CRISC Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

The risk associated with malicious functionality in outsourced application development is that the vendor may introduce unauthorized or harmful code into the enterprise’s system, which could compromise its security, integrity, or performance.

To mitigate this risk, the enterprise should perform an in-depth code review with an expert who can verify that the code meets the specifications, standards, and quality requirements, and that it does not contain any malicious or unwanted functionality.

A code review is a systematic examination of the source code of a software program, which can identify errors, vulnerabilities, inefficiencies, or deviations from best practices. A code review can also ensure that the code is consistent, readable, maintainable, and well-documented.

An expert is someone who has the knowledge, skills, and experience to perform the code review effectively and efficiently. An expert may be an internal or external resource, depending on the availability, cost, and independence of the reviewer.

A code review should be performed before the code is deployed to the production environment, and preferably at multiple stages of the development life cycle, such as design, testing, and integration.

A code review can also be complemented by other techniques, such as automated code analysis, testing, and scanning tools, which can detect common or known issues in the code. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, p. 143

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 143

Compensating controls are additional or alternative controls that are implemented when the existing controls are found to be ineffective or do not meet the required standards. Compensating controls are designed to reduce the risk exposure to an acceptable level and ensure that the organization can still comply with the relevant regulations and industry best practices. For an organization that processes credit cards, compensating controls may include enhanced encryption, monitoring, auditing, or authentication mechanisms. By having compensating controls in place, the organization can maintain an effective overall control environment despite the deficiencies in the existing controls. The other options are not correct because they do not ensure that the overall control environment is effective. A control mitigation plan is a document that outlines the actions and resources needed to address the control deficiencies, but it does not guarantee that the compensating controls will be implemented or effective. Risk management is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating risks, but it does not directly affect the control environment. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk treatment, and it may or may not be acceptable depending on the risk appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 153-1541; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 632

 The best way to mitigate the ongoing risk associated with operating system (OS) vulnerabilities is to document and implement a patching process. A patching process is a set of procedures and guidelines that define how to identify, evaluate, test, apply, and monitor patches for the OS. Patches are updates or fixes that address the known vulnerabilities or bugs in the OS. By documenting and implementing a patching process, the organization can ensure that the OS is regularly updated and protected from the potential exploits or attacks that may exploit the vulnerabilities. The other options are not as effective as documenting and implementing a patching process, as they are related to the temporary, partial, or reactive measures to deal with the OS vulnerabilities, not the proactive and continuous measures to prevent or reduce the OS vulnerabilities. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

 The most important outcome of a business impact analysis (BIA) is understanding and prioritization of critical processes. A BIA is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects of disruptions or disasters on the organization’s business functions and processes. A BIA helps to understand the dependencies, interrelationships, and impacts of the business processes, and to prioritize them based on their importance and urgency. A BIA also helps to determine the recovery objectives, strategies, and resources for the business processes, such as the recovery time objective (RTO), the recovery point objective (RPO), and the minimum operating requirements (MOR). The other options are not as important as understanding and prioritization of critical processes, although they may be part of or derived from the BIA. Completion of the business continuity plan (BCP), identification of regulatory consequences, and reduction of security and business continuity threats are all activities or outcomes that can be supported or facilitated by the BIA, but they are not the primary purpose or result of the BIA. References = CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 5-9.

 The business owner is the person who is responsible for approval when a change in an application system is ready for release to production. The business owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the business process or function that is supported by the application system. The business owner should approve the change to ensure that it meets the business requirements, objectives, and expectations, and that it does not introduce any adverse impacts or risks to the business operations. The information security officer, the IT risk manager, and the chief risk officer (CRO) are not responsible for the approval of the change, although they may provide input, feedback, or oversight. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 3-32.

The greatest concern of maintaining independent departmental risk registers that are not automatically aggregated is that management may be unable to accurately evaluate the risk profile. The risk profile is the overall view of the risks that the organization faces and their impact on the organization’s objectives. It helps management to prioritize and allocate resources for risk management and to align the risk appetite and strategy. If the departmental risk registers are not aggregated, management may not have a complete and consistent picture of the risks across the organization. They may miss some important risks, overestimate or underestimate some risks, or have conflicting or redundant risk information. This may lead to poor risk management decisions and outcomes. The other options are also concerns, but they are not as critical as the inability to evaluate the risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.2: IT Risk Analysis, page 63.

