner should provide senior management with the information and guidance they need to make informed and effective decisions regarding the sharing of confidential data. A risk practitioner should submit a report that outlines the possible risk scenarios, such as data loss, theft, or compromise, and theirlikelihood and impact. A risk practitioner should also suggest mitigation plans, such as encryption, access control, monitoring, or contractual agreements, that could reduce or transfer the risk. The other options are not as effective as submitting a report containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans, although they may be part of or derived from the report. Designing controls to encrypt the data to be shared, developing a project plan for classification of the data, and summarizing the data protection and privacy legislation are all activities or outcomes that could be included or referenced in thereport, but they are not the best course of action for a risk practitioner. References = CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 2-23

Prioritizing threats and controls helps tofocus resources and mitigationon high-risk elements that directly impact project objectives. This enhances decision-making and project alignment with business goals.

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 andpolicies 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

Involve the development team in planning is the best recommendation to help reduce IT risk associated with scheduling overruns when starting a new application development project. This is because involving the development team in planning can help ensure that the project scope, requirements, resources, and timeline are realistic, feasible, and agreed upon by all stakeholders. It can also help improve the communication, collaboration, and commitment of the development team, as well as identify and mitigate potential risks and issues early in the project life cycle. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk identification techniques for IT projects is to involve the project team and other relevant parties in the risk assessment process1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, involving the development team in planning is the correct answer to this question2.

Implementing a tool to track the development team’s deliverables, reviewing the software development life cycle, and assigning more developers to the project team are not the best recommendations to help reduce IT risk associated with scheduling overruns. These are possible actions that can be taken during or after the planning phase, but they do not address the root cause of the risk, which is the lack of involvement of the development team in planning. Implementing a tool to track the development team’s deliverables can help monitor the project progress and performance, but it does not guarantee that the deliverables are aligned with the project objectives and expectations. Reviewing the software development life cycle can help ensure that the project follows a structured and standardized process, but it does not account for the specific needs and challenges of the project. Assigning more developers to the project team can help increase the project capacity and productivity, but it can also introduce new risks such as coordination, communication, and quality issues.

The best way to ensure the continued effectiveness of the IT risk management function within an organization experiencing high employee turnover is to have well documented policies and procedures. Policies and procedures are the formal documents that define the roles, responsibilities, processes, and standards for the IT risk management function. They provide guidance, consistency, and continuity for the IT risk management activities and outcomes. They also facilitate the knowledge transfer, training, and performance evaluation of the IT risk management staff. The other options are not as helpful as well documented policies and procedures, as they are related to the tools, mechanisms, or structures that support the IT risk management function, not the foundation and direction of the IT risk managementfunction. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Process, page 15.

The conditional approval of the CIO’s proposal indicates the organization’s risk appetite. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. By setting a limit for expenditures before final approval, senior management isexpressing their willingness to take a calculated risk with the new technology, but also their desire to control the potential loss or harm. Risk capacity, management capability, and treatment strategy are other possible factors, but they are not as relevant as risk appetite. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97

There is no definitive answer to this question, as different factors may be more or less important depending on the context and the nature of the risk. However, based on some web search results, one possible factor that could be considered essential for managing risk in a highly dynamic environment is D. Implementing detection and response measures.

Detection and response measures are the practices and procedures that enable an organization to identify and mitigate any potential or actual cybersecurity events that could compromise its network, systems, data, or assets. Detection and response measures can help an organization to reduce the impact and duration of a cyberattack, as well as to learn from the incident and improve its security posture and resilience. Detection and response measures can also help an organization to comply with regulatory and legal requirements, as well as to maintain its reputation and trust among its stakeholders.

