CRISC Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

The risk scenario chart shows the initial and residual risk ratings, and the project cost, for four projects named Sierra, Tango, Uniform, and Victor. The initial risk rating is the level of risk before applying any controls or mitigation measures, while the residual risk rating is the level of risk after applying the controls or measures. The project cost is the amount of resources required to implement the project. These three factors can be used to determine the relative positions of the projects on a risk map, which is a graphical tool for displaying the risks based on their impact and likelihood. The risk map can help to prioritize and compare the risks, and to select the most appropriate risk response strategy. The other options are not the best answers, as they are not directly shown or derived from the risk scenario chart. The risk treatment options are the possible actions that can be taken to address the risks, such as accept, avoid, mitigate, or transfer. The capability of enterprise to implement is the ability of the organization to execute the risk response plan,considering the available resources, skills, and constraints. The multiple risk factors addressed by a chosen response are the various elements that contribute to or affect the risk, such as the threat sources, events, vulnerabilities, assets, and impacts. These factors are not explicitly stated or measured in the risk scenario chart, and may require further analysis or information. References = How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA; Identifying the Right Risk Scenarios to Measure with FAIR; How to write good risk scenarios and statements

Defining risk response options is performed after a risk assessment is completed. A risk assessment is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that affect the enterprise’s objectives and operations. After a risk assessment is completed, the enterprise needs to define the risk response options, which are the actions that can be taken to address the risks.The risk response options include accepting, avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or exploiting the risks. Defining risk response options helps to select the most appropriate and effective strategy to manage the risks. Defining risk taxonomy, identifying vulnerabilities, and conducting an impact analysis are performed before or during a risk assessment, not after. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.4, page 541

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 644.

The most effective way to limit the impact of a ransomware attack is to have data backups. Data backups are copies of the data that are stored in a separate location or device, and can be used to restore the data in case of a loss or corruption. Data backups can help to recover the data that is encrypted or deleted by the ransomware, and to avoid paying the ransom to the attackers. Data backups also help to reduce the downtime and disruption caused by the ransomware attack, and to maintain the business continuity and availability of the data. Cyber insurance, cryptocurrency reserve, and end user training are not the most effective ways to limit the impact of a ransomware attack, as they may not prevent or recover the data loss, and may incur additional costs or risks for the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.1.1.1, page 2281

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 657.

The most critical factor to consider when determining an organization’s risk appetite is the management culture. The management culture reflects the values, beliefs, and attitudes of the senior management and the board of directors toward risk management. The management culture influences how the organization defines, communicates, and implements its risk appetite and tolerance. Fiscal management practices, business maturity, and budget for implementing security are other factors that may affect the risk appetite, but they are not as critical as the management culture. References = ISACA Certified in Risk andInformation Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

Confirming that the risk has been mitigated to the intended level is paramount to ensure that the risk response was effective. This ties toRisk Mitigation and Treatment, ensuring that controls implemented have reduced the risk to within the organization's appetite. Updating registers or recalibrating tolerances comes secondary to verifying the effectiveness of mitigation.

An IT risk profile is a document that summarizes the IT-related risks that an organization faces, as well as the information and actions related to those risks, such as the risk description, assessment, response, status, and owner. An IT risk profile is a valuable tool for managing and communicating IT risks and their impact on the organization’s objectives and operations. The best description of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions is that it helps assess the effects of IT decisions on risk exposure. This means that the IT risk profile can help toevaluate the potential consequences and implications of different IT choices or actions on the level and nature of the IT risks that the organization faces. The IT risk profile can also help to identify and address the gaps or opportunities for improvement in the IT risk management process and performance. The other options are not the best descriptions of the role of the IT risk profile in strategic IT-related decisions, although they may be related or beneficial. Comparing performance levels of IT assets to value delivered is a technique to measure and optimize the efficiency and effectiveness of the IT resources and activities that support the organization’s goals and needs. However, this technique does not necessarily involve the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the output and outcome of the IT assets, not the input and impact of the IT risks. Facilitating the alignment of strategic IT objectives to business objectives is a technique toensure that the IT strategy and plans are consistent and compatible with the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, and objectives. However, this technique does not depend on the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the direction and purpose of the IT objectives, not the probability and threat of the IT risks. Providing input to business managers when preparing a business case for new IT projects is a technique to support and justify the initiation and implementation of new IT initiatives that can create value or solve problems for the organization. However, this technique does not require the IT risk profile, as it focuses on the cost and benefit of the IT projects, not the risk and response of the IT risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 962; IT Risk Management Guide for 2022 | CIO Insight3; IT Risk Management Process, Frameworks & Templates4

According to the CRISC exam content outline2, one of the tasks of a risk practitioner is to “report on risk, in line with organizational reporting requirements, to enable decision making andescalation”. Therefore, the first thing that the risk practitioner should do after discovering apolicy violation is to report the incident to the appropriate authority, such as the IT security manager or the risk management committee. This will ensurethat the incident is properly documented, investigated, and resolved, and that any potential impact or consequences are minimized.