Assigning a data owner would best facilitate the implementation of data classification requirements. A data owner is responsible for defining the classification of the data, ensuring that the data is properly labeled, and approving access requests. Implementing technical control over the assets, implementing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution, and scheduling periodic audits are important activities, but they are not as effective as assigning a data owner. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

 A recovery time objective (RTO) is the maximum acceptable time that a business process or function can be disrupted or unavailable before it causes significant damage or loss to the organization. A business continuity plan (BCP) is a document that describes how the organization will resume its critical business operations in the event of a disaster or disruption. A disaster recovery plan (DRP) is a document that describes how the organization will restore its IT systems and infrastructure in the event of a disaster or disruption. The RTO defined in the BCP and the DRP should be consistent and aligned, as they both support the continuity and recovery of the business. If the RTO defined in the BCP is shorter than the RTO defined in the DRP, it means that the BCP expects the business process or function to be restored faster than the DRP can provide. This can create a gap or a conflict between the BCP and the DRP, and can compromise the effectiveness and efficiency of the continuity and recovery efforts. Therefore, the best way for the risk practitioner to address this concern is to communicate the discrepancy to the DR manager for follow-up, meaning that the risk practitioner should report the issue and its implications to the DR manager, who is responsible for developing and maintaining the DRP. The DR manager should review the discrepancy and determine whether it is justified or not, and whether it requires any adjustment or alignment of the RTOs in the BCP and the DRP. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.2, p. 206-207

 A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the information about the identified risks, such as the risk description, category, owner, probability, impact, response strategy, status, and action plan. Reviewing the risk register is the best way to help an organization gain insight into its overall risk profile, which is the summary of the nature and level of risk that the organization faces. By reviewing the risk register, the organization can obtain a comprehensive and holistic view of the sources, causes, and consequences of the risks, their likelihood and impact, their interrelationships and dependencies, and their alignment with therisk appetite and tolerance. The risk register can also help the organization to prioritize the risks, allocate the resources, select the risk responses, monitor the risk performance, and evaluate the risk outcomes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

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

The internal auditor is the best suited to provide objective input when updating residual risk to reflect the results of control effectiveness. The internal auditor is an independent and impartial function that evaluates the adequacy and effectiveness of the internal controls and reports on the findings and recommendations. The internal auditor can provide an unbiased and reliable assessment of the residual risk, which is the risk that remains after the controls are applied. The other options are not as objective as the internal auditor, as they may have vested interests or conflicts of interest in the control environment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the information about the identified risks, such as the risk description, category, owner, probability, impact, response strategy, status, and action plan. The most important consideration for effectively maintaining a risk register is to update it frequently, as the risk environment is dynamic and subject to change. By updating the risk register regularly, an organization can ensure that the risk information is current, accurate, and relevant, and that the risk responses are timely, appropriate, and effective. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

As part of business continuity planning, the most important thing to include in a business impact analysis (BIA) is an industry standard framework. A BIA is a process of identifying and analyzing the potential effects of disruptions to the critical business functions and processes. An industry standard framework is a set of best practices, guidelines, and methodologies that provide a consistent and comprehensive approach to conducting a BIA. An industry standard framework can help to ensure that the BIA is complete, accurate, and reliable, and that it covers all the relevant aspects, such as the scope, objectives, criteria, methods, data sources, and reporting. An industry standard framework can also help to benchmark the BIA results against the industry norms and expectations, and to align the BIA with the business continuity strategy and plan. The other options are not as important as an industry standard framework, as they are related to the specific steps, activities, or outputs of the BIA, not the overall structure and quality of the BIA. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

