Pass the Isaca Isaca Certification CRISC Questions and answers with CertsForce

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 The most important thing for an organization to have in place when developing a risk management framework is a strategic approach to risk including an established risk appetite, as this provides the direction, scope, and objectives of the risk management process, and defines the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or avoid in pursuit of its goals. A strategic approach to risk aligns the risk management framework with the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, and ensures that the risk management activities support the achievement of the desired outcomes. An established risk appetite sets the boundaries and criteria for risk decision making, and guides the selection and implementation of risk responses. The other options are not the most important things for an organization to have in place when developing a risk management framework, although they may be useful or necessary components of it. A risk-based internal audit plan is a tool that helps to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of the risk management framework, but it does not define or drive the risk management process. A control function within the risk management team is a role that helps to implement and monitor the risk controls, but it does not determine or influence the risk strategy or appetite. An organization-wide risk awareness training program is a method that helps to enhance the risk culture and competence of the organization, but it does not establish or communicate the risk approach or appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, page 23.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2: 10 security risks of wearables | CSO Online2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

5: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA3

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

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

Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US

Risk mitigation procedures are the actions and plans that an organization implements to reduce the likelihood and impact of identified risks. Risk mitigation procedures should include the deployment of counter measures, which are the specific controls or solutions that address the root causes or sources of the risks, and prevent or minimize the potential losses or damages. For example, a counter measure for therisk of data breach could be encrypting the data or implementing a firewall. The deployment of counter measures should be based on a cost-benefit analysis, a risk assessment, and a risk response strategy. The other options are not necessarily part of risk mitigation procedures. Buying an insurance policy is an example of risk transfer,which is a risk response strategy that shifts the responsibility or burden of the risk to another party, such as an insurer or a vendor. However, risk transfer does not eliminate or reduce the risk itself, and it may involve additional costs or conditions. Acceptance of exposures is an example of risk acceptance, which is a risk response strategy that acknowledges the existence and consequences of the risk, and decides not to take any action to change the risk situation. However, risk acceptance does not mitigate the risk, and it may require contingency plans or reserves to deal with the potential outcomes. Enterprise architecture implementation is an example of a business process or project that may involve or create risks, but it is not a risk mitigation procedure itself. Enterprise architecture is the design and structure of an organization’s IT systems, networks, and resources, and how they align with the organization’s goals and strategies. Enterprise architecture implementation may require risk management activities, such as risk identification, assessment, and response, but it is not a risk mitigation procedure itself. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 151

The ultimate objective of utilizing key control indicators (KCIs) in the risk management process is to provide early warning signs of a potential change in risk level, as they indicate the performance and adequacy of the controls, and alert the stakeholders to any control gaps or deficiencies that may affect the risk exposure and impact. The other options are not the ultimate objectives, as they are more related to the insight, basis, or benchmark of the risk managementprocess, respectively, rather than the early warning sign of the risk management process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

The best input for conducting a review of emerging risk is the annual threat reports. Emerging risk is the risk that arises from new or evolving sources, or from existing sources that have not been previously considered or recognized. Emerging risk may have significant impact on the organization’s objectives, strategies, operations, or reputation, and may require new or different risk responses. Annual threat reports are the reports that provide information and analysis on the current and future trends, developments, and challenges in the threat landscape, such as cyberattacks, natural disasters, geopolitical conflicts, or pandemics. Annual threat reports can help to identify and assess the emerging risk, as they can provide insights into the sources, drivers, indicators, and scenarios of the emerging risk, as well as the potential impact and likelihood of the emerging risk. Annual threat reports can also help to benchmark and compare the organization’s risk exposure and preparedness with the industry and the peers, and to prioritize and respond to the emerging risk. Audit reports, industry benchmarks, and financial forecasts are not as useful as annual threat reports, as they do not focus on the emerging risk, and may not capture the latest or future changes in the threat landscape. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

The most important objective of information security controls is to provide measurable risk reduction. Information security controls are the policies, procedures, techniques, or technologies that are implemented to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information assets. The main purpose of information security controls is to reduce the risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure,modification, or destruction of information assets, and to ensure that the information assets support the enterprise’s objectives and performance. Information security controls should be measurable, meaning that they should have clear and quantifiable criteria for evaluating their effectiveness and efficiency in reducing the risk exposure to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, page 1151