The other options are not the first actions that the risk practitioner should take. Planning a security awareness session (B) may be a preventive measure to avoid future incidents, but it does not address the current one. Assessing the new risk © may be part of the risk response process, but it should be done after reporting the incident and gathering more information. Updating the risk register (D) may be a result of the risk assessment and response, but it should not be done before reporting the incident and following the organizational procedures.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a root cause analysis is a technique that identifies the underlying causes of an event or a problem. It helps to determine the most effective actions to prevent or mitigate the recurrence of the event or problem. A root cause analysis is the best approach for the risk practitioner to take in this scenario, because it will help to understand why the number of emergency changes has increased substantially and what can be done to address the issue. The other options are not the best approaches, because they do not address the underlying causes of the problem. Temporarily suspending emergency changes may disrupt the business operations and create more risks. Documenting the control deficiency in the risk register is a passive action that does not resolve the problem. Continuing monitoring change management metrics is an ongoing activity that does not provide any insight into the problem. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.4, page 130.

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

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

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

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

Encrypting the log data to prevent unauthorized access or disclosure

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

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

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

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

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

Recovery time objectives (RTOs) are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the critical functions and processes after a disruption1. RTOs are derived from the business impact analysis (BIA) andreflect the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives2. Risk tolerance is the level of risk a company is willing to tolerate, and it is affected by a number of factors, including how much uncertainty or financial loss can be tolerated and where those losses will impact operations3. Risk tolerance is used to measure if the risk exposure is within the risk appetite and to implement controls to reduce the residual risk to an acceptable level2. If the majority of core IT application RTOs have exceeded the maximum time defined by the business application owners, it means that the organization is not meeting its risk appetite and is exposed to more risk than it can accept. Therefore, the most likely change as a result is to adjust the risk tolerance to reflect the current reality and to take actions to improve the recovery capabilities and reduce the risk exposure4. Risk forecasting is the process of estimating the potential outcomes and impactsof future events that may affect the organization’s objectives5. Risk forecasting may change as aresult of the RTOs exceeding the maximum time, but it is not the most likely change, as it does not directly address the gap between the risk appetite and the risk exposure. Risk likelihood is the probability of a risk event occurring5. Risk likelihood may change as a result of the RTOs exceeding the maximum time, but it is not the most likely change, as it does not directly measure the impact of the risk event on the organization’s objectives. Risk appetite is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives2. Risk appetite may change as a result of the RTOs exceeding the maximum time, but it is not the most likely change, as it is a strategic decision that reflects the organization’s vision and mission, and not a tactical response to a specific risk event. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.3: Business Continuity Planning, pp. 227-238.

Risk mitigation procedures are the actions and plans that an organization implements to reduce the likelihood and impact of identified risks. Risk mitigation procedures should include the deployment of counter measures, which are the specific controls or solutions that address the root causes or sources of the risks, and prevent or minimize the potential losses or damages. For example, a counter measure for therisk of data breach could be encrypting the data or implementing a firewall. The deployment of counter measures should be based on a cost-benefit analysis, a risk assessment, and a risk response strategy. The other options are not necessarily part of risk mitigation procedures. Buying an insurance policy is an example of risk transfer,which is a risk response strategy that shifts the responsibility or burden of the risk to another party, such as an insurer or a vendor. However, risk transfer does not eliminate or reduce the risk itself, and it may involve additional costs or conditions. Acceptance of exposures is an example of risk acceptance, which is a risk response strategy that acknowledges the existence and consequences of the risk, and decides not to take any action to change the risk situation. However, risk acceptance does not mitigate the risk, and it may require contingency plans or reserves to deal with the potential outcomes. Enterprise architecture implementation is an example of a business process or project that may involve or create risks, but it is not a risk mitigation procedure itself. Enterprise architecture is the design and structure of an organization’s IT systems, networks, and resources, and how they align with the organization’s goals and strategies. Enterprise architecture implementation may require risk management activities, such as risk identification, assessment, and response, but it is not a risk mitigation procedure itself. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 151

