CISM Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

 According to the CISM Review Manual, the information security manager’s best course of action when security controls may no longer be adequate due to changes in the organization’s environment is to perform a new risk assessment. A risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that affect the organization’s information assets and business processes. A risk assessment should be performed periodically or whenever there are significant changes in the organization’s environment, such as new threats, vulnerabilities, technologies, regulations, or business objectives. A risk assessment helps to determine the current level of risk exposure and the adequacy of existing security controls. A risk assessment also provides the basis for developing or updating the risk treatment plan, which defines the appropriate risk responses, such as implementing new or enhanced security controls, transferring the risk to a third party, accepting the risk, or avoiding the risk.

The other options are not the best course of action in this scenario. Reviewing the previous risk assessment and countermeasures may not reflect the current state of the organization’s environment and may not identify new or emerging risks. Evaluating countermeasures to mitigate new risks may be premature without performing a new risk assessment to identify and prioritize the risks. Transferring the new risk to a third party may not be feasible or cost-effective without performing a new risk assessment to evaluate the risk level and the available risk transfer options.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 1, pages 43-45.

Before implementing a BYOD program, it is most important to develop an acceptable use policy that defines the roles and responsibilities of the organization and the employees, the security requirements and controls for the devices, the acceptable and unacceptable behaviors and activities, and the consequences of non-compliance. This policy will help to establish a clear and consistent framework for managing the risks and benefits of BYOD.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, page 197

= According to the CISM Review Manual, availability is the degree to which information and systems are accessible to authorized users in a timely and reliable manner1. Availability ensures that services are delivered to the users as expected and agreed upon. Nonrepudiation is the ability to prove the occurrence of a claimed event or action and its originating entities1. It ensures that the parties involved in a transaction cannot deny their involvement. Authenticity is the quality or state of being genuine or original, rather than a reproduction or fabrication1. It ensures that the identity of a subject or resource is valid. Recovery time objective (RTO) is the maximum acceptable period of time that can elapse before the unavailability of a business function severely impacts the organization1. It is a metric used to measure the recovery capability of a system or service, not a factor that ensures timely and reliable access to services. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 2, Information Risk Management, pages 66-67.

Senior leadership needs to understand how Zero Trust supports risk reduction and business needs. Communicating the impact on risk reduction and user experience aligns security initiatives with business goals.

“Communicating how security initiatives support business objectives and risk reduction is critical for gaining senior management support.”

— CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1: Information Security Governance, Section: Business Alignment*

The best way to support effective communication during information security incidents is to have predetermined service level agreements (SLAs) because they define the expectations and responsibilities of the parties involved in the incident response process, and specify the communication channels, methods, and frequency for reporting and updating on the incident status and resolution. Frequent incident response training sessions are not very effective because they do not address the communication needs or challenges during an actual incident. Centralized control monitoring capabilities are not very effective because they do not address the communication needs or challenges during an actual incident. Responsibilities defined within role descriptions are not very effective because they do not address the communication needs or challenges during an actual incident. References: https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2017/volume-5/incident-response-lessons-learned https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2018/volume-3/incident-response-lessons-learned

The best course of action when the organization receives complaints from users that some of their files have been encrypted and they are receiving demands for money to decrypt the files is to initiate incident response. This is because the organization is facing a ransomware attack, which is a type of malicious software that encrypts the victim’s data and demands a ransom for the decryption key. Ransomware attacks can cause significant disruption, damage, and loss to the organization’s operations, assets, and reputation. Therefore, the organization needs to quickly activate its incident response plan and team, which are designed to handle such security incidents in a coordinated, effective, and efficient manner. The incident response process involves the following steps1:

Preparation: The incident response team prepares the necessary resources, tools, and procedures to respond to the incident. The team also establishes the roles, responsibilities, and communication channels among the team members and other stakeholders.

Identification: The incident response team identifies the scope, source, and severity of the incident. The team also collects and preserves the relevant evidence and logs for further analysis and investigation.

Containment: The incident response team isolates the affected systems and networks to prevent the spread of the ransomware and limit the impact of the incident. The team also implements temporary or alternative solutions to restore the essential functions and services.

Eradication: The incident response team removes the ransomware and any traces of its infection from the affected systems and networks. The team also verifies that the systems and networks are clean and secure before restoring them to normal operations.

Recovery: The incident response team restores the affected systems and networks to normal operations. The team also decrypts or restores the encrypted data from backups or other sources, if possible. The team also monitors the systems and networks for any signs of recurrence or residual issues.

Lessons learned: The incident response team conducts a post-incident review to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the incident response process and team. The team also identifies the root causes, lessons learned, and best practices from the incident. The team also recommends and implements the necessary improvements and corrective actions to prevent or mitigate similar incidents in the future.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 4: Information Security Incident Management, Section: Incident Response Process, pages 229-2331; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, Question 45, page 432.

 An information security strategy is the most important element to have in place as a basis for developing an effective information security program that supports the organization’s business goals. An information security strategy is a high-level plan that defines the vision, mission, objectives, scope, and principles of information security for the organization1. It also aligns the information security program with the organization’s strategy, culture, risk appetite, and governance framework2. An information security strategy provides the direction, guidance, and justification for the information security program, and ensures that the program is consistent, coherent, and comprehensive3. An information security strategy also helps to prioritize the information security initiatives, allocate the resources, and measure the performance and value of the information security program4.

The other options are not as important as an information security strategy, because they are either derived from or dependent on the strategy. Metrics are used to drive the information security program, but they need to be based on the strategy and aligned with the goals and objectives of the program. Information security policies are the rules and standards that implement the information security strategy and define the expected behavior and responsibilities of the stakeholders. A defined security organizational structure is the way the information security roles and functions are organized and coordinated within the organization, and it should reflect the strategy and the governance model. References = 1: CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.1 2: CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2 3: CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3 4: CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.4 : CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.5 : CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.6 : CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.7

The information security steering committee is composed of business leaders is the best indicator that information security governance and corporate governance are integrated, as this shows that the information security program is aligned with the business objectives and strategies, and that the information security manager has the support and involvement of the senior management. The information security steering committee is responsible for overseeing the information security program, setting the direction and scope, approving policies and standards, allocating resources, and monitoring performance and compliance. The information security steering committee also ensures that the information security risks are communicated and addressed at the board level, and that the information security program is consistent with the corporate governance framework and culture. The information security team is aware of business goals, the board is regularly informed of information security key performance indicators (KPIs), and a cost-benefit analysis is conducted on all information security initiatives are also important, but not as important as the information security steering committee is composed of business leaders, as they do not necessarily imply that the information security governance and corporate governance are integrated, and that the information security program has the authority and accountability to achieve its goals. References = CISM Review Manual 2023, page 271; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2023, page 342; ISACA CISM - iSecPrep, page 193

Performing a risk assessment gives a holistic and objective understanding of the threats, vulnerabilities, and controls across the organization. It reveals actual risk exposures and the effectiveness of current controls, which directly reflect the organization’s security posture.

“Risk assessments identify and evaluate risk and provide the basis for determining how those risks should be managed and mitigated.”

— CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 2: Risk Management, Section: Risk Assessment

According to ISACA’s CISM Practice Question Database, performing a risk assessment is prioritized over reviewing documents or conducting interviews because it offers direct insight into current exposures and control effectiveness.

The business data owner is accountable for data loss in the event of an information security incident at a third-party provider because they are ultimately responsible for the protection and use of their data, regardless of where it is stored or processed. The information security manager is not accountable for data loss at a third-party provider, but rather responsible for implementing and enforcing the security policies and standards that govern the relationship with the provider. The service provider that hosts the data is not accountable for data loss at their site, but rather liable for any breach of contract or service level agreement that may result from such an incident. The incident response team is not accountable for data loss at a third-party provider, but rather responsible for responding to and managing the incident according to the incident response plan. References: https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2017/volume-1/data-ownership-and-custodianship-in-the-cloud https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2018/volume-3/incident-response-lessons-learned

A capability maturity model evaluation is the best way to determine the gap between the present and desired state of an information security program because it provides a systematic and structured approach to assess the current level of maturity of the information security processes and practices, and compare them with the desired or target level of maturity that is aligned with the business objectives and requirements. A capability maturity model evaluation can also help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the information security program, prioritize the improvement areas, and develop a roadmap for achieving the desired state.

References = Information Security Architecture: Gap Assessment and Prioritization, CISM Review Manual 15th Edition

 = The information security manager should contact the information owner after the incident has been confirmed, as this is the first step of the incident response process. The information owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for the information asset that is affected by the incident. The information owner needs to be informed of the incident as soon as possible, as they may have to make decisions or take actions regarding the protection, recovery, or restoration of the information asset. The information owner may also have to communicate with other stakeholders, such as the business units, customers, regulators, or media, depending on the nature and impact of the incident.