Some examples of detection and response measures include:

•Using threat intelligence, user behavior analytics, and attacker behavior analytics to monitor and analyze the network activity and identify any anomalies or signs of compromise 12

•Implementing security continuous monitoring, intrusion detection and prevention systems, and antivirus and antimalware software to detect and block malicious traffic and malware 3

•Establishing incident response plans, teams, and tools to contain, eradicate, and recover from a cyberattack, as well as to communicate and coordinate with internal and external parties 45

•Conducting regular audits, assessments, and tests to evaluate the effectiveness of the detection and response measures and to identify any gaps or weaknesses 6

Therefore, implementing detection and response measures could be seen as an essential factor for managing risk in a highly dynamic environment, as it can help an organization to protect its critical assets and functions, and to respond quickly and effectively to any emerging or evolving threats.

The first step in conducting a BIA is to identify critical information assets. This involves determining which assets are essential to the organization's operations and would have the most significant impact if disrupted. Understanding these assets sets the foundation for assessing potential impacts and developing appropriate recovery strategies.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1: Risk and control self-assessment - KPMG Global1

2: Control Self Assessments - PwC2

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

4: RISK MANAGEMENT SELF-ASSESSMENT TEMPLATE - Smartsheet5

5: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

The BEST way to demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives is through risk scenarios, because they are the descriptions and illustrations of the potential events or situations that may affect the achievement of the business objectives and processes. Risk scenarios can help to demonstrate how the risk profile, which is the summary and representation of the identified and assessed risks, is relatedand relevant to the business objectives and processes, and how the risk responses and controls are designed and implemented to support and enable the business objectives and processes. The other options are not the best way, because:

Option B: Risk tolerance is the level of variation or deviation from the expected or desired outcome that the organization is willing to accept or endure, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of ensuring that the risk profile and the business objectives are consistent and compatible with each other.

Option C: Risk policy is the document that defines the principles, guidelines, and requirements for the risk management process and activities in the organization, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of showing and proving that the risk profile and the business objectives are coherent and integrated with each other.

Option D: Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to take or pursue in order to achieve its objectives and goals, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of establishing and maintaining that the risk profile and the business objectives are aligned and balanced with each other. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 104.

Conducting interviews with senior management is the best method for determining an enterprise’s current appetite for risk, because it helps to obtain the direct and qualitative input and feedback from the senior management on their expectations and preferences regarding thelevel and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept or pursue, in relation to its objectives and strategy. Risk appetite is the amount and nature of risk that an enterprise is willing to take in order to achieve its objectives and create value. Risk appetite is influenced by factors such as the enterprise’s culture, values, vision, mission, and strategy, as well as the externalenvironment and stakeholders. Risk appetite may vary depending on the context and situation, and may change over time. Conducting interviews with senior management is the best method, as it helps to understand and capture the current and explicit risk appetite of the enterprise, and to align the risk management process and activities with the senior management’s risk vision and direction. Conducting comparative analysis of peer companies, reviewing brokerage firm assessments, and performing trend analysis using prior annual reports are all possible methods for determining an enterprise’s current appetite for risk, but they are not the best method, as they may provide only indirect, quantitative, or historical information, and may not reflect the current and specific risk appetite of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 45

The most important element to update when an organization’s risk appetite changes is the key risk indicators (KRIs). KRIs are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. They help to monitor the level of risk and to trigger risk responses when the risk exceeds the risk appetite. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk reportingmethodology, key performance indicators (KPIs), and risk taxonomy are other elements that may be updated, but they are not as important as the KRIs. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

A risk treatment plan is a document that outlines the approach and actions to be taken to address the unacceptable risks identified in the risk assessment process1. A risk treatment plan should include the following components2:

The risk identification number and description

The risk treatment option chosen (e.g., avoid, reduce, share, or accept)

The risk treatment owner, who is responsible for implementing and monitoring the risk treatment

The risk treatment actions, which are the specific tasks or steps to be performed to execute the risk treatment

The risk treatment resources, which are the human, financial, or technical resources required to support the risk treatment

The risk treatment target date, which is the deadline for completing the risk treatment

The risk treatment performance indicators, which are the measures to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk treatment

The risk treatment status, which is the current progress or outcome of the risk treatment

Among the four options given, the most important component in a risk treatment plan is the treatment plan ownership. This is because the treatment plan ownership defines theaccountability and authority for the risk treatment, and ensures that the risk treatment actions are carried out as planned and reported as required3. The treatment plan ownership also facilitates the communication and coordination among the stakeholders involved in the risk treatment, and enables the escalation and resolution of any issues or challenges that may arise during the risk treatment process4.