According to the LDR514: Security Strategic Planning, Policy, and Leadership Course, after mapping generic risk scenarios to organizational security policies, the next course of action should be to validate the risk scenarios for business applicability. This is because generic risk scenarios are not specific to the organization’s context, objectives, and environment, and they may not capture the unique threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts that the organization faces. Therefore, validating the risk scenarios for business applicability will help to ensure that the risk scenarios are relevant, realistic, and consistent with the organization’s security policies. Validating the risk scenarios will also help to identify any gaps, overlaps, or conflicts between the risk scenarios and the security policies, and to resolve themaccordingly. References = LDR514: Security Strategic Planning, Policy, and Leadership Course, Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative

The best way to ensure that access remains appropriate for an organization that practices the principle of least privilege is to review user access rights on a regular basis by obtaining an access control matrix and approval from the user’s manager. An access control matrix is a table that shows the access rights and permissions of each user or role for each resource or function. An access control matrix helps to verify that the users have the minimum level of access required to perform their duties, and to identify any unauthorized or excessive access rights. Approval from the user’s manager helps to confirm that the user’s access rights are consistent with their current role and responsibilities, and to authorize any changes or exceptions as needed. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 1281

The primary reason to perform ongoing risk assessments is that the risk environment is subject to change. The risk environment is the external and internal factors that influence the level and nature of the risks that the organization faces1. These factors include economic, political, social, technological, legal,and environmental aspects, as well as the organization’s objectives, strategies, culture, and resources2. The risk environment is dynamic and unpredictable, and may change due to various events, trends, ordevelopments that create new or modify existing risks3. Therefore, it is important to perform ongoing risk assessments to identify, analyze, and evaluate the changes in the risk environment, and to adjust the risk response and management accordingly. Ongoing risk assessments help to ensure that the organization’s risk profile is up to date and reflects the current reality, and that the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance are aligned with the changing risk environment4. The other options are not the primary reason to perform ongoing risk assessments, as they are either less comprehensive or less relevant than the changing risk environment. Emerging risk must be continuously reported to management. This option is a consequence or outcome of performing ongoing risk assessments, not a reason for doing so. Emerging risk is a new or evolving risk that has the potential to affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance5. Ongoing risk assessments can help to identify and monitor emerging risks, and to report them to management for decision making and action. However, this is not the main reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not cover the existing or modified risks that may also change due to the risk environment. Newsystem vulnerabilities emerge at frequent intervals. This option is a specific or narrow example of a changing risk environment, not a general or broad reason for performing ongoing risk assessments. System vulnerabilities are weaknesses or flaws in the design, implementation, or operation of information systems that can be exploited by threats to cause harm or loss6. Ongoing risk assessments can help to discover and assess new system vulnerabilities that may emerge due to technological changes, cyberattacks, or human errors. However, this is not the primary reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not encompass the other types or sources of risks that may also change due to the risk environment. The information security budget must be justified. This option is a secondary or incidental benefit of performing ongoing risk assessments, not a primary or essential reason for doing so. The information security budget is the amount of money that the organization allocates for implementing and maintaining information security measures and controls7. Ongoing risk assessments can help tojustify the information security budget by demonstrating the value and effectiveness of the security measures and controls in reducing the risks, and by identifying the gaps or needs for additional or improved security measures and controls. However, this is not the main reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not address the purpose or objective of risk assessment, which is to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks and their impact on the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, Page 47.

Stakeholders provide operational insight that enhances the accuracy and context of risk ratings. Their input ensures the ratings reflect actual risk exposure and business priorities, validating the relevance of the assessments.

A key control indicator (KCI) is a metric that provides information on the extent to which a given control is meeting its intended objectives in terms of loss prevention, reduction, etc. A KCI should have an explicit relationship to both the specific control and the specific risk against which the control has been implemented. For risk related to IT infrastructure failure, a possible control is to have a recovery plan that can restore the critical IT services and minimize the impact of the failure. A KCI that can measure the effectiveness of this control is the number of successful recovery plan tests, which indicates how well the recovery plan can be executed in a real scenario. The higher the number of successful tests, the lower the risk of IT infrastructure failure. Therefore, this is the best KCI among the given options. References =

Integrating KRIs and KPIs for Effective Technology Risk Management

Key Control Indicator (KCI) - CIO Wiki

Infrastructure Issues: Understanding and Mitigating Risks

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

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

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

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

 Understanding the Question:

The question seeks to identify which source provides the most useful information for evaluating the effectiveness of existing controls.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Previous audit reports:Provide historical data but might not reflect current risks.