 The best recommendation to address the situation where personal information from the production environment is required for testing purposes in non-production environments is to de-identify data before being transferred to the test environment. De-identification is the process of removing or modifying any personally identifiable information (PII) or other sensitive data from the data sets, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc., so that the data cannot be traced back to specific individuals. De-identification protects the privacy and confidentiality of the data, while still allowing for testing, analysis, or training purposes. Enabling data encryption, preventing the use of production data, and enforcing multi-factor authentication are also useful measures, but they do not eliminate the risk of data breaches or unauthorized access to PII. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

The best way to resolve the concern where a control process has been implemented in response to a new regulatory requirement, but has significantly reduced productivity, is to escalate the issue to senior management. Senior management is the highest level of authority and responsibility in the organization, and they are responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization. Senior management should also oversee the risk management process, and ensure that the controls are aligned with the organization’s goals and values. Escalating the issue to senior management can help to find a balance between complying with the regulatory requirement and maintaining the productivity of the organization. The other options are not as effective or desirable as escalating the issue to senior management, because they either ignore the problem, violate the regulation, or compromise the control.

To ensure that new IT policies address the enterprise’s requirements, it is important to involve the business owners who are the primary stakeholders of the IT services and processes. Business owners can provide valuable input on the business objectives, risks, and expectations that the IT policies should align with and support. By involving business owners in the policy development process, the IT policies will be more relevant, realistic, and acceptable to the business units. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

The control owner is the person who is responsible for ensuring that the control is designed to effectively address risk. The control owner is also responsible for implementing, operating, monitoring, and maintaining the control. The control owner should ensure that the control is aligned with the risk owner’s risk appetite and tolerance, and that the control is periodically reviewed and updated to reflect changes in the risk environment. The risk manager, the control tester, and the risk owner are not directly responsible for the design of the control, although they may provide input, feedback, or approval. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 1-15.

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

The most important input into the assessment of the risk of shadow IT usage is the classification of the data that is being processed, stored, or transmitted by the unauthorized applications or devices. This determines the level of confidentiality, integrity, and availability that is required for the data and the potential impact of a breach or loss. Business benefits of shadow IT, application-related expenses, and volume of data are less important inputs that may affect the risk analysis, but not as much as the data classification. References = Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, page 28; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 98.

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. KRIs signal that a change in the control environment has occurred, provide a basis to set the risk appetite for an organization, and assist in the preparation of the organization’s risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

 Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. They help to monitor changes in the level of risk and enable timely actions to mitigate the risk. The major advantage of using KRIs is that they identify when risk exceeds defined thresholds, which are the acceptable or tolerable levels of risk that the organization has established. By identifying when risk exceeds defined thresholds, the KRIs can alert the management and stakeholders of the need to take corrective or preventive measures, and avoid or reduce the potential losses or damages. References = 3

 Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite can be expressed in qualitative or quantitative terms, and can vary depending on the context and the stakeholder. Risk appetite should be defined and communicated by the senior management or the board of directors, and should guide the risk management decisions and actions throughout the organization. When a project team has accepted a risk outside the established risk appetite, the risk practitioner’s best course of action is to escalate the risk decision to the project sponsor for review, meaning that the risk practitioner should report the risk acceptance and its rationale to the project sponsor, who is the person or group that provides the resources and support for the project, and is accountable for its success. The project sponsor should review the risk decision and determine whether it is aligned with the organization’s objectives and strategy, and whether it requires any further approval or action. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, p. 25-26

Optimizing resource utilization is the main reason for prioritizing IT risk responses, as it helps to allocate resources to the most critical and urgent risks. The other options are not the main reasons for prioritizing IT risk responses, although they may be related to the process.

The greatest concern when establishing key risk indicators (KRIs) is using ineffective methods to assess risk. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. To establish effective KRIs, the risk assessment methods should be reliable, valid, consistent, and timely. Ineffective methods to assess risk could lead to inaccurate or misleading KRIs, which could result in poor risk management decisions and outcomes. The other options are not as significant as using ineffective methods to assess risk, although they may also affect the quality and usefulness of KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

The three lines of defense model is a framework that describes the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders in the risk management and internal control processes of an organization. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense: the operational management and staff who are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks, as well as implementing and maintaining the controls within their areas of activity.