References = Risk Treatment (With Examples), ISO 27001 Risk Assessment & Risk Treatment: The Complete Guide, Risk Management Framework - Treat Risks, Risk Management Plan Components

Scheduling periodic audits is the best way to facilitate the maintenance of data classification requirements, because it helps to verify and validate that the data are classified and handled according to the established policies, standards, and guidelines, and that the data classification requirements are updated and aligned with the changes in the data environment or regulations. Data classification is a process of categorizing data according to their sensitivity, confidentiality, and value to the organization, and specifying the appropriate handling and protection measures for each category. Data classification requirements are the rules or criteria that define how data should be classified and treated. Scheduling periodic audits is the best way to ensure that the data classification requirements are followed and maintained, and that any issues or gaps are identified and addressed. Assigning a data custodian, implementing technical controls over theassets, and establishing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution are all useful ways to facilitate the maintenance of data classification requirements, but they are not the best way, as they do not provide a comprehensive and independent review and assessment of the data classification process and outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

 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 outlinesthe 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 seniormanagement 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 aggregationtool 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 theroles 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 vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in the IT system or environment that could be exploited by a threat. A threat event is an occurrence or action that exploits a vulnerability and causes harm or damage to the IT system or environment. The lack of data to measure threat events is the most important factor, because it may affect the accuracy and reliability of the risk assessment and evaluation, and consequently, the risk response and strategy. The lack of data to measure threat events may also create challenges or risks for the organization, such as compliance, legal, reputational, or operational risks, or conflicts or inconsistencies with the organization’s risk appetite, risk objectives, or risk policies. The other options are not as important as the lack of data to measure threat events, although they may also influence the risk response and strategy. The likelihood and impact of threat events, the cost to implement the risk response, and the monetary value of the asset are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the risk response and strategy, but they do not necessarily affect the validity and quality of the risk assessment and evaluation

The risk practitioner’s first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls should be A. Determine whether the impact is outside the risk appetite1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk culture, strategy, and values2

When an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, it means that the controls are not providing the expected level of protection or assurance for the information assets or processes. This may result in increased exposure or vulnerability to threats, or reduced ability to achieve objectives. Therefore, the risk practitioner should first determine whether the impact of the ineffective controls is outside the risk appetite, as this would indicate the need for urgent action or escalation3

The other options are not the first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, because:

•B. Requesting a formal acceptance of risk from senior management may be appropriate if the impact of the ineffective controls is within the risk appetite, and the organization decides to accept the risk as it is. However, this should not be the first course of action, as it may not address the root cause of the ineffective controls, or the potential consequences or opportunities for improvement4

•C. Reporting the ineffective control for inclusion in the next audit report may be part of the risk communication and reporting process, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may delay the resolution or mitigation of the issue, or the implementation of corrective actions. Moreover, the next audit report may not be timely or relevant for the decision-makers or stakeholders who need to be informed of the ineffective controls5

•D. Deploying a compensating control to address the identified deficiencies may be a possible risk response option, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may require further analysis, evaluation, and approval. Moreover, deploying a compensating control may not be the most effective or efficient solution, as it may introduce additional complexity, cost, or risk.

1: CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 100003 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 28 3: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 223 4: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 224 5: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 225 : CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 226

 A violation of segregation of duties is when the same person performs two or more conflicting tasks that could compromise the security or integrity of a system or process. In the context of IT risk management, segregation of duties aims to prevent fraud, errors, sabotage, theft, misuse of information, and other security breaches. One of the common categories of functions to be separated is the authorization function, which involves evaluating and approving transactions or changes. Another category is the custody function, which involves managing or accessing physical or digital assets. A programmer who writes and promotes code into production is performing both the authorization and the custody functions, which creates a high-risk conflict.The programmer could introduce malicious or erroneous code into the system without proper review or approval, and potentially cause harm to the organization or its stakeholders. Therefore, this scenario is a violation of segregation of duties. References =