B. Control objectives:These are standards to be achieved, not current evaluations.

C. Risk responses in the risk register:Useful but focused on specific responses rather than overall effectiveness.

D. Changes in risk profiles:Reflect current and emerging risks, providing a dynamic view of control effectiveness.



Risk Profiles:Evaluating changes in risk profiles helps understand how effective existing controls are against current threats. If risk levels are increasing, it may indicate that controls are insufficient or need updating.

Proactive Adjustment:By monitoring changes in risk profiles, organizations can proactively adjust their controls to address new or evolving risks.

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

Residual risk is the remaining risk after the risk response has been implemented. Residual risk can be expressed as a combination of the probability and impact of the risk scenario, or as a single value such as loss expectancy. Residual risk can be compared with the inherent risk, which is the risk level before considering the existing controls or responses, to evaluate the risk reduction and value creation of the risk response. Senior management has asked the risk practitioner for the overall residual risk level for a process that contains numerous risk scenarios. The best way to provide this information is to calculate the average of anticipated residual risklevels for each risk scenario, and to present it as a single value or a range. This can help to provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the residual risk exposure and performance of the process, as well as to align it with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. The sum of residual risk levels for each scenario, the loss expectancy for aggregated risk scenarios, or the highest loss expectancy among the risk scenarios are not the best ways to provide the overall residual risk level, as they may overestimate or underestimate the risk exposure and performance of the process, and may not reflect the actual risk reduction and value creation of the risk response. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, p. 108-109

 A risk register is a document that is used as a risk management tool to identify and track risks that may affect a project or an organization1. A risk register also includes information about the risk responses,which are the actions taken or planned to mitigate or eliminate the risks2. Therefore, a risk register provides the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it shows the status and progress of the riskresponses, the results and outcomes of the risk responses, and the feedback and lessons learned from the risk responses3. A risk policy review is not the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it does not provide specific information on the risk responses. A risk policy review is a process that involves checking and verifying that the organization’s risk management policies are up to date, relevant, and effective4. A risk policy review can help to identify and address any gaps or issues in the risk management policies, but it does not show the details and performance of the risk responses. A business impact analysis (BIA) is not the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it does not provide specific information on the riskresponses. A BIA is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects of a disruption on the critical functions and processes of an organization5. A BIA can help to forecast the impacts of a risk event, but it does not show the actions and outcomes of the risk responses. A control catalog is not the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it does not provide specific information on the risk responses. A control catalog is adocument that lists and describes the controls that are implemented or planned to manage the risks within an organization6. A control catalog can help to document and communicate the controls, but it does not show the status and results of the risk responses. References = 1: Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana2: Risk Response Strategy and Contingency Plans - ProjectManagement.com3: Risk Register: Examples, Benefits, and Best Practices4: A brief guide to assessing risks and controls | ACCA Global5: Using Business Impact Analysis to Inform Risk Prioritization and Response6: [Control Catalogue - ISACA]

 The first course of action for a risk practitioner when an organization plans to adopt a cloud computing strategy is to perform a controls assessment. This means evaluating the existing controls in the organization and the cloud service provider, and identifying the gaps and weaknesses that need to be addressed. A controls assessment can help to determine the level of risk exposure and the suitability of the cloud service model and provider for the organization’s needs and objectives. It can also help to establish the baseline for monitoring and reporting on the cloud service performance and compliance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2.2, p. 242-243

Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) provides organizations with the highest level of control over their IT resources in the cloud. With IaaS, clients manage the operating systems, storage, deployed applications, and possibly limited control of select networking components. This level of control allows organizations to manage the data life cycle comprehensively, including data creation, storage, processing, and disposal. In contrast, PaaS and SaaS models abstract more of these controls, limiting the client's ability to manage the data life cycle directly.

