CRISC Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

The best option to protect against a future recurrence of unauthorized access by a service provider’s administrator is D. Contractual requirements. Data encryption, intrusion prevention system, and two-factor authentication are all technical measures that can enhance the security of the data stored in the Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) model, but they do not prevent the service provider’s administrator from accessing the data if they have the necessary credentials, keys, or permissions. Contractual requirements, on the other hand, are legal obligations that bind the service provider to respect the customer’s privacy and confidentiality, and to limit the access to the data to only authorized and necessary personnel. Contractual requirements can also specify the penalties or remedies for any breach of contract, which can deter the service provider’s administrator from violating the terms of the agreement. Therefore, contractual requirements are the most effective way to protect against a future recurrence of unauthorized access by a service provider’s administrator12

1: What is Data Encryption? | Forcepoint 2: The elements of a contract: understanding contract requirements - Juro

 A rule-based data loss prevention (DLP) tool is a software solution that identifies and helps prevent unsafe or inappropriate sharing, transfer, or use of sensitive data. It can help an organization monitor and protect sensitive information across on-premises systems, cloud-based locations, and endpoint devices. It can also help an organization comply with regulations such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). A rule-based DLP tool works by comparing content to the organization’s DLP policy, which defines how the organization labels, shares, and protects data without exposing it to unauthorized users. The tool can then apply protective actions such as encryption, access restrictions, and alerts. As a result of implementing a rule-based DLP tool, the most likely change is the reduction of risk likelihood, which is the probability of a risk event occurring. By detecting and preventing data breaches, exfiltration, or unwanted destruction of sensitive data, a rule-based DLP tool can lower the chance of such incidents happening and thus decrease the risk likelihood. The other options are less likely to change as a result of implementing a rule-based DLP tool. Risk velocity is the speed at which a risk event impacts an organization, which depends on factors such as the nature of the threat, the response time, and the recovery process. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, which depends on factors such as the organization’s culture, strategy, and stakeholder expectations. Risk impact is the potential loss or damage that a risk event can cause to an organization, which depends on factors such as the severity of the incident, the extent of the exposure, andthe resilience of the organization. While a rule-based DLP tool may have some influence on these factors, it is not the primary driver of change for them. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 13

An IT risk management framework is a set of principles, processes, and practices that guide and support the identification, analysis, evaluation, treatment, monitoring, and communication of IT-related risks within an organization12.

The primary advantage of implementing an IT risk management framework is the establishment of a reliable basis for risk-aware decision making, which enables the organization to balance the potential benefits and adverse effects of using IT, and to allocate resources and prioritize actions accordingly12.

A reliable basis for risk-aware decision making consists of the following elements12:

A common language and understanding of IT risk, its sources, impacts, and responses

A consistent and structured approach to IT risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment

A clear and transparent governance structure and accountability for IT risk management

A comprehensive and up-to-date IT risk register and profile that reflects the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

A regular and effective IT risk monitoring and reporting process that provides relevant and timely information to stakeholders

A continuous and proactive IT risk improvement process that incorporates feedback and lessons learned

The other options are not the primary advantage, but rather possible outcomes or benefits of implementing an IT risk management framework. For example:

Compliance with relevant legal and regulatory requirements is an outcome of implementing an IT risk management framework that ensures the organization meets its obligations and avoids penalties or sanctions12.

Improvement of controls within the organization and minimized losses is a benefit of implementing an IT risk management framework that reduces the likelihood and impact of IT-related incidents and events12.

Alignment of business goals with IT objectives is a benefit of implementing an IT risk management framework that ensures the IT strategy and activities support the organization’s mission and vision12. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

When determining an appropriate risk assessment approach, the most important factor to understand is the value of information assets. This is because the value of information assets determines the potential impact of risks and the level of protection required. The value of information assets can be assessed based on their confidentiality, integrity, availability, and relevance to the business objectives and processes. A risk assessment approach should be aligned with the value of information assets and the risk appetite of the organization. The other options are not the most important factors to understand when determining a risk assessment approach, although they may influence the choice of methods and tools. The complexity of the IT infrastructure may affect the scope and depth of the risk assessment, but it does not indicate the level of risk or the priority of risk management. The management culture may affect the risk tolerance and the risk communication, but it does not reflect the value of information assets or the risk exposure. The threats and vulnerabilities may affect the likelihood and severity of risks, but they do not measure the value of information assets or the risk acceptance. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 582

 A business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects of a disaster on the critical functions and processes of an organization1. A BIA helps to forecast the operational, financial, legal, and reputational impacts of a disaster, as well as the recovery priorities and resources needed to resume normal operations2. A BIA also helps to determine the recovery time objectives (RTO), which are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the critical functions and processes after a disaster3. Therefore, developing a BIA is the most important step for an organization to forecast the effects of a disaster and plan for its recovery. Defining RTOs is a part of the BIA process, not a separate activity. Analyzing capability maturity model gaps is a method to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s processes and practices, but it does not directly forecast the effects of adisaster4. Simulating a disaster recovery is a way to test and validate the recovery plans and procedures, but it does not forecast the effects of a disaster either5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.3: Business Continuity Planning, pp. 227-238.