The best method to maintain a common view of IT risk within an organization is to establish and communicate the IT risk profile. An IT risk profile is a document that summarizes the key IT risks that the organization faces or accepts, and their likelihood, impact, and priority. An IT risk profile helps to identify and prioritize the most critical or relevant IT risks, and to align them with the organization’s objectives, strategy, and risk appetite. Establishing and communicating the IT risk profile is the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk, because it helps to create a shared understanding and awareness of the IT risks among the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Establishing andcommunicating the IT risk profile also helps to facilitate the IT risk decision-making and reporting processes, and to monitor and control the IT risk performance and improvement. Theother options are not the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk, although they may be part of or derived from the IT risk profile. Collecting data for IT risk assessment, utilizing a balanced scorecard, and performing and publishing an IT risk analysis are all activitiesthat can help to support or update the IT risk profile, but they are not the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 1-15.

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

Key Control Indicators (KCIs) measure the performance and effectiveness of controls. When regulatory objectives are tied to technical controls (like firewalls or SIEM), KCIs can detect when those controls are failing or operating outside of thresholds. This allows proactive remediation before compliance violations occur.

The primary risk management responsibility of the second line of defense is to monitor the risk responses. The second line of defense is the function that oversees and supports the risk management activities of the first line of defense, which is the function that owns and manages the risks. The second line of defense includes the risk management, compliance, and quality assurance functions, among others. The second line of defense is responsible for monitoring the risk responses, which are the actions taken to address the risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risks. The second line of defense monitors the risk responses to ensure that they are implemented effectively and efficiently, that they achieve the desired outcomes, and that they are aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The second line of defense also provides guidance, advice, and feedback to the first line of defense on the risk responses, and reports the results and issues to the senior management and the board. Applying risk treatments, providing assurance of control effectiveness, and implementing internal controls are not the primary risk management responsibilities of the second line of defense, as they are either the responsibilities of the first line of defense or the third line ofdefense, which is the function that provides independent assurance of the risk management activities, such as the internal audit function. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

Review Assignments of Data Ownership for Key Assets:

Data Ownership: Ensuring that data ownership is clearly assigned helps establish accountability for data protection. Data owners are responsible for the classification, management, and protection of data.

Baseline Understanding: Reviewing data ownership assignments provides a baseline understanding of who is responsible for sensitive data and ensures that the responsibilities are clearly defined and understood.

Compliance and Control: Proper data ownership ensures that controls are in place and that there is compliance with data protection policies and regulations.

Comparison with Other Options:

Identify Staff Who Have Access to Sensitive Data: This is important but should follow the establishment of clear data ownership to ensure that access controls are appropriately applied.

Identify Recent and Historical Incidents Involving Data Loss: Reviewing incidents helps understand past issues but does not address current data ownership and accountability.

Review the Organization's Data Inventory: While important, a data inventory review is part of understanding data ownership and control but should not be the first step.

Best Practices:

Clear Documentation: Ensure that data ownership is clearly documented and communicated across the organization.

Regular Reviews: Conduct regular reviews of data ownership assignments to ensure they remain accurate and up-to-date.

Training and Awareness: Provide training to data owners on their roles and responsibilities regarding data protection and risk management.

Conducting phishing exercises would best help minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats, because they can help to raise awareness and educate employees about the common techniques and tactics used by social engineers, such as sending deceptive emails or text messages that ask for sensitive information or direct users to malicious websites. Phishing exercises are simulated attacks that test the employees’ ability to recognize and respond to social engineering attempts, and provide feedback and guidance on how to improve their security behavior. By conducting phishing exercises, the organization can measure and improve the employees’ level of security awareness and resilience, and reduce the likelihood and impact of falling victim to social engineering attacks. The other options are less effective ways to minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats. Enforcing employees’ sanctions can help to deter and punish employees who violate the security policies or procedures, but it may not prevent or reduce the occurrence of social engineering attacks, as they may target employees who are unaware, careless, or coerced by the attackers. Enforcing segregation of duties can help to prevent or limit the damage caused by social engineering attacks, by restricting the access and authority of employees to perform certain tasks or functions, but it may not address the root cause or source of the attacks, which is the human factor. Reviewing the organization’s risk appetite can help to define and communicate the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, but it may not directly affect or influence the employees’ behavior or attitude toward social engineering threats, which may depend on their individual or situational factors. References = How to Prevent and Mitigate Social Engineering Attacks 1

