CRISC Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

Ethics committees are typically responsible for developing, implementing, and overseeing an organization’s ethical guidelines and policies. They play a crucial role in mitigating ethical risk by ensuring that the organization’s operations align with its ethical standards123.

References

1What Is Ethically Informed Risk Management? - Journal of Ethics

2Five Ways to Reduce Ethics and Compliance Risk - Free Ethics Toolkit

35 Ways to Manage Ethical Risks - ClearRisk

Post-implementation verification ensures that changes achieve the desired outcomes without causing unintended issues. It validates the success of change deployment and minimizes operational disruption, making it the most direct indicator of change management effectiveness.

The best way to help an enterprise define and communicate its risk appetite is to use a risk register, which is a document that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses1. A risk register can help to:

Define the risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives2. The risk register can include the risk appetite statement, which is a clear and concise expression of the enterprise’s risk preferences and boundaries3.

Communicate the risk appetite, which is the process of sharing and informing the risk appetite to the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, the management, the employees, or the customers4. The risk register can be used as a communication tool, which can provide a consistent and transparent view of the enterprise’s risk profile and performance5.

The other options are not the best ways to help an enterprise define and communicate its risk appetite, because:

Gap analysis is a technique that compares the current state and the desired state of a process, system, or organization, and identifies the gaps or differences between them6. Gap analysis can help to assess the alignment or misalignment of the enterprise’s risk appetite with its risk level, but it does not help to define or communicate the risk appetite itself.

Risk assessment is a process that estimates the probability and impact of the risks, and prioritizes the risks based on their significance and urgency. Risk assessment can help to identify andanalyze the risks that may affect the enterprise’s objectives, but it does not help to define or communicate the risk appetite itself.

Heat map is a graphical representation that uses colors to indicate the level or intensity of a variable, such as risk. Heat map can help to visualize and compare the risks based on their probability and impact, but it does not help to define or communicate the risk appetite itself.

References =

Risk Register - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite Statement - CIO Wiki

Risk Communication - CIO Wiki

Risk Reporting - CIO Wiki

Gap Analysis - CIO Wiki

[Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

[Heat Map - CIO Wiki]

[Risk and Information Systems Control documents and learning resources by ISACA]

The average time to provision user accounts is the most useful indicator to measure the efficiency of an identity and access management (IAM) process, because it reflects how quickly and smoothly the process can grant access to the appropriate users. The average time to provision user accounts can be calculated by dividing the total time spent on provisioning user accounts by the number of user accounts provisioned in a given period. A lower average time indicates a more efficient IAM process, as it means that users can access the resources they need without unnecessary delays or errors. A higher average time may indicate problems or bottlenecks in the IAM process, such as manual steps, complex workflows, lack of automation, or insufficient resources. The average time to provision user accounts can also be compared across different applications, systems, or business units to identify areas for improvement or best practices. The other options are less useful indicators to measure the efficiency of an IAM process. The number of tickets for provisioning new accounts shows the demand for the IAM process, but not how well the process meets the demand. The password reset volume per month shows the frequency of password-related issues, but not how effectively the IAM process handles them. The average account lockout time shows the impact of account lockouts on user productivity, but not howefficiently the IAM process prevents or resolves them. References = Top Identity and Access Management Metrics 

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. KRIthresholds 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

Risk appetite determined by senior management reflects the enterprise's willingness to accept certain levels of risk, including noncompliance. This decision underscores the strategic trade-offs made in risk management, a key element inGovernance and Risk Policy Alignment.

An organization may rely on third-party vendors to provide some of its IT systems, applications, or services, such as cloud computing, software development, or data processing. The organization should evaluate the control environment of the third-party vendors, which is the set of policies, procedures, and practices that establish the tone and culture of the vendor’s risk management and control activities. The best way to evaluate the control environment of severalthird-party vendors is to obtain independent control reports from high-risk vendors. Independent control reports are the documents that attest to the design, implementation, and effectiveness of the vendor’s controls, based on the standards or frameworks that are relevant and applicable for the vendor’s services, such as the ISAE 3402 or the SOC 2. Independentcontrol reports are prepared by independent and qualified auditors, who provide an objective and reliable assessment of the vendor’s controls. High-risk vendors are the vendors that pose the highest level of risk to the organization, such as by having access to sensitive or confidential data, or by providing critical or complex services. By obtaining independent control reports from high-risk vendors, the organization can verify that the vendor’s controls are adequate and appropriate for the organization’s needs, and that the vendor complies with thecontractual and regulatory requirements. The other options are not as good as obtaining independent control reports from high-risk vendors, as they may not provide sufficient or consistent information or evidence on the vendor’s control environment:

Review vendors’ internal risk assessments covering key risk and controls means that the organization examines the vendor’s own evaluation of its risks and controls, such as by reviewing the vendor’s risk register, risk matrix, or risk report. This may provide some information or insight on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as reliable or objective as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s internal risk assessments may have biases, conflicts, or gaps in their methodology, scope, or quality.