A risk response action plan is a document that specifies the actions to be taken to address the identified risks, the resources required, the timelines, the owners, and the expected outcomes. The risk response action plan should be aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance, and should be approved by the relevant stakeholders. The best way to ensure the implementation of an effective risk response action plan is to assign clear roles and responsibilities to the individuals or groups who will execute the actions, monitor the progress, and report the results. This will help to avoid confusion, ambiguity, duplication, or omission of tasks, and will ensure accountability and ownership of the risk responses. The other options are not as directly related to the implementation of the risk response action plan, although they may be involved in some aspects of it. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1.1, pp. 121-122.

The greatest security risk in this scenario is that data may be commingled with other tenants’ data on the public cloud infrastructure. Data commingling occurs when data from different sources or customers are mixed together without proper segregation or encryption. This may result in data leakage, unauthorized access, or loss of confidentiality and integrity. Data commingling is a common challenge in public cloud environments, where multiple customers share the same physical resources and network. System downtime, infrastructure management, and cloud provider certification are also potential risks in this scenario, butthey are not as great as data commingling. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.1, page 2451

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 638.

Sensitivity and reliability are the most important criteria for selecting KRIs, as they indicate how well the KRIs reflect the changes in the risk level and how consistent and accurate the KRIs are in measuring the risk.Sensitivity means that the KRIs should respond quickly and proportionally to the variations in the risk exposure, and provide early warning signals of potential risk events. Reliability means that the KRIs should be based on valid and verifiable data sources, and produce consistent and comparable results over time and across different units or functions. Historical data availability, implementation and reporting effort, and ability to display trends are also useful criteria, but they are not as critical as sensitivity and reliability.

References:

•ISACA, Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, 2019, p. 751

•ISACA, Risk and Information Systems Control Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2020, p. 2122

The best way to mitigate the risk of reputational damage from inappropriate use of social media sites by employees is to implement training and awareness programs that educate them on the acceptable andunacceptable use of social media, the potential consequences of violating the policy, and the best practices for protecting the organization’s reputation and information. Training and awareness programs can also help to foster a culture of risk awareness and responsibility among employees, and encourage them to report any incidents or issues related to social media use. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.4, page 131.

 A control self-assessment (CSA) is a technique that allows managers and work teams directly involved in business units, functions, or processes to participate in assessing the organization’s risk management and control processes. The main purpose of conducting a CSA is to gain a better understanding of the control effectiveness in the organization, which means how well the controls are designed, implemented, and operated to achieve the desired outcomes and mitigate the risks. A CSA can help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the existing controls, as well as the gaps and opportunities for improvement. A CSA can also help to enhance the awareness, ownership, and accountability of the control environment among the managers and staff. The other options are not the main purpose of conducting a CSA, although they may be related or beneficial. Gaining a better understanding of the risk in the organization is a result of conducting a CSA, but it is not the primary goal. The primary goal is to evaluate the controls that address the risks, not the risks themselves. Adjusting the controls prior to an external audit is a possible action that may follow a CSA, but it is not the reason for conducting a CSA. The reason for conducting a CSA is to improve the control effectiveness, not to prepare for an audit. Reducing the dependency on external audits is a potential benefit of conducting a CSA, but it is not the objective of conducting a CSA. The objective of conducting a CSA is to enhance the internal control assurance, not to replace the external audit assurance. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 153-1541; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 802

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics used to measure and evaluate the achievement of the organization’s objectives and strategies1. KPIs for critical IT assets are KPIs that focus on the performance and value of the IT assets that are essential for the organization’s operations and functions2. KPIs for critical IT assets may include metrics such as availability, reliability, utilization, cost, and security of the IT assets3. The need to review and update KPIs for critical IT assets may be driven by various factors, such as changes in the business environment, customer expectations, or regulatory requirements. However, the most likely factor that would drive the need to review and update KPIs for critical IT assets is the outcomes of periodic risk assessments. A risk assessment is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts on the organization’s objectives and performance4. A periodic risk assessment is a risk assessment that is performed at regular intervals, such as monthly, quarterly, or annually, to capture the changes and updates in the risk environment and the risk profile5. The outcomes of periodic risk assessments would most likely drive the need to review and update KPIs for critical IT assets, as they would provide insights into the current and emerging risks that may affect the performance and value of the critical IT assets, as well as the effectiveness and efficiency of the existingand planned controls and responses. By reviewing and updating the KPIs for critical IT assets based on the outcomes of periodic risk assessments, the organization can ensure that the KPIs are relevant, realistic, and aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and that they provide accurate and timely information for decision making and reporting. The outsourcing of related IT processes, changes in service level objectives, and findings from continuous monitoring are not the most likely factors that would drive the need to review and update KPIs for critical IT assets, as they do not provide the same level of information and impact as the outcomes of periodic risk assessments. The outsourcing of related IT processes is a decision that involves transferring some or all of the IT processes that support or enable the critical IT assets to an external service provider. The outsourcing of related IT processes may affect the performance and value of the critical IT assets, but it does not necessarily require a review and update of the KPIs for critical IT assets, as the KPIs may still be valid and applicable for the outsourced IT processes. Changes in service level objectives are changes in the expected or agreed level of quality or performance of the IT services that support or enable the critical IT assets. Changes in service level objectives may affect the performance and value of the critical IT assets, but they do not necessarily require a review and update of the KPIs for critical IT assets, as the KPIs may still be consistent and compatible with the changed service level objectives. Findings from continuous monitoring are the results or outcomes of the ongoing observation and measurement of the performance and compliance of the IT processes and systems that support or enable the critical IT assets. Findings from continuous monitoring may affect the performance and value of the critical IT assets, but they do not necessarily require a review and update of the KPIs for critical IT assets, as the KPIs may still be relevant and reliable for the continuously monitored IT processes and systems. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