A gap analysis is the best approach to identify information systems control deficiencies, as it helps to compare and evaluate the current and desired states of the information systems and their controls, and to identify and prioritize the gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. A gap analysis is a process of assessing and measuring the difference between the actual and expected performance or outcomes of a system or a process, such as an information system or a control process. A gap analysis can help to identify information systems control deficiencies by providing the following benefits:

It enables a data-driven and evidence-based approach to information systems control assessment and improvement, rather than relying on subjective or qualitative judgments.

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating information systems control performance and quality across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the alignment of information systems and their controls with the organizational strategy and objectives, and helps to evaluate the achievement of the desired outcomes.

It helps to identify and prioritize the root causes and contributing factors of information systems control deficiencies, and to develop and implement appropriate strategies and actions to address them.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the information systems and their controls, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best approaches to identify information systems control deficiencies. Countermeasures analysis is a method of identifying and evaluating the potential countermeasures or solutions to mitigate or eliminate a specific threat or risk, but it does not directly address the information systems control deficiencies. Best practice assessment is a method of comparing and benchmarking the information systems and their controls against the industry standards or best practices, but it does not provide a comprehensive or customized analysis of the information systems control deficiencies. Risk assessment is a method ofidentifying and analyzing the potential risks and their impacts on the information systems and their objectives, but it does not measure or evaluate the information systems control performance or quality. References = Gap Analysis: A Practical Guide | Smartsheet, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, How to Perform a Gap Analysis: Step-By-Step Guide & Template

When likelihood is unknown, range-based estimates from subject-matter experts provideinformed and realistic insights into potential risk exposure. This approach helps approximate the inherent risk based on experience and expertise, supporting effective decision-making.

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

KRIs must be aligned to business processes to ensure they reflect actual risk conditions affecting critical operations. Misalignment can lead to inaccurate monitoring and ineffective response.

The primary responsibility of senior management in risk management is to prioritize the risk scenarios based on severity. Risk scenarios are hypothetical events or situations that could affect the achievement of the objectives. Risk severity is a measure of the overall level of risk, based on the combination of the probability and impact of the risk scenario. Prioritizing the risk scenarios based on severity is the primary responsibility of senior management, because it helps to allocate the resources and actions to the most critical and urgent risks, and to align the risk management process with the organizational strategy and risk appetite. Senior management also has the authority and accountability to make the final decisions and approve the risk response plans for the prioritized risks. The other options are not the primary responsibility of senior management, although they may be involved or consulted in these activities. Bottom-up identification of emerging risks is a process of identifying and reporting the new or changing risks that may arise from the operational or tactical level of the organization. This is usually the responsibility of the risk owners or the risk practitioners, who have the knowledge and experience of the specific functions and processes. Categorization of risk scenarios against a standard taxonomy is a process of classifying and organizing the risk scenarios into predefined categories or groups, based on their nature, source, or impact. This is usually the responsibility of the risk analysts or the risk coordinators, who have the skills and tools to perform the risk analysis and assessment. Review of external loss data is a process of collecting and analyzing the data and information on the losses or incidents that occurred in other organizations or industries, due to similar or related risks. This is usually the responsibility of the risk researchers or the risk consultants, who have the access and expertise to obtain and interpret the external data and information. References = The Role of Executive Management in ERM - Corporate Compliance Insights, Guidelines on Risk Management Practices – Board and Senior Management, Risk Manager Job Description [+2023 TEMPLATE] - Workable

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

 A key outcome of risk ownership is that risk responsibilities are addressed, as this means that the risk owner has the authority and accountability to manage the risk, and that the roles and expectations of the other stakeholders are clearly defined and agreed upon. Risk ownership is the process of assigning a person or entity with the responsibility to manage a particular risk. Risk ownership helps to ensure that the risk is properly identified, assessed, and treated, and that the risk status and performance are monitored and reported. The other options are not key outcomes of risk ownership, although they may be related or beneficial aspects of it. Risk-related information is communicated is an outcome of risk reporting, which is a part of risk monitoring and control. Risk-oriented tasks are defined is an outcome of risk response planning, which is a part of risk treatment. Business process risk is analyzed is an outcome of risk assessment, which is a part of risk identification and analysis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 47.

