CISM Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

 Standards are detailed statements of the minimum requirements for hardware, software, or security configurations. They are used to define the minimum security controls required for user workstations. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, page 69.

Escalate to senior management, because this could help the information security manager to inform the decision-makers of the situation, explain the implications and trade-offs, and seek their guidance and approval for the next steps2. However, this answer is not certain, and you might need to consider other factors as well.

The first step is to research legal and regulatory requirements for the new locations. Different countries have varying security and privacy laws, and understanding these is critical before adapting policies or procedures.

“Security requirements will vary depending on local legal and regulatory obligations, which must be understood as part of international expansion.”

— CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1: Information Security Governance, Section: Compliance Requirements

The ISACA CISM practice database also highlights this step as the initial and critical move in international expansions.

The most important consideration when establishing information security policies for an organization is to ensure that senior management supports the policies. Senior management support is essential for the successful implementation and enforcement of information security policies, as it demonstrates the commitment and accountability of the organization’s leadership to information security. Senior management support also helps to allocate adequate resources, establish clear roles and responsibilities, and promote a security-aware culture within the organization. Without senior management support, information security policies may not be aligned with the organization’s goals and objectives, may not be communicated and disseminated effectively, and may not be followed or enforced consistently.

Job descriptions that include requirements to read security policies are a way of ensuring that employees are aware of their security obligations, but they are not the most important consideration when establishing information security policies. The policies should be relevant and applicable to the employees’ roles and functions, and should be reinforced by regular training and awareness programs.

The policies should be updated periodically to reflect the changes in the organization’s environment, risks, and requirements, but updating them annually may not be sufficient or necessary. The frequency of updating the policies should depend on the nature and impact of the changes, and should be determined by a defined policy review process.

The policies should be aligned with industry best practices, standards, and frameworks, but this is not the most important consideration when establishing information security policies. The policies should also be customized and tailored to the organization’s specific context, needs, and expectations, and should be consistent with the organization’s vision, mission, and values. References =

ISACA, CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, 2020, pages 37-38.

ISACA, CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 12th Edition, 2020, question ID 1009.

The primary objective of performing a vulnerability assessment following a business system update is to review the effectiveness of controls. A vulnerability assessment is a systematic review of security weaknesses in an information system. It evaluates if the system is susceptible to any known vulnerabilities, assigns severity levels to those vulnerabilities, and recommends remediation or mitigation, if and whenever needed1. A business system update is a process of modifying or enhancing an information system to improve its functionality, performance, security, or compatibility. A business system update may introduce new features, fix bugs, patch vulnerabilities, or comply with new standards or regulations2. Performing a vulnerability assessment following a business system update is important because it helps to:

•Review the effectiveness of controls that are implemented to protect the information sys-tem from threats and risks

•Identify any new or residual vulnerabilities that may have been introduced or exposed by the update

•Evaluate the impact and likelihood of potential incidents that may exploit the vulnerabili-ties

•Prioritize and implement appropriate actions to address the vulnerabilities

•Verify and validate the security posture and compliance of the updated information sys-tem

Therefore, the primary objective of performing a vulnerability assessment following a business system update is to review the effectiveness of controls that are designed to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information system and its data. The other options are not the primary objectives of performing a vulnerability as-sessment following a business system update. Determining operational losses is not an objective, but rather a possible consequence of not performing a vulnerability as-sessment or not addressing the identified vulnerabilities. Improving the change control process is not an objective, but rather a possible outcome of performing a vulnerability assessment and incorporating its results and recommendations into the change man-agement cycle. Updating the threat landscape is not an objective, but rather a prereq-uisite for performing a vulnerability assessment that requires using up-to-date sources of threat intelligence and vulnerability information. References: 1: Vulnerability As-sessment - NIST 2: System Update - Techopedia : Vulnerability Assessment vs Penetra-tion Testing - Imperva : Change Control Process - NIST : Threat Landscape - NIST

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation = The risk owner is the person or entity with the accountability and authority to manage a risk. The risk owner should have the decision-making authority and the ability to allocate resources for risk treatment and related control activities. The risk owner should also be responsible for monitoring and reporting on the risk, but these are not the most important considerations when assigning a risk owner. The risk owner may not have adequate knowledge of risk treatment and related control activities, but can delegate or consult with experts as needed. The risk owner should also have sufficient time for managing the risk effectively, but this is not a prerequisite for assigning a risk owner.

References =

CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 76

CISM Practice Quiz, question 4171

According to the CISM Review Manual, information asset classification is the first step in an information asset management program, as it provides the basis for determining the level of protection required for each asset. System owners, key applications and information asset inventory are subsequent steps that depend on the classification of the assets.

References = CISM Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.2, page 381.

A brute force attack is a type of cyberattack that attempts to gain unauthorized access to an account, file, or other protected information by trying different combinations of usernames and passwords until finding the correct one. Brute force attacks can be very effective if the target system has weak or default passwords, or if the attacker has access to a large number of potential credentials. To mitigate this risk, an organization should implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) for its critical systems. MFA is a security method that requires users to provide more than one piece of evidence to verify their identity before accessing a system or service. For example, MFA can involve using a password in addition to a code sent to a phone or email, or using a biometric factor such as a fingerprint or face scan. MFA can significantly reduce the impact of brute force attacks by making it harder for attackers to guess or obtain valid credentials, and by increasing the time and effort required for them to compromise the system. References = CISM Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: Information Security Risk Management, Section 3.1: Risk Identification, p. 115-1161. CISM Review Manual (Print Version), Chapter 3: Information Security Risk Management, Section 3.1: Risk Identification, p. 115-1162. CISM ITEM DEVELOPMENT GUIDE, Domain 3: Information Security Program Development and Management, Task Statement 3.1, p. 193.

 A service provider is a third-party supplier that provides IT services or products to an organization. A service provider should comply with the organization’s information security requirements, such as policies, standards, procedures, and controls, to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the organization’s data and systems. The best way to provide an information security manager with sufficient assurance that a service provider complies with the organization’s information security requirements is to have the ability to audit the third-party supplier’s IT systems and processes. An audit is a systematic and independent examination of evidence to determine the degree of conformity to predetermined criteria. An audit can verify the effectiveness and efficiency of the service provider’s security controls, identify any gaps or weaknesses, and provide recommendations for improvement. An audit can also ensure that the service provider adheres to the contractual obligations and service level agreements (SLAs) with the organization. Therefore, option B is the most appropriate answer.

Option A is not the best answer because a live demonstration of the third-party supplier’s security capabilities may not be comprehensive, objective, or reliable. A live demonstration may only show the positive aspects of the service provider’s security, but not reveal any hidden or potential issues. A live demonstration may also be subject to manipulation or deception by the service provider.

Option C is not the best answer because third-party security control self-assessment (CSA) results may not be accurate, complete, or consistent. A self-assessment is a process where the service provider evaluates its own security controls against a set of criteria or standards. A self-assessment may be biased, subjective, or incomplete, as the service provider may not disclose or report all the relevant information or issues. A self-assessment may also vary in quality and scope depending on the service provider’s expertise, resources, and methodology.

Option D is not the best answer because an independent review report indicating compliance with industry standards may not be sufficient or specific for the organization’s information security requirements. An independent review is a process where an external party evaluates the service provider’s security controls against a set of industry standards or best practices, such as ISO/IEC 27001, NIST CSF, PCI DSS, etc. An independent review report may provide a general overview of the service provider’s security posture, but not address the organization’s unique or specific security needs, risks, or expectations. An independent review report may also be outdated, limited, or generic, as the industry standards or best practices may not reflect the current or emerging security threats or trends. References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition1, pages 257-258; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription, QID 301.

An independent review report indicating compliance with industry standards BEST provides an information security manager with sufficient assurance that a service provider complies with the organization’s information security requirements. This is because an independent review report is an objective and reliable source of evidence that the service provider has implemented and maintained effective security controls that meet the industry standards and best practices. An independent review report can also provide assurance that the service provider has addressed any gaps or weaknesses identified in previous audits or assessments.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are measurable values that demonstrate how effectively an organization is achieving its key objectives and goals. KPIs can help senior management understand the status of information security compliance by providing quantifiable and relevant data on the performance and progress of the information security program and processes. KPIs can also help senior management to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the information security controls and activities, identify strengths and weaknesses, and make informed decisions and adjustments. KPIs should be aligned with the organization’s strategy, vision, and mission, and should be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound). Some examples of information security KPIs are: percentage of compliance with policies and standards, number of security incidents and breaches, mean time to detect and respond to incidents, percentage of systems and applications patched, number of security awareness trainings completed, etc.

Industry benchmarks, business impact analysis (BIA) results, and risk assessment results are not the most useful to help senior management understand the status of information security compliance, although they may provide some useful information or insights. Industry benchmarks are comparative measures of the performance or practices of other organizations in the same industry or sector. Industry benchmarks can help senior management to compare and contrast their own information security performance or practices with those of their peers or competitors, and identify gaps or opportunities for improvement. However, industry benchmarks may not reflect the specific goals, needs, or context of the organization, and may not be readily available or reliable. Business impact analysis (BIA) results are the outcomes of the process of analyzing the potential impacts of disruptive events on the organization’s critical business functions and processes. BIA results can help senior management to understand the dependencies, priorities, and recovery objectives of the organization’s business functions and processes, and to plan for business continuity and disaster recovery. However, BIA results do not directly measure or indicate the status of information security compliance, and may not be updated or accurate. Risk assessment results are the outcomes of the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the information security risks that the organization faces. Risk assessment results can help senior management to understand the sources, causes, and consequences of information security risks, and to determine the appropriate risk responses and controls. However, risk assessment results do not directly measure or indicate the status of information security compliance, and may vary depending on the risk assessment methodology, criteria, and frequency. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, pages 47-481, 54-551, 69-701, 72-731; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, page 832

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics that measure the effectiveness and ef-ficiency of information security processes and activities. They help senior manage-ment understand the status of information security compliance by providing relevant, timely and accurate information on the performance of security controls, the level of risk exposure, the return on security investment and the progress toward security ob-jectives. KPIs can also be used to benchmark the organization’s security performance against industry standards or best practices. KPIs should be aligned with the organiza-tion’s strategic goals and risk appetite, and should be reported regularly to senior man-agement and other stakeholders.

An independent assessment against a relevant standard (B) provides the greatest assurance because it offers objective, third-party validation that security controls and development practices meet defined criteria. Examples include assessments against secure development standards or recognized control frameworks. Training (A), certifications (C), and policy reviews (D) are useful inputs, but they are indirect and do not confirm consistent, effective implementation. CISM emphasizes independent assurance for third-party risk management, especially when outsourcing high-risk activities such as custom software development. Independent assessments reduce reliance on self-attestation and help validate governance, SDLC controls, and security testing practices.

= The best approach for developing a physical access control policy for the organization is to conduct a risk assessment to determine the security risks and mitigating controls that are relevant and appropriate for the organization’s data center. A risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the information security risks that could affect the availability, integrity, or confidentiality of the servers, applications, and data that are hosted in the data center. A risk assessment can help to determine the likelihood and impact of the unauthorized or inappropriate physical access to the data center, such as theft, damage, sabotage, or espionage, and the potential consequences for the organization and its customers, such as service disruption, data loss, data breach, or legal liability. A risk assessment can also help to identify and prioritize the appropriate risk treatment options, such as implementing technical, administrative, or physical controls to prevent, detect, or respond to the physical access incidents, such as locks, alarms, cameras, guards, badges, or logs. A risk assessment can also help to communicate and report the risk level and status to the senior management and the relevant stakeholders, and to provide feedback and recommendations for improvement and optimization of the physical access control policy and the risk management process.

Reviewing customers’ security policies, developing access control requirements for each system and application, and designing single sign-on (SSO) or federated access are all possible steps that the organization can take after conducting the risk assessment, but they are not the best ones. Reviewing customers’ security policies is a process of understanding and complying with the customers’ expectations and requirements for the security of their servers, applications, and data that are hosted in the data center, and ensuring that the organization’s physical access control policy is consistent and compatible with them. Developing access control requirements for each system and application is a process of defining and implementing the specific rules and criteria for granting or denying the physical access to the servers and applications that are hosted in the data center, based on the roles, responsibilities, and privileges of the users, and the sensitivity and criticality of the systems and applications. Designing single sign-on (SSO) or federated access is a process of enabling and facilitating the authentication and authorization of the users who need to access the servers and applications that are hosted in the data center, by using a single or shared identity and credential across multiple systems and domains. References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, pages 51-531; CISM Practice Quiz, question 1542

Risk appetite (C) best informs the design of an information security framework because it defines the level of risk the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. CISM stresses that security frameworks, policies, and control structures must be aligned with business risk tolerance to avoid over- or under-protection. Audit findings (A) highlight gaps, cost (B) affects feasibility, and available skills (D) influence implementation—but none define the strategic level of protection required. Risk appetite ensures that the framework supports business goals, prioritizes resources appropriately, and provides consistent guidance for decision-making across the organization.

The primary objective of creating a security culture is to reduce risk to acceptable levels (C) by influencing employee behavior and decision-making. CISM stresses that culture is a means to an end—not the end itself. Prioritization (B), resource acquisition (A), and reporting (D) are outcomes or enablers, but the ultimate purpose is effective risk reduction aligned with business objectives. A strong security culture helps prevent incidents, improves compliance, and strengthens resilience through consistent, risk-aware behavior at all levels of the organization.

 According to the CISM Review Manual, an organization’s security posture is the overall condition of its information security, which is determined by the effectiveness of its security program and the alignment of its security objectives with its business goals. To understand the security posture, the senior leadership needs to have a holistic view of the security risks and the actions taken to address them. Therefore, assessing the progress of risk mitigation efforts is the most important activity for the senior leadership, as it provides them with the information on how well the security program is performing and whether it is meeting the expected outcomes. Evaluating the results of the most recent incident response test, reviewing the number of reported security incidents, and ensuring established security metrics are reported are all useful activities for the senior leadership, but they are not sufficient to understand the security posture. They only provide partial or isolated information on the security performance, which may not reflect the overall security condition or the alignment with the business objectives. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 1, Information Security Governance, pages 28-29.