A loss event is the result of a realized risk scenario, as it represents the actual occurrence of an adverse outcome or impact due to the exploitation of a vulnerability by a threat. A threat event, a vulnerability event, and a technical event are not the results of a realized risk scenario, as they are more related to the sources, conditions, or mechanisms of the risk, respectively, rather than the outcome or impact of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

The product owner should own the associated risk when contracting with a cloud service provider to support the deployment of a new product. The product owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for defining the product vision, requirements, and priorities. The product owner also has the accountability for the business value and outcomes of the product. Therefore, the product owner should be the one who identifies, assesses, and manages the risks related to the cloud service provider, such as security, compliance, performance, and quality. The product owner should also collaborate with the other stakeholders, such as the head of EA, the IT risk manager, and the information security manager, to ensure that the cloud service provider meets the organization’s standards and expectations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: IT Risk Mitigation, Section 5.3: IT Risk Mitigation Strategies and Approaches, Page 254; Best Practices to Manage Risks in the Cloud - ISACA.

A new risk scenario without controls means that there is a potential threat or event that could adversely affect the organization’s objectives, and there are no existing measures to prevent or reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk. Therefore, the most appropriate action is to include the new risk scenario in the current risk assessment, so that the risk practitioner can analyze the risk, evaluate its severity and priority, and recommend suitable controls to mitigate the risk. By including the new risk scenario in the current riskassessment, the risk practitioner can ensure that the risk register is updated and reflects the current risk profile of the organization. The other options are not appropriate because they either ignore the new risk scenario, delay the risk assessment process, or remove valuable information from the risk register. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 95.

The primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan should be that the risk response reduces risk to an acceptable level. A risk response action plan is a document that describes the actions or measures that are taken or planned to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk1. Validating a risk response action plan means verifying whether the plan is feasible, effective, and efficient in addressing the risk2. The main objective of validating a risk response action plan is to ensure that the risk response reduces risk to an acceptable level, which is the level of risk that the organization is willing to tolerate or bear, based on its risk appetite and risk criteria3. Reducing risk to an acceptable level means that the risk response actions can lower the likelihood or impact of the risk to a point where the risk does not pose a significant threat or challenge to the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance. Reducing risk to an acceptable level also means that the risk response actions can balance the benefits and costs of the risk response, and that they can provide a reasonable assurance of the risk management effectiveness and efficiency4. The other options are not the primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as they are either less relevant or less specific than reducing risk to an acceptable level. Quantifying risk impact is a component or element of validating a risk response action plan, not a focus of it. Quantifying risk impact means measuring or estimating the potential effects or consequences of the risk on the organization5. Quantifying risk impact can help to evaluate the severity and priority of the risk, as well as to compare the risk against the risk criteria and the risk appetite. However, quantifying risk impact is not the primary focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not address the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. Aligning with business strategy is a secondary or incidental benefit of validating a risk response action plan, not a primary or essential focus of it. Aligning with business strategy means ensuring that the risk response actions are consistent and coherent with the organization’s goals and values6. Aligning with business strategy can help to integrate the risk response actions with the organization’s culture and governance, as well as to support and enable the achievement of the organization’s mission and vision. However, aligning with business strategy is not the main focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not indicate the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. Advancing business objectives is a tertiary or indirect outcome of validating a risk response action plan, not a primary or direct focus of it. Advancing business objectives means contributing to the improvement and enhancement of the organization’s performance and results7. Advancing business objectives can help to create value and deliver benefits for the organization and its stakeholders, as well as to optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities. However, advancing business objectives is not the main focus of a risk practitioner when validating a risk response action plan, as it does not address the feasibility, effectiveness, or efficiency of the risk response actions, or the level of risk reduction that they can achieve. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

The best approach for selecting controls to minimize risk is to perform a risk assessment. A risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the risks that could affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A risk assessment helps to determine the likelihood and impact of the risks, and to prioritize them based on their severity and relevance. A risk assessment also helps to select the most appropriate and effective controls to minimize the risks, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risks. A risk assessment is the best approach for selecting controls, because it helps to align the controls with the organization’s risk profile, risk appetite, and risk objectives, and to ensure that the controls are adequate, suitable, and cost-effective. The other options are not the best approach for selecting controls, although they may be part of or derived from the risk assessment. Industry best practice review, cost-benefit analysis, and control-effectiveness evaluation are all activities that can help to support or improve the control selection, but they are not the best approach for selecting controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

The most helpful input to develop risk scenarios associated with hosting an organization’s key IT applications in a cloud environment is conducting a risk workshop with key stakeholders. A risk workshop is a facilitated session that involves brainstorming, discussing, and analyzing the potential risks and opportunities related to a specific topic or project. A risk workshop helps to identify and prioritize the most relevant and significant risk scenarios, as well as to explore the possible causes, impacts, and responses. A risk workshop also helps to engage and align the key stakeholders, such as the business owners, IT managers, cloud providers, and risk experts, and to leverage their knowledge, experience, and perspectives. The other options are not as helpful as conducting a risk workshop, although they may provide some inputor information for the risk scenario development. Reviewing the results of independent audits, performing a site visit to the cloud provider’s data center, and performing a due diligence review are all activities that can help to assess the current state and performance of the cloud environment, but they do not necessarily generate or evaluate the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