Obtaining input from business management is the best way to enable the development of a successful IT strategy focused on business risk mitigation, because it helps to align and integrate the IT objectives and activities with the business goals and priorities. An IT strategy is a plan that defines how IT supports and enables the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy. A business risk mitigation is a process that aims to reduce or eliminate the risks that may affect the achievement of the business objectives or expectations. Obtaining input from business management is the best way to ensure that the IT strategy is relevant, realistic, and responsive to the business needs and challenges, and that the IT risks are identified, assessed, and managed in accordance with the business risk appetite and tolerance. Providing risk awareness training for business units, understanding the business controls currently in place, and conducting a businessimpact analysis (BIA) are all useful ways to support the development of an IT strategy focused on business risk mitigation, but they are not the best way, as they do not directly involve the input and feedback from business management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 37

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

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks what best enables the integration of IT risk management across an organization.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Enterprise risk management (ERM) framework:Provides a comprehensive approach to integrating risk management across the entire organization.

B. Enterprise-wide risk awareness training:Important for education but doesn't ensure integration.

C. Robust risk reporting practices:Crucial for communication but not integration.

D. Risk management policies:Necessary but need to be part of an overall framework for effective integration.



ERM Framework:An ERM framework ensures that risk management practices are standardized and integrated throughout the organization. It aligns risk management with business objectives, ensuring that IT risk is considered within the broader context of enterprise risk.

Comprehensive Approach:ERM covers all aspects of risk, including IT, and facilitates a unified approach to managing risk across all departments and levels.

Determining the impact of the missing threat is the best course of action for a peer review of a risk assessment, as it helps to assess the potential consequences and severity of the threat on the information system and the business objectives. Determining the impact of the missing threat is a process of estimating and quantifying the possible harm or loss that could result from the occurrence of the threat event, such as data breach, system failure, or service disruption. Determining the impact of the missing threat can help to:

Identify and prioritize the critical assets, processes, and functions that could be affected by the threat

Evaluate and measure the extent and magnitude of the damage or disruption caused by the threat

Analyze and compare the current and residual risk levels and control effectiveness

Develop and implement appropriate risk response and mitigation strategies and actions

Communicate and report the risk exposure and status to the relevant stakeholders

Determining the impact of the missing threat is an essential step to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the risk assessment and to improve the quality and reliability of the risk management and control processes.

The other options are not the best courses of action for a peer review of a risk assessment. Asking the business to make a budget request to remediate the problem is a possible action to allocate the resources and costs for the risk mitigation, but it does not address the root cause or the severity of the problem. Building a business case to remediate the fix is a possible action to justify and support the risk mitigation, but it does not provide a clear and comprehensive analysis of the problem. Researching the types of attacks the threat can present is a possible action to understand and anticipate the threat scenarios andtechniques, but it does not evaluate the actual or potential impact of the threat. References = Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Peer Review Assessment Framework

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

 The most important factor when deciding on a control to mitigate risk exposure is the cost-benefit analysis. This is a process that compares the costs and benefits of implementing a control, and determines whether the control is worth the investment. A cost-benefit analysis helps to ensure that the control is efficient and effective in reducing the risk to an acceptable level, and that it does not introduce new risks or adversely affect other objectives. A cost-benefit analysis also helps to prioritize the controls based on their value and feasibility, and to allocate the resources accordingly. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.5, page 1861

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

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

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

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

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

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 9

Information Technology & Security, page 3

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 1

Data archival processes should be the primary focus of a risk practitioner when ensuring that organization records are being retained for a sufficient period of time to meet legal obligations, because data archival processes ensure that records are stored securely, reliably, and accessibly for as long as they are needed. Data archival processes also help to manage the storage capacity, retention policies, and disposal procedures of records. Data duplication processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for backup and recovery purposes, not for long-term retention. Data anonymization processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for privacy and confidentiality purposes, not for legal compliance. Data protection processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for security and integrity purposes, not for retention requirements. References = Free ISACA CRISC Sample Questions and Study Guide

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.