Review vendors performance metrics on quality and delivery of processes means that the organization measures and monitors the vendor’s performance and outcomes, such as by using key performance indicators (KPIs), service level agreements (SLAs), or customer satisfaction surveys. This may provide some information or feedback on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as comprehensive or relevant as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s performance metrics may not cover all the aspects or components of the vendor’s controls, or may not reflect the latest or updated status or results of the vendor’s controls.

Obtain vendor references from third parties means that the organization collects and verifies the testimonials or recommendations of the vendor’s services from other customers or stakeholders, such as by contacting them directly or by reading their reviews or ratings. This may provide some information or evidence on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as accurate or consistent as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s references from third parties may have biases, conflicts, or variations in their expectations, experiences, or opinions of the vendor’s services. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.2.1, pp. 147-148.

A risk register is the primary tool for communicating progress: it consolidates risk scenarios, mitigation plans, current status, and residual risk in a structured format. Senior management relies on it to make informed decisions.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, stakeholders are the individuals or groups that have an interest or stake in the outcome of the IT system and its risks. Stakeholders include the system owners, users, operators, developers, managers, auditors, regulators, and customers. It is most important to ensure that agreement is obtained from stakeholders when testing the security of an IT system, as this helps to define the scope, objectives, and expectations of the test, and to obtain the necessary authorization, support, and resources for the test. Agreement from stakeholders also helps to avoid any conflicts, disruptions, or misunderstandings that may arise during or after the test, and to ensure the validity and acceptance of the test results and recommendations. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 198, 224.

Performing a threat assessment is the best course of action for a risk practitioner upon learning that regulatory authorities have concerns with an emerging technology that the organization is considering, because it helps to identify and analyze the sources and types of threats that may exploit the vulnerabilities or weaknesses of the technology, and to estimate their likelihood and impact. A threat is a potential event or action that may cause harm or damage to the organization or its objectives, such as a natural disaster, a cyberattack, or a human error. A threat assessment is a process of systematically identifying and assessing the threats that an organization faces, and estimating their probability and severity. An emerging technology is a new or innovative technology that has the potential to disrupt or transform the existing markets, industries, or practices, such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, or biotechnology. An emerging technology may offer benefits such as competitive advantage, efficiency, or creativity, but it may also pose risks such as technical complexity, interoperability issues, regulatory uncertainty, or ethicaldilemmas. Therefore, performing a threat assessment is the best course of action, as it helps to understand and evaluate the threats and their consequences, and to determine the appropriate controls or mitigating factors to reduce or eliminate them. Redesigning key riskindicators (KRIs), updating risk responses, and conducting a SWOT analysis are all possiblecourses of action to perform after performing a threat assessment, but they are not the best course of action, as they depend on the results and recommendations of the threat assessment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 87

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, authorizing user access requests is the process of granting or denying access to IT resources based on the user’s role, responsibilities, and business needs. Authorizing user access requests is a key control accountability that should be retained within the organization, as it helps to ensure that the principle of least privilege is applied, and that the access rights are aligned with the organization’s policies, standards, and risk appetite. Authorizing user access requests also helps to prevent unauthorized access, data leakage, fraud, and other potential risks associated with user access provisioning and termination. Therefore, the best control accountability to retain within the organizationwhen a third-party vendor offers to perform user access provisioning and termination is authorizing user access requests. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 240.

An independent security audit report is a document that provides an objective and comprehensive assessment of the security posture and practices of a cloud service provider (CSP), based on a set of standards, criteria, or frameworks1. An independent security audit report can help an organization to evaluate the risks and benefits of using a CSP, and to ensure that the CSP meets the organization’s security and compliance requirements2.

If an organization receives an independent security audit report of its CSP that indicates significant control weaknesses, the next step that should be done in response to this report is to analyze the impact of the provider’s control weaknesses to the business. This means that the organization should:

Identify and prioritize the business processes, functions, or objectives that depend on or are affected by the CSP’s services

Assess the potential consequences and likelihood of the control weaknesses leading to security incidents, breaches, or losses

Estimate the financial, operational, reputational, or legal impacts of the security incidents, breaches, or losses

Compare the impacts with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and determine the level of risk exposure and acceptance

Communicate the results of the analysis to the relevant stakeholders and decision-makers3

References = What is a Security Audit?, Cloud Security Audit: A 10-Step Checklist, Independent security audits are essential for cloud service providers. Here’s why

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

===========

The 3-minute threshold is a KRI designed to act as an early warning before a more critical limit (5 minutes) is breached, helping prevent risk realization.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the risk register is a tool that records the results of risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment. The risk register should be populated as soon as possible in the risk management process, to capture and document the risks and their attributes. The best time for the risk practitioner to start populating the risk register is when identifying risk scenarios, as this is the first step in the risk identification process. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the potential causes, impacts, and responses of a risk event. Identifying risk scenarios helps to generate a comprehensive and relevant list of risks that can be recorded in the risk register. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 191, 206.