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

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

Integrating the results of top-down risk scenario analyses is the most helpful in aligning IT risk with business objectives, as it helps to identify and prioritize the IT-related risks that could affect the achievement of the business goals and strategies. A top-down risk scenario analysis is a method of risk assessment that starts from the business perspective and considers the potential impact and likelihood of various risk events on the business outcomes and performance. A top-down risk scenario analysis can help to align IT risk with business objectives by providing the following benefits:

It ensures that the IT risk assessment is driven by the business needs and priorities, rather than by the IT technical details or assumptions.

It enables a holistic and comprehensive view of the IT risk landscape and its interdependencies with the business processes and functions.

It facilitates the communication and collaboration among the business and IT stakeholders and enhances their understanding and awareness of the IT risk exposure and control environment.

It supports the development and implementation of effective and efficient IT risk response and mitigation strategies that are aligned with the business risk appetite and objectives.

The other options are not the most helpful in aligning IT risk with business objectives. Introducing an approved IT governance framework is a good practice to establish the principles, policies, and processes for the governance of IT, but it does not directly address the IT riskalignment with the business objectives. Performing a business impact analysis (BIA) is an important step to assess the potential consequences of IT disruptions on the business operations and continuity, but it does not provide information on the likelihood or sources of the IT risk events. Implementing a risk classification system is a useful tool to categorize and organize the IT risks based on their characteristics and attributes, but it does not link the IT risks with the business objectives or outcomes. References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, How to reduce risk by aligning business strategy and IT strategy - QuoStar

Applying risk appetite is the most important topic to cover in a training session to communicate risk assessment methodologies. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. It is a key element of the risk management framework and influences the risk assessment process. Applying risk appetite helps to ensure a consistent risk view within the organization by providing a common basis for evaluating and prioritizing risks, aligning risk responses with business goals, and communicating risk information to stakeholders. The other options are not the most important topics to cover in a training session to communicate risk assessment methodologies, although they may be relevant and useful. Applying risk factors is a technique to quantify or qualify the likelihood and impact of risks based on predefined criteria or scales. Referencing risk event data is a source of information to identify and analyze risks based on historical or current incidents. Understanding risk culture is a factor that affectsthe risk behavior and attitude of the organization and its people. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 40-411; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 612

The main benefit of using key risk indicators (KRIs) for an organization is that they provide an early warning that a risk threshold is about to be reached. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. KRIs also help to trigger timely and appropriate risk responses, before the risk becomes unmanageable or unacceptable. The other options are not the main benefit of using KRIs, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

 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 theresources, 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 first step when conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) is identifying critical information assets. A BIA is a process of analyzing the potential impacts of disruptive events on the business processes,functions, and resources. A BIA identifies the criticality, dependencies, recovery priorities, and recovery objectives of the business processes, and quantifies the financial and non-financial impacts of disruption. Information assets are the data, information, and knowledge that are essential for the operation and performance of the business processes. Identifying critical information assets is the first step of the BIA, as it helps to determine which information assets are vital for the continuity and recovery of the business processes, and whichinformation assets are most vulnerable or exposed to the disruptive events. Identifying critical information assets also helps to scope and focus the BIA on the most important and relevant information assets, and to avoid unnecessary or redundant analysis. Identifying events impacting continuity of operations, creating a data classification scheme, and analyzing previous risk assessment results are not the first steps of the BIA, as they are either the inputs or the outputs of the BIA, and they depend on the identification of critical information assets. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 130.

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a measurable value that demonstrates how effectively an organization is achieving its key objectives. A KPI should be relevant, specific, measurable, achievable, and time-bound. The number of identified system vulnerabilities is a KPI that measures the security posture and performance of the organization’s information systems. It also helps to identify the areas that need improvement or remediation. The number of identified system vulnerabilities is relevant to the organization’s objective of protecting its information assets, specific to the system level, measurable by using tools or methods, achievable by implementing security controls or practices, and time-bound by setting a target or threshold. Aggregate risk of the organization, number of exception requests processed in the past 90 days, and number of attacks against the organization’s website are not KPIs, as they are either too broad, not relevant, or not measurable. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.1.1, page 1741

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 647.

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.

 The PRIMARY purpose of using control metrics is to evaluate the variance against objectives, because control metrics are measures that indicate the performance and effectiveness of the controls in achieving the desired outcomes and goals. Control metrics can help to identify and quantify the gaps or deviations between the actual and expected results of the controls, and to provide feedback and improvement for the control design and implementation. The other options are not the primary purpose, because:

Option A: Amount of risk reduced by compensating controls is a result of using control metrics, but not the primary purpose. Compensating controls are controls that provide an alternative or additional level of protection or assurance when the primary or preferred controls are not feasible or effective. Control metrics can help to measure and monitor the amount of risk reduced by compensating controls, but they are not the only or the most important measure of the control performance and effectiveness.