The risk inventory contains a current and historical record of identified risks and their statuses. Monitoring this inventory reveals emerging risks, shifts in severity, and whether mitigation is effective. It supports trend analysis and continuous improvement.

Code review could BEST detect an in-house developer inserting malicious functions into a web-based application, because it is a process that involves examining and verifying the source code of the application for any errors, vulnerabilities, or malicious functions. Code review can help toidentify and remove any unauthorized or harmful code that the developer may have inserted, either intentionally or unintentionally, and to ensure that the application meets the quality andsecurity standards and requirements. The other options are not as effective as code review, because:

Option A: Segregation of duties is a control that involves separating the roles and responsibilities of the developer from those of the tester, the approver, and the deployer, to prevent any conflict of interest or misuse of authority. Segregation of duties can help to reduce the risk of the developer inserting malicious functions into the web-based application, but it does not detect them.

Option C: Change management is a process that involves controlling and documenting any changes to the web-based application, such as new features, enhancements, or bug fixes, to ensure that they are authorized, tested, and approved. Change management can help to track and monitor the changes that the developer may have made to the web-based application, but it does not detect the malicious functions.

Option D: Audit modules are components that are embedded in the web-based application to record and report the activities and transactions that occur within the application, such as user login, data input, or data output. Audit modules can help to audit and review the performance and functionality of the web-based application, but they do not detect the malicious functions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 214.

 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.

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner reviewing current key risk indicators (KRIs) is that the KRIs’ source data lacks integrity, as this means that the data is inaccurate, incomplete, inconsistent, or outdated, and therefore cannot provide reliable and valid information on the risk level and performance. The KRIs are metrics that measure and monitor the changes in the risk exposure and the effectiveness of the risk response over time. The KRIs’ source data should be collected and verified from credible and relevant sources, and should be updated and maintained regularly. The KRIs’ source data should also be aligned and integrated with the enterprise’s data governance and quality standards. The other options are not the greatest concerns for a risk practitioner reviewing current key risk indicators (KRIs), although they may pose some challenges or limitations. The KRIs are not automated is a concern for the efficiency and timeliness of the KRI reporting and analysis, but it does not affect the integrity of the KRI sourcedata. The KRIs are not quantitative is a concern for the objectivity and comparability of the KRI measurement and prioritization, but it does not affect the integrity of the KRI source data. The KRIs do not allow for trend analysis is a concern for the usefulness and relevance of the KRI communication and decision making, but it does not affect the integrity of the KRI source data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 183.

The recovery time objective (RTO) is the planned recovery time for a process or system which should occur before reaching the business process’s maximum tolerable downtime (MTD) or maximum allowable outage (MAO). The RTO must be aligned with the MAO to ensure that the continuity of the business process is not compromised by a prolonged outage. The RTO is determined by the business impact analysis (BIA) based on the criticality and urgency of the business process and its dependencies. The RTO also helps to select and implement appropriate recovery methods and procedures for the process or system. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 6: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 6.2: ITRisk Reporting, Page 307; What is the difference between RPO, RTO, and MTD? - Tandem Blog.

The greatest benefit of using IT risk scenarios is that they facilitate communication of risk, as they provide a clear and realistic description of the risk sources, events, impacts, and responses, and enable the stakeholders to understand and appreciate the risk exposure and appetite of the organization. Supporting compliance with regulations, providing evidence of risk assessment, and enabling the use of key risk indicators (KRIs) are also benefits of using IT risk scenarios, but they are not the greatest benefit, as they are more related to the outcomes or consequences of risk communication, rather than the process or value of risk communication. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

Accurate asset inventories depend on havingformal, standardized processes for onboarding new assets. ISACA emphasizes that without proper onboarding and updating procedures, asset data quickly becomes inaccurate and unreliable for risk management.

===========

The risk register element that is most likely to be updated if the attack surface or exposure of an asset is reduced is the likelihood rating, as this reflects the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring. The attack surface or exposure of an asset is the measure of the extent and accessibility of the asset to potential threats or attackers. If the attack surface or exposure of an asset is reduced, the likelihood of the asset being compromised or damaged by a risk event is also reduced. Therefore, the likelihood rating of the risk should be updated accordingly. Theother options are not the risk register elements that are most likely to be updated if the attack surface or exposure of an asset is reduced, although they may be affected or influenced by it. Control effectiveness is the measure of how well the risk controls reduce the risk level or achieve the control objectives. Assessment approach is the method or technique used to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks. Impact rating is the measure of the magnitude or severity of the consequences of a risk event on the asset or the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 54.

