CTPRP Exam Dumps - Shared Assessments Third Party Risk Management Questions and Answers

Shadow IT is the use and management of any IT technologies, solutions, services, projects, and infrastructure without formal approval and support of internal IT departments. Shadow IT can pose significant security risks to the organization, such as data breaches, compliance violations, malware infections, or network disruptions. Therefore, assessing and mitigating the risk of shadow IT is an essential part of organizational security.

One of the most important factors when assessing the risk of shadow IT is whether the organization maintains adequate policies and procedures that communicate required controls for security functions. Policies and procedures are the documents that define the organization’s security objectives, standards, roles, responsibilities, and processes. They provide guidance and direction for the organization’s security activities, such as risk assessment, vendor management, incident response, data protection, access control, etc. They also establish the expectations and requirements for the organization’s employees, vendors, and other stakeholders regarding the use and management of IT resources.

By maintaining adequate policies and procedures that communicate required controls for security functions, the organization can:

• Educate and inform its employees about the security risks and implications of shadow IT, and the benefits and advantages of using authorized and supported IT resources.
• Establish and enforce clear and consistent rules and boundaries for the use and management of IT resources, and the consequences and penalties for violating them.
• Monitor and audit the compliance and performance of its employees, vendors, and other stakeholders regarding the use and management of IT resources, and identify and address any deviations or issues.
• Review and update its policies and procedures regularly, and communicate any changes or updates to its employees, vendors, and other stakeholders.

By doing so, the organization can reduce the likelihood and impact of shadow IT, and increase the visibility and accountability of its IT environment. The organization can also foster a culture of security awareness and responsibility among its employees, vendors, and other stakeholders, and encourage them to report and resolve any shadow IT incidents or problems.

The other factors, such as the organization’s security training and certification, staffing levels, and resources and investment, are also relevant for assessing the risk of shadow IT, but they are not as important as the organization’s policies and procedures. Security training and certification can help the organization’s security personnel to acquire and maintain the necessary skills and knowledge to deal with shadow IT, but they do not address the root causes or motivations of shadow IT. Staffing levels can affect the organization’s ability to detect and respond to shadow IT, but they do not prevent or deter shadow IT from occurring. Resources and investment can enable the organization to provide adequate and appropriate IT resources to its employees, vendors, and other stakeholders, but they do not guarantee the satisfaction or compliance of those parties. References:

• : Shadow IT Explained: Risks & Opportunities - BMC Software
• : What is Shadow IT? | IBM
• : Shadow IT: What Are the Risks and How Can You Mitigate Them? - Ekran System
• : Policies and Procedures - Shared Assessments

A documented process to gain approvals for use of open source applications is typically not part of evaluating the vendor’s patch management controls, because it is not directly related to the patching process. Patch management controls are the policies, procedures, and tools that enable an organization to identify, acquire, install, and verify patches for software vulnerabilities. Patch management controls aim to reduce the risk of exploitation of known software flaws and ensure the functionality and compatibility of the patched systems. A documented process to gain approvals for use of open source applications is more relevant to the software development and procurement processes, as it involves assessing the legal, security, and operational implications of using open source software components in the vendor’s products or services. Open source software may have different licensing terms, quality standards, and support levels than proprietary software, and may introduce additional vulnerabilities or dependencies that need to be managed. Therefore, a documented process to gain approvals for use of open source applications is a good practice for vendors, but it is not a patch management control per se. References:

• Guide to Enterprise Patch Management Planning
• Governance of Key Aspects of System Patch Management
• Certified Third Party Risk Professional (CTPRP) Study Guide

The risk of increased expense to conduct vendor assessments based on client contractual requirements is the least important factor in defining your risk assessment process for new global third party relationships. This is because the expense of vendor assessments is not a direct risk to your organization’s security, compliance, reputation, or performance, but rather a cost of doing business that can be budgeted and optimized. While vendor assessments are necessary and beneficial, they are not the primary driver of your risk assessment process, which should focus on the potential impact and likelihood of adverse events or incidents involving your third parties. The other factors (B, C, and D) are more important because they directly affect the level of risk exposure and the mitigation strategies for your third parties. For example, natural disasters and physical security risks can disrupt your third party’s operations and service delivery, government regulation and political stability can affect your third party’s compliance and legal obligations, and financial risk can affect your third party’s solvency and reliability. Therefore, these factors should be considered more carefully when defining your risk assessment process. References:

• 1: Third Party Risk Management: Managing Risk | Deloitte US
• 2: What Is Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM)? 2024 Guide | UpGuard
• 3: What is Third-Party Risk Management? | Blog | OneTrust

Due diligence is the process of evaluating the risks and opportunities associated with a potential or existing third-party vendor. Due diligence can vary in scope and depth depending on the level of risk that the vendor poses to the organization. Lower risk vendors are those that have minimal impact on the organization’s operations, reputation, or compliance, and that do not handle sensitive or confidential data or systems. For lower risk vendors, conducting due diligence may involve accepting the service provider’s self-assessment questionnaire responses as sufficient evidence of their capabilities, performance, and compliance. A self-assessment questionnaire is a tool that allows the vendor to provide information about their organization, services, processes, controls, and policies. The organization can use the questionnaire to verify the vendor’s identity, qualifications, references, and certifications, and to assess the vendor’s alignment with the organization’s standards and expectations. Accepting the vendor’s self-assessment questionnaire responses as the primary source of due diligence can save time and resources for the organization, and can also demonstrate trust and confidence in the vendor. However, the organization should also ensure that the questionnaire is comprehensive, relevant, and updated, and that the vendor’s responses are accurate, complete, and consistent. The organization should also reserve the right to request additional information or documentation from the vendor if needed, and to conduct periodic reviews or audits of the vendor’s performance and compliance.