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that reflects how well an organization is achieving its goals and objectives. A KPI should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. For an IT department that has organized training sessions to improve user awareness of organizational information security policies, the best KPI to reflect the effectiveness of the training is the percentage of staff members who complete the training with a passing score. This KPI measures the level of knowledge and understanding of the security policies among the staff members, as well as the quality and impact of the training sessions. It also indicates whether the training sessions have met the predefined criteria and standards for success. A high percentage of staff members who complete the training with a passing score implies that the training sessions have been effective in improving user awareness of organizational information security policies. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, p. 117-118

Conducting independent audits to verify that appropriate security controls are in place is the most effective way to mitigate the risk of data loss at a third-party provider. These audits provide assurance that the provider adheres to security best practices and complies with relevant standards and regulations. While contractual clauses and insurance can provide financial remedies post-incident, proactive verification of security controls helps prevent breaches from occurring in the first place.

The effectiveness of a control refers to how well it achieves its intended purpose of reducing the risk of material misstatement or error in a process or activity2. One way to measure the effectiveness of a control is to monitor the number of control deviations detected, which are instances where the control fails to operate as designed or is not applied consistently or correctly3. A high number of control deviations indicates a low effectiveness of the control, while a low number of control deviations indicates a high effectiveness of the control. The other options are not good indicators of the effectiveness of a control, as they do not directly relate to the performance or outcome of the control. The scope of the control coverage, the number of exceptions granted, and the number of steps necessary to operate the process are more relevant to the design or efficiency of the control, not its effectiveness

Service level agreements (SLA) are contracts that define the expected level of performance and quality of service that an IT service provider will deliver to its customers. SLA are the best indicators that an organization has implemented IT performance requirements, as they specifythe measurable and verifiable criteria that the IT service provider must meet or exceed, such as availability, reliability, security, and responsiveness. SLA also establish the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved, the methods of monitoring and reporting the service performance, and the consequences of non-compliance or breach of the agreement. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 232. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 232. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 232.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (aligned to ISACA CRISC guidance)

CRISC highlights that inadequate termination or role-change procedures for access rights expose the organization to serious insider threats. When users change roles but retain access not needed for their new responsibilities, the risk of fraudulent insider activities and unauthorized use of systems significantly increases. Excessive privileges can be abused intentionally or misused accidentally, leading to data breaches, financial loss, or regulatory non-compliance. While noncompliance with policy is an issue, it is a secondary, formal concern—the primary risk is actual misuse of privileges. Misaligned job duties and inefficiencies in access review are consequences but not as severe as the potential for fraud, sabotage, or data theft. Therefore, the greatest concern is the exposure to insider risk due to inadequate de-provisioning and access recertification processes.

The best way for a risk practitioner to help management prioritize risk response is to assess risk against business objectives. This means comparing the level and nature of the risks with the goals and strategies of the organization, and determining which risks pose the most significant threat or opportunity to the achievement of those objectives. By assessing risk against business objectives, the risk practitioner can help management identify the most critical and relevant risks, and prioritize the risk response actions accordingly. The risk response actions should be aligned with the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to take in order to meet its strategic goals1. The other options are not the best ways for a risk practitioner to help management prioritize risk response, as they are either less effective orless specific than assessing risk against business objectives. Aligning business objectives to the risk profile is a way of ensuring that the organization’s objectives are realistic and achievable, given the current and potential risks that the organization faces. However, this is not the same as prioritizing risk response, as it does not indicate which risks should be addressed first or howtheyshould be managed. Implementing an organization-specific risk taxonomy is a way of creating a common language and classification system for describing and categorizing risks. This can help improve the consistency and clarity of risk communication and reporting across the organization. However, this is not the same as prioritizing risk response, as it does not measure the likelihood and impact of the risks, or their relation to the organization’s objectives. Explaining risk details to management is a way of providing information and insight on the sources, drivers, consequences, and responses of the risks. This can help increase the awareness and understanding of the risks among the decision makers and stakeholders. However, this is not the same as prioritizing risk response, as it does not suggest or recommend the best course of action for managing the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.6, Page 57.