The second line of defense: the risk management, compliance, and security functions who are responsible for establishing the risk policies and standards, providing guidance and support, monitoring and reporting on the risk performance and compliance, and facilitating the risk management and internal control processes across the organization.

The third line of defense: the internal audit function who is responsible for providing independent and objective assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and internal control processes, as well as recommending improvements and best practices. The stakeholders who are typically included as part of a line of defense within the three lines of defense model are the legal team, who belong to the second line of defense. The legal team is responsible for ensuring that the organization complies with the relevant laws and regulations, as well as for advising and assisting the organization on the legal aspects and implications of the risk management and internal control processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.1, p. 32-33

The most useful information for a risk practitioner when planning response activities after risk identification is the risk priorities. Risk priorities are the order or ranking of the risks based on their level of importance or urgency. Risk priorities help the risk practitioner to focus on the most critical risks, and allocate the resources and efforts accordingly. Risk priorities are usually determined by using a combination of factors, such as the likelihood and impact of the risks, the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and the cost and benefit of the risk responses. The other options are not as useful as the risk priorities, although they may provide some input or context for the risk response planning. The risk register is the document that records the details of all identified risks, but it does not necessarily indicate the risk priorities. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take, but it does not specify the risk priorities. The risk heat maps are graphical tools that display the risk level of each risk based on the likelihood and impact, but they do not show the risk priorities. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

 A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the risks that may affect a project, as well as the actions that are taken or planned to manage them1. A risk register should include information such as the risk description, category, source, impact, likelihood, severity, owner, status, and response2. Among these, the most important information to capture in the risk register is the action plans to address risk scenarios requiring treatment. This is because the action plans are the specific steps that are taken to reduce, avoid, transfer, or accept the risks, depending on the chosen risk treatment option3. The action plans should beclear, realistic, measurable, and aligned with the project objectives and constraints4. The action plans should also be monitored and updated regularly to ensure that they are effective and appropriate for the changing risk environment5. The action plans are essential for managing the risks and ensuring the successful delivery of the project. The other options are not the most important information to capture in the risk register, as they are either less relevant or less actionable than the action plans. The team that performed the risk assessment is the group of people who identified, analyzed, and evaluated the risks, using various tools and techniques6. While this information may be useful for accountability and communication purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not indicate how the risks are treated or resolved. The assigned risk manager to provide oversight is the person who has the responsibility and authority to oversee the risk management process and ensure that the risks are properly identified, assessed, treated, and reported. While this information may be useful for governance and coordination purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not specify what actions are taken or planned to manage the risks. The methodology used to perform the risk assessment is the approach or framework that is used to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks, based on the project context, scope, and objectives. While this information may be useful for consistency and transparency purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not describe how the risks are addressed or mitigated. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.5, Page 55.

The most important requirement for monitoring key risk indicators (KRIs) using log analysis is providing accurate logs in a timely manner, because this ensures that the risk data is reliable, relevant, and up-to-date. Logs are records of events or activities that occur in IT systems, such as network traffic, user actions, system errors, or security incidents. Log analysis is the process of reviewing and interpreting logs to identify and assess risks, such as performance issues, operational failures, compliance violations, or cyberattacks. By providing accurate logs in a timely manner, an organization can monitor the current status and trends of its KRIs, which are metrics that measure the level and impact of risks. Accurate logs mean that the logs are complete, consistent, and free of errors or anomalies that may distort the risk data. Timely logs mean that the logs are available as soon as possible after the events or activities occur, and that they are updated frequently to reflect the latest changes. Providing accurate logs in a timely manner can help an organization to detect and respond to risks promptly, and to support risk-based decision making and reporting. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 22

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the information owner is the official with statutory or operational authority for specified information and responsibility for establishing the controls for its generation, collection, processing, dissemination, and disposal. The information owner is also responsible for authorizing access to the information within their domain, based on the principle of least privilege and the need to know. Therefore, the information owner should be accountable for authorizing information system access to internal users12

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

 Whistleblower Program:

A whistleblower program provides a confidential and anonymous channel for employees to report unethical behavior, violations of laws, regulations, or company policies.