Option B: Amount of risk present in the organization is an input to using control metrics, but not the primary purpose. The amount of risk present in the organization is the level of exposure and uncertainty that the organization faces in pursuing its objectives and goals. Control metrics can help to assess and report the amount of risk present in the organization, but they are not the only or the most important measure of the risk profile and exposure.

Option D: Number of incidents is a source of using control metrics, but not the primary purpose. Incidents are events or occurrences that disrupt or threaten the normal operations or security of the organization. Control metrics can help to analyze and respond to the number of incidents, but they are not the only or the most important measure of the incident management andresolution. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 120.

This can help to:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

ISACA Risk Starter Kit provides risk management templates and policies

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Risk Reporting - CIO Wiki

Chief Risk Officer - CIO Wiki

Risk Register - CIO Wiki

Risk Mitigation - CIO Wiki

A critical patch is a software update that fixes a security vulnerability or a bug that may affect the performance, functionality, or reliability of a system or a network. A critical patch implementation is a process that applies the software update to the system or network in a timely and effective manner. The failure of a critical patch implementation is a situation where the software update is not applied or not applied correctly, which may expose the system or networkto various threats, such as data theft, data corruption, data leakage, or denial of service. The failure of a critical patch implementation would be reflected in an organization’s risk profile by increasing the residual risk. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response, which means the risk that is not avoided, transferred, or mitigated by the existing controls or measures. The failure of a critical patch implementation would increase the residual risk, as it would reduce the effectiveness or efficiency of the existing controls or measures that are supposed to address the security vulnerability or the bug. The failure of a critical patch implementation would also increase the likelihood or impact of the potential threats, as well as the exposure or consequences of the system or network. The other options are not the correct changes that would be reflected in an organization’s risk profile after the failure of a critical patch implementation, although they may be affected or related. Risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is not willing to accept. Risk tolerance may be decreased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the organization may become more cautious or conservative in accepting the risk, but it is not a direct or immediate change in the risk profile. Inherent risk is the risk that exists in the absence of any controls or measures, which means the risk that is inherent to the system or network or the environment. Inherent risk may be increased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the system or network may become more vulnerable or susceptible to the threats, but it is not a change in the risk profile, as the risk profile considers the existing controls or measures. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite may be decreasedby the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the organization may become less willing orable to accept the risk, but it is not a change in the risk profile, as the risk profile reflects the actual or current risk level, not the desired or expected risk level. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 972; What is a Critical Patch? - Definition from Techopedia3; What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia4

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), threat analysis would be the most helpful when estimating the likelihood of negative events, as it involves identifying and evaluating the sources and causes of potential harm or loss to the IT assets and processes. Threat analysis helps to:

Determine the frequency and probability of occurrence of different types of threats, such as natural disasters, human errors, malicious attacks, system failures, etc.

Assess the impact and severity of the threats on the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the IT assets and processes

Prioritize the threats based on their likelihood and impact

Develop appropriate risk response strategies to prevent, mitigate, transfer or accept the threats

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 35-361

A risk action plan is a document that outlines the actions to be taken to mitigate or avoid a risk. A risk action plan should be revised when the risk associated with a new technology is found to be increasing, as this indicates that the current plan is not effective or sufficient. Revising the risk action plan can help identify the root causes of the risk increase, evaluate the effectiveness of current controls, and implement additional or alternative controls as needed. Re-evaluatingcurrent controls, escalating the risk to senior management, and implementing additional controls are possible steps in the revision process, but they are not the first course of action. The first course of action should be to update the risk action plan to reflect the current risk situation and the appropriate risk response.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the right to audit the provider is the most important factor to help define the IT risk associated with outsourcing activity to a cloud-based service provider, as it enables the organization to verify the compliance and performance of the provider with the contractual obligations and service level agreements. The right to audit the provider helps to:

Assess the security, availability, confidentiality, integrity, and privacy of the data and processes hosted by the provider

Identify and evaluate the risks and controls related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s infrastructure

Monitor and measure the quality and effectiveness of the cloud-based services and the provider’s governance and management practices

Report and resolve any issues or incidents related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s operations

Ensure the alignment of the cloud-based services and the provider’s policies and standards with the organization’s objectives and requirements

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 176-1771

 Digital Signature Software:

Digital signatures are used to verify the authenticity and integrity of a message, document, or software. They provide cryptographic proof that the information has not been altered and that it comes from a verified source.