Conducting a root cause analysis is the best course of action for an IT business owner following an unexpected increase in emergency changes, as it helps to identify and address the underlying cause(s) of the problem and prevent it from recurring in the future. A root cause analysis is a systematic process of finding and resolving the fundamental factors that contribute to a specific issue or event. A root cause analysis can help to improve the quality and reliability of the IT services and processes, reduce the costs and risks associated with emergency changes, and enhance the customer satisfaction and trust.

The other options are not the best courses of action for an IT business owner following an unexpected increase in emergency changes. Evaluating the impact to control objectives is an important step to assess the potential consequences of the emergency changes on the IT governance and risk management, but it does not provide a solution or mitigation strategy for the problem. Validating the adequacy of current processes is a good practice to ensure that the IT processes are aligned with the business needs and objectives, but it does not address the specific cause(s) of the emergency changes. Reconfiguring the IT infrastructure is a possible action to implement the emergency changes, but it does not prevent the occurrence or recurrence of the problem. References = IT Business Owner’s Best Course of Action Following Unexpected Increase …, ITIL Change Types: Standard vs Normal vs Emergency - Freshworks, Emergency Change Management: Please Stop The Drama

 The most important reason to revisit a previously accepted risk is to ensure that the risk levels have not changed. A previously accepted risk is a risk that the organization has decided to tolerate or retain without taking any further action, because the risk is either low or unavoidable, or the cost or effort of mitigation outweighs the potential benefit. However, risk acceptance is not a static or permanent decision, as the risk levels may change over time due to various factors, such as new threats, vulnerabilities, impacts, or opportunities. Therefore, it is essential to revisit a previously accepted risk periodically or when there is a significant change in the internal or external environment, to verify that the risk is still within the acceptable range and that the risk acceptance rationale is still valid. If the risk levels have increased or decreased, the organization may need to revise the risk acceptance decision and consider other risk response options, such as avoidance, reduction, sharing, or exploitation. The other options are not the most important reason to revisit a previously accepted risk, although they may be relevant or necessary depending on the context and nature of the risk. Updating risk ownership is a part of the risk governance process, which ensures that the roles and responsibilities for managing the risk are clearly defined and assigned, but it does not affect the risk levels or the risk acceptance decision. Reviewing the risk acceptance with new stakeholders is a part of the risk communication process, which ensures that the risk information and the risk acceptance rationale are shared and understood by the relevant parties, but it does not change the risk levels or the risk acceptance decision. Ensuring that the controls are still operating effectively is a part of the risk monitoring and review process, which ensures that the risk response actions are implemented and maintained properly, but it does not apply to the accepted risks, as they do not have any additionalcontrols. References = Understanding Accepted Risk - SC Dashboard | Tenable®, Risk Acceptance — ENISA, Accepting Risk - Overview, Advantages, Disadvantages, Alternatives

 Developing IT Risk Scenarios:

Risk scenarios are hypothetical events that describe potential threats and their impact on business operations. These scenarios are essential for identifying and assessing risks.

 Importance of Potential Impact Events:

Events that could potentially impact the business provide the most useful information for developing risk scenarios because they directly relate to the organization’s objectives and operations.

Understanding these events helps in crafting realistic and relevant risk scenarios that can guide risk assessment and mitigation efforts.

 Components of Risk Scenarios:

Threat Actors:Identify who might exploit vulnerabilities.

Threat Events:Describe the specific events that could impact the business.

Business Impact:Assess how these events would affect business operations, finances, reputation, etc.

 Using Impact Events for Scenario Development:

Focusing on events that could disrupt critical business functions ensures that the scenarios are relevant and actionable.

It enables the risk practitioner to communicate the potential consequences effectively to stakeholders and prioritize mitigation efforts accordingly.

 Comparing Other Information Sources:

Published Vulnerabilities:Useful for understanding specific threats but may not directly relate to business impact.

Threat Actors:Important for identifying potential sources of risk but not sufficient alone for scenario development.

IT Assets:Relevant for risk assessment but secondary to understanding potential impact events.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the importance of considering events that could impact the business when developing risk scenarios (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4 Risk Scenario Development)​​.

Mitigating technology risk to acceptable levels means that the organization implements and maintains appropriate controls to reduce the likelihood and impact of potential threats or losses that may arise from the use of technology, such as IT systems, applications, networks, devices, etc.

The primary factor that should guide the mitigation of technology risk is the organizational risk appetite. This means that the organization defines and communicates the amount and type of risk that it is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives and strategy.

The organizational risk appetite helps to determine the risk tolerance and thresholds for different risk categories and scenarios, prioritize the risks, select the most suitable risk responses, allocate the resources and budget for risk management, and monitor and report the risk performance and outcomes.

