Pass the Isaca Isaca Certification CRISC Questions and answers with CertsForce

 The most concerning issue found during the review of a newly created disaster recovery plan (DRP) is that some critical business applications are not included in the plan. This means that the DRP is incomplete and does not cover all the essential IT systems and services that support the business continuity. This could result in significant losses and damages in the event of a disaster. The other issues are not as critical, as they can be addressed by ensuring proper contracts, standards, and approvals are in place for the outsourced activities, the framework, and the CISO. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the most effective approach to mitigate the risk associated with data loss due to users sending sensitive information by email without using encryption is to block unencrypted outgoing emails which contain sensitive data. This is an example of a risk avoidance strategy, which aims to eliminate the risk by removing the source of the risk or the activity that causes the risk. Blocking unencrypted outgoing emails which contain sensitive data can prevent unauthorized access, disclosure, modification or destruction of the sensitive information, and thus protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the data. This approach can also deter users from violating the encryption policy and enforce compliance with the security standards and regulations.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 167-1681

A good IT risk scenario must be aligned with a business objective. This alignment ensures that the risk scenario is relevant to the organization’s goals and can be effectively integrated into its risk management processes.

Alignment to Business Objective (Answer C):

Importance: Aligning risk scenarios with business objectives ensures that they are relevant and support the organization’s overall strategy.

Impact: This alignment helps in prioritizing risk management efforts and resources toward areas that directly affect the organization’s success.

Outcome: It leads to more effective risk management by focusing on risks that could impact key business outcomes.

Comparison with Other Options:

A. The scenario is aligned to business control processes:

Purpose: Control processes are important but secondary to business objectives.

B. The scenario is aligned to the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance:

Purpose: Important for overall risk management but not the primary characteristic of a good risk scenario.

D. The scenario is aligned to known vulnerabilities in information technology:

Purpose: While addressing vulnerabilities is important, the primary focus should be on how these vulnerabilities affect business objectives.

Data inconsistency is the greatest concern associated with redundant data in an organization’s inventory system, as it can lead to inaccurate, unreliable, and conflicting information that can affect the decision-making and performance of the organization. Redundant data can occur when the same data is stored in multiple locations or formats, or when data is not updated or synchronized properly. Data inconsistency can cause errors, confusion, and inefficiency in the inventory management process, and can also increase the risk of fraud, theft, or loss of inventory. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 238. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 238. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 238.

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

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

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

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

Risk assessmentsprovide a prioritized view of potential threats, their likelihood, and impact. This enables management tofocus resourceson high-priority risks, ensuring cost-effective mitigation aligned with organizational goals.

Risk treatment is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate risk response strategy and actions to address the identified risks. Risk treatment can involve different strategies, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Risk owner is the person or group who has the authority and accountability to manage the risk and its response. Risk owner is accountable for risk treatment, as they are responsible for deciding, approving, and executing the risk treatment plan, and for monitoring and reportingthe results and outcomes of the risk treatment. The other options are not accountable for risk treatment, as they have different roles or responsibilities in the risk management process:

Enterprise risk management team is the group of risk managers and practitioners who support the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provide guidance and direction to the risk owners and stakeholders. Enterprise risk management team may advise or assist the risk owner in risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment.

Risk mitigation manager is the person who designs, implements, and monitors the risk mitigation actions or measures that reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk to an acceptable level, such as controls, policies, or procedures. Risk mitigation manager may advise or assist the risk owner in risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment.

Business process owner is the stakeholder who is responsible for the business process that is supported by the IT system or application, such as the CRM system. Business process owner may be affected by or contribute to the risk, and may be involved in the risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment, unless they are also the risk owner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.1, pp. 95-96.