A primary benefit of engaging the risk owner during the risk assessment process is prioritization of risk action plans across departments, because this helps to ensure that the most critical and relevant risks are addressed first, and that the resources and efforts are allocated and coordinated efficiently and effectively. A risk owner is the person or group who is responsible for the day-to-day management and mitigation of a specific risk, and who has the authority and accountability to make risk-related decisions. A risk assessment is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value. A risk action plan is the set of actions and tasks that are designed and implemented to reduce the likelihood and impact of a risk, or to exploit the opportunities that a risk may create. By engaging the risk owner during the risk assessment process, the organization can benefit from the following advantages:

The risk owner can provide valuable input and feedback on the risk identification, analysis, and evaluation, based on their knowledge, experience, and perspective of the risk and its context.

The risk owner can help to develop and implement the risk action plan, based on their understanding of the risk objectives, expectations, and outcomes, and their ability to influence and control the risk factors and sources.

The risk owner can help to prioritize the risk action plan, based on their assessment of the risk severity, urgency, and importance, and their consideration of the costs, benefits, and feasibility of the risk actions.

The risk owner can help to coordinate the risk action plan across departments, by communicating and collaborating with other risk owners, stakeholders, and resources, and by aligning and integrating the risk actions with the organization’s strategy, processes, and culture. References = Risk Owners — What Do They Do1

The most important concern to address when formulating a social media policy to address information leakage is sharing company information on social media. Information leakage is the unauthorized or unintentional disclosure of confidential or sensitive information to unauthorized parties. Social media is a platform that enables the users to create and share content, such as text, images, videos, or links, with other users or the public. Sharing company information on social media is the most important concern, as it could expose the company’s trade secrets, intellectual property, customer data, financial data, or strategic plans to competitors, hackers, or regulators. Sharing company information on social media could also damage the company’s reputation, trust, or credibility, and result in legal or regulatory penalties, fines, or lawsuits. Therefore, a social media policy should clearly define what constitutes company information, and what are the rules and guidelines for sharing or not sharing company information on social media. A social media policy should also specify the roles and responsibilities of the employees, managers, and the social media team, and the consequences and sanctions for violating the policy. Sharing personal information on social media, using social media to maintain contact with business associates, and using social media for personal purposes during working hours are not as important as sharing company information on social media, as they do not directly involve the leakage of company information, and they may not have significant impact or risk on the company. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217

Residual risk is the amount of risk that remains after the implementation of risk mitigation controls. If the fraud detection controls in an online payment system do not perform as expected, the residual risk will most likely change as a result, because the controls will not be able to reduce the impact or likelihood of the fraud risk as intended. The residual risk may increase or decrease depending on the performance of the controls, and the risk practitioner may need to adjust the risk response strategy accordingly. The other options are not as likely to change as the residual risk, because they are not directly affected by the performance of the controls, but rather depend on other factors, such as the source of the risk, the organization’s objectives, or the external environment, as explained below:

A. Impact is the extent or magnitude of the harm or loss caused by a risk. The impact of the fraud risk in an online payment system may not change as a result of the controls’ performance, becausethe impact is determined by the potential consequences of the fraud, such as financial losses, reputational damage, or legal liabilities, which are independent of the controls.

C. Inherent risk is the amount of risk that exists before the implementation of any risk mitigation controls. The inherent risk of the fraud risk in an online payment system may not change as a result of the controls’ performance, because the inherent risk is determined by the nature and characteristics of the risk, such as the type, source, or frequency of the fraud, which are independent of the controls.

D. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. The risk appetite of the organization may not change as a result of the controls’ performance, because the risk appetite is determined by the organization’s strategy, culture, and values, which are independent of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 32. What is Residual Risk? Definition, Examples, and More, Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com, Residual Risk: What It Is and How to Manage It

The best answer is D. Escalation triggers. Escalation triggers are predefined thresholds or conditions that indicate when a key risk indicator (KRI) has reached a critical level that requires immediate attention or action. Escalation triggers can be based on quantitative or qualitative measures, such as percentages, scores, ratings, or colors. Escalation triggers can help to ensure appropriate action is taken to mitigate risk, because they provide clear and timely signals that alert the risk owners, managers, and other stakeholders of the need to review and revise the risk response plan, or to implement additional or alternative controls. Escalation triggers can also help to communicate and report the risk status and the risk response actions to the senior management and the board, and to obtain their support and approval, if needed. The other options are not the best answer, although they may be related or influential to the KRI and the risk mitigation. Management intervention is a part of the risk response process, which involves the actions and decisions taken by the management to address the risk, such as approving, implementing, or monitoring the controls. Management intervention can help to mitigate risk, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a consequence or a result of the escalation triggers. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite can help to define and align the KRI and the escalation triggers with the organizational strategy and culture, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a factor or a driver of the KRI. Board commentary is a part of the risk reporting process, which involves the feedback and guidance provided by the board on the risk management process and performance. Board commentary can help to improve and enhance the KRI and the risk mitigation, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a source or a resource of the KRI. References = Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture, KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva

Using a VPN ensures the secure transmission of sensitive data over a public network by encrypting the communication channel. This mitigates risks such as interception or unauthorized access, aligning withData Protection and Privacy Standards.