The other options are not the primary factors that should guide the mitigation of technology risk. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 25

Information Technology & Security, page 19

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 17

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

The risk associated with an asset after controls are applied can be expressed as a function of the likelihood and impact, as it helps to measure and quantify the residual risk level and exposure. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls or risk treatments. Residual risk can be calculated by multiplying the likelihood and impact of a risk event, where likelihood is the probability or frequency of the risk event occurring, and impact is the consequence or severity of the risk event on the asset or objective. Residual risk can be expressed as:

ResidualRisk=Likelihood×Impact

Expressing the risk associated with an asset after controls are applied as a function of the likelihood and impact helps to provide the following benefits:

It enables a data-driven and evidence-based approach to risk assessment and reporting, rather than relying on subjective or qualitative judgments.

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating risk levels and exposure across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the alignment of risk management and control activities with the organizational strategy and objectives, and helps to evaluate the achievement of the desired outcomes.

It helps to identify and prioritize the areas for improvement and enhancement of the risk management and control processes, and guide the development and implementation of corrective or preventive actions.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the risk management and control processes, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best ways to express the risk associated with an asset after controls are applied. A function of the cost and effectiveness of controls is a measure of the inputs or outputs of therisk management and control processes, but it does not indicate the risk level or exposure. The likelihood of a given threat is a component of the risk calculation, but it does not reflect the impact or consequence of the threat. The magnitude of an impact is a component of the risk calculation, but it does not reflect the likelihood or probability of the risk event.References=Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative,IT Risk Resources | ISACA,Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management - Video & Lesson …

Information security risk factors are the sources of uncertainty that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information assets within an organization. Information security risk factors can include threats, vulnerabilities, or impacts that may compromise the security of information assets. Information security risk factors should be mitigated when developing in-house applications, which are software applications that are designed, developed, and maintained by the organization itself, rather than by external vendors or providers. Mitigating information security risk factors when developing in-house applications canhelp prevent or reduce the occurrence or consequences of security incidents, such as data breaches, cyberattacks, unauthorized access, or data loss. The best way to ensure that information security risk factors are mitigated when developing in-house applications is to identify information security controls in the requirements analysis. The requirements analysis is the stage of the system development life cycle (SDLC) where the business needs and expectations of the application are defined and documented. The requirements analysis should include the functional and non-functional requirements of the application, such as the features, functions, performance, quality, reliability, and security of the application. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can help ensure that the security requirements of the application are clearly specified and agreed upon by the stakeholders, and that they are aligned with the organization’s security policies, standards, and regulations. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can also help ensure that the security requirements are integrated into the design, development, testing, and deployment of the application, and that they are verified and validated throughout the SDLC. Identifying information security controls in the requirements analysis can also help ensure that the security requirements are traceable, measurable, and manageable, and that they can be monitored and reviewed for effectiveness and efficiency. References = THE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT LIFE CYCLE (SDLC), p. 2-3, System Development Life Cycle - GeeksforGeeks, 7.3: Systems Development Life Cycle - Engineering LibreTexts, What Is SDLC? 7 Phases of System Development Life Cycle - Intetics.

The primary objective for selecting risk response options is to reduce risk to an acceptable level. Risk response options are the possible actions that can be taken to address the risks that have been identified and analyzed in the risk management process. Risk response options can be classified into four categories: avoid, transfer, mitigate, and accept for negative risks (or threats), and exploit, share, enhance, and accept for positive risks (or opportunities). The selection of the risk response options depends on various factors, such as the risk level, the risk appetite and tolerance, the cost and benefit, and the feasibility and availability of the options. The main goal of selecting the risk response options is to reduce the risk to a level that is acceptable to the organization, which means that the risk exposure is within the boundaries of the risk criteria and the risk appetite. The other options are not the primary objective for selecting risk response options, although they may be related or beneficial. Identifying compensating controls is a technique to implement additional or alternative controls when the existing controls are not effective or sufficient to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Minimizing residual risk is a result of selecting and implementing the risk response options, but it is not the main purpose. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response, and it may or may not be acceptable depending on the risk appetite and tolerance. Reducing risk factors is a method to decrease the likelihood or impact of the risk by addressing the root causes or sources of the risk. However,reducing risk factors does not necessarily mean that the risk is reduced to an acceptable level,as there may be other factors or uncertainties that affect the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 862

The potential loss to the business due to non-performance of the asset is the most helpful information for asset owners when classifying organizational assets for risk assessment, because it reflects the value and criticality of the asset to the business objectives and processes. The potential loss can be measured in terms of financial, operational, reputational, or legal impacts.The known emerging environmental threats are not relevant for asset classification, because they are external factors that affect the risk level, not the asset value. The known vulnerabilities published by the asset developer are not relevant for asset classification, because they are internal factors that affect the risk level, not the asset value. The cost of replacing theasset with a new asset providing similar services is not relevant for asset classification, because it does not reflect the business impact of losing the asset functionality or availability. References = CRISC Sample Questions 2024

