CISM Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

 Before classifying the suspected event as a security incident, it is most important for the security manager to follow the incident response plan, which is a predefined set of procedures and guidelines that outline the roles, responsibilities, and actions of the incident management team and the organization in the event of a security event or incident. Following the incident response plan can help to ensure a consistent, coordinated, and effective response to the suspected event, as well as to minimize the impact and damage to the business processes, functions, and assets. Following the incident response plan can also help to determine the nature, scope, and severity of the suspected event, and to decide whether it meets the criteria and threshold for being classified as a security incident that requires further escalation, investigation, and resolution. Following the incident response plan can also help to document and report the incident details, activities, and outcomes, and to provide feedback and recommendations for improvement and optimization of the incident response process and plan.

Conducting an incident forensic analysis, notifying the business process owner, and following the business continuity plan (BCP) are all important steps in the incident response process, but they are not the most important ones before classifying the suspected event as a security incident. Conducting an incident forensic analysis is a technical and detailed process that involves collecting, preserving, analyzing, and presenting evidence related to the incident, and it is usually performed after the incident has been classified, contained, and eradicated. Notifying the business process owner is a communication and notification process that involves informing the relevant stakeholders of the incident status, impact, and actions, and it is usually performed after the incident has been classified and assessed. Following the business continuity plan (BCP) is a recovery and restoration process that involves resuming and restoring the normal business operations and functions after the incident has been resolved and lessons learned have been identified and implemented. References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, pages 237-2411; CISM Practice Quiz, question 1422

The information security manager should first determine the risk related to noncompliance with the policy, as this will help to understand the impact and likelihood of the policy violation and the potential consequences for the organization. The information security manager can then use the risk assessment results to communicate the importance of the policy to the IT personnel, propose any necessary changes to the policy or the processes, or request an audit of the policy development process, depending on the situation. Conducting user awareness training, updating policies and procedures, or requesting an audit are possible actions that the information security manager can take after determining the risk, but they are not the first step. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 2: Information Risk Management, Section: Risk Assessment, page 86; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, Question 59, page 60.

The greatest benefit of conducting an organization-wide security awareness program is to improve the security behavior of the employees, contractors, partners, and other stakeholders who interact with the organization’s information assets. Security behavior refers to the actions and decisions that affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information, such as following the security policies and procedures, reporting security incidents, avoiding risky practices, and applying security controls. By improving the security behavior, the organization can reduce the human-related risks and vulnerabilities, enhance the security culture and awareness, and support the security strategy and objectives.

The other options are not as beneficial as improving the security behavior, although they may also be outcomes or objectives of a security awareness program. Promoting the security strategy is important to communicate the vision, mission, and goals of the security function, as well as to align the security activities with the business needs and expectations. However, promoting the security strategy alone is not enough to ensure its implementation and effectiveness, as it also requires the involvement and commitment of the stakeholders, especially the senior management. Reporting fewer security incidents may indicate a lower level of security breaches or threats, but it may also reflect a lack of detection, reporting, or awareness mechanisms. Moreover, reporting fewer security incidents is not a reliable measure of the security performance or maturity, as it does not account for the impact, severity, or root causes of the incidents. Detecting more security incidents may indicate a higher level of security monitoring, alerting, or awareness capabilities, but it may also reflect a higher level of security exposures or attacks. Moreover, detecting more security incidents is not a desirable goal of a security awareness program, as it also implies a higher level of security incidents that need to be responded to and resolved. References =

CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2022, pp. 201-202, 207-208.

CISM Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, ISACA, 2022, QID 1006.

The Benefits of Information Security and Privacy Awareness Training Programs, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2019, 1.

 The most important thing to include in the outsourcing agreement for disaster recovery activities is the recovery time objectives (RTOs). RTOs are the maximum acceptable time frames within which the critical business processes and information systems must be restored after a disaster or disruption. RTOs are based on the business impact analysis (BIA) and the risk assessment, and they reflect the business continuity requirements and expectations of the organization. By including the RTOs in the outsourcing agreement, the organization can ensure that the service provider is aware of and committed to meeting the agreed service levels and minimizing the downtime and losses in the event of a disaster. The other options are not as important as the RTOs, although they may be relevant and useful to include in the outsourcing agreement depending on the scope and nature of the disaster recovery services. References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 2471; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription, Question ID: 1033

 Before relying on a vendor’s certification for international security standards, such as ISO/IEC 27001, it is most important that the information security manager confirms that the certification scope is relevant to the service being offered. The certification scope defines the boundaries and applicability of the information security management system (ISMS) that the vendor has implemented and audited. The scope should cover the processes, activities, assets, and locations that are involved in delivering the service to the client. If the scope is too narrow, too broad, or not aligned with the service, the certification may not provide sufficient assurance of the vendor’s security capability and performance.

The current international standard was used to assess security processes (A) is an important factor, but not the most important one. The information security manager should verify that the vendor’s certification is based on the latest version of the standard, which reflects the current best practices and requirements for information security. However, the standard itself is generic and adaptable, and does not prescribe specific security controls or solutions. Therefore, the certification does not guarantee that the vendor has implemented the most appropriate or effective security processes for the service being offered.

The certification will remain current through the life of the contract (B) is also an important factor, but not the most important one. The information security manager should ensure that the vendor’s certification is valid and up to date, and that the vendor maintains its compliance with the standard throughout the contract period. However, the certification is not a one-time event, but a continuous process that requires periodic surveillance audits and recertification every three years. Therefore, the certification does not ensure that the vendor’s security capability and performance will remain consistent or satisfactory for the duration of the contract.

The certification can be extended to cover the client’s business (D) is not a relevant factor, as the certification is specific to the vendor’s ISMS and does not apply to the client’s business. The information security manager should not rely on the vendor’s certification to substitute or supplement the client’s own security policies, standards, or controls. The information security manager should conduct a due diligence and risk assessment of the vendor, and establish a clear and comprehensive service level agreement (SLA) that defines the security roles, responsibilities, expectations, and metrics for both parties.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 3: Information Security Program Development and Management, Section: Information Security Program Management, Subsection: Procurement and Vendor Management, page 142-1431

= A post-incident review is a process of analyzing and learning from a security incident, such as a data breach, to improve the security posture and resilience of an organization. A post-incident review should include the following elements12:

A clear and accurate description of the incident, including its scope, impact, timeline, root cause, and contributing factors.

A detailed assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the incident response process, including the roles and responsibilities, communication channels, coordination mechanisms, escalation procedures, tools and resources, documentation, and reporting.

An evaluation of the adequacy of existing controls, such as policies, standards, procedures, technical measures, awareness, and training, to prevent, detect, and mitigate similar incidents in the future.

A list of actionable recommendations and improvement plans, based on the lessons learned and best practices, to address the identified gaps and weaknesses in the security strategy, governance, risk management, and incident management.

A follow-up and monitoring mechanism to ensure the implementation and verification of the recommendations and improvement plans.

The most important element to include in a post-incident review following a data breach is the evaluation of the adequacy of existing controls, because it directly relates to the security objectives and requirements of the organization, and provides the basis for enhancing the security posture and resilience of the organization. Evaluating the existing controls helps to identify the vulnerabilities and risks that led to the data breach, and to determine the appropriate corrective and preventive actions to reduce the likelihood and impact of similar incidents in the future. Evaluating the existing controls also helps to align the security strategy and governance with the business goals and objectives, and to ensure the compliance with legal, regulatory, and contractual obligations.

The other elements, such as an evaluation of the effectiveness of the information security strategy, documentation of regulatory reporting requirements, and a review of the forensics chain of custody, are also important, but not as important as the evaluation of the existing controls. An evaluation of the effectiveness of the information security strategy is a broader and more strategic activity that may not be directly relevant to the specific incident, and may require more time and resources to conduct. Documentation of regulatory reporting requirements is a necessary and mandatory task, but it does not provide much insight or value for improving the security posture and resilience of the organization. A review of the forensics chain of custody is a technical and procedural activity that ensures the integrity and admissibility of the digital evidence collected during the incident investigation, but it does not address the root cause or the mitigation of the incident. References = 1: CISM Exam Content Outline | CISM Certification | ISACA 2: CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 147

 The information security manager should first evaluate the information security laws that apply to the acquired company, as they may differ from the laws of the parent organization. This will help the information security manager to understand the legal and regulatory requirements, risks, and challenges that the acquired company faces in its operating environment. The information security manager can then determine the best approach to align the information security programs of the two entities, taking into account the different laws and regulations, as well as the business objectives and strategies of the acquisition. References = : CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 32.

 Maintaining a chain of custody is the most important step when conducting a forensic investigation, as this ensures that the evidence is preserved, protected, and documented from the time of collection to the time of presentation in court. A chain of custody provides a record of who handled the evidence, when, where, why, and how, and prevents any tampering, alteration, or loss of the evidence. A chain of custody also establishes the authenticity, reliability, and admissibility of the evidence in legal proceedings. Analyzing system memory, documenting analysis steps, and capturing full system images are also important, but not as important as maintaining a chain of custody, as they do not guarantee the integrity and validity of the evidence. References = CISM Review Manual 2023, page 1701; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2023, page 332; ISACA CISM - iSecPrep, page 183

An incident response plan is a set of procedures and guidelines that define the roles and responsibilities of the incident response team, the steps to follow in the event of an incident, and the communication and escalation protocols to ensure timely and effective resolution of incidents. One of the essential components of an incident response plan is the criteria for escalation, which specify the conditions and thresholds that trigger the escalation of an incident to a higher level of authority or a different function within the organization. The criteria for escalation may depend on factors such as the severity, impact, duration, scope, and complexity of the incident, as well as the availability and capability of the incident response team. The criteria for escalation help to ensure that incidents are handled by the appropriate personnel, that management is kept informed and involved, and that the necessary resources and support are provided to resolve the incident. References =  https://blog.exigence.io/a-practical-approach-to-incident-management-escalation https://www.uc.edu/content/dam/uc/infosec/docs/Guidelines/Information_Security_Incident_Response_Escalation_Guideline.pdf

 = The information security manager should contact the information owner after the incident has been confirmed, as this is the first step of the incident response process. The information owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for the information asset that is affected by the incident. The information owner needs to be informed of the incident as soon as possible, as they may have to make decisions or take actions regarding the protection, recovery, or restoration of the information asset. The information owner may also have to communicate with other stakeholders, such as the business units, customers, regulators, or media, depending on the nature and impact of the incident.

The other options are not the correct time to contact the information owner, as they occur later in the incident response process. Contacting the information owner after the incident has been contained, mitigated, or logged may delay the notification and escalation of the incident, as well as the involvement and collaboration of the information owner. Moreover, contacting the information owner after the incident has been contained or mitigated may imply that the incident response team has already taken actions that may affect the information asset without the consent or approval of the information owner. Contacting the information owner after a potential incident has been logged may cause unnecessary alarm or confusion, as the potential incident may not be a real or significant incident, or it may not affect the information owner’s asset. References =

CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2022, pp. 219-220, 226-227.

CISM Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, ISACA, 2022, QID 1009.

The most important information to communicate with regard to the open items from the risk register to senior management is the potential business impact of these risks. The potential business impact is the estimated consequence or loss that the organization may suffer if the risk materializes or occurs. The potential business impact can be expressed in quantitative or qualitative terms, such as financial, operational, reputational, legal, or strategic impact. Communicating the potential business impact of the open items from the risk register helps senior management to understand the severity and urgency of these risks, and to prioritize the risk response actions and resources accordingly. Communicating the potential business impact also helps senior management to align the risk management objectives and activities with the business objectives and strategies, and to ensure that the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization are respected and maintained.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 2: Information Risk Management, Section: Risk Assessment, page 831; CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 2: Information Risk Management, Section: Risk Reporting, page 1012.

Asset classification is the process of assigning a value to information assets based on their importance to the organization and the potential impact of their compromise, loss or damage1. Asset classification helps to determine the level of protection required for assets, which is proportional to their value and sensitivity2. Asset classification also facilitates risk assessment and management, as well as compliance with legal, regulatory and contractual requirements3. Asset classification does not primarily determine the insurance coverage, priority for replacement, or replacement cost of assets, as these factors depend on other criteria such as risk appetite, business impact, availability and market value4. References = 1: CISM - Information Asset Classification Flashcards | Quizlet 2: CISM Exam Content Outline | CISM Certification | ISACA 3: CIS Control 1: Inventory and Control of Enterprise Assets 4: CISSP versus the CISM Certification | ISC2

= Requiring steering committee approval of risk treatment plans is the best way to help ensure an organization’s risk appetite will be considered as part of the risk treatment process because the steering committee is composed of senior management and key stakeholders who are responsible for defining and communicating the risk appetite and ensuring that it is aligned with the business objectives and strategy. The steering committee can review and approve the risk treatment plans proposed by the information security manager and ensure that they are consistent with the risk appetite and the risk tolerance levels. The steering committee can also monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the risk treatment plans and provide feedback and guidance to the information security manager. Establishing key risk indicators (KRIs), using quantitative risk assessment methods, and providing regular reporting on risk treatment to senior management are not the best ways to help ensure an organization’s risk appetite will be considered as part of the risk treatment process, although they may be useful tools and techniques to support the risk management process. KRIs are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the performance of risk controls. Quantitative risk assessment methods are techniques that use numerical values and probabilities to estimate the likelihood and impact of risk events. Regular reporting on risk treatment to senior management is a way to communicate the status and results of the risk treatment process and to obtain feedback and support from senior management. However, none of these methods can ensure that the risk treatment plans are approved and aligned with the risk appetite, which is the role of the steering committee. References = CISM Review Manual 2023, Chapter 2, Section 2.4.3, page 76; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription, Question ID: 121.

The best way to identify the risk associated with a social engineering attack is to test user knowledge of information security practices. Social engineering is a type of attack that exploits human psychology and behavior to manipulate, deceive, or influence users into divulging sensitive information, granting unauthorized access, or performing malicious actions. Therefore, user knowledge of information security practices is a key factor that affects the likelihood and impact of a social engineering attack. By testing user knowledge of information security practices, such as through quizzes, surveys, or simulated attacks, the information security manager can measure the level of awareness, understanding, and compliance of the users, and identify the gaps, weaknesses, or vulnerabilities that need to be addressed.

Monitoring the intrusion detection system (IDS) (A) is a possible way to detect a social engineering attack, but not to identify the risk associated with it. An IDS is a system that monitors network or system activities and alerts or responds to any suspicious or malicious events. However, an IDS may not be able to prevent or recognize all types of social engineering attacks, especially those that rely on human interaction, such as phishing, vishing, or baiting. Moreover, monitoring the IDS is a reactive rather than proactive approach, as it only reveals the occurrence or consequences of a social engineering attack, not the potential or likelihood of it.

Reviewing single sign-on (SSO) authentication lags (B) is not a relevant way to identify the risk associated with a social engineering attack. SSO is a method of authentication that allows users to access multiple applications or systems with one set of credentials. Authentication lags are delays or failures in the authentication process that may affect the user experience or performance. However, authentication lags are not directly related to social engineering attacks, as they do not indicate the user’s knowledge of information security practices, nor the attacker’s attempts or success in compromising the user’s credentials or access.

Performing a business risk assessment of the email filtering system (D) is also not a relevant way to identify the risk associated with a social engineering attack. An email filtering system is a system that scans, filters, and blocks incoming or outgoing emails based on predefined rules or criteria, such as spam, viruses, or phishing. A business risk assessment is a process that evaluates the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts to the organization’s business objectives, processes, and assets. However, performing a business risk assessment of the email filtering system does not address the risk associated with a social engineering attack, as it only focuses on the technical aspects and performance of the system, not the human factors and behavior of the users.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 2: Information Risk Management, Section: Risk Identification, Subsection: Threat Identification, page 87-881

 Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the likelihood of occurrence of potential adverse events that can affect the organization’s objectives and performance. KRIs are used to monitor changes in the risk environment and to provide early warning signals for potential issues that may require management attention or intervention. KRIs are also used to communicate the risk status and trends to the relevant stakeholders and to support risk-based decision making12.

The primary reason to monitor KRIs related to information security is to alert on unacceptable risk. Unacceptable risk is the level of risk that exceeds the organization’s risk appetite, tolerance, or threshold, and that poses a significant threat to the organization’s assets, operations, reputation, or compliance. Unacceptable risk can result from internal or external factors, such as cyberattacks, data breaches, system failures, human errors, fraud, natural disasters, or regulatory changes. Unacceptable risk can have severe consequences for the organization, such as financial losses, legal liabilities, operational disruptions, customer dissatisfaction, or reputational damage12.

By monitoring KRIs related to information security, the organization can identify and assess the sources, causes, and impacts of unacceptable risk, and take timely and appropriate actions to mitigate, transfer, avoid, or accept the risk. Monitoring KRIs can also help the organization to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing information security controls, policies, and procedures, and to identify and implement any necessary improvements or enhancements. Monitoring KRIs can also help the organization to align its information security strategy and objectives with its business strategy and objectives, and to ensure compliance with the relevant laws, regulations, standards, and best practices12.

While monitoring KRIs related to information security can also serve other purposes, such as identifying residual risk, reassessing risk appetite, or benchmarking control performance, these are not the primary reason for monitoring KRIs. Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after applying the risk treatment options, and it should be within the organization’s risk appetite, tolerance, or threshold. Reassessing risk appetite is the process of reviewing and adjusting the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to take in pursuit of its objectives, and it should be done periodically or when there are significant changes in the internal or external environment. Benchmarking control performance is the process of comparing the organization’s information security controls with those of other organizations or industry standards, and it should be done to identify and adopt the best practices or to demonstrate compliance12. References = Integrating KRIs and KPIs for Effective Technology Risk Management, The Power of KRIs in Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) - Metricstream, What Is a Key Risk Indicator? With Characteristics and Tips, KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva, Key risk indicator - Wikipedia