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

A data loss prevention (DLP) control is a technology that tries to detect and stop sensitive data breaches, or data leakage incidents, in an organization. A DLP control is used to prevent sensitive data, such as credit card numbers, from being disclosed to an unauthorized person, whether it is deliberate or accidental1. The best way to help ensure the effectiveness of a DLP control that has been implemented to prevent the loss of credit card data is to test the transmission of credit card numbers. This is a technique to verify that the DLP control can successfully identify and block the credit card data when it is sent or received through various channels, such as email, messaging, or file transfers. Testing the transmission of credit card numbers can help to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of the DLP control, as well as to identify and correct any false positives or false negatives. The other options are not the best ways to help ensure the effectiveness of a DLP control that has been implemented to prevent the loss of credit card data, although they may be helpful and complementary. Reviewing logs forunauthorized data transfers is a technique to monitor and analyze the DLP control activities and incidents, such as who, what, when, where, and how the data was transferred. However, reviewing logs is a reactive and passive approach, while testing the transmission is a proactive and active approach. Configuring the DLP control to block credit card numbers is a technique to set up the DLP control rules and policies, such as defining the data patterns, the detection methods, and the response actions. However, configuring the DLP control is a prerequisite and a preparation step, while testing the transmission is a validation and a verification step. Testing the DLP rule change control process is a technique to ensure that the DLP control rules and policies are updated and maintained in a controlled and coordinated manner, such as obtaining approval, documenting the changes, testing the changes, and communicating the changes. However, testing the DLP rule change control process is a quality and governance step, while testing the transmission is a performance and functionality step. References = What is Data Loss Prevention (DLP)? | Digital Guardian1; CRISC Review Manual, pages 164-1652; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 833

Risk tolerance refers to the acceptable level of variation in outcomes related to specific risks that an organization is willing to withstand. It defines the boundaries within which the organization can operate safely and is often set by senior leadership to guide decision-making processes. In the context of integrating a new acquisition, allowing for variation in the level of risk-taking directly pertains to the organization's risk tolerance.

Inherent risk is the most likely to increase as a result of the new initiative, because it is the risk that exists before any controls or mitigating factors are applied. Inherent risk reflects the natural or raw level of exposure that the organization faces from a given risk source or scenario. Accepting credit card payments from customers via the corporate website introduces new sources and types of risk, such as fraud, theft, data breach, or non-compliance, that increase the inherent risk level of the organization. Risk tolerance, risk appetite, and residual risk are all related to the risk management process, but they are not the most likely to increase as a result of the new initiative, as they depend on the organization’s risk strategy, objectives, and controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 51

Risk events are specific occurrences or changes that have a potential impact on the achievement of objectives. They can be positive or negative, and they can be internal or external to the organization. Risk events provide the basis for developing realistic risk scenarios, which are hypothetical situations that illustrate the possible consequences of a risk event. Risk scenarios help to understand and communicate the nature, sources, and causes of risk, as well as the potential impact and likelihood of risk occurrence. Risk scenarios can also be used to test the effectiveness of risk responses and controls.

The other options are not as useful as risk events for developing realistic risk scenarios. A balanced scorecard (A) is a strategic management tool that measures the performance of the organization against its objectives, vision, and strategy. It does not provide specific information about risk events or their consequences. A risk appetite (B) is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. It does not describe the risk events or their scenarios, but rather the level of risk tolerance and acceptance. A risk map © is a graphical representation of the risk profile of the organization, showing the relationship between the likelihood and impact of different risks. It does not provide the details or context of the risk events or their scenarios, but rather the relative ranking and prioritization of risks.

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

A maturity model is a tool that assesses the level of development and performance of key processes within an organization. A maturity model typically defines a set of criteria, standards, and best practices for each process, and assigns a rating or score based on the degree of compliance or achievement. A maturity model can help compare the current state of key processes to their desired state, by identifying the strengths, weaknesses, gaps, and opportunities for improvement. A maturity model can also help establish a roadmap for process improvement, by setting realistic and measurable goals and objectives, and monitoring the progress and results. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Scenarios, p. 49-50.