It is a proactive approach to uncover ethical violations that might not be detected through regular monitoring and controls.

 Enabling Detection:

Encourages employees to come forward without fear of retaliation.

Provides management with early warning signs of potential ethical issues, allowing them to address problems before they escalate.

 Comparing Other Methods:

Transaction Log Monitoring:While useful for detecting anomalies, it may not specifically identify ethical violations.

Access Control Attestation:Ensures that users have appropriate access but does not directly address ethical behavior.

Periodic Job Rotation:Helps prevent fraud by reducing opportunities for unethical behavior but may not actively detect violations.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the role of whistleblower programs in managing ethical risks and detecting violations (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4.4 Reporting Mechanisms) .

 Role of the Board and Executive Management:

The board of directors and executive management are responsible for setting the overall strategic direction of the organization, including its risk tolerance.

They have the authority and oversight necessary to define the levels of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives.

 Defining Risk Tolerance:

Risk tolerance refers to the acceptable level of variation in performance relative to the achievement of objectives. It is essentially the degree of risk the organization is willing to endure.

The board and executive management establish risk tolerance based on the organization's strategic goals, capacity to absorb losses, and regulatory requirements.

 Importance of Senior Leadership:

Senior leadership's involvement ensures that risk tolerance is aligned with the organization's overall strategy and risk appetite.

It provides a top-down approach to risk management, ensuring consistency and alignment across the organization.

 Comparing Other Stakeholders:

IT Compliance and IT Audit:These functions are responsible for monitoring and ensuring adherence to policies but do not set risk tolerance.

Regulators and Shareholders:They influence risk management practices through external pressures but do not define risk tolerance directly.

Enterprise Risk Management (ERM):ERM frameworks support the implementation of risk management but the actual definition of risk tolerance comes from the board and executive management.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses how senior management, including the board, is responsible for defining risk tolerance and ensuring it aligns with the organization's risk appetite (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.10 Risk Appetite, Tolerance, and Capacity) .

Requiring MFA increases the security of digital wallets by adding an additional layer of authentication, making it harder for unauthorized users to gain access. This aligns withAccess Control Standardsand significantly reduces the likelihood of fraud.

The number of emergency change requests is the most important factor to review when confirming whether implemented controls are operating effectively, as it indicates the frequency and severity of incidents or issues that require urgent changes to the controls, and may reflect the control deficiencies or failures. The results of benchmarking studies, the results of risk assessments, and the maturity model are not the most important factors, as they are more related to the comparison, evaluation, or improvement of the controls, respectively, rather than the confirmation of the control effectiveness. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

The greatest benefit of using IT risk scenarios is that they facilitate communication of risk, as they provide a clear and realistic description of the risk sources, events, impacts, and responses, and enable the stakeholders to understand and appreciate the risk exposure and appetite of the organization. Supporting compliance with regulations, providing evidence of risk assessment, and enabling the use of key risk indicators (KRIs) are also benefits of using IT risk scenarios, but they are not the greatest benefit, as they are more related to the outcomes or consequences of risk communication, rather than the process or value of risk communication. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

Well-developed, data-driven risk measurements should be focused on providing a forward-looking view, as they enable the organization to anticipate and prepare for the potential changes and impacts of the risk level and exposure, and to take proactive and appropriate actions to address the risk. The other options are not the characteristics of well-developed, data-driven risk measurements, as they may not reflect the strategic, comprehensive, or timely aspects of the risk measurements, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

The primary goal of risk mitigation is to reduce residual risk to an acceptable level. This aligns with the principles ofRisk Treatment, ensuring that the implemented strategies effectively address identified risks without exceeding the organization's risk appetite.

Ensuring Timely Recovery of Critical Business Operations:

Primary Focus: The primary focus of a Disaster Recovery Management (DRM) framework is to ensure that critical business operations can be recovered and resumed in a timely manner after a disruption.

Business Continuity: Timely recovery of operations is essential for maintaining business continuity and minimizing the impact of disruptions on the organization’s ability to deliver products and services.