Segregation of Duties: Examples of Roles, Duties & Violations

Separation of duties - Wikipedia

Segregation of duties: prevent fraud and error - eftsure

Key performance indicators (KPIs) will best support management reporting on risk, as they help to measure and monitor the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and control processes. KPIs are metrics or measures that provide information on the current or potentialperformance of a specific activity, process, or objective. KPIs can be classified into two types: leading and lagging. Leading KPIs are predictive indicators that provide early warning signals or trends of future performance. Lagging KPIs are outcome indicators that reflect the actual or historical performance.

KPIs help to support management reporting on risk by providing the following benefits:

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

They facilitate a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating risk performance across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

They support the alignment of risk management and control activities with the organizational strategy and objectives, and help to evaluate the achievement of the desired outcomes.

They help to identify and prioritize the areas for improvement and enhancement of the risk management and control processes, and guide the development and implementation of corrective or preventive actions.

They provide feedback and learning opportunities for the risk management and control processes, and help to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best choices to support management reporting on risk. Control self-assessment (CSA) is a process that involves the participation and involvement of the staff and managers in assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of the internal controls within their areas of responsibility, but it does not provide a comprehensive or objective view of the risk performance. Risk policy requirements are the documents that define the principles, rules, and guidelines for the risk management and control processes, but they do not provide actual or potential information on the risk performance. A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the information and status of the identified risks and their responses, but it does not measure or monitor the risk performance. References = Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Risk Management - Resolver, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Risk Reporting - Open Risk Manual

The next thing that the risk practitioner should do from a risk management perspective when the organization is considering the adoption of an aggressive business strategy to achieve desired growth is to identify new threats resulting from the new business strategy. A threat is a potentialcause of an unwanted incident that may affect the achievement of the objectives. An aggressive business strategy is a strategy that involves pursuing high-risk, high-reward opportunities or initiatives to gain a competitive advantage or a significant market share. An aggressive business strategy may introduce new threats or increase thelikelihood or impact of existing threats, such as market volatility, regulatory changes, customer dissatisfaction, or competitor retaliation. Therefore, the risk practitioner should identify the new threats resulting from the new business strategy, and assess their potential consequences and implications for the organization. The other options are not as immediate as identifying new threats resulting from the new business strategy, as they are related to the update, information, or measurement of the risk management process, not the identification or analysis of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

Requiring MFA increases the security of digital wallets by adding an additional layer of authentication, making it harder for unauthorized users to gain access. This aligns withAccess Control Standardsand significantly reduces the likelihood of fraud.

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

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

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

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

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 controland the frequency of failure of control are aspects of the risk assessment that may indicatethe 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

 The most important consideration when performing a vendor risk assessment is the inherent risk of the business process supported by the vendor, which is the risk that exists before any controls or mitigating factors are applied. The inherent risk reflects the potential impact and likelihood of the vendor’s failure or disruption on the enterprise’s objectives, operations, and reputation. The higher the inherent risk, the more rigorous and frequent the vendor risk assessment should be. The results of the last risk assessment of the vendor, the risk tolerance of the vendor, and the length of time since the last risk assessment of the vendor are not the most important considerations, as they do not directly measure the level of exposure and dependency that the enterprise has on the vendor. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question204; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 204.

A risk map, also known as a risk heat map, is a visual tool that helps an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios by plotting them on a matrix based on their likelihood and impact. A risk map can help to compare and contrast different risk scenarios, as well as to identify the most critical and urgent risks that require attention. A risk map can also help to communicate and report the risk profile and status to the stakeholders and decision makers. Therefore, the placement on the risk map would best help an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios. The other options are not the best ways to help an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios, although they may be relevant and useful. Industry best practices are the standards or guidelines that are widely accepted and followed by the organizations in a specific industry or domain. Industry best practices can help to benchmark and improve the risk management process and performance, but they may not reflect the specific risk context and needs of the enterprise. Degree of variances in the risk is the measure of the variability or uncertainty of the risk, which may affect the accuracy or reliability of the risk assessment and response. Degree of variances in the risk can help to adjust and refine the risk analysis and treatment, but it may not indicate the priority or importance of the risk. Cost of risk mitigation is the amount of resources or expenses that are required or allocated to implement the risk response actions, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risk. Cost of risk mitigation can help to evaluate and optimize therisk response options, but it may not determine the priority or urgency of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 892