The effectiveness of a control action plan’s implementation can be measured by the extent to which it achieves the desired risk reduction. A control action plan is a set of actions that are designed to address the root causes of a risk and mitigate its impact or likelihood. The best indicator of the effectiveness of a control action plan’s implementation is the reduced risk level, which means that the risk is either eliminated or brought within the acceptable range. The otheroptions are not the best indicators, because they do not directly reflect the risk reduction. Increased number of controls may not necessarily reduce the risk level, especially if the controls are not aligned with the risk causes, objectives, and priorities. Increased risk appetite may indicate a higher tolerance for risk, but it does not mean that the risk level has been reduced. Stakeholder commitment may facilitate the implementation of the control action plan, but it does not guarantee the effectiveness of the plan. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.2: Control Action Plan, p. 170-171.

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

The primary concern for a risk practitioner in adopting innovative big data analytics is the potential re-identification of individuals from previously anonymized data. Advanced analytics techniques can inadvertently combine datasets in ways that reveal personal identities, leading to privacy breaches and regulatory non-compliance. This risk is heightened when data from multiple sources are aggregated, increasing the chance of re-identification.

The risk associated with the leakage of confidential data is the possibility and impact of unauthorized disclosure, access, or use of sensitive information that may harm the organization or its stakeholders12.

The first step in managing the risk associated with the leakage of confidential data is to define and implement a data classification policy, which is a document that establishes the criteria, categories, roles, and responsibilities for identifying, labeling, and handling different types of data according to their sensitivity, value, and protection needs34.

Defining and implementing a data classification policy is the first step because it provides the foundation and framework for the data protection strategy, and enables the organization to prioritize and allocate the appropriate resources and controls for the most critical and confidential data34.

Defining and implementing a data classification policy is also the first step because it supports the compliance with the relevant laws and regulations, such as GDPR, HIPAA, or PCI-DSS, that require the organization to classify and protect the personal or financial data of its customers or clients34.

The other options are not the first step, but rather possible subsequent steps that may depend on or follow the data classification policy. For example:

Maintaining and reviewing the classified data inventory is a step that involves creating and updating a record of the data assets that have been classified, and verifying their accuracy and completeness over time34. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the data classification policy to provide the guidance and standards for the data inventory process34.

Implementing mandatory encryption on data is a step that involves applying a cryptographic technique that transforms the data into an unreadable format, and requires a key or a password to decrypt and access the data56. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the dataclassification policy to determine which data needs to be encrypted, and what level of encryption is appropriate56.

Conducting an awareness program for data owners and users is a step that involves educating and training the people who are responsible for or have access to the data, and informing them of their roles, obligations, and best practices for data protection78. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the data classification policy to define the data ownership and user rights, and the data protection policies and procedures78. References =

1: Top Four Damaging Consequences of Data Leakage | ZeroFox1

2: 8 Data Leak Prevention Strategies for 2023 | UpGuard2

3: Data Classification: What It Is, Why You Need It, and How to Do It3

4: Data Classification Policy Template - IT Governance USA4

5: Encryption: What It Is, How It Works, and Why You Need It5

6: Encryption Policy Template - IT Governance USA6

7: What Is Security Awareness Training and Why Is It Important? - Kaspersky7

8: Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US8

A private cloud is a type of cloud computing deployment that provides the consumer exclusive access to a pool of computing resources that are owned, managed, and operated by the consumer or a third-party provider on behalf of the consumer.

A private cloud provides the consumer the greatest degree of control over the environment, because the consumer can customize and configure the resources according to their specific needs and preferences, and can apply their own security and governance policies and standards.

The other options are not the types of cloud computing deployment that provide the consumer the greatest degree of control over the environment. They are either shared or limited by the provider’s settings and rules.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 23

Information Technology & Security, page 17

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 15

 An exception to the information security policy is a permission to continue operating a system, service, or product that cannot comply with the established information security standards and requirements1. A risk owner is a person or entity that has the authority and accountability for a risk and its management2. A risk practitioner is a person or entity that has the knowledge and skills to perform risk management activities3. A high number of exceptions to the information security policy indicates that there are many systems, services, or products that do not meet the expected level of security and pose potential risks to the organization. The risk practitioner’s greatest concern should be that the aggregate risk, which is the total amount of risk that the organization faces from all sources, is approaching the tolerance threshold, which is the limit beyond which the organization does not want to tolerate the risk4. If the aggregate risk isapproaching the tolerance threshold, it means that the organization is exposed to a high level of risk that may exceed its risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives5. This may result in negative consequences for the organization, such as breaches, losses, damages, or reputational harm. Therefore, the risk practitioner should monitor and report the aggregate risk level and the tolerance threshold, and advise the risk owners and the management on the appropriate risk responses and actions to reduce the aggregate risk to an acceptable level. Security policies are being reviewed infrequently, controls are not operating efficiently, and vulnerabilities are not being mitigated are not the risk practitioner’s greatest concern, as they are not directly related to the aggregate risk level and the tolerance threshold. Security policies are being reviewed infrequently is a condition that indicates that the organization’s security policies are not updated or revised regularly to reflect the changes and updates in the security environment and the security requirements6. This may affect the relevance and effectiveness of the security policies, but it does not necessarilyincrease the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. Controls are not operating efficiently is a condition thatindicates that the organization’s controls, which are the measures or actions taken to manage or mitigate the risks, are not performing well or optimally7. This may affect the quality and performance of the controls, but it does not necessarily increase the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. Vulnerabilities are not being mitigated is a condition that indicates that the organization’s vulnerabilities, which are the weaknesses or gaps that may be exploited by the threats, are not being addressed or reduced8. This may increase the likelihood or impact of the risks, but it does not necessarily increase the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. References = 1: IT/Information Security Exception Request Process2: [Risk Ownership - Risk Management] 3: [Risk Practitioner - ISACA] 4: Risk Threshold: Definition, Meaning & Example - PM Study Circle5: Risk Appetite vs Risk Tolerance vs Risk Threshold - projectcubicle6: [Security Policy Review and Update - SANS Institute] 7: [Control Effectiveness and Efficiency - ISACA] 8: [Vulnerability Management - ISACA] : [Risk andInformation Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Concepts, pp. 17-19.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

Fraudulent transactions are those that involve deception, manipulation, or misrepresentation of information or data to obtain an unauthorized or improper benefit or advantage1. Fraudulenttransactions can pose significant risks and losses for an organization, such as financial damages, legal liabilities, reputational damages, or operational disruptions2.

Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems are integrated software applications that support the core business processes and functions of an organization, such as accounting, finance, human resources, supply chain, inventory, or customer relationship management3. ERP systems can facilitate the efficiency, accuracy, and security of business transactions, but they can also be vulnerable to fraudulent transactions, such as:

Creating fake vendors or customers and processing false invoices or payments

Manipulating or falsifying financial or accounting data or reports

Changing or deleting critical or sensitive information or records

Abusing or misusing access privileges or credentials

Bypassing or compromising the system controls or security measures4

The design of procedures to prevent fraudulent transactions within an ERP system should be based on the control environment. The control environment is the set of standards, processes, and structures that provide the basis for carrying out internal control across the organization. The control environment comprises the following elements:

The tone at the top, which reflects the leadership’s commitment and attitude towards internal control and ethical conduct

The organizational structure, which defines the roles and responsibilities, reporting lines, and authority levels for internal control

The human resource policies and practices, which ensure that the staff have the appropriate skills, competencies, and incentives for internal control

The risk assessment process, which identifies and evaluates the potential risks and threats to the organization’s objectives and transactions

The control activities, which are the specific policies, procedures, and mechanisms that prevent, detect, or correct errors or fraud in transactions

The information and communication systems, which provide reliable and timely data and information for internal control and decision-making

The monitoring and evaluation activities, which measure and report the performance and effectiveness of internal control and ensure continuous improvement

By basing the design of procedures to prevent fraudulent transactions within an ERP system on the control environment, the organization can:

Ensure that the procedures are aligned with the organization’s objectives, values, and expectations regarding internal control and fraud prevention

Provide clear and consistent guidance and instructions for the staff and stakeholders involved in the transactions and the ERP system

Implement adequate and appropriate controls and safeguards to mitigate the risks and vulnerabilities of the transactions and the ERP system

Monitor and evaluate the compliance and effectiveness of the procedures and the ERP system, and identify and address any issues or gaps

References = What is Fraud?, Fraud Risk Management - AICPA, What is ERP?, ERP Fraud: How to Prevent It - ERP Focus, [COSO – Control Environment - Deloitte], [How to use COSO to assess IT controls - Journal of Accountancy]

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, controls are the policies, procedures, practices, and organizational structures that are designed and implemented to manage risk. The most important factor when defining controls is to align them with the business objectives, as this helps to ensure that the controls support the achievement of the organization’s strategy, goals, and values. Aligning controls with business objectives also helps to optimize the benefits and costs of controls, and to prioritize and allocate resources for control implementation and maintenance. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 202.

An internal data access policy is a set of rules and guidelines that define who, how, when, and why the users can access, use, share, or modify the data stored in a business application system, based on the data classification, sensitivity, and ownership.

Enforcing an internal data access policy is the most appropriate way to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system. This means that the organization implements and maintains effective controls to ensure that only the authorized users can access the confidential information, and that the access is logged and monitored for compliance and security purposes.