 The business application owner should have the authority to accept the associated risk, because they are responsible for the performance and outcomes of the critical application, and they understand the business requirements, expectations, and impact of the application. The business application owner can also evaluate the trade-offs between the potential benefits and costs of the application, and the potential risks and consequences of a disruption or failure of the application. The business application owner can also communicate and justify their risk acceptance decision to the senior management and other stakeholders, and ensure that the risk is monitored and reviewed regularly. The other options are less appropriate to have the authority to accept the associated risk. The business continuity director is responsible for overseeing the planning and execution of the business continuity strategy, which includes ensuring the availability andresilience of the critical business processes and applications. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. The disaster recovery manager is responsible for managing the recovery and restoration of the IT systems and applications in the event of a disaster or disruption. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. The data center manager is responsible for managing the operation and maintenance of the data center infrastructure, which includes providing the physical and environmental security, power, cooling, and network connectivity for the IT systems and applications. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 181

According to the What To Look For When Assessing Your Organization’s Security Risk Posture article, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite should be aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and values, and should reflect the organization’s risk culture and capabilities. When reviewing a risk response strategy, senior management’s primary focus should be placed on the alignment with risk appetite, as this indicates how well the risk response strategy supports the organization’s objectives and expectations, and how consistent it is with the organization’s risk tolerance and risk profile. By ensuring the alignment with risk appetite, senior managementcan evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response strategy, and determine if any adjustments or improvements are needed. References = What To Look For When Assessing Your Organization’s Security Risk Posture

 Computer-enabled fraud is the use of information technology (IT) to commit or conceal fraudulent activities, such as theft, manipulation, or unauthorized access of data, systems, or networks. Computer-enabled fraud can pose significant risks to an organization, such as financial loss, reputational damage, legal liability, or regulatory sanctions. Therefore, an organization should establish a comprehensive and effective framework to prevent, detect, and respond to computer-enabled fraud. The framework should involve three lines of defense, which are theroles and responsibilities of different functions within theorganization to manage and control risks. The first line of defense consists of the business owners, whose role is to identify, assess, and manage risks, including computer-enabled fraud risks. The primary responsibility of the first line of defense related to computer-enabled fraud is to implement processes to detect and deter fraud. This means designing and executing controls that can prevent or reduce the occurrence of computer-enabled fraud, such as authentication, authorization, encryption, logging, orsegregation of duties. This also means monitoring and reporting any suspicious or anomalous activities or transactions that may indicate computer-enabled fraud, such as unusual patterns, volumes, or frequencies of data or system access or usage. Implementing processes to detect and deter fraud can help the first line of defense to protect the organization’s assets, data, and reputation from computer-enabled fraud, and to comply with the organization’s policies and regulations. References = Three Lines of Defence, Roles of Three Lines of Defense for Information Security and Governance, THE THREE LINES OF DEFENSE IN EFFECTIVE RISK MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL, The Three Lines of Defense.

Conducting a proof of concept in a non-production environment ensures that any potential issues or vulnerabilities in the AI technology do not affect live systems or data. This approach allows for thorough testing and evaluation without risking operational disruptions or data breaches.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, centralized log management is the best way to assist in reconstructing the sequence of events following a security incident across multiple IT systems in the organization’s network, because it enables the collection, correlation, analysis, and retention of log data from various sources. Centralized log management can provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the activities and transactions that occurred before, during, and after the incident, and can facilitate the identification of the root cause, impact, and scope of the incident. The other options are not the best ways to assist in reconstructing the sequence of events, because they do not provide the same level of detail and accuracy as centralized log management. Network monitoring infrastructure is a tool that helps to monitor the performance and availability of the network, but it does not capture the log data from the IT systems. Centralized vulnerability management is a process that helps to identify and remediate the vulnerabilities in the IT systems, but it does not record the events and transactions that occurred on the systems. Incident management process is a process that helps to respond to and resolve the incidents, but it does not provide the log data from the IT systems. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 263.

Theimpact to business objectivesis paramount when developing risk scenarios, as the primary purpose of risk management is to protect and support business objectives. Understanding the impact helps tailor scenarios to potential risks that could disrupt key operations or strategic goals.