•A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions and resources needed to implement the chosen risk response strategy for each identified risk1. A risk response strategy is the way an organization decides to address a risk, such as avoiding, accepting, mitigating, or transferring it2.

•Sometimes, a risk treatment plan may not be completed on time due to various reasons, such as delays, resource constraints, technical issues, or changes in the risk environment. In such cases, the best approach is to implement compensating controls until the preferred action can be completed3.

•Compensating controls are alternative or additional controls that provide a similar level of assurance or protection as the original controls, when the latter are not feasible or sufficient3. Compensating controls can help to reduce the residual risk or maintain the risk within the acceptable level until the risk treatment plan is fully executed3.

•For example, if the risk treatment plan involves installing a firewall to protect the network from external threats, but the firewall is not available or compatible with the current system, a compensating control could be to use encryption, authentication, or monitoring tools to secure the network traffic until the firewall is installed3.

•Implementing compensating controls is better than the other options because it allows the organization to continue with the risk treatment plan while maintaining an adequate level of security and compliance. The other options are not advisable for the following reasons:

oReplacing the action owner with a more experienced individual (option A) may not solve the problem if the issue is not related to the action owner’s competence or performance. Moreover, replacing the action owner may cause disruption, confusion, or conflict in the risk management process.

oChanging the risk response strategy of the relevant risk to risk avoidance (option C) may not be possible or desirable if the risk is associated with a critical or beneficial activity or process. Risk avoidance means eliminating the source of the risk or discontinuing the activity that causes the risk2. This may result in losing opportunities, benefits, or value for the organization.

oDeveloping additional key risk indicators (KRIs) until the preferred action can be completed (option D) may not be effective or efficient if the existing KRIs are already sufficient to monitor and measure the risk. KRIs are metrics or data points that provide early warning signals or information about the level or trend of a risk456. Developing additional KRIs may not reduce the risk or improve the risk treatment plan, but may increase the complexity and cost of the risk management process.

References =

•Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions - SolveXia

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•Complete Guide to Key Risk Indicators — RiskOptics

•Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips

•Risk response strategies: mitigation, transfer, avoidance, acceptance - Twproject: project management software,resource management, time tracking, planning, Gantt, kanban

•Risk Response Strategies: A Guide to Navigating Uncertainty - Teamly

•Compensating Controls | Audit and Compliance | Pathlock

 Strong authentication is the most effective measure against external threats to an organization’s confidential information. Confidential information is any data or information that is sensitive, proprietary, or valuable to the organization, and that should not be disclosed to unauthorized parties1. External threats are malicious actors outside the organization who attempt to gain unauthorized access to the organization’s networks, systems, and data, using various methods such as malware, hacking, or social engineering2. Strong authentication is a method of verifying the identity and legitimacy of a user or device before granting access to the organization’s resources or data3. Strong authentication typically involves the use of multiple factors or methods of authentication, such as passwords, tokens, biometrics, orcertificates4. Strong authentication can prevent or reduce the risk of external threats to the organization’s confidential information, by making it more difficult and costly for the attackers to compromise the credentials or devices of the authorized users, and by limiting the access to the data or resources that are relevant and necessary for the users’ roles and responsibilities5. The other options are not the most effective measures against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as they are either less secure or less relevant than strong authentication. Single sign-on is a method of allowing a user to access multiple systems or applications with a single set of credentials, without having to log in separately for each system or application6. Single sign-on can improve the user experience and convenience, as well as reduce the administrative burden and cost of managing multiple accounts and passwords. However, single sign-on is not the most effective measure against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it can also increase the risk of credential compromise or misuse, and create a single point of failure or attack for the attackers to access multiple systems or data. Data integrity checking is a method of ensuring that the data or information is accurate, complete, and consistent, and that it has not been altered or corrupted by unauthorized parties or processes. Data integrity checking can involve the use of techniques such as checksums, hashes, digital signatures, or encryption. Data integrity checking can enhance the quality and reliability of the data or information, as well as detect and prevent any unauthorized or malicious changes or tampering. However, data integrity checking is not the most effective measure against external threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it does not prevent or reduce the risk of data theft or leakage, and it does not verify the identity or legitimacy of the users or devices accessing the data. Intrusion detection system is a system that monitors the network or system activities and events, and detects and alerts any suspicious or malicious behaviors or anomalies that may indicate an attempted or successful breach or attack. Intrusion detection system can help to identify and respond to external threats to the organization’s networks, systems, and data, by providing visibility and awareness of the network or system status and activities, and by enabling timely and appropriate actions or countermeasures. However, intrusion detection system is not the most effective measure againstexternal threats to the organization’s confidential information, as it is a reactive or passive system that does not prevent or block the attacks, and it may generate false positives or negatives that can affect its accuracy and efficiency. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, Page 189.

The second line of defense provides oversight functions, ensuring that risks and controls are effectively managed. This includes policy enforcement, compliance monitoring, and risk program evaluation, aligning with the organizational risk governance structure as described in the CRISC framework.