Recovery Objectives: Establishing clear recovery time objectives (RTOs) and recovery point objectives (RPOs) ensures that critical operations are prioritized and recovery efforts are aligned with business needs.

Comparison with Other Options:

Restoring IT and Cybersecurity Operations: While important, this is part of the broader goal of recovering critical business operations.

Assessing Impact and Probability of Disaster Scenarios: This is a preparatory step that informs the DRM framework but is not the primary focus.

Determining Capacity for Alternate Sites: This is a component of the DRM strategy but supports the primary focus of ensuring timely recovery.

Best Practices:

Comprehensive Planning: Develop comprehensive disaster recovery plans that prioritize the recovery of critical business operations.

Regular Testing: Regularly test and update disaster recovery plans to ensure they remain effective and aligned with business objectives.

Cross-Functional Collaboration: Involve all relevant business units in disaster recovery planning to ensure a coordinated and effective response.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Emphasizes the importance of focusing on the recovery of critical business operations to ensure business continuity.

ISACA Guidelines: Recommend prioritizing the timely recovery of critical operations as the primary goal of disaster recovery management efforts.

Local laws and regulations should be the primary consideration when assessing the risk of using IoT devices to collect and process PII, because they define the legal obligations and liabilities of the organization and the individuals involved. Non-compliance with local laws and regulations can result in fines, lawsuits, reputational damage, and loss of trust. Therefore, it is essential to understand and adhere to the applicable laws and regulations in the jurisdictions where the IoT devices operate and where the PII is stored, processed, and transferred.

References

•Considerations for Managing Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity and Privacy Risks

•The Internet of Things (IoT) and Digitally Stored PII: Avoidable or Inevitable?

•Security Issues in IoT: Challenges and Countermeasures

The second line of defense provides oversight to ensure risks and controls are effectively managed. This includes compliance, risk management policies, and performance monitoring, aligning withRisk Governanceframeworks and enhancing the organization’s risk resilience.

Integrating risk and security requirements in an organization’s enterprise architecture (EA) helps to ensure that information assets are consistently managed throughout their life cycle, and that the risks associated with them are identified and mitigated. (Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 5th Edition, page 112)

The introduction of a new product line is most likely to trigger the need to conduct a risk assessment. Here’s a detailed explanation:

Risk Assessment Triggers:

New Initiatives: New initiatives, such as the introduction of a new product line, significantly alter the business landscape. They introduce new processes, technologies, and potentially new regulatory requirements, all of which bring new risks that must be assessed.

Business Impact: A new product line can affect multiple areas of the business, including production, marketing, sales, and customer service. It can also impact the existing product portfolio and market position, requiring a thorough risk assessment to understand these impacts.

Comparison with Other Events:

Incident Resulting in Data Loss: While significant, an incident resulting in data loss is typically a reactive trigger for a specific security or forensic investigation rather than a comprehensive risk assessment.

Changes in Executive Management: Changes in executive management may necessitate a review of strategic risks but are less likely to trigger a comprehensive risk assessment compared to launching a new product.

Updates to the Information Security Policy: Updating the information security policy is an internal process that may not fundamentally alter the risk landscape like introducing a new product line.

Best Practices:

Comprehensive Planning: Before launching a new product, conduct a comprehensive risk assessment to identify potential risks, develop mitigation strategies, and ensure alignment with business objectives.

Stakeholder Involvement: Engage key stakeholders from various departments to provide insights and ensure all potential risks are considered.

References:

CRISC Review Manual: Highlights the importance of conducting risk assessments in response to significant changes in the business environment, such as new product introductions.

ISACA Guidelines: Emphasize the need for risk assessments to ensure that new initiatives align with organizational risk appetite and tolerance.