 Importance of Nonrepudiation:

Nonrepudiation ensures that the sender of the message cannot deny having sent the message and the recipient cannot deny having received it. This is critical for legal and security purposes, as it provides undeniable proof of the origin and integrity of the information.

 Selecting Digital Signature Software:

When selecting digital signature software, the most important consideration is that it provides strong nonrepudiation capabilities. This ensures that all parties involved can trust the authenticity and integrity of the signed data.

 Comparing Other Considerations:

Availability:Ensures the software is accessible when needed but does not directly impact the trustworthiness of the signatures.

Accuracy:Important but generally inherent in properly functioning digital signature software.

Completeness:Ensures all required information is included but nonrepudiation is the critical factor for security and legal purposes.

 References:

The CISSP Study Guide emphasizes the importance of nonrepudiation in digital signature technology to ensure authenticity and accountability (Sybex CISSP Study Guide, Chapter 7: PKI and Cryptographic Applications)​​.

The acquisition phase of the system development life cycle (SDLC) is the phase where the organization decides to purchase a new IT system from an external vendor or develop it internally. During this phase, the identified risks will most likely lead to architecture and design trade-offs, as the organization will have to balance the cost, quality, functionality, security, and performance of the new IT system. The organization will have to evaluate the different options and alternatives available, and select the one that best meets the business needs and the risk appetite. The other phases of the SDLC are not as likely to involve architecture and design trade-offs, as they are more focused on implementing, testing, deploying, and maintaining the new ITsystem. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

Specifying cloud service provider liability for data privacy breaches in the contract is the most effective control to address the risk associated with compromising data privacy within the cloud, because it establishes the roles and responsibilities of the cloud service provider and the customer in case of a data breach, and defines the compensation or remediation measures that the cloud service provider should provide. This control also creates an incentive for the cloud service provider to implement adequate security measures to protect the customer’s data and comply with the relevant laws and regulations. The other options are not the most effective controls, although they may also be helpful in reducing the risk of data privacy breaches. Establishing baseline security configurations with the cloud service provider, requiring the cloud service provider to disclose past data privacy breaches, and ensuring the cloud service provider performs an annual risk assessment are examples of preventive or detective controls that aim to reduce the likelihood or impact of a data breach, but they do not address the accountability or liability of the cloud service provider in case of a data breach. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

Cloud computing is a model for enabling ubiquitous, convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction. The cloud computing architecture is the structure and design of the cloud environment, which includes the components, services, interfaces, standards, and configurations. The cloud computing architecture should be used as the primary basis for evaluating the state of an organization’s cloud computing environment against leading practices, as it determines the performance, security, reliability, scalability, and interoperability of the cloud services. By comparing the cloud computing architecture with the best practices and benchmarks in the industry, an organization can identify the gaps and weaknesses in the cloud environment and implement the necessary improvements and controls. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 156.

Risk assessment reports are tailored to the organization and identify specific vulnerabilities, threats, and potential impacts. They provide actionable insights into IT risk exposure that can be used for prioritization and mitigation.

Tracking opened phishing emails provides a real-time behavioral indicator of how well employees follow security awareness and email policies. It is a leading metric of adherence and risk awareness.

The data owner should be accountable for ensuring that media containing financial information are adequately destroyed per an organization’s data disposal policy, as they have the authority and responsibility to define the classification, retention, and disposal requirements for the data they own. The compliance manager, the data architect, and the chief information officer (CIO) are not the best choices, as they have different roles and responsibilities related to data governance, design, and strategy, respectively, but they do not own the data. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

Risk appetite is defined as "the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, before action is deemed necessary to reduce the risk."1 It represents a balance between the potential benefits of innovation and the threats that change inevitably brings. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk attitude and its willingness to accept risk in specific scenarios, with a governance model in place for risk oversight. Risk appetite helps to guide the organization’s approach to risk and risk management, and to align its risk decisions with its business objectives and context. The other options are not the best descriptions of risk appetite, as they are either too vague (the effective management of risk and internal control environments), too narrow (acceptable variation between risk thresholds and business objectives), or confusing (the acceptable variation relative to the achievement of objectives). References = Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference?