CRISC Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References =

•Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions - SolveXia

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•Complete Guide to Key Risk Indicators — RiskOptics

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

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

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

•Compensating Controls | Audit and Compliance | Pathlock

A risk is the possibility of an event that may have a negative impact on the achievement of an organization’s objectives. A risk can be measured by the probability and impact of the event, which indicate the likelihood and consequence of the event. A risk manager is a person who is responsible for performing risk management activities, such as identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and communicating risks. When an organization retains footage from its data center security camera for 30 days when the policy requires 90-day retention, the risk manager’s best response to the business owner who challenges whether the situation is worth remediating is to evaluate the risk as a measure of probable loss, which means to estimate the potential harm or damage that may result from the non-compliance with the policy. By evaluating the risk as a measure of probable loss, the risk manager can provide the business owner with the rationale and justification for the risk remediation, and help the business owner to understand the cost-benefit analysis of the risk response. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 63.

Reassessing the risk profile is the first course of action that a risk practitioner should take after a hospital recently implemented a new technology to allow virtual patient appointments. This is because reassessing the risk profile can help identify, analyze, and evaluate the new or changed risks that the new technology may introduce or affect, such as data privacy, security, quality, reliability, or compliance risks. Reassessing the risk profile can also help determine the appropriate risk response and mitigation strategies, as well as monitor and report the risk performance and outcomes. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, reassessing the risk profile is one of the key steps in the IT risk management process1. According to the web search results, reassessing the risk profile is a common and recommended practice for addressing the risks of virtual patient appointments

Key control indicators are designed to measure the operational effectiveness of controls, specifically their contribution to defense-in-depth strategies. This helps assess if controls are functioning as intended to mitigate identified risks, aligning with Control Effectiveness Monitoring.

Providing encrypted access to organizational assets is the best method to mitigate the risk of inadvertent data leakage by remote workers. Encryption ensures that data remains secure, even if accessed over unsecured networks.

 Encrypting data before it leaves the organization is the best way to protect sensitive data from administrators within a public cloud, as it ensures that the data is secured at the source and remains encrypted throughout the transmission and storage in the cloud. Using an encrypted tunnel to connect to the cloud, encrypting the data in the cloud database, and encrypting physical hard drives within the cloud are not the best ways, as they may not prevent the cloud administrators from accessing the data or the encryption keys, or may not protect the data from unauthorized interception or modification during the transmission. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 153.

The most important factor to identify when developing top-down risk scenarios is B. Business objectives12

Top-down risk scenarios are based on the organization’s strategic goals, objectives, and key performance indicators (KPIs), and they aim to identify the potential events or situations that could prevent or hinder the achievement of those goals and objectives12

By identifying the business objectives, the risk practitioner can align the risk scenarios with the organization’s mission, vision, and values, and ensure that the risk scenarios are relevant, realistic, and meaningful for the senior management and other stakeholders12

The other factors are not as important as the business objectives when developing top-down risk scenarios, because they are either more relevant for bottom-up risk scenarios (A and D), or they are derived from the business objectives and the risk scenarios ©12

The best course of action when a new application is added to the environment after testing of the SSO control has been completed is to initiate a retest of the full control, as it may reveal any new issues or gaps that the new application may introduce to the SSO control, and ensure that the control remains effective and adequate. Retesting the control using the new application as the only sample, reviewing the corresponding change control documentation, and re-evaluating the control during the next assessment are not the best courses of action, as they may not provide sufficient assurance, evidence, or timeliness of the control testing, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

 Role of the Control Owner:

The control owner is responsible for the design, implementation, and maintenance of a specific control.

They have detailed knowledge of the control’s purpose, its intended functionality, and its operational context within the organization.

 Responsibility for Remediation:

When a penetration testing team discovers an ineffectively designed access control, it is the control owner’s responsibility to ensure the design gap is remediated.

The control owner must assess the findings, determine the root cause of the ineffectiveness, and take necessary actions to redesign or enhance the control to address the identified weaknesses.

 Steps to Remediate Control Design Gap:

Assess the Findings: Understand the specific issues identified by the penetration testing team.

Redesign the Control: Modify the control design to address the identified gaps and ensure it meets security requirements.

Implement Changes: Apply the redesigned control and test its effectiveness.

Continuous Monitoring: Regularly review the control to ensure it remains effective over time.

 Comparing Other Roles:

Risk Owner: Manages overall risk but does not directly handle control design.

IT Security Manager: Oversees the security posture but delegates specific control responsibilities to control owners.

Control Operator: Operates the control but is not responsible for its design or remediation.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the control owner's responsibility in maintaining and improving control effectiveness (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.7 Control Design and Selection)​​.

The policy has not been approved by the organization’s board should be of most concern, as it indicates a lack of governance and oversight for the organization’s cybersecurity posture. The board is ultimately responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization, and for ensuring that the cybersecurity policy aligns with them. Without the board’s approval, the policy may not reflect the organization’s vision, mission, values, and culture, and may not be communicated, implemented, or enforced effectively. The board’s approval also demonstrates the commitment and support of the senior management for the cybersecurity program, and enhances the accountability and responsibility of the stakeholders involved.

References:

•ISACA, Essential Functions of a Cybersecurity Program1

•ISACA, Cybersecurity: Based on the NIST Cybersecurity Framework2

The effective implementation of a risk treatment plan is best indicated by managing residual risk within the organization’s appetite and tolerance levels. Residual risk is the remaining risk after controls have been applied, and ensuring it is within acceptable levels demonstrates that the risk treatment plan is effective.

Managing Residual Risk within Appetite and Tolerance (Answer B):

Definition: Residual risk is the risk remaining after risk treatment measures have been implemented.

Significance: Managing residual risk within the set appetite and tolerance levels shows that the implemented controls are effective and aligned with the organization’s risk management objectives.

Outcome: It ensures that the organization's risk exposure is kept within acceptable boundaries, thereby protecting its assets and operations.

Comparison with Other Options:

A. Inherent risk is managed within an acceptable level:

Definition: Inherent risk is the risk before any controls are applied.

Limitation: The focus should be on residual risk post-treatment.

C. Risk treatments are aligned with industry peers:

Purpose: While benchmarking is useful, it does not directly indicate the effectiveness of risk treatment.

D. Key controls are identified and documented:

Purpose: Identifying and documenting controls is necessary, but effectiveness is shown by managing residual risk.

References:

ISACA CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3, "Risk Response and Reporting", which highlights the importance of managing residual risk within the organization’s appetite and tolerance.

Continuous monitoring of key risk indicators (KRIs) will provide an early warning so that proactive action can be taken, because it helps to detect and measure the changes or trends in the risk level or performance, and to alert the risk owners and stakeholders when the risk exceeds the predefined thresholds or targets. A KRI is a metric or indicator that helps to monitor and evaluate the likelihood or impact of a risk, or the effectiveness or efficiency of a control. A KRI can be quantitative or qualitative, and can be derived from internal or external sources. Continuous monitoring is a process of collecting and analyzing data on a regular or real-time basis, to provide timely and relevant information for decision making or action taking. Continuous monitoring of KRIs will provide an early warning, as it helps to identify and address the risk issues or incidents before they escalate or cause significant damage or disruption. Ensuring that risk will not exceed the defined risk appetite of the organization, providing a snapshot of the risk profile, and ensuring that risk tolerance and risk appetite are aligned are all possible outcomes of continuous monitoring of KRIs, but they are not the best answer, as they do not reflect the main purpose and benefit of continuous monitoring of KRIs, which is to provide an early warning. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 97

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

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

A risk awareness program is a set of activities that aim to educate and inform employees about the organization’s risk culture, policies, and procedures. A risk awareness program can help improve an organization’s risk culture by enhancing the employees’ understanding of risk, their roles and responsibilities in risk management, and the benefits of risk mitigation. A risk awareness program can also foster a culture of openness, trust, and collaboration among employees, managers, and stakeholders, which can improve the organization’s risk performance and resilience.

Maintaining a documented risk register, rewarding employees for reporting security incidents, and allocating resources for risk remediation are also important aspects of risk management, but they do not directly address the organization’s risk culture, which is the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes that influence how risk is perceived and handled within the organization.

•Risk acceptance is a status quo risk response, where the risk owner acknowledges the risk exists but accepts it with minimal response1. Risk acceptance may be appropriate when the cost of other risk responses exceeds the value that would be gained, or when the risk is below the risk acceptance criteria2.

•Risk acceptance criteria are the criteria used as a basis for decisions about acceptable risk2. They should be established before conducting a risk assessment, and they may be influenced by factors such as utility, equality, technology, and risk perception2. Different organizations and countries may have different risk acceptance criteria, depending on their context and values3.

•In this scenario, the organization has conducted a risk assessment for regulatory compliance, and has identified only one possible mitigating control. However, the cost of the control is higher than the penalty of noncompliance, which implies that the risk is below the risk acceptance criteria. Therefore, the best recommendation is to accept the risk with management sign-off, which means that the management agrees to take the risk and is accountable for the consequences.

•Ignoring the risk until the regulatory body conducts a compliance check (option B) is not a good recommendation, as it may expose the organization to legal, financial, or reputational damage. Moreover, ignoring the risk may violate the principle of risk reduction, which states that risks should be reduced wherever practicable2.

•Mitigating the risk with the identified control (option C) is not a good recommendation, as it may not be cost-effective or efficient for the organization. The cost of the control is higher than the penalty of noncompliance, which means that the organization would spend more resources than necessary to reduce the risk. Moreover, mitigating the risk may not be aligned with the principle of utility, which states that resources should be used as efficiently as possible for the society as a whole2.

•Transferring the risk by buying insurance (option D) is not a good recommendation, as it may not be feasible or beneficial for the organization. Transferring the risk means that the organization shifts the responsibility or burden of the risk to another party, such as an insurer, a contractor, or a partner1. However, transferring the risk does not eliminate the risk, and it may incur additional costs or complications for the organization. Moreover, transferring the risk may not be possible or acceptable for some types of regulatory compliance risks, such as those related to health, safety, or environmental standards3.

References:

•Compliance risk assessments - Deloitte United States

•Compliance Risk Assessment [5 Key Steps] | Hyperproof

•Compliance Risk Assessments | Deloitte US

•Risk Acceptance Criteria: Overview of ALARP and Similar Methodologies as Practiced Worldwide

•Risk Assessment 4. Risk acceptance criteria - Norwegian University of Science and Technology

•Risk Acceptance - Institute of Internal Auditors

Introducing recovery control procedures is the best way to address the risk of an outage of the fraud detection system for an online payment processor, because it helps to restore the functionality and availability of the system as quickly and effectively as possible, and to minimize the impact and disruption to the business operations and customers. A fraud detection system is a system that monitors and analyzes the transactions and activities of an online payment processor, and detects and prevents any fraudulent or suspicious behavior, such as identity theft, money laundering, or chargebacks. An outage is a situation where the system is unavailable or inaccessible, due to factors such as technical failure, human error, or malicious attack. An outage of the fraud detection system may have severe consequences for the online payment processor, such as financial losses, reputational damage, customer dissatisfaction, or regulatory penalties. A recovery control procedure is a procedure that defines the steps and actions to be taken to recover the system from an outage, such as identifying the root cause, isolating the affected components, restoring the data and functionality, testing the system, and reporting the incident. Introducing recovery control procedures is the best way to address the risk, as it helps to ensure that the system is back online and operational as soon as possible, and that the risk exposure and impact are reduced and contained. Implementing continuous control monitoring, communicating the risk to management, and documenting a risk response plan are all possible ways to address the risk, but they are not the best way, as they do not directly address the recovery of the system from an outage, and they may not be sufficient or effective to mitigate the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 208

The risk practitioner’s first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls should be A. Determine whether the impact is outside the risk appetite1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk culture, strategy, and values2

When an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, it means that the controls are not providing the expected level of protection or assurance for the information assets or processes. This may result in increased exposure or vulnerability to threats, or reduced ability to achieve objectives. Therefore, the risk practitioner should first determine whether the impact of the ineffective controls is outside the risk appetite, as this would indicate the need for urgent action or escalation3

The other options are not the first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, because:

•B. Requesting a formal acceptance of risk from senior management may be appropriate if the impact of the ineffective controls is within the risk appetite, and the organization decides to accept the risk as it is. However, this should not be the first course of action, as it may not address the root cause of the ineffective controls, or the potential consequences or opportunities for improvement4

•C. Reporting the ineffective control for inclusion in the next audit report may be part of the risk communication and reporting process, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may delay the resolution or mitigation of the issue, or the implementation of corrective actions. Moreover, the next audit report may not be timely or relevant for the decision-makers or stakeholders who need to be informed of the ineffective controls5

•D. Deploying a compensating control to address the identified deficiencies may be a possible risk response option, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may require further analysis, evaluation, and approval. Moreover, deploying a compensating control may not be the most effective or efficient solution, as it may introduce additional complexity, cost, or risk.

1: CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 100003 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 28 3: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 223 4: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 224 5: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 225 : CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 226

Using the risk management process will best ensure that controls adequately support business goals and objectives, as it involves identifying, assessing, responding, and monitoring the risks that may affect the achievement of the business goals and objectives, and designing and implementing controls to mitigate those risks. Enforcing strict disciplinary procedures in case of noncompliance, reviewing results of the annual company external audit, and adopting internationally accepted controls are also good practices, but they are not the best, as they do not necessarily align the controls with the business goals and objectives. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 146.

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks what the most important update for keeping the risk register current is.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Modifying organizational structures when lines of business merge: Reflects significant changes in the organization that impact risk profiles.

B. Adding new risk assessment results annually: Important but periodic.

C. Retiring risk scenarios that have been avoided: Necessary but not as impactful as major organizational changes.

D. Changing risk owners due to employee turnover: Important but secondary to major structural changes.

 Detailed Explanation:

Organizational Changes: When lines of business merge, it can significantly alter the risk landscape, introducing new risks and changing the impact and likelihood of existing ones. Updating the risk register to reflect these changes is crucial for accurate risk management.

Impact on Risk Profiles: Mergers and acquisitions can affect every aspect of an organization, from operational processes to regulatory compliance, making it essential to update the risk register accordingly.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, discusses the importance of keeping the risk register updated to reflect organizational changes and ensure effective risk management​​.

The source that provides the most reliable evidence to support conclusions after completing an information systems controls assessment is the information generated by the systems, as it reflects the actual and objective data and results of the system operations and performance, and can be verified and tested against the control objectives and criteria. The other options are not the most reliable sources, as they may be subjective, biased, or incomplete, and may not reflect the actual or current state of the system controls, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

 Understanding the Question:

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

 Analyzing the Options:

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

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

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

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

 Detailed Explanation:

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

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

References:

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

Key risk indicators are designed to provide early warnings about increasing risk exposure, enabling timely risk mitigation efforts. This supports proactive risk management, as outlined in the Risk Monitoring and Reporting domain of CRISC.

The vendor must host data in a specific geographic location to ensure that the data is protected by the applicable data protection laws of the EU or the country where the data originates. This is especially important for SaaS customers who transfer personal data from the EU to third countries, as they need to comply with the GDPR and the new Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) that regulate such transfers. The vendor must also provide adequate security measures and guarantees to protect the data from unauthorized access, disclosure, or loss. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: IT Risk Mitigation, Section 5.3: IT Risk Mitigation Strategies and Approaches, Page 253; Data Protection – New EU Standard Contractual Clauses - Bodle Law.

The best indicator of the condition of a risk management program is the amount of residual risk. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses. Residual risk reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management program in reducing the risk exposure to an acceptable level, and in aligning the risk profile with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. A low amount of residual risk indicates that the risk management program is performing well, and that the controls are adequate and appropriate. A high amount of residual risk indicates that the risk management program is not functioning properly, and that the controls are insufficient or ineffective. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2, page 191

IT assets are the resources that support the organization’s business processes and objectives, such as hardware, software, data, and information. IT assets are the primary targets of IT risk, as they may be exposed to threats, vulnerabilities, and control deficiencies that could compromise their confidentiality, integrity, availability, or value. Therefore, identifying and classifying IT assets is the first step in developing relevant IT risk scenarios, as it helps to determine the scope, boundaries, and dependencies of the IT risk environment.

The other options are not the first things to review for identifying IT risk scenarios. Technology threats (A) are the potential sources of harm or damage to IT assets, such as natural disasters, cyberattacks, human errors, or sabotage. Technology threats are important to consider, but they are not the starting point for IT risk scenarios, as they depend on the context and characteristics of the IT assets. Security vulnerabilities © are the weaknesses or flaws in IT assets or controls that could be exploited by threats, such as outdated software, misconfigured systems, or insufficient encryption. Security vulnerabilities are also important to identify, but they are not the first thing to review, as they are specific to the IT assets and their configurations. IT risk register (D) is a document that records and tracks the identified IT risks, their analysis, evaluation, and response. IT risk register is a result of the IT risk assessment process, not an input to it.

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

New regulatory requirements impacting IT are those that impose new obligations, restrictions, or standards on how an organization uses, manages, or secures its IT systems, data, or services1. Examples of such regulations include the GDPR, the CCPA, the HIPAA, or the PCI-DSS2. New regulatory requirements impacting IT can pose significant challenges and risks for an organization, such as:

Compliance costs and efforts, such as updating policies, procedures, and systems, training staff, or hiring experts

Noncompliance penalties and consequences, such as fines, lawsuits, sanctions, or reputational damages

Operational disruptions or inefficiencies, such as system changes, data migrations, or service interruptions

Competitive disadvantages or opportunities, such as losing or gaining customers, partners, or markets3

The first step that should be done when a company is made aware of new regulatory requirements impacting IT is to review the risk tolerance and appetite. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that an organization is willing to accept around its risk appetite. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to take in order to meet its strategic objectives. By reviewing the risk tolerance and appetite, the company can:

Establish a clear and consistent understanding of the organization’s goals, values, and expectations regarding the new regulatory requirements impacting IT

Assess the current and potential impacts of the new regulatory requirements impacting IT on the organization’s performance, operations, or assets

Determine the level of risk exposure and acceptance that the organization is comfortable with, and identify the risk thresholds or limits that should not be exceeded

Align the risk management strategies and actions with the organization’s risk tolerance and appetite, and prioritize the most critical and urgent risks to be addressed

Communicate and report the risk tolerance and appetite to the stakeholders and regulators, and ensure transparency and accountability

References = Regulating emerging technology | Deloitte Insights, Ten Key Regulatory Challenges of 2024 - kpmg.com, The Risks of Non-Compliance with Data Protection Laws, [Risk Tolerance - COSO], [Risk Appetite - COSO], [Risk Appetite and Tolerance - IRM]

Occurrences of specific events are the most likely to cause a key risk indicator (KRI) to exceed thresholds, as they represent the actual or potential realization of the risk. A KRI is a metric that measures the level of risk exposure and the effectiveness of risk response strategies, and it has predefined thresholds that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable risk status. When a specific event occurs that affects the risk, such as a security breach, a system failure, or a compliance violation, the KRI value may change and exceed the thresholds, triggering an alert or an action. A performance measurement, the risk tolerance level, and risk scenarios are not the most likely to cause a KRI to exceed thresholds, as they do not reflect the actual or potential occurrence of the risk, but rather the expected or desired outcome, limit, or simulation of the risk. References = [CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version)], page 121; CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 217.

The main purpose of reviewing a control after implementation is to validate that the control operates as intended, as this can help to ensure that the control is effective and efficient in mitigating the risk, and that it meets the control objectives and requirements. Reviewing a control after implementation can also help to identify and address any issues or gaps that may arise during the control operation, and to monitor and evaluate the performance and impact of the control. Reviewing a control after implementation can also provide feedback and information to the control owners and stakeholders, and enable them to adjust the control design and implementation accordingly. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 254. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 254. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

The most important factor to communicate to senior management during the initial implementation of a risk management program is the desired risk level, which is the level of risk that the organization aims to achieve in order to fulfill its objectives and strategy1. The desired risk level can help to:

Define and communicate the risk appetite and tolerance, which are the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives2.

Guide and align the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes, and ensure that the risks are consistent and proportional to the desired risk level3.

Measure and monitor the risk performance and outcome, and ensure that the actual risk level is within the desired risk level, or take corrective actions if needed4.

The other factors are not the most important to communicate to senior management, because:

Regulatory compliance is a necessary but not sufficient factor to communicate to senior management, as it ensures that the risk management program complies with the applicable laws, rules, or standards that govern the organization’s activities and operations5. However, regulatory compliance does not guarantee that the risk management program is relevant and useful for the organization’s specific objectives and strategy.

Risk ownership is a desirable but not essential factor to communicate to senior management, as it assigns the roles and responsibilities for managing the risks and implementing the risk responses to the appropriate individuals or entities within the organization. However, risk ownership does not ensure that the risk management program is effective and efficient in achieving the desired risk level.

Best practices are a useful but not critical factor to communicate to senior management, as they provide the guidelines and standards for designing and implementing the risk management program, based on the experience and knowledge of the industry or the profession. However, best practices do not ensure that the risk management program is suitable and feasible for the organization’s specific context and capabilities.

References =

Desired Risk Level - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite and Tolerance - CIO Wiki

Risk Management Process - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring - CIO Wiki

Regulatory Compliance - CIO Wiki

[Risk Ownership - CIO Wiki]

[Best Practice - CIO Wiki]

[Risk Management - CIO Wiki]

A virus transmitted on a USB thumb drive is a scenario that represents a threat, as it involves a malicious or harmful event that could compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of an information system. A virus is a type of malware that can infect and damage files, programs, or devices by replicating itself and spreading to other systems or networks. A USB thumb drive is a portable storage device that can be used to transfer data between computers or devices. A virus transmitted on a USB thumb drive can occur when a user inserts an infected USB thumb drive into a computer or device, or when a user downloads or copies an infected file from a USB thumb drive to a computer or device. A virus transmitted on a USB thumb drive can pose a serious risk to the information system, as it can corrupt or delete data, disrupt or degrade performance, steal or leak information, or allow unauthorized access or control.

The other options are not scenarios that represent a threat, but rather vulnerabilities or weaknesses that could increase the likelihood or impact of a threat. Connecting a laptop to a free, open, wireless access point (hotspot) is a vulnerability, as it exposes the laptop to potential eavesdropping, interception, or manipulation by malicious actors on the same network. Visitors not signing in as per policy is a vulnerability, as it creates a gap in the physical security and access control of the premises, and could allow unauthorized or malicious visitors to enter or access sensitive areas or assets. Storing corporate data in unencrypted form on a laptop is a vulnerability, as it reduces the protection and security of the data, and could enable unauthorized or malicious access, disclosure, or modification of the data in case of loss, theft, or compromise of the laptop. References = What is a Computer Virus? | McAfee, What is a USB Flash Drive? | Kingston Technology, Threats, Vulnerabilities, and Exploits – oh my!

The best recommendation for a risk practitioner when an employee lost a personal mobile device that may contain sensitive corporate information is to initiate a remote data wipe. A remote data wipe is a process of erasing the data stored on a device remotely, using a command sent over a network or a wireless connection. A remote data wipe can help to prevent the unauthorized access, use, disclosure, or theft of the sensitive corporate information, and to minimize the potential impact of the loss on the enterprise’s reputation, operations, and compliance. A remote data wipe can also help to comply with the data breach notification laws and regulations, and to reduce the legal liability and penalties. Conducting a risk analysis, invoking the incident response plan, and disabling the user account are not as immediate and effective as initiating a remote data wipe, as they do not address the primary risk of data exposure and loss. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

A cause-and-effect diagram, also known as a fishbone diagram or an Ishikawa diagram, is a graphical tool that helps to identify and analyze the potential causes and effects of a problem or an event. A cause-and-effect diagram can be used to develop technical risk scenarios related to a recently developed ERP system, because it can help to:

Break down the complex problem or event into manageable and measurable categories and subcategories of causes and effects

Visualize the relationships and interactions among the various factors that contribute to the problem or event

Identify the root causes and the most significant effects of the problem or event

Generate ideas and hypotheses for testing and validating the problem or event

Communicate and present the problem or event clearly and logically to the stakeholders1

A cause-and-effect diagram can be constructed by following these steps:

Define the problem or event and write it in a box on the right side of the diagram

Draw a horizontal line from the box to the left side of the diagram, representing the main spine of the fishbone

Identify the major categories of causes that affect the problem or event, such as people, process, technology, environment, etc., and write them on the branches of the spine

For each category, brainstorm and list the possible subcategories and specific causes that influence the problem or event, and write them on the sub-branches of the spine

For each cause, identify and list the possible effects or consequences that result from the problem or event, and write them on the sub-sub-branches of the spine

Analyze the diagram and prioritize the causes and effects based on their frequency, severity, and controllability

Develop technical risk scenarios based on the most critical causes and effects, and describe how they could affect the ERP system and the organization1

The best course of action when a risk practitioner identifies a database application that has been developed and implemented by the business independently of IT is to include the application in IT risk assessments. IT risk assessments are the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT-related risks that could affect the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives. By including the application in IT risk assessments, the risk practitioner can identify the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts associated with the application, and recommend the appropriate controls and mitigation strategies to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Escalating the concern to senior management, documenting the reasons for the exception, and proposing that the application be transferred to IT are not the best courses of action, as they do not address the risk exposure and impact of the application, and may not be feasible or desirable for the business. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 47.

The primary focus of management when key risk indicators (KRIs) begin to rapidly approach defined thresholds is to determine what has changed in the environment. KRIs are metrics that provide information and insight on the current level and trend of the risk exposure, and help to monitor and report the risk status and performance. Defined thresholds are the values or ranges of the KRIs that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable level of the risk exposure, and trigger the risk response actions. When KRIs begin to rapidly approach defined thresholds, it means that the risk exposure is increasing or decreasing significantly, and that the risk situation and status may have changed. Therefore, the primary focus of management is to determine what has changed in the environment, which is the internal or external context that influences or affects the risk exposure and impact. Determining what has changed in the environment helps to identify and analyze the causes, drivers, or factors of the risk change, and to evaluate the implications and consequences of the risk change. Determining what has changed in the environment also helps to update and adjust the risk assessment and response, and to communicate and escalate the risk change to the relevant stakeholders. Designing compensating controls, determining if KRIs have been updated recently, and assessing the effectiveness of the incident response plan are not the primary focus of management, as they are either the outputs or the inputs of the risk change analysis, and they do not address the primary need of understanding the risk change. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

A conflict of interest is a situation where a person’s personal or professional interests may interfere with their ability to act in the best interest of the organization or the project1. A conflict of interest can compromise the integrity, objectivity, and impartiality of the person, and create ethical or legal issues for the organization or the project2. In the context of due diligence, a conflict of interest can affect the quality and reliability of the information and analysis, and jeopardize the success and confidentiality of the acquisition3.

The best course of action for a member of the due diligence team who realizes a close acquaintance is a high-ranking IT professional at a subsidiary of the company about to be acquired is to disclose potential conflicts of interest. This means that the team member should inform the due diligence leader and the organization’s management about the relationship with the acquaintance, and explain how it may affect their role or responsibility in the due diligence process. By disclosing potential conflicts of interest, the team member can:

Demonstrate honesty and transparency, and uphold the ethical standards and values of the organization and the project4.

Enable the due diligence leader and the organization’s management to assess the situation and decide the appropriate course of action, such as reassigning the team member, implementing additional controls or safeguards, or obtaining consent or approval from the relevant parties5.

Avoid or minimize the negative consequences or risks that may arise from the conflict of interest, such as legal liability, reputational damage, or loss of trust and credibility6.

References =

Conflict of Interest - CIO Wiki

What is a Conflict of Interest? Give Me Some Examples - The Balance Careers

How to Avoid Conflicts of Interest in M&A Transactions - DealRoom

How to Handle Conflicts of Interest - Harvard Business Review

Conflict of Interest Policy - ISACA

Managing Conflicts of Interest in the Public Sector Toolkit - OECD

The best course of action for the risk practitioner upon learning that the number of failed back-up attempts continually exceeds the current risk threshold is to inquire about the status of any planned corrective actions. This would help the risk practitioner to understand the root causes of the problem, the progress of the remediation efforts, and the expected timeline for resolution. It would also help the risk practitioner to provide guidance and support to the responsible parties, and to escalate the issue if necessary. Inquiring about the status of any planned corrective actions would demonstrate the risk practitioner’s proactive and collaborative approach to risk management, and ensure that the risk exposure is reduced to an acceptable level as soon as possible. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.3, page 2371

An intrusion detection system (IDS) is a network security tool that monitors network traffic and devices for known malicious activity, suspicious activity or security policy violations1. An IDS can generate alerts when it detects any potential threats, but not all alerts are accurate or relevant. There are two types of errors that can affect the performance and reliability of an IDS: false positives and false negatives2.

A false positive is when an IDS incorrectly flags a benign or normal activity as malicious or suspicious. For example, an IDS may alert on a legitimate network scan or a harmless software update. False positives can reduce the credibility and efficiency of an IDS, as they can overwhelm the security team with unnecessary alerts, distract them from the real threats, and cause them to ignore or disable the IDS3.

A false negative is when an IDS fails to flag a malicious or suspicious activity as such. For example, an IDS may miss a stealthy or novel attack that does not match any known signatures or patterns. False negatives can compromise the security and integrity of the network, as they can allow attackers to bypass the IDS and cause damage or steal data without being detected4.

The risk practitioner should recommend to analyze the alerts to minimize the false positives, because this is the best way to improve the accuracy and usefulness of the IDS. By analyzing the alerts, the risk practitioner can:

Identify the sources and causes of the false positives, such as misconfigured or outdated IDS rules, network anomalies, or legitimate traffic that resembles malicious traffic5.

Adjust or fine-tune the IDS settings, such as the alert threshold, the sensitivity level, the detection method, or the rule base, to reduce the number of false positives without increasing the risk of false negatives.

Validate or verify the alerts with other sources of information, such as logs, network traffic analysis, or threat intelligence, to confirm or dismiss the alerts as true or false positives.

Prioritize or classify the alerts based on their severity, impact, or likelihood, to focus on the most critical or relevant alerts and avoid alert fatigue.

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

Resetting the alert threshold based on peak traffic is not a reliable or effective way to minimize the false positives, as it may also increase the risk of false negatives. The alert threshold is the level of activity or deviation that triggers an alert from the IDS. If the threshold is set too high, the IDS may miss some malicious or suspicious activity that occurs below the threshold. If the threshold is set too low, the IDS may generate too many alerts for normal or benign activity that exceeds the threshold. The optimal threshold depends on various factors, such as the network size, topology, traffic volume, and baseline. Peak traffic is not a good indicator of the optimal threshold, as it may vary depending on the time, day, or season, and it may not reflect the normal or expected network behavior.

Analyzing the traffic to minimize the false negatives is not the main issue or goal in this scenario, as the problem is the high number of alerts, not the low number of alerts. Analyzing the traffic can help to identify the malicious or suspicious activity that the IDS may have missed, but it does not address the root cause of the false positives or improve the IDS performance. Moreover, analyzing the traffic can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, especially for large or complex networks, and it may require specialized tools or skills that the risk practitioner may not have.

Sniffing the traffic using a network analyzer is not a suitable or feasible option in this scenario, as it may violate the privacy or security policies of the network or the organization. Sniffing the traffic means capturing and inspecting the network packets that are transmitted or received by the devices on the network. A network analyzer is a tool that can perform this function and display the packet data in a readable format. However, sniffing the traffic can also expose sensitive or confidential information, such as passwords, usernames, or credit card numbers, that may be contained in the packets. Therefore, sniffing the traffic may require authorization or consent from the network owners or users, and it may be restricted or prohibited by law or regulation.

References =

What is an intrusion detection system (IDS)? - IBM

Intrusion detection system - Wikipedia

What Are Intrusion Detection Systems? - MUO

12 Best Intrusion Detection System (IDS) Software 2024 - Comparitech

What is an Intrusion Detection System (IDS)? - Fortinet

[False Positive and False Negative in Intrusion Detection System]

[False Positives and False Negatives in Intrusion Detection Systems]

[How to Reduce False Positives for Your IDS/IPS]

[How to Set the Right Alert Thresholds for Your IDS/IPS]

[Network Traffic Analysis: What It Is and How It Works]

[What is a Network Analyzer? - Definition from Techopedia]

The best evidence of an effective risk treatment plan is that the risk tolerance threshold is above the asset residual risk, because this means that the risk treatment plan has reduced the risk to a level that is acceptable to the enterprise. The risk tolerance threshold is the maximum amount of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept for a given asset or process. The asset residual risk is the remaining risk after applying the risk treatment plan. The risk treatment plan is effective if the asset residual risk is lower than or equal to the risk tolerance threshold. The other options are not the best evidence, although they may also be indicators of an effective risk treatment plan. The inherent risk being below the asset residual risk, the remediation cost being below the asset business value, and the remediation being completed within the asset recovery time objective (RTO) are examples of desirable or expected outcomes of the risk treatment plan, but they do not directly measure the effectiveness of the risk treatment plan. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

Risk treatment options are the actions or plans that are implemented to modify or reduce the risk exposure of the organization. Risk treatment options receive adequate funding when the organization allocates sufficient resources and budget to support the risk response actions, and to ensure that the risk controls are effective and efficient. This is the best evidence that risk management is driving business decisions in the organization, as it shows that the organization prioritizes and values the risk management process, and that it aligns its risk strategy and objectives with its business goals and value creation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 245. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 245. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 245.

The most important factor when developing risk scenarios is obtaining input from key stakeholders. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could affect the enterprise’s objectives, processes, or resources. Obtaining input from key stakeholders, such as business owners, process owners, subject matter experts, or external parties, helps to ensure that the risk scenarios are realistic, relevant, and comprehensive. It also helps to identify the sources, drivers, indicators, likelihood, impact, and responses of the risk scenarios, and to align them with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. Obtaining input from key stakeholders also fosters a collaborative and participatory approach to risk management, and enhances the risk awareness and ownership among the stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.3, page 621

A noncompliant control is a control that does not meet the requirements or standards of an audit, regulation, or policy. A noncompliant control can expose the organization to risks such as errors, fraud, or breaches. When a noncompliant control is identified, the service provider and the client should work together to resolve the issue as soon as possible. However, sometimes the resolution may not be feasible or cost-effective, and the client may decide to accept the risk associated with the noncompliant control.

In this case, the service provider’s most appropriate action would be to ask the client to document the formal risk acceptance for the provider. This means that the client should acknowledge the existence and consequences of the noncompliant control, and provide a written justification for accepting the risk. The risk acceptance document should also specify the roles and responsibilities of the service provider and the client, and the duration and conditions of the risk acceptance. The risk acceptance document should be signed by the client’s senior management and the service provider’s management, and kept as part of the audit evidence.

The other options are not appropriate actions for the service provider. Developing a risk remediation plan overriding the client’s decision would be disrespectful and unprofessional, as it would ignore the client’s authority and preference. Making a note for this item in the next audit explaining the situation would be insufficient and misleading, as it would imply that the issue is still unresolved and that the service provider is responsible for it. Insisting that the remediation occur for the benefit of other customers would be unreasonable and impractical, as it would disregard the client’s business needs and constraints, and potentially harm the relationship between the service provider and the client. References =

Risk Acceptance - Institute of Internal Auditors

New Guidance on the Evaluation of Non-compliance with the Risk Assessment Standard and its Peer Review Impact - REVISED

The Impact of Non-compliance: Understanding The Risks And Consequences

The most helpful factor for an information security management team when allocating resources to mitigate exposures is the risk assessment results. The risk assessment results provide a comprehensive and objective analysis of the risks facing the enterprise, including their likelihood, impact, and root causes. The risk assessment results also help to identify the gaps and weaknesses in the existing controls, and to prioritize the risks based on their severity and urgency. The risk assessment results enable the information security management team to allocate the resources in a cost-effective and risk-based manner, and to implement the most appropriate risk responses to reduce the exposures to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.1, page 1751

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls. It is important for a risk practitioner to verify that the residual risk is within the acceptable levels defined by the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. This ensures that the controls are effective in reducing the risk exposure to an acceptable level and align with the enterprise’s objectives and strategy. References = CRISC Review Manual 27th Edition, page 131. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers.

The drawback in the use of quantitative risk analysis is that it requires more resources than other methods. Quantitative risk analysis is a method of risk analysis that assigns numeric values to the exposures of assets, the impact and likelihood of risk events, and the cost and benefit of risk responses. Quantitative risk analysis can provide more precise and objective results, and support the risk-based decision making process. However, quantitative risk analysis also requires more resources than other methods, such as data, time, expertise, and tools, to collect, validate, and analyze the quantitative information, and to perform the complex calculations and simulations. Quantitative risk analysis may also be limited by the availability, reliability, and accuracy of the data, and the assumptions and models used. Assigning numeric values to exposures of assets, producing the results in numeric form, and being based on impact analysis of information assets are not drawbacks, but characteristics of quantitative risk analysis. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics that reflect how well an organization is achieving its goals and objectives. KPIs should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. The most important characteristic of a KPI is its relevance, meaning that it should be aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, and values. A relevant KPI should also be meaningful and useful for the intended audience, such as the management, the staff, or the stakeholders. A relevant KPI should provide insight into the performance and progress of the organization, as well as enable decision making and improvement actions. A KPI that is not relevant may be misleading, inaccurate, or irrelevant, and may not reflect the true state of the organization or its goals. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, p. 116-117

Risk response strategy is the approach that an organization takes to address the risks that it faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. Risk response strategy involves selecting and implementing the appropriate risk response options, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, or acceptance, for each risk, based on the risk level, the risk appetite, and the cost-benefit analysis1.

The most important consideration for senior management when developing a risk response strategy is the risk appetite of the organization. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk attitude and its willingness to take on risk in specific scenarios. Risk appetite is usually expressed in a qualitative statement approved by the board of directors2.

Considering the risk appetite of the organization is essential for developing a risk response strategy, because it can help to:

Align the risk response strategy with the overall business strategy and vision, and ensure that the risk response options support the achievement of the organizational objectives

Balance the risk response strategy with the expected benefits and opportunities, and ensure that the risk response options do not eliminate or reduce the potential value or performance of the organization

Enhance the risk response strategy with the stakeholder expectations and requirements, and ensure that the risk response options meet the needs and interests of the customers, suppliers, partners, regulators, and other parties

Optimize the risk response strategy with the available resources and capabilities, and ensure that the risk response options are feasible and cost-effective for the organization34

The other options are not as important as the risk appetite of the organization for developing a risk response strategy, but rather some of the factors or outcomes of it. Cost of controls is the amount of resources and funds that are required to implement and maintain the risk response controls, such as policies, procedures, or technologies, that aim to prevent or reduce the negative effects of the risks. Cost of controls is a factor that can affect the selection and implementation of the risk response options, but it is not the primary consideration for developing the risk response strategy. Risk tolerance is the acceptable variation in the outcomes related to specific objectives or risks. Risk tolerance is a factor that can measure the risk analysis and guide the risk response, but it is not the primary consideration for developing the risk response strategy. Probability definition is the process of estimating the likelihood or frequency of the risk events, based on historical data, statistical analysis, expert judgment, or other methods. Probability definition is an outcome of the risk analysis that can inform the risk response, but it is not the primary consideration for developing the risk response strategy. References =

Risk Response - ISACA

Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference? - ISACA

Risk Response Strategies: Types & Examples (+ Free Template)

Risk Response Strategy - ISACA

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

A critical threshold value for a key control indicator (KCI) is the value that indicates that the control is no longer performing its intended function of mitigating a risk. If the KCI reaches or exceeds this value, it means that the control effectiveness has failed and corrective actions are needed. The other options are not the best representations of a critical threshold value for a KCI, because they do not reflect the actual performance or outcome of the control. Thresholds benchmarked to peer organizations, a typical operational value, and a value that represents the intended control state are examples of target or acceptable values for a KCI, not critical or unacceptable values. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

 Risk monitoring is the process of tracking and evaluating the performance and effectiveness of the risk management process and controls, and identifying any changes or emerging risks that may affect the enterprise’s objectives and strategy. The primary benefit of risk monitoring is that it facilitates risk-aware decision making, as it provides timely and relevant information and feedback to the decision-makers and stakeholders, and enables them to adjust the risk strategy and response actions accordingly. Risk monitoring also helps to ensure that the risk management process is aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance, and supports the achievement of the enterprise’s goals and value creation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 239. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 239. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 239.