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

The best metric to verify adherence to the policy that requires critical security patches to be deployed in production within three weeks of patch availability is the maximum time gap between patch availability and deployment, as it measures the longest duration that the organization takes to apply the patches, and ensures that it does not exceed the policy limit. The other options are not the best metrics, as they may not reflect the actual or optimal compliance with the policy, or may not be relevant or measurable for the policy, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the control owners in the IT department should determine whether risk responses still effectively address risk after a restructuring and outsourcing of certain functions. This is because the restructuring and outsourcing may have changed the risk profile, the control environment, and the control activities of the IT department. The control owners should review the existing risk responses and evaluate if they are still appropriate, adequate, and efficient in mitigating the risks associated with the outsourced functions. The control owners should also monitor the performance and compliance of the service providers and ensure that the contractual obligations and service level agreements are met12

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

The number of suspected malicious activities reported since the policy's implementation directly measures thepolicy's effectiveness in identifying and mitigating insider threats. This aligns withKey Performance Indicators (KPIs)used to evaluate control outcomes.

Identifying specific risk events provides the foundational input for creating relevant and actionable risk scenarios. These scenarios form the basis of assessing potential impacts and determining effective controls. This is a key step in theRisk Identification and Assessmentprocess.

 The most important consideration when selecting an external service provider for outsourcing the payroll function is the internal controls to ensure data privacy. The payroll function involves processing and storingsensitive personal and financial information of the employees, such as salaries, taxes, benefits, bank accounts, etc. This information needs to be protected from unauthorized access, disclosure, modification, or loss, as it may result in legal, regulatory, reputational, or financial consequences for the organization and the employees. Therefore, the external service provider should have adequate internal controls, such as encryption, access control, backup, logging, monitoring, etc., to ensure data privacy and compliance with the organization’s policies and standards. Disaster recovery plan, right to audit, and transparency of KPIs are also important considerations when selecting an external service provider, but they are not as important as internal controls to ensure data privacy. 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 648.

The best way to justify the risk mitigation actions recommended in a risk assessment would be to focus on the business drivers, which are the factors that influence the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

Focusing on the business drivers means aligning the risk mitigation actions with the organization’s strategic goals, priorities, and values, and demonstrating how the actions will support or enhance the organization’s capabilities, opportunities, and competitive advantage12.

Focusing on the business drivers also means communicating the benefits, costs, and trade-offs of the risk mitigation actions to the relevant stakeholders, and showing how the actions will address the organization’s risk appetite, tolerance, and exposure12.

The other options are not the best way to justify the risk mitigation actions, but rather possible sources of information or guidance that may support the justification. For example:

Aligning with audit results is a way to validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk mitigation actions, and to identify any gaps or weaknesses that need improvement34. However, audit results may not reflect the organization’s current or future business drivers, and may not capture the full scope or impact of the risk mitigation actions34.

Benchmarking with competitor’s actions is a way to compare the organization’s risk mitigation actions with the best practices or standards of the industry or market, and to identify any areas of improvement or differentiation56. However, competitor’s actions may not be suitable or applicable for the organization’s specific context, needs, or challenges, and may not align with the organization’s business drivers56.

Referencing best practice is a way to adopt the proven or accepted methods or techniques for risk mitigation, and to ensure the quality and consistency of the risk mitigation actions78. However, best practice may not be the most optimal or innovative solution for the organization’s unique situation, and may not address the organization’s business drivers78. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

4: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

5: Benchmarking IT Risk Management Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 4, 2017

6: Benchmarking: A Tool for Improving IT Risk Management, ISACA Now Blog, March 27, 2017

7: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2018

8: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Now Blog, January 9, 2018

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), key risk indicator (KRI) thresholds are the most likely elements of a risk register to change as a result of change in management’s risk appetite, as they reflect the acceptable levels of risk exposure for the organization. KRI thresholds are the values or ranges that trigger an alert or a response when the actual KRI values deviate from the expected or desired values. KRI thresholds help to:

Monitor and measure the current risk levels and performance of the IT assets and processes

Identify and report any risk issues or incidents that may require attention or action

Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response actions and controls

Align the risk management activities and decisions with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

If the management’s risk appetite changes, the KRI thresholds may need to be adjusted accordingly to ensure that the risk register reflects the current risk preferences and expectations of the organization.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 217-2181

According to the What Is Risk Management & Why Is It Important? article, risk management is the systematic process of identifying, assessing, and mitigating threats or uncertainties that can affect your organization. The primary goal of a risk management program is to help ensure objectives are met, by aligning the risk management process with the organization’s strategy, vision, mission, values, and objectives. By having a risk management program, an organization can identify potential problems before they occur and have a plan for addressing them, as well as monitor and report on the effectiveness of the risk responses. This can help the organization to achieve its desired outcomes and create value for its stakeholders. References = What Is Risk Management & Why Is It Important?

 A primary function of the risk register is to provide supporting information for the development of an organization’s risk profile, which is a comprehensive and structured representation of the risks that the organization faces. The risk profile helps the organization to understand its risk exposure, appetite, and tolerance, and to align its risk management strategy with its business objectives and context. The risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, owners, and status. The risk register is an essential input for creating and updating the risk profile, as it provides the data and analysis of the risks that need to be prioritized and addressed. The other options are not the primary function of the risk register, although they may be related to it. The risk strategy is the plan and approach for managing the risks, and it is based on the risk profile. The risk process is the set of activities and tasks for identifying, assessing, responding, and monitoring the risks, and it is facilitated by the risk register. The risk map is a graphical tool for displaying the risks based on their impact and likelihood, and it is derived from the risk register. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Purpose of a risk register: Here’s what a risk register is used for; Risk Register: Definition, Importance, and Elements! - Bit Blog; What is a Risk Register? A Complete Guide | Capterra; Risk Registers: What Are They, When Should You Use Them, and Why?