 The risk of users circumventing application controls is the most significant exposure when an application uses individual user accounts to access the underlying database. This is because users may have direct access to the data and bypass the validation, authorization, and logging mechanisms that are implemented at the application level. Users may also be able to modify or delete data without proper authorization or audit trail. The other options are less significant exposures, as they do not directly affect the integrity or confidentiality of the data. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009, page 35; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 214.

Granting remote access to a system containing sensitive data to an overseas third party poses various risks to the organization, such as data breaches, unauthorized access, data loss, compliance violations, or reputational damage. The greatest concern to management when granting remote access to a third party is the lack of monitoring over vendor activities, meaning that the organization may not be able to control or verify how the third party is accessing, using, storing, or transferring the sensitive data. The lack of monitoring over vendor activities can increase the risk exposure and uncertainty of the organization, as well as reduce the accountability and transparency of the third party. Therefore, the organization should implement appropriate measures to monitor and audit the vendor activities, such as logging, reporting, reviewing, or testing, and to ensure that the vendor complies with the contractual obligations and the security policies and standards of the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2.1, p. 243-244

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk taxonomy is the system of classification and categorization of risks based on common characteristics and attributes. Risk taxonomy is necessary to enable an IT risk register to be consolidated with the rest of the organization’s risk register, because it helps to ensure consistency, comparability, and alignment of the risks across the organization. Risk taxonomy also helps to facilitate the communication, reporting, and aggregation of the risks. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not essential for consolidating the risk registers. Risk response is the action taken to address the risk, which may vary depending on the risk level and strategy. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept, which may differ across the organization’s units and functions. Risk ranking is the process of prioritizing the risks based on their impact and likelihood, which may change over time and context. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, page 69.

Updating a risk register with assessment results for a key project must primarily capture action plans to address risk scenarios requiring treatment.

Risk Register Purpose:

Documentation of Risks:The risk register is a central repository for all identified risks and their respective treatment plans. It ensures that all risks are documented, tracked, and managed throughout the project lifecycle.

Action Plans:It is crucial to document action plans for risks that require treatment. This ensures that there are clear strategies in place to mitigate or manage these risks.

Importance of Action Plans:

Mitigation and Management:Action plans detail the steps necessary to mitigate identified risks, providing a clear path for risk management. This is vital for ensuring that risks do not negatively impact the project.

Accountability and Tracking:Including action plans in the risk register assigns responsibility and timelines for risk treatment, which is essential for accountability and tracking progress.

The most important factor for a risk practitioner to consider when determining the control requirements for data privacy arising from emerging technologies is the laws and regulations that apply to the organization and the technologies. Laws and regulations are the legal and ethical obligations that the organization must comply with when collecting, processing, storing, and sharing personal data. Laws and regulations can vary depending on the jurisdiction, sector, and type of data involved, and they can impose different requirements and restrictions on the use of emerging technologies that may affect data privacy. For example, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the United States, and the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) in Singapore are some of the laws and regulations that govern data privacy and protection in different regions and contexts123. A riskpractitioner should consider the laws and regulations when determining the control requirements for data privacy arising from emerging technologies, because they can help to ensure that the organization respects the rights and interests of the data subjects, avoids legal and reputational risks, and maintains trust and accountability. The other options are not the mostimportant factor, although they may be relevant or influential to the control requirements for data privacy arising from emerging technologies. Internal audit recommendations are the suggestions and feedback from the internal audit function, which evaluates and improves the effectiveness of the governance, risk management, and control systems of the organization, but they do not supersede or replace the laws and regulations. Policies and procedures are the rules and guidelines that define how the organization operates and conducts its activities, but they should be aligned and consistent with the laws and regulations. Standards and frameworks are the best practices and benchmarks that are adopted by the organization to guide and support its processes and performance, but they should be compatible and compliant with the laws and regulations. References = Emerging privacy-enhancing technologies: Current regulatory and policy approaches | en | OECD, Data and Cybersecurity: 2023 Regulatory Challenges - KPMG, Ethical Dilemmas and Privacy Issues in Emerging Technologies: A … - MDPI

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk attitude and its willingness to take on risk in specific scenarios. Risk appetite is usually expressed in a qualitative statement approved by the board of directors1.

Risk capacity is the maximum amount of risk that an organization can responsibly take on without jeopardizing its financial stability or other key objectives. Risk capacity is determined by objective factors like income, assets, liabilities, debts, insurance coverage, dependents, and time horizon. Risk capacity is usually expressed in a quantitative measure that sets the limit of how much risk the organization can handle2.

Prudent business practice requires that risk appetite not exceed risk capacity, because this would mean that the organization is taking on more risk than it can afford or sustain. If the risk appetiteis higher than the risk capacity, the organization may face serious consequences such as insolvency, bankruptcy, reputational damage, legal liability, or regulatory sanctions. Therefore, the organization should align its risk appetite with its risk capacity, and ensure that its risk exposure is within its risk tolerance3.

The other options are not correct. Inherent risk is the level of risk that exists in the absence of controls or mitigations. It is the natural level of risk inherent in a process or activity. Residual risk is the level of riskthat remains after the controls or mitigations have been applied. It is the remaining risk after the risk response has been implemented. Risk tolerance is the acceptable variation in the outcomes related to specific objectives or risks. It is the range of risk exposure that the organization is prepared to accept4. None of these concepts are directly comparable torisk appetite, and none of them represent the limit of how much risk the organization can take on. References =

Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference? - ISACA

What Is the Difference Between Risk Tolerance and Risk Capacity? - Investopedia

Risk Management: Understanding Risk Capacity, Appetite, and Tolerance - Consulting Edge

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

In a SaaS model, while the provider manages the infrastructure and application,data ownership and ultimate responsibilityfor its confidentiality remains with thecustomer's data owner, including due diligence and contractual safeguards.

Key Risk Indicators (KRIs)are metrics used to monitor changes in risk exposure, enabling proactive adjustments to keep risks within appetite. They provide early warnings of potential breaches in risk thresholds.

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, the first step in prioritizing risk response is to address the high risk factors that have efficient and effective solutions. This means that management should focus on the risks that have the most impact on the organization’s objectives and can be mitigated with the least amount of resources and effort. This approach helps to optimize the risk response process and achieve the best results in terms of risk reduction and value creation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, Page 223.

Automated information security controls are controls that are implemented or executed by software or hardware, without human intervention, to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information and systems1. Examples of automated information security controls include firewalls, antivirus software, encryption, authentication, and logging2. The effectiveness of automated information security controls refers to how well they achieve their intended objectives and outcomes, such as preventing, detecting, or responding to security threats or incidents3. The best way to measure the effectiveness of automatedinformation security controls prior to going live is to test them in a non-production environment, which is an environment thatsimulates the production environment, but does not contain real or sensitive data orsystems4. Testing in a non-production environment allows the organization to verify the proper and consistent configuration, functionality, and performance of the automated information security controls, without affecting the normal operations or risking the exposure of the data or systems5. Testing in a non-production environment also enables the organization to identify andresolve any issues or gaps in the automated information security controls, and to evaluate their compatibility and interoperability with other systems or controls6. Performing a security control review, reviewing the security audit report, and conducting a risk assessment are not the best ways to measure the effectiveness of automated information security controls prior to going live, as they do not provide direct and timely information on the configuration, functionality, and performance of the automated information security controls. Performing a security control review is a process that involves checking and verifying that the organization’s security controls are up to date, relevant, and effective7. A security control review can help to identify and address any issues or gaps in the security controls, but it does not show the actual behavior and results of the automated information security controls in a realistic environment. Reviewing the security audit report is a process that involves reading and analyzing the findings and recommendations of an independent examination and evaluation of the organization’s security controls8. A security audit report can help to provide assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the security controls, but it does not show the current and dynamic status and performance of the automated information security controls in a changing environment. Conducting a risk assessment is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts on the organization’s objectives and performance. A risk assessment can help to anticipate and prepare for the risks that may affect the organization’s security, but it does not show the actual impact and outcome of the automated information security controls in a specific scenario. References = 1: Automation Support for Security Control Assessments - NIST2: Automated Security Control Assessment: When Self-Awareness Matters3: Technology Control Automation: Improving Efficiency, Reducing … - ISACA4: [What is a Non-Production Environment? | Definition and FAQs] 5: [Why You Need a Non-Production Environment - Plutora] 6: [Testing Automated Security Controls - SANS Institute] 7: A brief guide to assessing risks and controls | ACCA Global8: IT Risk Resources | ISACA : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.]

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

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

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

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

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the primary benefit of selecting an appropriate set of key risk indicators (KRIs) is that they provide a warning of emerging high-risk conditions. KRIs are metrics that monitor changes in the level of risk exposure and contribute to the early warning signs that enable organizations to report risks, prevent crises, and mitigate them in time. KRIs help risk managers to identify potential threats, assess their impact and likelihood, and take proactive measures to reduce the risk or seize the opportunity12

1: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Study Guide, 4th Edition, page 33 2: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Handbook, 1st Edition, page 25

Limited integration with external systems and blockchainsis the greatest concern. Without considering interoperability during the SDLC, the system may not be able to connect seamlessly with partners or external networks, hindering business goals and limiting the blockchain’s benefits.

===========

The most important objective from a cost perspective for considering aggregated risk responses in an organization is to address more than one risk response. Aggregated risk responses are risk responses that can affect multiple risks or objectives simultaneously. By addressing more than one risk response, the organization can achieve cost efficiency and effectiveness in risk management. Prioritizing risk response options, reducing likelihood, and reducing impact are other possible objectives, but they are not as important from a cost perspective as addressing more than one risk response. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 10; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 140.

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

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

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

Implement and monitor the cybersecurity controls and processes

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

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

Continuously improve the cybersecurity capabilities and maturity

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

External audit reports are independent and objective, typically conducted under standard frameworks (e.g., SOC 2). They assess the third party’s controls in a structured and verifiable manner, offering the highest assurance of confidentiality protections.

 The areas to address first when classifying and prioritizing risk responses are those with high cost effectiveness ratios and high risk levels, as they represent the most optimal and urgent risk responses that can reduce the risk exposure and impact significantly with a reasonable cost. Theother options are not the areas to address first, as they may indicate suboptimal or less urgent risk responses that may not align with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

A risk owner is the individual who is accountable for the management of a specific risk. A risk owner can decide to accept a high-impact risk if the control that mitigates the risk is adversely affecting the process efficiency. However, before updating the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the identified risks and their responses, it is most important for the risk practitioner to obtain approval from senior management. Senior management is the group of executives who have the authority and responsibility for the strategic direction and performance of the organization. Obtaining approval from senior management can help ensure that the risk acceptance decision is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and policies, and that the potential consequences of the high-impact risk are understood and accepted by the top-level decision makers. Obtaining approval from senior management can also help communicate and justify the risk acceptance decision to other stakeholders, such as regulators, auditors, customers, etc., and avoid any conflicts or misunderstandings that may arise from the risk acceptance decision. References = Why Assigning a Risk Owner is Important and How to Do It Right, Risk Ownership: A brief guide, Creating a Risk Register: All You Need to Know.

 A review of a third-party vendor is a process that involves examining and evaluating the performance, quality, and compliance of the vendor that provides a product or service to the organization1. A review of a third-party vendor can help to identify and address the risks and issues that may arise from the vendorrelationship, such as data breaches, service disruptions, contract violations, or reputation damage2. Following a review of a third-party vendor, it is most important for an organization to ensure that the results of the review are accurately reported to management, as this will enable the management to make informed and timely decisions and actions based on the findings and recommendations of the review. Accurate reporting of the results of the review will also help to establish and maintain the trust and transparency between the organization and the vendor, and to demonstrate the accountability and responsibility of the organization for its vendor risk management3. Identified findings are reviewed by the organization, results of the review are validated by internal audit, and identified findings are approved by the vendor are not the most important things to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as they do not provide the same level of impact and value as accurate reporting of the results of the review. Identified findings are reviewed by the organization is a process that involves analyzing and interpreting the outcomes and implications of the review of a third-party vendor, and determining the appropriate risk responses and actions to address the findings4. Thisis an important step in the vendor risk management process, but it is not the most important thing to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as it does not communicate or inform the management or the vendor of the results of the review. Results of the review are validated by internal audit is a process that involves verifying and confirming the accuracy and reliability of the review of a third-party vendor, and providing assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the vendor risk management. This is an important step in the vendor risk management process, but it is not the most important thing to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as it does not report or share the results of the review with the management or the vendor. Identified findings are approved by the vendor is a process that involves obtaining the consent and agreement of the vendor on the outcomes and recommendations of the review of a third-party vendor, and ensuring their cooperation and compliance with the risk responses and actions. This is an important step in the vendor risk management process, but it is not the most important thing to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as it does not report or inform the management of the results of the review. References = 1: The guide to third-party vendor reviews - TerraTrue HQ | TerraTrue2: 4 Tips For Organizations To Evaluate Third-Party Vendors – Forbes Advisor3: Vendor Risk Management: Best Practices for 2023 - Venminder4: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Options, pp. 113-115.] : [IT Risk Resources | ISACA] : Who Is Considered a Third Party or Vendor? - Venminder : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information SystemsControl Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1:Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

A web-based service provider is an organization that offers online services or applications to its customers or users, such as e-commerce, social media, cloud computing, etc. A web-based service provider depends on the availability, reliability, and security of its web servers, networks, and systems to deliver its services or applications.

A low risk appetite for system outages means that the organization is not willing to accept a high level or frequency of system outages, which are interruptions or disruptions in the normal operation or functionality of the web servers, networks, or systems. System outages can cause customer dissatisfaction, revenue loss, reputation damage, or legal liability for the web-based service provider.

A current risk profile for online security is the current state or condition of the online security risks that may affect the web-based service provider’s objectives and operations. It includes the identification, analysis, and evaluation of the online security risks, and the prioritization and response to them based on their significance and urgency.

The most relevant observation to escalate to senior management is an increase in attempted distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, which are malicious attacks that aim to overwhelm or overload the web servers, networks, or systems with a large volume or frequency of requests or traffic, and prevent them from responding to legitimate requests or traffic. An increase in attempted DDoS attacks indicates a high likelihood and impact of system outages, and a high level of threat or vulnerability for the web-based service provider’s online security. Escalating this observation to senior management can help them to understand the severity and urgency of the risk, and to decide on the appropriate risk response and allocation of resources.

The other options are not the most relevant observations to escalate to senior management, because they do not indicate a high likelihood or impact of system outages, and they may not be relevant or actionable for senior management.

An increase in attempted website phishing attacks means an increase in malicious attempts to deceive or trick the web-based service provider’s customers or users into providing their personal or financial information, such as usernames, passwords, credit card numbers, etc., by impersonating the web-based service provider’s website or email. An increase in attemptedwebsite phishing attacks indicates a high level of threat or vulnerability for the web-based service provider’s online security, but it may not directly cause system outages, unless thephishing attacks are used to compromise the web servers, networks, or systems. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval.

A decrease in achievement of service level agreements (SLAs) means a decrease in the extent or degree to which the web-based service provider meets or exceeds the agreed or expected standards or criteria for the quality, performance, or availability of its services or applications, as specified in the contracts or agreements with its customers or users. A decrease in achievement of SLAs indicates a low level of customer satisfaction, retention, or loyalty, and a low level of competitiveness or profitability for the web-based service provider. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval.

A decrease in remediated web security vulnerabilities means a decrease in the number or percentage of web security vulnerabilities that have been identified and resolved or mitigated by the web-based service provider. Web security vulnerabilities are weaknesses or flaws in the web servers, networks, or systems that can be exploited by malicious attackers to compromise or damage the web-based service provider’s online security. A decrease in remediated web security vulnerabilities indicates a low level of effectiveness or efficiency for the web-based service provider’s web security controls or processes. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval. 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 161

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The most effective approach to prioritize risk scenarios is by assessing the impact to the strategic plan, because this will help to align the risk management process with the organization’s vision, mission, and goals. The strategic plan is the document that defines the organization’s direction, priorities, and objectives, and guides the allocation of resources and efforts. By assessing theimpact to the strategic plan, the organization can determine which risk scenarios pose the greatest threat or opportunity to the achievement of the strategic objectives, and prioritize them accordingly. The other options are not as effective as assessing the impact to the strategic plan, because they do not directly relate to the organization’s specific context, needs, and expectations, as explained below:

B. Aligning with industry best practices is an approach that involves following the standards, norms, and expectations for risk management that are established and followed by the peers or competitors in the same industry or sector. Aligning with industry best practices can help to benchmark and compare the organization’s risk management performance and maturity, and identify areas for improvement or innovation. However, this approach is not as effective as assessing the impact to the strategic plan, because it does not account for the organization’s unique and customized risk scenarios, which may differ from the industry average or standard.

C. Soliciting input from risk management experts is an approach that involves seeking advice, guidance, or feedback from the professionals or specialists who have the knowledge, experience, or skills in risk management. Soliciting input from risk management experts can help to enhance the quality and validity of the risk analysis and evaluation, and provide insights and recommendations for risk mitigation. However, this approach is not as effective as assessing the impact to the strategic plan, because it does not reflect the organization’s risk appetite, preferences, and expectations, which may differ from the risk management experts’ opinions or perspectives.

D. Evaluating the cost of risk response is an approach that involves estimating the resources and efforts required to implement the risk response strategies, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Evaluating the cost of risk response can help to optimize the risk management efficiency and effectiveness, and balance the potential benefits and costs of taking risks. However, this approach is not as effective as assessing the impact to the strategic plan, because it does not consider the potential consequences and outcomes of the risk scenarios, which may affect the organization’s performance and reputation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 45. The Ultimate Guide to Risk Prioritization - Hyperproof, Risk Prioritization: What Is It? [2021 Guide & Matrix] - ERM Software, What is Risk Prioritization | Centraleyes, Scenario Planning in Risk Management: Why It is Needed - SmartCompliance

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.

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

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

The primary reason to have risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register is to ensure that risk is treated appropriately, as risk owners are responsible for implementing the risk response strategies and monitoring the risk status and outcomes. Risk owners are also accountable for the risk and its impact on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. Having risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register helps to clarify the roles and responsibilities, improve the communication and coordination, and enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process. Mitigating actions are prioritized, risk entries are regularly updated, and risk exposure is minimized are not the primary reasons to have risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register, but rather the results or benefits of having risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 206; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 206.

The best way to mitigate the risk to operations caused by severe weather events is to develop a business continuity plan (BCP). A BCP is a document that describes the procedures and resources needed to ensure the continuity of the organization’s critical functions and processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. A BCP helps to identify the recovery objectives, strategies, and priorities, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the recovery team members. A BCP also helps to prepare and test the recovery capabilities and resources, such as alternate locations, backup systems, and communication channels. The other options are not as effective as developing a BCP, although they may be part of the BCP process or outcomes. Preparing a cost-benefit analysis to evaluate relocation, preparing a disaster recovery plan (DRP), and conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) for an alternate location are all activities that can help to develop or implement a BCP, but they are not the best way to mitigate the risk to operations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 5-9.

 The analysis of logs and system events will best help validate whether suspicious network activity is malicious, because they provide detailed and timely information about the source, destination, content, and context of the network traffic. Logs and system events can be collected from various sources, such as firewalls, routers, switches, servers, applications, and endpoints, and can be correlated and analyzed using tools such as security information and event management (SIEM) systems. By analyzing logs and system events, an organization can identify anomalies, patterns, trends, and indicators of compromise (IOCs) that may signal malicious network activity, such as unauthorized access, data exfiltration, malware infection, denial-of-service attack, or lateral movement. Logs and system events can also help determine the scope, impact, and root cause of the malicious network activity, and support the incident response and remediation process. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 221