The other options are not the correct time to contact the information owner, as they occur later in the incident response process. Contacting the information owner after the incident has been contained, mitigated, or logged may delay the notification and escalation of the incident, as well as the involvement and collaboration of the information owner. Moreover, contacting the information owner after the incident has been contained or mitigated may imply that the incident response team has already taken actions that may affect the information asset without the consent or approval of the information owner. Contacting the information owner after a potential incident has been logged may cause unnecessary alarm or confusion, as the potential incident may not be a real or significant incident, or it may not affect the information owner’s asset. References =

CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2022, pp. 219-220, 226-227.

CISM Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, ISACA, 2022, QID 1009.

The most influential factor on an organization’s response to a new industry regulation is the organization’s risk appetite. This is because the risk appetite defines the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, and it guides the decision-making process for managing risks. The risk appetite also determines the extent to which the organization needs to comply with the new regulation, and the resources and actions required to achieve compliance. The risk appetite should be aligned with the organization’s strategy, culture, and values, and it should be communicated and monitored throughout the organization.

 = Penetration testing is most appropriate when a new system is about to go live, because it is a method of evaluating the security of a system by simulating an attack from a malicious source. Penetration testing can help to identify and exploit vulnerabilities, assess the impact and risk of a breach, and provide recommendations for remediation and improvement. Penetration testing can also help to validate the effectiveness of the security controls and policies implemented for the new system, and ensure compliance with relevant standards and regulations. Penetration testing is usually performed after the system has undergone other types of testing, such as functional, performance, and usability testing, and before the system is deployed to the production environment. Penetration testing is not as appropriate when a new system is being designed, because the system is still in the early stages of development and may not have all the features and functionalities implemented. Penetration testing at this stage may not provide a realistic or comprehensive assessment of the system’s security, and may cause delays or disruptions in the development process. Penetration testing is also not as appropriate when a security policy is being developed, because the policy is a high-level document that defines the goals, objectives, and principles of information security for the organization. Penetration testing is a technical and operational activity that tests the implementation and enforcement of the policy, not the policy itself. Penetration testing is also not as appropriate when a security incident has occurred, because the incident may have already compromised the system and caused damage or loss. Penetration testing at this stage may not be able to prevent or mitigate the incident, and may interfere with the incident response and recovery efforts. Penetration testing after an incident may be useful for forensic analysis and lessons learned, but it is not the primary or immediate response to an incident. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2021, pages 229-230, 233-234.

Cost-benefit analysis of mitigating controls is the BEST way to assist in determining whether to accept residual risk of a critical security system, because it helps to compare the costs of implementing and maintaining the controls with the benefits of reducing the risk and the potential losses. Cost-benefit analysis can help to justify the investment in security controls and to optimize the level of residual risk that is acceptable for the organization.

References =

CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 50: “Cost-benefit analysis is the process of comparing the costs of risk treatment options with the benefits of risk reduction and the potential losses from risk events.”

CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 51: “Cost-benefit analysis can help to justify the investment in information security controls and to optimize the level of residual risk that is acceptable for the enterprise.”

CISM Domain 2: Information Risk Management (IRM) [2022 update]: “Cost-benefit analysis: This is a comparison of the costs of implementing and maintaining security controls with the benefits of reducing risk and potential losses. It helps to justify the investment in security controls and optimize the level of residual risk.”

Incident impact is the primary factor for classification and categorization. It ensures incidents are addressed based on their potential to disrupt the organization.

“Incident impact should be the primary factor in defining categorization levels to ensure appropriate prioritization and response.”

— CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 4: Incident Management, Section: Incident Classification and Prioritization*

ISACA practice database stresses that focusing on impact ensures incidents receive the proper response priority.

Since the identified risks are subject to regulatory requirements, and cannot simply be accepted without oversight, the information security manager should escalate the issue to the risk management team or higher authority to ensure proper governance.

“When risk acceptance contradicts regulatory requirements, it must be escalated to senior management or the risk function for resolution.”

— CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1: Governance Responsibilities, Section: Risk Governance and Oversight*

Chain of custody forms with points of contact are the best way to enable an organization to maintain legally admissible evidence because they document the sequence of control, transfer, and analysis of the evidence, and every person who handled it, the dates and times, and the purpose for each action1. They also ensure the authenticity and integrity of the evidence, and prevent tampering or loss1. Documented processes around forensic records retention are not sufficient to maintain legally admissible evidence because they do not track or verify the handling of the evidence. Robust legal framework with notes of legal actions are not sufficient to maintain legally admissible evidence because they do not record or validate the preservation of the evidence. Forensic personnel training that includes technical actions are not sufficient to maintain legally admissible evidence because they do not account or certify the custody of the evidence. References: 1 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326079761_Digital_Chain_of_Custody