The primary reason for periodically monitoring key risk indicators (KRIs) is to detect changes in the risk profile of the enterprise. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks. By monitoring KRIs, the enterprise can identify any deviations from the expected risk level, and take appropriate actions to adjust the risk response or the risk appetite. Monitoring KRIs also helps to validate the effectiveness of risk mitigation controls and the accuracy of risk assessments. Rectifying errors in results of KRIs, reducing costs of risk mitigation controls, and continually improving risk assessments are possible benefits of monitoring KRIs, but they are not the primary reason. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.1.2, page 175.

When using a third party to perform penetration testing, the most important control to minimize operational impact is to clearly define the project scope. This means specifying the objectives, boundaries, methods, and deliverables of the testing, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved. A clear project scope helps to avoid misunderstandings, conflicts, and disruptions that could compromise the security, availability, or integrity of the systems under test. It also helps to ensure that the testing is aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and compliance requirements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3.2, Page 137.

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the information and status of the identified risks and their responses. It includes the risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, priority, response, owner, action plan, status, etc.

A risk profile is a summary or representation of the organization’s exposure or level of risk, based on the results of the risk assessment and evaluation. A risk profile can show the distribution and comparison of the risks based on various criteria, such as likelihood, impact, category, source, etc. A risk profile can also indicate the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and the gaps or opportunities for improvement.

The primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register is that it helps to build a risk profile for management review, because it provides the data and information that are necessary and relevant for creating and updating the risk profile, and for communicating and reporting the risk profile to the management. Maintaining an up-to-date risk register can help to build a risk profile for management review by providing the following benefits:

It can ensure that the risk profile reflects the current and accurate state and performance of the organization’s risk management function, and that it covers all the relevant and significant risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations.

It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the identification, analysis, evaluation, and communication of the risks and their responses, and for the alignment and integration of the risks and their responses with the organization’s strategy and culture.

It can support the decision making and planning for the risk management function, and for the allocation and optimization of the resources, time, and budget for the risk management function.

The other options are not the primary benefits of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of building a risk profile for management review, which is to summarize and represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and to communicate and report it to the management.

Implementing uniform controls for common risk scenarios means applying and enforcing the same or similar controls or countermeasures for the risks that have the same or similar characteristics or features, such as source, cause, impact, etc. Implementing uniform controls for common risk scenarios can help to ensure the consistency and efficiency of the risk management function, but it is not the primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because it does not summarize or represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization’s objectives and needs.

Ensuring business unit risk is uniformly distributed means ensuring that the risks that are associated with the different business units or divisions of the organization are balanced or equalized, and that they do not exceed or fall below the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Ensuring business unit risk is uniformly distributed can help to optimize the performance and profitability of the organization, but it is not the primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because it does not summarize or represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and it may not be feasible or realistic for the organization.

Quantifying the organization’s risk appetite means measuring and expressing the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing and able to accept or take, in pursuit of its objectives and goals. Quantifying the organization’s risk appetite can help to establish and communicate the boundaries and expectations for the organization’s risk management function, but it is not the primary benefit of maintaining an up-to-date risk register, because it does not summarize or represent the organization’s exposure or level of risk, and it may not be consistent or compatible with the organization’s strategy and culture. 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 201

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

After a risk has been identified, the risk owner is in the best position to select the appropriate risk treatment option. The risk owner is the person or entity with the accountability and authority to manage a risk1. The risk owner is responsible for evaluating the risk, choosing the most suitable risk treatment option, implementing the risk treatment plan, and monitoring and reviewing the risk and its treatment2. The risk owner has the most knowledge and stake in the risk and its impact on the objectives and activities of the organization. The other options are not the best choices for selecting the risk treatment option, as they do not have the same level of accountability and authority as the risk owner. The risk practitioner is the person or entity with the knowledge and skills to perform the risk management activities1. The risk practitioner can assist the risk owner in identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating the risk, but the final decision and responsibility lies with the risk owner. The business process owner is the person or entity with the accountability and authority to manage a business process3. The business process owner may be affected by the risk or involved in the risk treatment, but the risk owner is the one who has the overall responsibility for the risk. The control owner is the person or entity with the accountability and authority to ensure that the controls are properly designed, implemented, and operated4. The control owner can provide input and feedback on the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, but the risk owner is the one who decides which controls are needed and how they are applied. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.3, Page 51.

 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 course of action for a system administrator who suspects a colleague may be intentionally weakening a system’s validation controls in order to pass through fraudulent transactions is B. Share the concern through a whistleblower communication channel1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a whistleblower communication channel is a mechanism that allows employees to report suspected fraud or unethical behavior without fear of retaliation or reprisal. A whistleblower communication channel is part of an effective fraud detection and prevention framework, and it helps to promote a culture of integrity and accountability within the organization2

The other options are not as effective or appropriate as sharing the concern through a whistleblower communication channel, because:

•A. Implementing compensating controls to deter fraud attempts may not address the root cause of the problem, and it may also create additional complexity and cost for the system. Moreover, it may not prevent the colleague from finding other ways to bypass the controls or collude with external parties.

•C. Monitoring the activity to collect evidence may expose the system administrator to legal or ethical risks, especially if the monitoring is done without proper authorization or due process. It may also delay the reporting and resolution of the issue, and potentially allow more fraudulent transactions to occur.

•D. Determining whether the system environment has flaws that may motivate fraud attempts may be useful for understanding the context and the factors that contribute to the fraud risk, but it does not address the immediate concern of reporting the suspected fraud. It may also imply that the system administrator is trying to justify or rationalize the colleague’s behavior, rather than holding them accountable.

1: CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 100002 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 224

Assigning a data owner ensures accountability and responsibility for classifying and protecting data according to its sensitivity. This role is critical in implementing effectiveData Governance Practices.

 Business Impact Assessment (BIA):

BIA identifies and evaluates the potential effects of interruptions to critical business operations. It helps determine the priority of risk mitigation efforts based on the potential impact on business functions.

BIA provides detailed information on which processes and systems are most critical to the organization's operations and their respective impact levels.

 Prioritizing Risk Mitigation:

The results of a BIA guide decision-makers in prioritizing which risks to address first based on their potential to disrupt critical business operations.

Risks that could cause significant operational, financial, or reputational damage are prioritized higher.

 Comparing Other Factors:

Cost of Risk Mitigation:Important but secondary to understanding the impact on business operations.

Asset Criticality:Relevant but typically part of the BIA process.

Acceptable Risk Level:Defines the threshold but does not prioritize specific risks.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses how BIA facilitates risk prioritization by identifying critical processes and their impacts (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.7 Business Impact Analysis)​​.

The primary objective of risk management is to achieve business objectives, as risk management involves identifying, assessing, responding, and monitoring the risks that may affect the desired outcomes and performance of the organization, and aligning them with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. Identifying and analyzing risk, minimizing business disruptions, and identifying threats and vulnerabilities are not the primary objectives, as they are more related to the process, outcome, or source of risk management, respectively, rather than the purpose or value of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

Modifying logs before analysis compromises the integrity and reliability of monitoring processes. This action creates a risk of inaccurate data feeding into key risk indicators, which undermines the effectiveness of monitoring and decision-making. Maintaining log integrity is a foundational practice inRisk Monitoring and Reporting.

 Risk appetite is the most important factor to consider first when creating a comprehensive IT risk register, as it defines the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, and guides the identification, assessment, response, and monitoring of the IT risks. The other options are not the most important factors, as they are more related to the resources, actions, or methods of the IT risk management, respectively, rather than the strategy or direction of the IT risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

The operational risk associated with attacks on a web application should be owned by the individual in charge of the business function, because they are the primary stakeholder and beneficiary of the web application, and they are responsible for defining and achieving the business objectives and requirements that the web application supports or enables. An operational risk is a risk of loss or damage resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people, or systems, or from external events. An attack on a web application is a type of operational risk that involves a malicious or unauthorized attempt to compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the web application, such as a denial-of-service attack, a SQL injection attack, or a cross-site scripting attack. A web application is an application that runs on a web server and can be accessed or used through a web browser, such as an online shopping site, a social media platform, or a web-based email service. A business function is a set of activities or tasks that support or enable the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, such as marketing, sales, or customer service. A risk owner is a person or role that has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk, and to implement and monitor the risk response and controls. The individual in charge of the business function should be the risk owner, as they have the best understanding and interest of the web application and its business value and impact, and they have the ability and responsibility to manage the operational risk associated with the attacks on the web application. The individual in charge of network operations, the cybersecurity function, or application development are all possible candidates for the risk owner, but they are not the best choice, as they may not have the same level of stake and influence in the web application and its business objectives and requirements, and they may have different or conflicting priorities or perspectives on the operational risk and its management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 101

The first step in selecting a risk response after a penetration test reveals several vulnerabilities in a web-facing application is to assess the level of risk associated with the vulnerabilities, as it involves evaluating the likelihood and impact of the vulnerabilities being exploited, and comparing them with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. Correcting the vulnerabilities, developing a risk response action plan, and communicating the vulnerabilities are possible steps in selecting a risk response, but they are not the first step, as they require the prior knowledge of the risk level and the optimal risk response. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 108.

The percentage of projects introduced into production without high-risk issues is the most important measure of the effectiveness of risk management in project implementation, as it reflects the ability of risk management to ensure that the project deliverables meet the quality, functionality, and security requirements, and do not introduce unacceptable risks to the organization. The percentage of projects having the risk register updated regularly, having key risk indicators (KRIs) established to measure risk, or having an action plan to remediate overdue issues are not the most important measures, as they are more related to the process, performance, or compliance of risk management, rather than the outcome or value of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks about the greatest risk associated with inappropriate classification of data.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Inaccurate record management data:This could lead to inefficiencies but doesn't directly pose a major risk.

B. Users having unauthorized access to data:Inappropriate classification can lead to sensitive data being under-protected, making it accessible to unauthorized users, which is a significant security risk.

C. Inaccurate recovery time objectives (RTOs):While this is important for business continuity, it is not the primary risk related to data classification.

D. Lack of accountability for data ownership:This can cause confusion but doesn't directly lead to significant risk as compared to unauthorized data access.

 Detailed Explanation:

Data Classification Importance:Classifying data appropriately ensures that sensitive data receives the necessary protection levels. It determines access controls and other security measures.

Risk of Unauthorized Access:If data is not classified correctly, sensitive information might be treated as less critical data. This can result in weaker access controls, making it easier for unauthorized users to access sensitive information, leading to data breaches and potential legal and financial repercussions.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, emphasizes the importance of appropriate data classification in risk management​​.