The other options do not best describe conducting due diligence of a lower risk vendor, because they either involve more extensive or rigorous methods of due diligence, or they are not directly related to due diligence. Preparing reports to management regarding the status of third party risk management and remediation activities is an important part of monitoring and managing the vendor relationship, but it is not a due diligence activity per se. Reviewing a service provider’s self-assessment questionnaire and external audit report(s) is a more thorough way of conducting due diligence, but it may not be necessary or feasible for lower risk vendors, especially if the external audit report(s) are not readily available or relevant. Requesting and filing a service provider’s external audit report(s) for future reference is a good practice for maintaining documentation and evidence of due diligence, but it is not a due diligence activity itself.

References:

• Third Party Risk Management (TPRM) | Shared Assessments
• Vendor Due Diligence Strategy Guide and Checklist | Prevalent
• Vendor due diligence: a practical guide and checklist

Threat modeling is a core element of the Microsoft Security Development Lifecycle (SDL) and a structured approach to identify, quantify, and address the security risks associated with an application12. Threat modeling helps to shape the application’s design, meet the security objectives, and reduce risk1. The best time to perform threat modeling analysis is before the application design and development activities begin, as this allows the application service provider to:

• Communicate about the security design of their systems1.
• Analyze the design for potential security issues using a proven methodology1.
• Suggest and manage mitigations for security issues1.
• Incorporate security requirements into the design2.
• Avoid costly rework or redesign later in the SDLC2.
• Identify the most critical and relevant threats to focus on2. References: 1: Microsoft Security Development Lifecycle Threat Modelling1 2: Threat Modeling Process | OWASP Foundation2

According to the Shared Assessments Certified Third Party Risk Professional (CTPRP) Study Guide, physical security compliance is the process of ensuring that the physical assets and personnel of an organization are protected from unauthorized access, theft, damage, or harm1. Physical security compliance can be achieved by implementing various measures, such as locks, alarms, cameras, guards, fences, badges, etc. However, these measures need to be regularly monitored, tested, and verified to ensure their effectiveness and alignment with the defined standards and policies2. Therefore, maintaining a standardized schedule for confirming controls to defined standards demonstrates a greater maturity of physical security compliance, as it indicates a proactive and consistent approach to assessing and improving the physical security posture of an organization3.

The other options do not reflect a high level of physical security compliance maturity, as they either rely on reactive or ad hoc methods, or lack sufficient verification and validation mechanisms. Leveraging periodic reporting to schedule facility inspections based on reported events may indicate a lack of preventive and predictive measures, as well as a dependency on external or internal incidents to trigger the inspections. Providing a checklist for self-assessment may indicate a lack of independent and objective evaluation, as well as a potential for bias or error in the self-assessment process. Conducting unannounced checks on an ad hoc basis may indicate a lack of planning and coordination, as well as a potential for disruption or inconsistency in the checks.

References:

• 1: Shared Assessments Certified Third Party Risk Professional (CTPRP) Study Guide, page 24
• 2: Physical Security: Planning, Measures & Examples + PDF - Avigilon
• 3: Security Maturity Models: Levels, Assessment, and Benefits
• [4]: Best Practices for Planning and Managing Physical Security Resources - CISA, page 10
• [5]: Self-Assessment vs. Independent Assessment: What’s the Difference? | Linford & Company LLP
• [6]: The Pros and Cons of Unannounced Audits | NQA

 Criticality is a measure of how essential a service provider is to the organization’s core business functions and objectives. It reflects the potential consequences of a service disruption or failure on the organization’s operations, reputation, compliance, and financial performance. Criticality is not the same as risk, which is the likelihood and severity of a negative event occurring. Criticality helps to prioritize the risk assessment and mitigation efforts for different service providers based on their relative importance to the organization. Criticality is not limited to a specific type of service, such as disaster recovery or personal information, nor is it determined by the mode of access or connectivity. Criticality is assigned to the service providers that have the greatest impact on the organization’s ability to deliver its products or services to its customers and stakeholders in a timely and satisfactory manner. References:

• Shared Assessments. (2020). Certified Third Party Risk Professional (CTPRP) Study Guide1
• Milliman. (2017). Defining “critical or important functions or activities” for outsourcing purposes2
• Webster, C. and Sundaram, D.S. (2009). Effect of service provider’s communication style on customer satisfaction in professional services setting: the moderating role of criticality and service nature. Journal of Services Marketing, 23(2), 103-1131