The primary focus of an ongoing risk awareness program should be to enable better risk-based decisions, as this can help the organization to achieve its objectives, optimize its performance, and manage its risks effectively. An ongoing risk awareness program is a process of educating, communicating, and engaging the stakeholders about the organization’s risk management framework, methodology, and practices. An ongoing risk awareness program can help the stakeholders to understand the risk context, criteria, appetite, and profile of the organization, and to identify, assess, treat, monitor, and review the risks that may affect their roles and responsibilities. By doing so, an ongoing risk awareness program can empower the stakeholders to make informed and rational decisions that balance the benefits and costs of risk-taking, and that align with the organization’s strategy and goals.

References:

•ISACA, Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, 2019, p. 761

•ISACA, Managing Human Risk Requires More Than Just Awareness Training2

According to the three lines of defense model, the responsibility for managing risk and controls resides with the operational management, which forms the first line of defense. The operational management is the function that owns and manages risk as part of their accountability for achieving objectives. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, mitigating, and reporting on risks and controls within their areas ofoperation. They are also responsible for implementing and maintaining effective internal controls and ensuring compliance with policies, standards, and regulations.

References:

•ISACA, Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, 2019, p. 741

•Internal audit: three lines of defence model explained2

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks which method best enables timely detection of changes in the security control environment.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Control self-assessment (CSA):Allows for continuous monitoring and quick detection of any changes or deficiencies in controls.

B. Log analysis:Useful for detecting security incidents but not as comprehensive as CSA for overall control environment changes.

C. Security control reviews:Typically periodic and might not be as timely.

D. Random sampling checks:Not as systematic or comprehensive as CSA.

 Detailed Explanation:

Control Self-Assessment (CSA):CSA involves regular, structured evaluations by internal staff to ensure controls are working effectively. It promotes early detection of issues by those directly responsible for the controls.

Timeliness:CSA is an ongoing process, making it more timely in identifying changes compared to periodic reviews or random checks.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, emphasizes the importance of CSA in maintaining and improving control environments​​.

The greatest challenge for a risk practitioner during a merger of two organizations is the variances between organizational risk appetites, as they may indicate a significant difference in the risk culture, strategy, and objectives of the two organizations, and may require a complex and lengthy process of alignment and integration. Different taxonomies to categorize risk scenarios, disparate platforms for governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) systems, and dissimilar organizational risk acceptance protocols are not the greatest challenges, as they are more related to the technical, operational, or procedural aspects of risk management, rather than the strategic or cultural aspects of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

 The most effective way to promote organization-wide awareness of data security in response to an increase in regulatory penalties for data leakage is to require training on the data handling policy, as it educates the employees on the importance, requirements, and procedures of data protection, and enhances their knowledge and skills to prevent, detect, and respond to data leakage incidents. Enforcingsanctions for noncompliance with security procedures, conducting organization-wide phishing simulations, and requiring regular testing of the data breach response plan are not the most effective ways, as they are more related to the enforcement, evaluation, or improvement of the data security, respectively, rather than the promotion of the data security awareness. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 155.

When a risk practitioner identifies an increasing trend of employees copying company information unrelated to their job functions to USB drives, the element of the risk register that should be updated is the risk likelihood. Here’s why:

Risk Likelihood:

Risk likelihood refers to the probability that a risk event will occur.

Observing an increasing trend of inappropriate behavior (such as copying sensitive information) indicates a higher probability of occurrence, thus increasing the risk likelihood.

Risk Impact:

While the impact of such actions could be significant, the increasing trend specifically affects the likelihood rather than the immediate impact.

The risk impact remains constant unless there is a change in the potential damage caused by the action.

Key Risk Indicator (KRI):

This observation might serve as a KRI, but the immediate action is to update the likelihood in the risk register, reflecting the increased probability.

Risk Appetite:

Risk appetite defines the level of risk an organization is willing to accept. This observation suggests a deviation but does not directly affect the risk appetite itself.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of regularly updating the risk likelihood based on new observations and trends (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.9.1 Inherent Risk).

The primary reason to implement a formalized risk taxonomy is to reduce subjectivity in risk management, as it provides a common and consistent language and structure for identifying, classifying, and reporting risks, and facilitates the comparison and aggregation of risks across the organization. The other options are not the primary reasons, as they are more related to the outcomes, benefits, or drivers of risk management, respectively, rather than the reason for risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.