The best way to help an enterprise define and communicate its risk appetite is to use a risk register, which is a document that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses1. A risk register can help to:

Define the risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives2. The risk register can include the risk appetite statement, which is a clear and concise expression of the enterprise’s risk preferences and boundaries3.

Communicate the risk appetite, which is the process of sharing and informing the risk appetite to the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, the management, the employees, or the customers4. The risk register can be used as a communication tool, which can provide a consistent and transparent view of the enterprise’s risk profile and performance5.

The other options are not the best ways to help an enterprise define and communicate its risk appetite, because:

Gap analysis is a technique that compares the current state and the desired state of a process, system, or organization, and identifies the gaps or differences between them6. Gap analysis can help to assess the alignment or misalignment of the enterprise’s risk appetite with its risk level, but it does not help to define or communicate the risk appetite itself.

Risk assessment is a process that estimates the probability and impact of the risks, and prioritizes the risks based on their significance and urgency. Risk assessment can help to identify andanalyze the risks that may affect the enterprise’s objectives, but it does not help to define or communicate the risk appetite itself.

Heat map is a graphical representation that uses colors to indicate the level or intensity of a variable, such as risk. Heat map can help to visualize and compare the risks based on their probability and impact, but it does not help to define or communicate the risk appetite itself.

References =

Risk Register - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite Statement - CIO Wiki

Risk Communication - CIO Wiki

Risk Reporting - CIO Wiki

Gap Analysis - CIO Wiki

[Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

[Heat Map - CIO Wiki]

[Risk and Information Systems Control documents and learning resources by ISACA]

Participation in the risk assessment may constitute a conflict of interest, because it may create a situation where the risk practitioner’s personal or professional interests or relationships interfere with their objectivity, independence, or impartiality in conducting the risk assessment. A conflict of interest is a type of risk that may compromise the integrity, quality, or validity of the risk assessment process and outcomes, and may damage the reputation or trust of the risk practitioner or the organization. A conflict of interest may arise when the risk practitioner has a direct or indirect connection or involvement with the subject or stakeholder of the risk assessment, such as a previous or current role, responsibility, or relationship, that may influence or bias theirjudgment or decision. Participation in the risk assessment may constitute a conflict of interest, as the risk practitioner may have a prior or residual interest or loyalty to the financialprocess team or the new critical application, and may not be able to assess the risk in a fair and unbiased manner.

The risk assessment team being overly confident of its ability to identify issues, the risk practitioner being unfamiliar with recent application and process changes, and the risk practitioner still having access rights to the financial system are all possible concerns with the request, but they are not the greatest concern, as they do not necessarily imply a conflict of interest, and they may be mitigated or resolved by other means, such as training, documentation, or review.

The type of risk that is most likely to materialize as a result of allowing several employees to retire early in order to avoid layoffs is institutional knowledge loss, as it represents the loss of valuable information, experience, and expertise that the employees have accumulated over time, and that may not be easily transferred or replaced. Confidentiality breach, intellectual property loss, and unauthorized access are not the most likely types of risk, as they are more related to the security, ownership, or access of information, respectively, rather than the retention or transfer of knowledge. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

The primary reason for logging is to provide evidence of activities, ensuring accountability and traceability. This supports investigations, audits, and compliance requirements, aligning withControl Monitoring and Reportingstandards.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the security management function is responsible for ensuring that effective cybersecurity controls are established and maintained. The security management function should:

Define the cybersecurity strategy and objectives aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and business goals

Establish and maintain the cybersecurity policies, standards, procedures and guidelines

Implement and monitor the cybersecurity controls and processes

Coordinate and communicate with other stakeholders, such as risk owners, IT management, enterprise risk function, internal and external auditors, regulators and third parties

Report on the cybersecurity performance and risk posture to senior management and the board

Continuously improve the cybersecurity capabilities and maturity

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Management Roles and Responsibilities, pp. 29-301

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that reflects how well an organization is achieving its goals and objectives. A KPI should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. For an IT department that has organized training sessions to improve user awareness of organizational information security policies, the best KPI to reflect the effectiveness of the training is the percentage of staff members who complete the training with a passing score. This KPI measures the level of knowledge and understanding of the security policies among the staff members, as well as the quality and impact of the training sessions. It also indicates whether the training sessions have met the predefined criteria and standards for success. A high percentage of staff members who complete the training with a passing score implies that the training sessions have been effective in improving user awareness of organizational information security policies. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, p. 117-118

The percentage of IT systems routinely running at peak utilization serves as a leading indicator of potential future availability issues. Systems operating at or near full capacity are more susceptible to performance degradation or outages, which can impede their ability to meet service level agreements (SLAs). Monitoring this KRI allows organizations to proactively address capacity constraints before they impact system availability.

The best recommendation to address recent IT risk trends that indicate social engineering attempts are increasing in the organization is to conduct a simulated phishing attack, as it tests the awareness and behavior of the employees in responding to a realistic and targeted email scam, and identifies the areas and individuals that need improvement or training. Updating spam filters, revising the acceptable use policy, and strengthening disciplinary procedures are not the best recommendations, as they may not address the human factor of the risk, or may be too reactive or punitive, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

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 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 orunacceptable. 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.

 A compensating control is a control that is implemented to reduce the risk exposure when the primary control is not feasible or cost-effective. A compensating control may not directly address the root cause of the risk, but it can provide an alternative or supplementary way of mitigating the risk. A residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response has been implemented. A residual risk can be accepted, monitored, or further reduced depending on the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. During a risk assessment, a risk practitioner is a person who is responsible for identifying and analyzing the potential sources and consequences of risk events. When a risk practitioner learns that an IT risk factor is adequately mitigated by compensating controls in an associated business process, the action that would enable the most effective management of the residual risk is to schedule periodic reviews of the compensating controls’ effectiveness, which means to measure and evaluate the performance and compliance of the compensating controls on a regular basis. By scheduling periodic reviews of the compensating controls’ effectiveness, the risk practitioner can ensure that the compensating controls are stilloperating as intended, and that they are delivering the expected results. The risk practitioner can also identify any gaps or weaknesses in the compensating controls, and recommend any improvements or adjustments as needed. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 177.

When establishing leading indicators for the information security incident response process, it is most important to consider the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the service levelagreement (SLA). A leading indicator is a metric that can predict or influence the future performance or outcome of a process or activity. A leading indicator for the information security incident response process should measure how well the process is achieving its objectives, such as minimizing the impact of incidents, restoring normal operations as quickly as possible, and preventing recurrence of incidents. The percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is a leading indicator that reflects the efficiency and effectiveness of the information security incident response process. It shows how well the process is meeting the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders, such as the business units, customers, and regulators. It also shows how well the process is managing the resources, such as time, budget, and personnel, that are allocated for incident response. A high percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA indicates that the information security incident response process is performing well and delivering value to the organization. A low percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA indicates that the information security incident response process is facing challenges and needs improvement. The percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA can also help identify the root causes of incidents, the gaps in the process, and the areas for improvement. For example, if the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is low, it may indicate that the process has issues with the following aspects: - Incident detection and reporting: The process may not have adequate tools, techniques, or procedures to detect and report incidents in a timely and accurate manner. - Incident prioritization and classification: The process may not have clear and consistent criteria to prioritize and classify incidents based on their severity, impact, and urgency. - Incident analysis and investigation: The process may not have sufficient skills, knowledge, or evidence to analyze and investigate the incidents and determine their root causes, scope, and consequences. - Incident containment and eradication: The process may not have effective methods or measures to contain and eradicate the incidents and prevent them from spreading or escalating. - Incidentrecovery and restoration: The process may not have reliable backup and recovery plans or systems to restore the normal operations and functionality of the affected systems or services. - Incident communication and escalation: The process may not have proper communication and escalation channels or protocols to inform and involve the relevant stakeholders, such as the management, the users, the vendors, or the authorities. - Incident documentation and closure:The process may not have adequate documentation and closure procedures to record and report the incidents and their resolution. - Incident review and improvement: The process may not have regular review and improvement activities to evaluate and enhance the process and its performance. Therefore, the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is the most important leading indicator for the information security incident response process, as it can provide valuable insights and feedback for the process and its improvement. References = Information Security Incident Response | Process Street1, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Security Operations and Incident Response2, 7 Incident Response Metrics and How to Use Them3

Data leakage is the unauthorized or accidental disclosure of sensitive or confidential data to unauthorized parties. Data leakage can cause serious damages or losses to the organization, such as data breaches, fines, lawsuits, reputational harm, or loss of customer trust. Data leakage can occur due to various reasons, such as human errors, malicious attacks, or inadequate controls1.

An organization that uses a vendor to destroy hard drives faces a risk of data leakage, as the vendor may not properly or securely destroy the hard drives, or may access or misuse the data stored on them. The best way to reduce this risk is to use an accredited vendor to dispose of the hard drives, because it means that the vendor:

Has been certified or verified by a reputable or recognized authority or organization, such as ISACA, NAID, or R2, to provide hard drive destruction services

Follows the industry standards and best practices for hard drive destruction, such as NIST 800-88 or DoD 5220.22-M, and ensures the compliance with the legal and regulatory requirements, such as HIPAA, PCI DSS, or GDPR

Provides a secure and transparent process for hard drive destruction, such as using a specialized shredder, issuing a certificate of destruction, or allowing the customer to witness the destruction

Maintains a high level of professionalism and integrity, and does not compromise the confidentiality or security of the customer’s data234

The other options are not the best ways to reduce the risk of data leakage, but rather some of the steps or aspects of hard drive destruction. Require the vendor to degauss the hard drives is a step that can help to erase the data on the hard drives by using a strong magnetic field. However,degaussing may not be effective or reliable for some types of hard drives, such as solid state drives (SSDs), and it may not prevent the vendor from accessing or misusing the data before degaussing5. Implement an encryption policy for the hard drives is an aspect that can help to protect the data on the hard drives by using a cryptographic algorithm to make it unreadable without a key. However, encryption may not be sufficient or applicable for some types of data, such as metadata, and it may not prevent the vendor from accessing or misusing the key or the encrypted data6. Require confirmation of destruction from the IT manager is a step that can help to verify that the hard drives have been destroyed by the vendor, and to document the process and the outcome. However, confirmation of destruction may not be accurate or authentic, and it may not prevent the vendor from accessing or misusing the data before destruction7. References =

Data Leakage - ISACA

Hard Drive Shredding Services | Hard Drive Destruction & Disposal

Hard Drive Shredding and Destruction Service | CompuCycle

Electronic Destruction & Recycling | Shred Nations

Degaussing - ISACA

Encryption - ISACA

Certificate of Destruction - ISACA

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The information classification policy is the most important document regarding the treatment of sensitive data, because it defines the categories and criteria for classifying data according to their sensitivity, confidentiality, and value to the organization, and specifies the appropriate handling and protection measures for each category. Sensitive data are data that contain personal,proprietary, or confidential information that may cause harm or damage to the organization or its stakeholders if disclosed, modified, or destroyed without authorization. An information classification policy helps to ensure that sensitive data are identified and treated in a consistent and secure manner, and that the organization complies with the applicable laws andregulations regarding data protection and privacy. An encryption policy, an organization risk profile, and a digital rights management policy are all useful documents for the treatment of sensitive data, but they are not the most important document, as they do not directly address the classification and handling of sensitive data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

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 copewith 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 169

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep