Pass the Isaca Isaca Certification CRISC Questions and answers with CertsForce

 Robust organizational communication channels are the best way to support ethical IT risk management practices, as they enable transparent and consistent sharing of risk information anddecisions among all stakeholders. Ethical IT risk management requires that the risk management process and outcomes are aligned with the enterprise’s values, objectives, and obligations, and that the risk management activities are conducted with integrity, accountability, and respect. Robust organizational communication channels facilitate these aspects by ensuring that the risk management roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and communicated, that the risk management policies and procedures are widely disseminated and understood, that the risk management performance and results are regularly reported and reviewed, and that the risk management feedback and improvement suggestions are solicited and addressed. Mapping of key risk indicators (KRIs) to corporate strategy, capability maturity models integrated with risk management frameworks, and rigorously enforced operational service level agreements (SLAs) are not directly related to ethical IT risk management practices, but rather to the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question201; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 201.

Using cloud-based backup tominimize the impactof a potential data loss event is a classic example ofrisk mitigation, which involves reducing risk to an acceptable level through proactive controls.

The business application owner is accountable for business impact and must approve any change that affects application availability. ISACA’s CRISC emphasis on ownership roles indicates business owners should approve changes with risk implications.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

According to the definition of key control indicators (KCIs), they are metrics that provide information on the extent to which a given control is meeting its intended objectives in terms of loss prevention, reduction, etc.1 Therefore, option D is the correct answer, as it reflects the purpose and function of KCIs. The other options are not accurate descriptions of KCIs, as they do not directly relate to the performance or outcome of the control. Option A is more relevant to the efficiency or productivity of the control, not its effectiveness. Option B is more relevant to the role of key risk indicators (KRIs), which measure the level of risk exposure or potentialimpact of risk events2. Option C is also more related to KRIs, as they monitor changes in the likelihood or frequency of adverse events due to risk factors2.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (aligned to ISACA CRISC guidance)

The risk register is a living document. CRISC states it should be maintained so that it accurately reflects current risk conditions, including changes in threats, vulnerabilities, impacts, controls, and ownership. Therefore, it is most important to update entries when aspects of the risk scenario change—for example, when a new control is implemented, business processes change, threat activity increases, or the magnitude of impact alters. Waiting until KRI thresholds are reached may delay updating until risk is already elevated. Updating only when internal audit requires it or just before a periodic review undermines real-time visibility and decision-making. Timely updates when the scenario changes support effective monitoring, reporting, and governance, ensuring that management decisions are based on current, not outdated, risk information.

The main benefit of using a top-down approach to develop risk scenarios is that it establishes the relationship between risk events and organizational objectives. A top-down approach is a method of risk identification and analysis that starts with the organization’s strategic objectives and then identifies the potential risk events that could affect or prevent the achievement of those objectives. A top-down approach helps to establish the relationship between risk events and organizational objectives, because it links the risk scenarios to the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and it prioritizes the risk scenarios based on their impact and relevance to the organization’s objectives. A top-down approach also helps to align and communicate the risk scenarios with the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, and business units, and to facilitate the risk response and monitoring activities. The other options are not the main benefit of using a top-down approach, although they may be part of or derived from the top-down approach. Describing risk events specific to technology used by the enterprise, using hypothetical and generic risk events specific to the enterprise, and helping management and the risk practitioner to refine risk scenarios are all activities or outcomes that could be performed or achieved by using a top-down approach, but they are not the primary purpose or result of the top-down approach. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

The average time between user transfers and access updates is a trend that would cause the greatest concern regarding the effectiveness of an organization’s user access control processes, as it indicates thedelay or inefficiency in updating the user access rights and privileges according to the user’s current role and responsibilities. This can result in unauthorized or excessive access to the organization’s information assets, and increase the risk of data leakage, fraud, or misuse. The user access control processes should ensure that the user access rights and privileges are reviewed and modified regularly, and especially when the user’s role or status changes, such as transfer, promotion, demotion, or termination. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question241. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 241. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 241.

A security log is a record of security-related events or activities that occur in an IT system, network, or application, such as user authentication, access control, firewall activity, or intrusion detection1. Security logscan help to monitor and audit the security posture and performance of the IT environment, and to detect and investigate any security incidents, breaches, or anomalies2.

The integrity of a security log refers to the accuracy and completeness of the log data, and the assurance that the log data has not been modified, deleted, or tampered with by unauthorized or malicious parties3. The integrity of a security log is essential for ensuring the reliability and validity of the log analysis and reporting, and for providing evidence and accountability for security incidents and compliance4.

Among the four options given, the most important factor to the integrity of a security log is the inability to edit. This means that the security log data should be protected from any unauthorized or accidental changes or alterations, such as adding, deleting, or modifying log entries, or changing the log format or timestamps5. The inability to edit can be achieved by implementing various controls and measures, such as:

Applying digital signatures or hashes to the log data to verify its authenticity and integrity

Encrypting the log data to prevent unauthorized access or disclosure

Implementing least privilege access to the log data to restrict who can view, modify, or delete the log data

Using write-once media or devices to store the log data, such as CD-ROMs or WORM drives

Sending the log data to a secure and centralized log server or repository, and using syslog or other protocols to ensure secure and reliable log transmission

Performing regular backups and archiving of the log data to prevent data loss or corruption

References = Security Log: Best Practices for Logging and Management, Security Audit Logging Guideline, Confidentiality, Integrity, & Availability: Basics of Information Security, Steps for preserving the integrity of log data, Guide to Computer Security Log Management

Business Impact Analysis (BIA):

Objective: The primary objective of a BIA is to identify and evaluate the effects of disruptions on business operations. This includes determining the criticality of IT assets that support key business processes.

Risk Mitigation: By identifying critical IT assets, organizations can prioritize risk mitigation efforts to ensure that key business processes remain operational during and after disruptions.

Appropriate IT Risk Mitigation:

Critical Asset Identification: Knowing which IT assets are essential allows for targeted risk mitigation strategies. This ensures resources are allocated efficiently to protect the most important systems.

Impact Assessment: Understanding the impact of potential disruptions on critical IT assets helps in developing effective disaster recovery and continuity plans.

Comparison with Other Options:

Validating Critical IT Risk: While important, this is typically part of a broader BIA process rather than its primary objective.

Assigning Accountability for IT Risk: This is crucial for governance but does not directly enable risk mitigation actions.

Defining IT Risk-aware Culture: Important for overall risk management but does not directly influence specific mitigation actions.

Best Practices:

Detailed Asset Inventory: Maintain an up-to-date inventory of IT assets and their dependencies on business processes.

Regular Updates and Reviews: Continuously update the BIA to reflect changes in the IT environment and business processes.

A risk management program is a set of processes, policies, and tools that enable an enterprise to identify, analyze, evaluate, treat, monitor, and communicate its risks. The maturity level of a risk management program indicates how well the program is integrated, standardized, and aligned with the enterprise’s objectives, culture, and values. The best indication that an organization’s risk management program has not reached the desired maturity level is large fluctuations in risk ratings between assessments. Risk ratings are the measures of the impact and likelihood of the risks, and they should be consistent and comparable across the enterprise and over time. Large fluctuations in risk ratings between assessments suggest that the risk management program is not stable, reliable, or effective, and that the risk identification and analysis methods are not robust, accurate, or transparent. The other options are not as indicative of the maturity level of the riskmanagement program, as they involve different aspects or outcomes of the risk management program:

Significant increases in risk mitigation budgets means that the enterprise is spending more resources on implementing risk responses, such as controls, policies, or procedures. This may indicate that the enterprise is facing more or higher risks, or that the risk responses are more costly or complex, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the enterprise’s risk appetite, tolerance, and strategy.

A steady increase in the time to recover from incidents means that the enterprise is taking longer to restore its normal operations after a disruption or a loss. This may indicate that the enterprise is not prepared or resilient enough to deal with the incidents, or that the incidents are more frequent or severe, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the nature and source of the incidents, or the availability and effectiveness of the recovery plans.

A large number of control exceptions means that the enterprise is deviating from the established controls, policies, or procedures, either intentionally or unintentionally. This may indicate that the enterprise is not complying with the risk management program, or that the controls are not adequate or appropriate for the enterprise’s needs, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the reasons and justifications for the exceptions, or the approval and monitoring processes for the exceptions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.3.1, pp. 14-15.

The most important consideration when establishing a contingency plan and an alternate processing site for a company that has located its computer center on a moderate earthquake fault is that the alternative site does not reside on the same fault no matter how far the distance apart, as it ensures that the alternative site is not affected by the same earthquake event that may disrupt the primary site, and that the business continuity and recovery objectives can be met. The other options are not the most important considerations, as they are more related to the backup, priority, or readiness of the alternative site, respectively, rather than the location of the alternative site. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

The second line of defense is responsible for challenging the risk decision making of the first line of defense, which is the business process owners and managers. The second line of defense also provides oversight, guidance, and support to the first line of defense in implementing andmaintaining effective risk management practices. The second line of defense includes functions such as risk management, compliance, quality assurance, and internal audit. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: IT Risk Management Roles and Responsibilities, Page 14.

The first step to ensure continuity of operations when performing a risk assessment of a new service to support a new business process is to identify the conditions that may cause disruptions to the service or the process. This is because identifying the potential sources, causes, and scenarios of disruptions helps to determine the impact and likelihood of the risks, and to select the appropriate risk responses and recovery strategies. The other options are not the first steps, although they may also be part of the risk assessment process. Reviewing incident response procedures, evaluating the probability of risk events, and defining metrics for restoring availability are examples of subsequent steps that depend on the identification of the conditions that may cause disruptions. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The primary concern is the immediate risk of undetected threats due to missing endpoint protection. Addressing this ensures the organization's ability to detect and respond to security incidents, aligning withIncident Detection and Responseprinciples.

A data protection management plan is a document that outlines how an organization will protect its sensitive data from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, or loss. A data protection management plan should include the following components1:

The scope and objectives of the data protection management plan, and how it aligns with the organization’s data protection policy and strategy

The roles and responsibilities of the data protection team and other stakeholders, and how they will communicate and coordinate

The data protection risks and threats that the organization faces, and how they will be assessed and prioritized

The data protection controls and measures that the organization will implement and maintain, and how they will be monitored and evaluated

The data protection incidents and breaches that the organization may encounter, and how they will be reported and resolved

The data protection training and awareness programs that the organization will provide and conduct, and how they will be measured and improved

The first step that should be done when developing a data protection management plan is to identify critical data. This means that the organization should:

Define what constitutes sensitive data in the organization, such as personal data, confidential data, or regulated data

Identify and classify the sensitive data that the organization collects, processes, stores, or transfers, and assign appropriate labels or tags

Determine the value and importance of the sensitive data to the organization and its stakeholders, and the potential impacts or consequences of data loss or compromise

Map the data flows and locations of the sensitive data within the organization and across its partners or vendors, and document the data lifecycle stages and activities

By identifying critical data, the organization can:

Establish a clear and consistent understanding of the data protection scope and objectives, and ensure that they are relevant and realistic

Provide a comprehensive and accurate data inventory that can support the data protection risk assessment and control implementation

Identify and prioritize the data protection needs and requirements of the organization and its stakeholders, and align them with the data protection laws and standards

Communicate and report the data protection status and performance to the stakeholders and regulators, and ensure transparency and accountability

References = Guide to Developing a Data Protection Management Programme

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

KRIs should be identified during the development of a risk monitoring process to ensure alignment with organizational objectives and effective risk tracking. This reflectsProactive Risk Monitoring.

Controls should be incorporated into system specifications in the design phase of the system development life cycle (SDLC), because this is the phase where the system requirements are translated into detailed specifications and architectures that define how the system will be built and operated. Incorporating controls in the design phase ensures that the system is secure, reliable, and compliant from the start, and reduces the cost and complexity of implementing controls later in the SDLC. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not the phases where controls are incorporated into system specifications. The implementation phase is the phase where the system is installed, configured, and tested. The development phase is the phase where the system is coded, integrated, and tested. The feasibility phase is the phase where the system concept and scope are defined and evaluated. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

Ineffective control implementation can result in increased risk exposure, reduced compliance, and diminished performance for the organization. Therefore, the most relevant information for stakeholders is the impact of ineffective control implementation on the business objectives, processes, and outcomes. The impact on business can include financial losses, reputational damage, operational inefficiencies, customer dissatisfaction, and legal liabilities. The other options are not as relevant as the impact on business, because they do not directly link the control effectiveness to the business value. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 128.

This can help to:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

ISACA Risk Starter Kit provides risk management templates and policies

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Risk Reporting - CIO Wiki

Chief Risk Officer - CIO Wiki

Risk Register - CIO Wiki

Risk Mitigation - CIO Wiki

 It is most important for a risk practitioner to have an awareness of an organization’s processes in order to identify potential sources of risk, as this enables the risk practitioner to understand the objectives, activities, resources, dependencies, and outputs of the processes, and how they may be affected by internal or external factors that create uncertainty or variability. Identifying potential sources of risk is the first step in the risk identification process, which aims to find, recognize, and describe the risks that could affect the achievement of the organization’s goals. The other options are not the most important reasons for a risk practitioner to have an awareness of an organization’s processes, although they may be related or beneficial aspects of it. Performing a business impact analysis is a part of the risk analysis process, which aims to understand the nature and extent of the risks and their consequences on the organization’s objectives and functions. Establishing risk guidelines is a part of the risk governance process, which aims to define and communicate the risk management principles, policies, and roles across the organization. Understanding control design is a part of the risk response process, which aims to select and implement the appropriate actions to modify the risk level or achieve the risk objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 47.

The best way to protect company sensitive information from being exposed when an organization allows employee use of social media accounts for work purposes is to require employees to sign nondisclosure agreements. Nondisclosure agreements are legal contracts that prohibit the employees from disclosing or sharing the company sensitive information with unauthorized parties, such as competitors, media, or regulators. Nondisclosure agreements also specify the scope, duration, and conditions of the nondisclosure obligation, and the penalties or remedies for breaching the agreement. Requiring employees to sign nondisclosure agreements is the best way to protect company sensitive information, as it helps to prevent or deter the employees from exposing or leaking the company sensitive information on social media, and to hold the employees accountable and liable for their actions. Requiring employees to signnondisclosure agreements also helps to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements for data protection and privacy. Educating employees on what needs to be kept confidential, implementing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution, and taking punitive action against employees who expose confidential data are also useful ways, but they are not as effective as requiring employees to sign nondisclosure agreements, as they are either dependent on the employees’ awareness or behavior, or reactive or corrective measures, rather than proactive or preventive measures. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics that measure the achievement of objectives and the effectiveness of processes. KPIs can help management report on risk by providing quantitative and qualitative information on the risk profile, the risk appetite, the risk response, and the risk outcomes. KPIs can also help monitor and communicate the progress and results of risk management activities, such as risk identification, assessment, mitigation, and reporting. KPIs can be aligned with the strategic,operational, and tactical goals of the organization, and can be tailored to the specific needs and expectations of different stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Risk Indicators and Key Performance Indicators, p. 197-199.

Inherent risk rating is a measure of the natural level of risk that is part of an application, before any controls are applied1. Inherent risk rating helps to identify and prioritize the applications that pose the highest risk to the organization and require the most attention and resources for risk management2. The responsibility for determining the inherent risk rating of an application should belong to the risk practitioner, as they have the expertise and knowledge to perform a comprehensive and consistent risk assessment of the application, using a standard methodologyand criteria3. The risk practitioner should also communicate and report the inherent risk rating of the application to the relevant stakeholders, such as the application owner, senior management, and business process owner, and provide recommendations for risk mitigation4. The application owner, senior management, and business process owner are not the best choices for determining the inherent risk rating of an application, as they may not have the same level of skill and objectivity as the risk practitioner. The application owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the application and its performance5. The application owner may be involved in providing input and feedback to the risk practitioner during the risk assessment process, but they may not be able to assess the inherent risk rating of the application independently and impartially, as they may have a vested interest in the application’s success and reputation6. Senior management is the group of executives who set the strategic direction and objectives of the organization and oversee its performance7. Senior management may be involved in approving and endorsing the risk assessment process and its results, but they may not be able to assess the inherent risk rating of the application in detail and depth, as they may have a broader and higher-level perspective of the organization’s risk profile and priorities8. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for a business process that is supported or enabled by the application. The business process owner may be involved in providing input and feedback to the risk practitioner during the risk assessment process, but they may not be able to assess the inherent risk rating of the application accuratelyand comprehensively, as they may have a limited and specific view of the application’s functionality and value. References = 2: Introduction toapplication risk rating & assessment | Infosec3: Application Security Risk: Assessment and Modeling - ISACA4: Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.1: Inherent Risk Rating - Shared Assessments - Third Party Risk Management5: [Application Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] 6: Perform Inherent Risk Analysis - Oracle7: [Senior Management - Definition, Roles and Responsibilities] 8: Rating Inherent and Residual Risk - Barn Owl : [Business Process Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] : [Business Process Owner - Roles and Responsibilities]

Root cause analysis helps identify the fundamental reason for an incident, allowing the enterprise to implement controls that reduce the probability of recurrence.

Occurrences of specific events are the most likely to cause a key risk indicator (KRI) to exceed thresholds, as they represent the actual or potential realization of the risk. A KRI is a metric that measures the level of risk exposure and the effectiveness of risk response strategies, and it has predefined thresholds that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable risk status. When a specific event occurs that affects the risk, such as a security breach, a system failure, or a compliance violation, the KRI value may change and exceed the thresholds, triggering an alert or an action. A performance measurement, the risk tolerance level, and risk scenarios are not the most likely to cause a KRI to exceed thresholds, as they do not reflect the actual or potential occurrence of the risk, but rather the expected or desired outcome, limit, or simulation of the risk. References = [CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version)], page 121; CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 217.

The second line of defense in the Three Lines Model plays a risk oversight and monitoring role rather than operational execution.

According to ISACA’s CRISC framework:

The first line (operational management) owns and manages risk and implements controls.

The second line (risk and compliance functions) provides risk oversight, guidance, and monitoring of risk responses and ensures adherence to policies and frameworks.

The third line (internal audit) provides independent assurance regarding the overall effectiveness of controls.

Therefore, the primary responsibility of the second line is to monitor and evaluate risk responses implemented by the first line to ensure they are effective and aligned with enterprise risk appetite.

Supporting Extract:

CRISC study notes (Slides 127–134) state:

“The most significant benefit of using the three lines of defense model is that it clarifies essential roles of key stakeholders. The second line of defense provides oversight and monitoring of risk and control activities.”

Hence, the correct answer is C. Monitoring risk responses.

Local laws and regulations should be the primary consideration when assessing the risk of using Internet of Things (IoT) devices to collect and process personally identifiable information (PII), because they define the legal and ethical obligations and boundaries for the protection and privacy of PII, and the potential consequences of non-compliance or violation. IoT devices are devices that are connected to the internet and can collect, transmit, or process data, such as smart watches, cameras, sensors, or appliances. PII is information that can be used to identify, locate, or contact an individual, such as name, address, phone number, or email address. PII is considered sensitive and confidential, and may be subject to various laws and regulations that govern how it should be collected, processed, stored, shared, or disposed, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the United States. Therefore, local laws and regulations should be the primary consideration, as they provide the legal and ethical framework and guidance for the use of IoT devices to collect and process PII, and the potential risks and impacts of non-compliance or violation. Costs and benefits, security features and support, and business strategies and needs are all possible considerations when assessing the risk of using IoT devices to collect and process PII, but they are not the primary consideration, as they may vary or conflict depending on the situation or context, and may not override the local laws and regulations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

A balanced scorecard is a strategic management tool that helps to measure and communicate the performance of an organization or a program against its goals and objectives. A balanced scorecard typicallyconsists of four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth. Each perspective has a set of key performance indicators (KPIs) that reflect the critical success factors and desired outcomes of the organization or the program1.

A balanced scorecard is most useful for reporting on the overall status and effectiveness of the IT risk management program, because it can provide a comprehensive and balanced view of the program’s performance across multiple dimensions. A balanced scorecard can help to align the IT risk management program with the business strategy and vision, and to demonstrate the value and impact of the program to the stakeholders. A balanced scorecard can also help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the IT risk management program, and to monitor and improve the program’s processes and outcomes2.

The other options are not as useful as a balanced scorecard for reporting on the overall status and effectiveness of the IT risk management program. A capability maturity level is a measure of the maturity and quality of a process or a practice, based on a predefined set of criteria andstandards. A capability maturity level can help to assess and benchmark the IT risk management program’s processes and practices, but it does not provide a holistic view of the program’s performance and results3. An internal audit plan is a document that outlines the scope, objectives, and methodology of an internal audit activity. An internal audit plan can help to evaluate and verify the IT risk management program’s controls and compliance, but it does not provide a strategic view of the program’s goals and outcomes4. A control self-assessment (CSA) is a technique that involves the participation of the process owners and the staff in assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of their own controls. A CSA can help to enhance the awareness and ownership of the IT risk management program’s controls, but it does not provide an objective and independent view of the program’s performance and impact. References =

Balanced Scorecard Basics - Balanced Scorecard Institute

Using the Balanced Scorecard to Measure and Manage IT Risk

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Overview

Internal Audit Planning: The Basics - The IIA

[Control Self-Assessment - ISACA]

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (aligned to ISACA CRISC guidance)

Threat-based risk event modeling often involves significant expert judgment: choosing plausible threats, estimating their capability, attack paths, and motivations, and modeling multi-step attack scenarios. According to CRISC, such modeling demands strong justification and documented rationale because assumptions and inputs may be challenged by stakeholders and auditors. Semi-quantitative approaches and ALE calculations also require explanation, but they are generally based on standardized scales, historical data, or accepted formulas. MTBF is an engineering reliability metric, usually based on vendor data or operational history, requiring limited justification from a risk perspective. Threat-based modeling, however, drives critical decisions about controls and investment, and because it can be sensitive to subjective inputs, risk practitioners must carefully justify scenario selection, likelihood estimates, and impact assumptions to maintain credibility and enable informed governance decisions.

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

The greatest concern when assessing the risk profile of an organization is that the risk profile was last reviewed two years ago. A risk profile is a snapshot of the current risk exposure and appetite of the organization, based on the identification, analysis, and evaluation of the risks that could affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives. A risk profile should be reviewed and updated regularly, atleast annually, or whenever there are significant changes in the internal or external environment, such as new projects, strategies, regulations, or incidents. A risk profile that was last reviewed two years ago may not reflect the current risk situation and status of the organization, and may lead to inaccurate or incomplete risk assessment and response. The risk profile not being updated after a recent incident, the risk profile being developed without using industry standards, and the risk profile not containing historical loss data are also concerns, but they are not as critical as the risk profile being outdated. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 48.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), assessing changes in residual risk is the best approach for determining whether a risk action plan is effective, as it measures the impact and value of the risk response actions and controls on the risk level. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response actions and controls have been implemented. Assessing changes in residual risk helps to:

Evaluate the extent to which the risk response actions and controls have reduced the likelihood and/or impact of the risk to an acceptable level

Identify and report any deviations, errors, or weaknesses in the risk response actions and controls and their performance

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address any issues or deficiencies in the risk response actions and controls

Monitor and measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response actions and controls and their alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

Update the risk register and the risk treatment plan to reflect the current risk status and the residual risk levels

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

New risk exposures due to changes in the business environment are the possibilities and impacts of new or emerging threats or opportunities that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation, as a result of changes in the internal or external factors that influence the organization’s operations, such as technology, competition, regulation, or customer behavior12.

The most helpful tool in identifying new risk exposures due to changes in the business environment is a SWOT analysis, which is a technique that involves identifying and analyzing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) that are relevant to the organization’s situation, goals, and capabilities34.

A SWOT analysis is the most helpful tool because it helps the organization to scan and assess the business environment, and to identify and prioritize the new or emerging risk exposures that may arise from the changes in the environment34.

A SWOT analysis is also the most helpful tool because it helps the organization to align and adapt its strategy and actions to the changes in the environment, and to leverage its strengths and opportunities, and mitigate its weaknesses and threats34.

The other options are not the most helpful tools, but rather possible sources or inputs that may be used in a SWOT analysis. For example:

Standard operating procedures are documents that describe the routine tasks and processes that are performed by the organization, and the policies and standards that govern them56. However, these documents are not the most helpful tools because they may not reflect or capture the changes in the business environment, and they may need to be revised or updated to address the new or emerging risk exposures56.

Industry benchmarking is a technique that involves comparing and contrasting the performance and practices of the organization with those of the similar or leadingorganizations in the same or related industry, and identifying the gaps or opportunities for improvement78. However, this technique is not the most helpful tool because it may not provide a comprehensive or holistic view of the business environment, and it may not align with the organization’s specific situation, goals, or capabilities78.

Control gap analysis is a technique that involves assessing and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls that are designed and implemented to mitigate the risks, and identifying and addressing the areas or aspects that need to be improved or added . However, this technique is not the most helpful tool because it is reactive rather than proactive, and it may not identify or anticipate the new or emerging risk exposures that may result from the changes in the business environment . References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: SWOT Analysis - ISACA1

4: SWOT Analysis: What It Is and When to Use It2

5: Standard Operating Procedure - Wikipedia3

6: How to Write Effective Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)4

7: Benchmarking - Wikipedia5

8: Benchmarking: Definition, Types, Process, Advantages & Examples6

Control Gap Analysis - ISACA7

Control Gap Analysis: A Step-by-Step Guide8

Risk culture is the foundation upon which ERM is built. It dictates how employees perceive, communicate, and act on risk. A strong risk culture ensures consistency in risk behaviors, supports governance, and sustains long-term effectiveness of the ERM.

IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how IT-related risks can affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or assets1. IT risk scenarios help to make IT risk more concrete and tangible, and to enable proper risk analysis and assessment2. IT risk scenarios are developed after IT risks are identified, and are used as inputs for risk analysis, where the frequency and impact of the scenarios are estimated3.

The most important factor to the successful development of IT risk scenarios is threat and vulnerability analysis. Threat and vulnerability analysis is the process of identifying and evaluating the potential sources and causes of IT risks, such as malicious actors, natural disasters, human errors, or technical failures4. Threat and vulnerability analysis can help to:

Define the scope and boundaries of the IT risk scenarios, and ensure that they are relevant and realistic

Identify the critical assets, processes, or functions that are exposed or affected by the IT risks, and assess their value and importance to the organization

Determine the likelihood and methods of the threat events, and the existing or potential weaknesses or gaps in the IT control environment

Estimate the potential consequences and impacts of the IT risks, such as financial losses, operational disruptions, reputational damages, or compliance violations5

References = IT Scenario Analysis in Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA, IT Risk Scenarios - Morland-Austin, Threat and Vulnerability Analysis - Wikipedia, Threat and Vulnerability Analysis - ISACA

 Emerging risk is a risk that is new or evolving, and has the potential to significantly affect the enterprise’s objectives, performance, or reputation. Emerging risk can arise from changes in the internal or external environment, such as technological innovations, regulatory developments, or social trends. The best way to support communication of emerging risk is to include it on the next enterprise risk committee agenda. The enterprise risk committee is a group of senior executives who oversee the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provide guidance and direction to the risk owners and practitioners. By including the emerging risk on the agenda, the risk practitioner can ensure that the enterprise risk committee is aware of the risk, its causes, impacts, and likelihood, and can decide on the appropriate risk response strategy and actions. The other options are not the best way to support communication of emerging risk, as they involve different aspects of the risk management process:

Update residual risk levels to reflect the expected risk impact means that the risk practitioner adjusts the risk levels after considering the existing or planned risk responses. This may not befeasible or accurate for emerging risk, as the risk responses may not be defined or implemented yet, or may not be effective for the new or evolving risk.

Adjust inherent risk levels upward means that the risk practitioner increases the risk levels before considering any risk responses. This may not reflect the true nature or magnitude of the emerging risk, as the inherent risk levels are based on the assumptions and estimates of the risk practitioner, and may not account for the uncertainties or complexities of the emerging risk.

Include it in the risk register for ongoing monitoring means that the risk practitioner records and tracks the emerging risk, its causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and owners. This is an important step in the risk management process, but it does not necessarily support communication ofthe emerging risk, as the risk register may not be accessible or visible to all the relevant stakeholders, or may not be updated or reviewed frequently enough to capture the changes in the emerging risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2.2, pp. 21-22.

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 change in the risk profile would be the most important information to communicate to stakeholders after an annual risk assessment is completed, as it indicates how the risk landscape of the organization has changed over time, and how it affects the achievement of the business goals and objectives. A decrease in threats, an increase in reported vulnerabilities, and an increase in identified risk scenarios are also important information, but they are not the most important, as they are specific aspects of the risk profile, and do not provide a holistic view of the risk exposure and appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

Updating the risk likelihood in the risk register is appropriate when an improved control, such as an automated interface, is implemented. This change affects the probability of the risk occurring, thus reflecting the enhanced control environment.

According to the CRISC Manual, developing IT risk scenarios must align with business objectives to ensure the scenarios are relevant and meaningful. A top-down approach driven by organizational objectives ensures scenarios are contextually appropriate and address what matters most to the enterprise. This ensures that risk management supports the enterprise’s ability to achieve its mission and goals.

Residual risk exceeds acceptable limits, because it indicates that the risk level is higher than the organization’s risk appetite or tolerance, and that the risk responses and controls are insufficient or ineffective. Residual risk is the level of risk remaining in a process or procedure following the implementation of risk controls to limit or remove it. Escalation is a process that increases theawareness and involvement of higher-level stakeholders or authorities in a risk issue or situation. Escalation is appropriate when the risk issue or situation is outside the scope or authority of the current risk owner or manager, and requires the attention or action of the senior management or the board of directors. Residual risk exceeding acceptable limits is the best situation to justify escalation, as it implies that the current risk owner or manager cannot manage the risk within the predefined boundaries or expectations, and that the senior management or the board of directors need to intervene or approve the risk acceptance or transfer.

Residual risk being inadequately recorded, residual risk remaining after controls have been applied, and residual risk equaling current risk are all possible situations that may require escalation, but they are not the best situations, as they do not necessarily indicate that the risk level is higher than the acceptable limits, and that the senior management or the board of directors need to be involved.

A loss event is an occurrence that results in a negative consequence or damage for an organization, such as a data breach, a cyberattack, or a natural disaster. The impact of a loss event is the extent or magnitude of the harm or loss caused by the event, such as financial losses, reputational damage, operational disruptions, or legal liabilities. A newly enacted information privacy law that significantly increases financial penalties for breaches of personally identifiable information (PII) will most likely increase the impact of a loss event for an organization affected by the new law, because it will increase the potential cost and severity of a data breach involving PII. The other options are not as likely as an increase in loss event impact, because they do not directly result from the new law, but rather depend on other factors, such as the organization’s risk management capabilities, as explained below:

A. Increase in compliance breaches is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will not comply with the new law, which would expose it to more risks and penalties. A rational organization would try to comply with the new law by implementing appropriate controls and measures to protect PII and prevent data breaches.

C. Increase in residual risk is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will not adjust its risk response strategies to account for the new law, which would leave it with more risk exposure than desired. A prudent organization would try to reduce its residual risk by enhancing its risk mitigation controls or transferring its risk to a third party, such as an insurance company.

D. Increase in customer complaints is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will experience more data breaches involving PII, which would affect its customersatisfaction and loyalty. A responsible organization would try to avoid data breaches by improving its security posture and practices, and by communicating transparently and effectively with its customers about the new law and its implications. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 32.

 Process owners are the best suited to help a risk practitioner understand the impact of IT-related events on business objectives, as they have the responsibility and authority over the design, execution, and performance of business processes. Process owners are also accountable for the risks and controls associated with their processes, and they can provide valuable input and feedback on the likelihood and impact of IT-related events on the process outcomes and objectives.

The other options are not the best suited to help a risk practitioner understand the impact of IT-related events on business objectives. IT management is responsible for the delivery and support of IT services and solutions, but they may not have the full visibility or understanding of the business objectives and processes. Internal audit is responsible for providing independent and objective assurance and consulting services on the effectiveness and efficiency of governance, risk management, and control processes, but they may not have the direct involvement or influence on the business objectives and processes. Senior management is responsible for settingthe strategic direction and objectives of the organization, but they maynot have the detailed knowledge or experience of the business processes and their risks and controls. References = IT Risk Manager: Skills and Roles & Responsibilities, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Managing information technology risk | Business Queensland

Enterprise risk management (ERM) is a holistic and strategic approach to managing the risks that an organization faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. ERM aims to align the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance with its objectives and vision, and to optimize the value and performance of the organization1.

IT risk management is a subset of ERM that focuses on identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks related to the use of information technology (IT) in the organization. IT risk management aims to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of IT resources and information, and to support the IT governance and strategy of the organization2.

The greatest benefit when ERM provides oversight of IT risk management is aligning IT with short-term and long-term goals of the organization, because it can help to:

Integrate IT risk management with the overall business strategy and risk management, and ensure that IT risks are considered and addressed at the enterprise level

Align IT risk appetite and tolerance with the business risk appetite and tolerance, and ensure that IT risks are balanced with the expected benefits and opportunities

Enhance IT risk awareness and communication among the stakeholders, and ensure that IT risks are reported and escalated appropriately

Optimize IT risk response and control, and ensure that IT risks are managed efficiently and effectively

Demonstrate IT risk value and impact, and ensure that IT risks are measured and monitored against the business objectives and performance34

The other options are not the greatest benefit when ERM provides oversight of IT risk management, but rather some of the outcomes or consequences of it. Ensuring the IT budget and resources focus on risk management is a benefit that can help to allocate and prioritize the IT resources and funds according to the IT risk level and the business needs. Ensuring senior management’s primary focus is on the impact of identified risk is a benefit that can help to increase the senior management’s involvement and accountability in IT risk management, and to support the IT risk decision making and reporting. Prioritizing internal departments that provide service to customers is a benefit that can help to improve the quality and efficiency of the IT service delivery and customer satisfaction. References =

Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA

IT Risk Management - ISACA

Aligning IT risks with Enterprise Risk Management (ERM)

Five Benefits of Enterprise Risk Management : Articles : Resources …

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

 The MOST important consideration when performing a risk assessment of a fire suppression system within a data center is the maintenance procedures, because they ensure that the fire suppression system is functioning properly and reliably, and that it can prevent or minimize the damage caused by fire incidents. The maintenance procedures should include regular testing, inspection, and servicing of the fire suppression system components, such as sprinklers, detectors, alarms, and extinguishers. The other options are not as important as the maintenance procedures, because:

Option A: Insurance coverage is a financial measure that can compensate for the loss or damage caused by fire incidents, but it does not prevent or reduce the likelihood or impact of the fire incidents. Insurance coverage is also dependent on the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, which may not cover all the scenarios or costs of the fire incidents.

Option B: Onsite replacement availability is a contingency measure that can facilitate the recovery or restoration of the fire suppression system after a fire incident, but it does not prevent or reduce the likelihood or impact of the fire incidents. Onsite replacement availability is alsodependent on the availability and compatibility of the replacement parts, which may not match the original fire suppression system specifications or requirements.

Option D: Installation manuals are a reference source that can provide guidance on how to install or configure the fire suppression system, but they do not ensure that the fire suppression system is functioning properly and reliably. Installation manuals are also static documents that may not reflect the current or updated fire suppression system standards or practices. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 211.

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner when reviewing the findings of a security awareness program assessment is that the program uses non-customized training modules. Non-customizedtraining modules are generic and may not address the specific security needs, issues, and challenges of the organization. They may also fail to engage and motivate the employees to follow the security policies and procedures, and to enhance their security knowledge and skills. The program not decreasing threat counts, not considering business impact, or being significantly revised are other possible findings, but they are not as concerning as the program using non-customized training modules. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.