The other options are not the most appropriate ways to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system. They are either secondary or not essential for data access control.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 28

Information Technology & Security, page 22

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 20

Residual risk is the remaining risk after implementing risk responses, such as controls or mitigation strategies. With the deployment of an IAM solution, the organization has addressed certain access-related risks. Updating the risk register to reflect the new residual risk levels ensures accurate tracking and informs future risk management decisions.

 A source code review is the process of examining and analyzing the source code of an application to identify any vulnerabilities, errors, or flaws that may compromise the security, functionality, or performance of the application. A source code review is the most effective way to identify an application backdoor prior to implementation, as it can detect any hidden or unauthorized code that may allow unauthorized access, bypass security controls, or execute malicious commands. A source code review can also help to improvethe quality and reliability of the application, and ensure compliance with the coding standards and best practices. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 181.

The control owner is the person who is accountable for ensuring that a control is designed, implemented, and operated effectively to mitigate risk. The control owner is also responsible for monitoring the performance of the control and reporting any issues or deficiencies. The risk manager is the person who oversees the risk management process and ensures that risks are identified, assessed, and treated appropriately. The control operator is the person who executes the control activities on a day-to-day basis. The risk treatment owner is the person who is accountable for implementing the risk response strategy and ensuring that the residual risk is within the acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, p. 181.

The business application owner is responsible for the operation and risk decisions related to the application. Since the loss of failover may impact business continuity, their approval is essential.

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.

Assessing the threat and associated impact is the next thing that a risk practitioner should do after learning that Internet of Things (IoT) devices installed in the production environment lack appropriate security controls for sensitive data. This is because assessing the threat and associated impact can help determine the level and nature of the risk posed by the IoT devices, as well as the potential consequences and costs of a security breach or incident. Assessing the threat and associated impact can also provide the basis for further risk analysis and response steps, such as evaluating risk appetite and tolerance levels, recommending device management controls, or enabling role-based access control. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, assessing the threat and associated impact is one of the key steps in the IT risk assessment process1. According to the web search results, assessing the threat and associated impact is a common and recommended practice for addressing the security risks of IoT devices

The best input to assess the inherent risk impact of leakage of customer data is the number of customer records held. Inherent risk impact is a measure of the potential severity or consequence of a risk event, before considering the existing controls. Inherent risk impact can be based on quantitative or qualitative factors, such as financial, operational, reputational, or legal factors.The number of customer records held is the best input, because it directly reflects the amount and type of data that could be leaked, and the potential harm or loss that could result from the leakage. The number of customer records held can also help to estimate the probability and frequency of the leakage, as well as the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls. The more customer records the organization holds, the higher the inherent risk impact of leakage, and the more controls the organization needs to implement and maintain. The other options are not the best input, although they may be related or influential to the inherent risk impact. The number of databases that host customer data is a measure of the complexity or diversity of the data storage and management systems, but it does not directly indicate the amount or type of data that could be leaked, or the potential harm or loss that could result from the leakage. The number of databases that host customer data may also vary depending on the design and configuration of the systems, which may not reflect the inherent risk impact. The number of encrypted customer databases is a measure of the security or protection of the data storage and management systems, but it is not an input to the inherent risk impact, rather it is an output or a result of the control implementation. The number of encrypted customer databases may also depend on the quality and reliability of the encryption methods and keys, which may not indicate the inherent risk impact. The number of staff members having access to customer data is a measure of the exposure or vulnerability of the data to internal threats, such as unauthorized or malicious actions by the staff members. The number of staff members having access to customer data can affect the inherent risk impact, but it is not the best input, as it does not account for the external threats, such as hackers or competitors, or the amount or type of data that could be leaked, or the potential harm or loss that could result from the leakage. References = What is Inherent Risk? You Could Be at Risk of a Data Breach | UpGuard, Data leakage: A data leak is an unintentional exposure of sensitive data on the internet. For example, an employee might upload customer data files to an unsecured server. Lack of encryption: This is the storing, sending, or transferring information without converting it into ciphertext first.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (aligned to ISACA CRISC guidance)

On discovering that IoT devices handling sensitive data lack proper security controls, the risk practitioner’s next step is to assess the threat and associated impact. CRISC emphasizes that after identifying a weakness, the practitioner must evaluate likelihood (threat capability, exposure, existing safeguards) and impact (data confidentiality, integrity, availability, regulatory fines, operational disruption). This analysis determines how serious the situation is and how urgently it must be addressed. Only once risk level is understood should specific treatments—such as device management, hardening, segmentation, or RBAC—be designed and prioritized. Evaluating risk appetite and tolerance is necessary when deciding whether residual risk is acceptable, but it follows (not precedes) the technical risk assessment of the scenario.