The most significant risk to an organization when updating the incident response plan is the undefined assignment of responsibility. An incident response plan is a document that defines the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for responding to an incident that could disrupt the normal operations of the organization, or compromise its assets, reputation, or compliance. An incident response plan should clearly assign the responsibility for each task and activity involved in the incident response process, such as detection, containment, analysis, eradication, recovery, and reporting. Undefined assignment of responsibility could lead to confusion, duplication, conflict, or omission among the stakeholders, and impair the effectiveness and efficiency of the incident response process. Undefined assignment of responsibility could also increase the risk of escalation, recurrence, or impact of the incident, and affect the accountability and performance of the organization. Obsolete response documentation, increased stakeholder turnover, and failure to audit third-party providers are also risks, but they are not as significant as undefined assignment of responsibility, as they do not directly affect the execution and outcome of the incident response process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 130.

Thefirst stepis toprevent further disseminationof sensitive data to limit the impact of the breach. ISACA emphasizes that containment is the priority in risk response to minimize harm before addressing other aspects like root cause analysis or reputational management.

===========

The first step in response to an identified risk is updating the risk profile to reflect the new exposure. This informs further actions such as treatment planning or tolerance reassessment.

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

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls. It is important for a risk practitioner to verify that the residual risk is within the acceptable levels defined by the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. This ensures that the controls are effective in reducing the risk exposure to an acceptable level and align with the enterprise’s objectives and strategy. References = CRISC Review Manual 27th Edition, page 131. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers.

A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses or gaps in an application that may expose it to potential threats or attacks.

When vulnerability assessment results identify a weakness in an application, the first thing that a risk practitioner should do is to assess the risk to determine mitigation needed. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the likelihood and impact of the weakness being exploited, the existing controls that are in place to prevent or reduce the exploitation, and the residual risk that remains after applying the controls.

Assessing the risk to determine mitigation needed helps to prioritize the actions that are required to address the weakness, such as implementing new or additional controls, accepting the risk, transferring the risk, or avoiding the risk.

The other options are not the first things that a risk practitioner should do when vulnerability assessment results identify a weakness in an application. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 18

Information Technology & Security, page 12

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 10

 The best way to measure the effectiveness of the subsidiary’s IT systems controls is to review metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs), as they provide quantitative and qualitative measures of the performance and outcomes of the IT systems and processes, and how well they meet the predefined standards and expectations. Metrics and KPIs can help to evaluate the efficiency, reliability, security, and quality of the IT systems and controls, and to identify any gaps, weaknesses, or issues that need to be addressed. Metrics and KPIs can also help to compare and benchmark the subsidiary’s IT systems and controls with those of the parent organization or other similar entities. The other options are not the best ways to measure the effectiveness of the subsidiary’s IT systems controls, although they may be useful or complementary methods. Implementing IT systems in alignment with business objectives is a good practice, but it does not measure the effectiveness of the IT systems controls, as it focuses on the alignment andintegration of the IT systems with the business strategy and goals. Reviewing design documentation of IT systems can provide some information on the specifications and requirements of the IT systems, but it does not measure the effectiveness of the IT systems controls, as it does not reflect the actual implementation and operation of the IT systems. Evaluating compliance with legal and regulatory requirements can ensure that the subsidiary’s IT systems and controls meet the minimum standards and obligations of the foreign country, but it does not measure the effectiveness of the IT systems controls, as it does not consider the performance and outcomes of the IT systems and processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 187.

Determining the business purpose of the application is the first thing that a risk practitioner should do when a shadow IT application is identified in a business owner’s business impactanalysis (BIA), because it helps to understand the rationale and value of the application, and the potential risks and issues that it may introduce or affect. A shadow IT application is an IT system or application that is used by the business units or employees without the knowledge or approval of the IT department or management. A shadow IT application may offer benefits such as convenience, efficiency, or innovation, but it may also pose risks such as security breaches, data loss, compatibility issues, or regulatory non-compliance. A BIA is a process of analyzing the potential impact of disruption to the critical business functions or processes, and identifying the recovery priorities and requirements. A BIA may reveal the existence of ashadow IT application, as it may be used to support or enable a critical business function or process. Determining the business purpose of the application is the first thing to do, as it helps to evaluate the necessity and suitability of the application, and to plan the appropriate actions to address the shadow IT application. Including the application in the business continuity plan (BCP), segregating the application from the network, and reporting the finding to management are all possible things to do after determining the business purpose of the application, but they are not the first thing to do, as they depend on the results of the evaluation of the application. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 143

The data custodian is the person who is responsible for implementing and maintaining security controls to protect the data entrusted to them by the data owner. The data custodian is typically a system administrator or a security systems administrator who has the technical skills and access rights to manage the security systems and processes that safeguard the data. The data custodian’s responsibilities include, but are not limited to: Installing, configuring, and updating security systems such as firewalls, anti-virus software, encryption tools, etc. Monitoring network trafficand system logs to detect and respond to security incidents. Conducting regular security assessments and audits to ensure compliance with security policies and standards. Implementing backup and recovery procedures to ensure data availability and integrity. The data custodian works under the direction and guidance of the data owner, who is the person who has the authority and accountability for the data and its use. The data owner defines the data classification, the data retention period, and the data access rights and privileges. The data owner also approves any changes to the security controls or the data itself. The data owner is typically a senior manager or a business unit leader who has the business knowledge and responsibility for the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: Data Classification, pp. 11-131

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

 The PRIMARY basis for selecting a security control is the ability to mitigate risk, because it is the measure of how well the control can prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk, and how effectively the control can achieve the desired level of security and protection for the system and the data. The ability to mitigate risk is the most important criterion for selecting a security control, as it directly relates to the purpose and value of the control. The other options are not the primary basis, because:

Option A: To achieve the desired level of maturity is a goal of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The desired level of maturity is the state or condition of the security control that reflects its quality, consistency, and reliability, and it should be aligned with the organization’s security objectives and standards. The desired level of maturity is a result of selecting a security control, not a reason for selecting it.

Option B: The materiality of the risk is a factor of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The materiality of the risk is the degree or extent of the risk that affects the organization’s performance, reputation, and value, and it should be considered when selecting a security control, but it is not the only or the most important factor. The materiality of the risk is an input to selecting a security control, not an output of selecting it.

Option D: The cost of the control is a constraint of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The cost of the control is the amount of resources and expenditure that are required to implement and maintain the control, and it should be balanced with the benefit and effectiveness ofthe control, but it is not the only or the most important constraint. The cost of the control is a limitation of selecting a security control, not a motivation for selecting it. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 211.

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

The primary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation is to ensure that risk is mitigated by the control. A control is a measure or action that is taken to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk, or to increase the likelihood or impact of an opportunity1. Testing the effectiveness of anew control before implementation means verifying whether the control can achieve its intended purpose and objective, and whether it can address the risk adequately and appropriately2. Testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation helps to avoid wasting resources, time, and effort on implementing a control that is ineffective, inefficient, or unsuitable for the risk scenario. It also helps to ensure that the control does not introduce new or unintended risks, or adversely affect other controls or processes3. The other options are not the primary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation, as they are either less relevant or less specific than ensuring that risk is mitigated by the control. Measuring efficiency of the control process is a secondary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Efficiency refers to the optimal use of resources to achieve the desired outcome4. Measuring efficiency of the control process means evaluating whether the control can achieve its objective with the least amount of cost, time, and effort. Measuring efficiency of the control process helps to optimize the performance and value of the control, but it is not the main reason for testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Confirming control alignment with business objectives is a tertiary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Alignment refers to the consistency and coherence of the control with the goals and strategies of the organization5. Confirming control alignment with business objectives means ensuring that the control supports and enables the achievement of the organization’s mission, vision, and values. Confirming control alignment with business objectives helps to integrate the control with the organization’s culture and governance, but it is not the primary reason for testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Complying with the organization’s policy is a quaternary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new controlbefore implementation. Policy refers to the set of principles and rules that guide the organization’s decisions and actions6. Complying with the organization’s policy means adhering to the standards and requirements that the organization has established for implementing and operating controls. Complying with the organization’s policy helps to ensure the quality and consistency of the control, but it is not the main objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.