CRISC Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

Monitoring the average time to complete tasks and monthly reporting of the findings during the month-end close process aligns with the definition of a Key Performance Indicator (KPI).

Understanding KPIs:

Performance Measurement:KPIs are used to measure how effectively a company is achieving its key business objectives. Monitoring the average time to complete tasks during the month-end close process provides a performance metric.

Tracking Efficiency:By reporting these findings monthly, management can track the efficiency and performance of the system load capabilities.

Specific Measure:

Task Completion Time:The average time to complete tasks is a specific, measurable indicator of performance. It helps in understanding how well the system handles load and identifies areas for improvement.

Continuous Improvement:Regular monitoring and reporting encourage continuous improvement, which is a core aspect of using KPIs.

The main goal of the risk analysis process is to determine the frequency and magnitude of loss, because this will help to measure the level of risk exposure and the need for risk mitigation controls. Frequency refers to how often a risk event may occur, while magnitude refers to how much harm or damage a risk event may cause. By determining the frequency and magnitude of loss, the risk analysis process can quantify the impact and likelihood of the risks, and assign a risk rating and priority. The other options are not the main goal of the risk analysis process, because they are either inputs or outputs of the process, as explained below:

A. Potential severity of impact is an output of the risk analysis process, as it is the result of estimating the consequences of a risk event on the organization’s objectives, assets, or processes. The potential severity of impact is influenced by the magnitude of loss, but also by other factors, such as the timing, duration, and scope of the risk event.

C. Control deficiencies are an input of the risk analysis process, as they are the gaps or weaknesses in the existing controls that may increase the risk exposure or reduce the risk mitigation effectiveness. Control deficiencies are identified by comparing the current control environment with the desired control environment, and by evaluating the design and operation of the controls.

D. Threats and vulnerabilities are inputs of the risk analysis process, as they are the sources and causes of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, assets, or processes. Threats are external or internal factors that have the potential to exploit the vulnerabilities, while vulnerabilitiesare internal or external weaknesses that increase the susceptibility to the threats. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 45. What is Risk Analysis? Process, Types, Examples & Methods, Risk Analysis Tutorial - The Process | solver, What is the goal of a risk assessment? - Creative Safety Supply

Deviation from a mitigation action plan’s completion date should be determined by the risk owner as determined by risk management processes, because the risk owner is the person or entity who has the accountability and authority to manage the risk and its associated mitigation actions. The risk owner should monitor and report the progress and status of the mitigation action plan, and determine if there is any deviation from the expected completion date, based on the risk management processes and criteria. The other options are not the ones who should determine the deviation, because:

Option A: Change management as determined by a change control board is a process that ensures that any changes to the project scope, schedule, cost, or quality are controlled and approved, but it does not determine the deviation from the mitigation action plan’s completion date, which is a risk management activity.

Option B: Benchmarking analysis with similar completed projects is a technique that compares the performance and practices of the current project with those of similar or successful projects, but it does not determine the deviation from the mitigation action plan’s completion date, which is a risk management activity.

Option C: Project governance criteria as determined by the project office is a set of rules and standards that define the roles, responsibilities, and authority of the project stakeholders, but it does notdetermine the deviation from the mitigation action plan’s completion date, which is a risk management activity. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 122.

Performing risk prioritization would best help to improve the risk register, which is a document that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses1. Risk prioritization is the process of ranking the risks according to their significance and urgency, based on their probability and impact2. By performing risk prioritization, the organization can:

Reduce the complexity and volume of the risk register, and focus on the most important and relevant risks that require immediate attention and action3.

Enhance the communication and understanding of the risks among the senior management and other stakeholders, and facilitate the decision-making and resource allocation for the risk responses4.

Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the risk management process, and ensure that the risk register is aligned with the organization’s risk strategy, objectives, and appetite5.

The other options are not the best ways to improve the risk register, because:

Analyzing the residual risk components is not the best way, as it may not address the issue of the large volume of risk scenarios. Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses6. Analyzing the residual risk components can help to measure the exposure or uncertainty of the assets, and to determine the need and extent of the risk responses. However, it may not reduce the complexity or volume of the risk register, as it may add more information or data to the risk register.

Validating the risk appetite level is not the best way, as it may not address the issue of the overwhelming risk scenarios. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives7. Validating the risk appetite levelcan help to ensure that the risk register is consistent and proportional to the risk level, and that the risk responses are suitable and feasible. However, it may not reduce the complexity or volume of the risk register, as it may require more information or data to validate the risk appetite level.

Conducting a risk assessment is not the best way, as it may not address the issue of the existing risk scenarios. Risk assessment is the process of estimating the probability and impact of the risks, and prioritizing the risks based on their significance and urgency. Conducting a risk assessment can help to identify and analyze new or emerging risks, and to update or revise the risk register accordingly. However, it may not reduce the complexity or volume of the risk register, as it may introduce more information or data to the risk register.

References =

Risk Register - CIO Wiki

Risk Prioritization - CIO Wiki

Risk Prioritization: A Guide for Project Managers - ProjectManager.com

Risk Prioritization: How to Prioritize Risks in Project Management - Clarizen

Risk Prioritization: A Key Step in Risk Management - ISACA

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

[Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

Business impact analysis (BIA) is the most useful analysis for prioritizing risk scenarios associated with loss of IT assets, because it evaluates the potential consequences of disruption tocritical business functions and processes. BIA helps to identify the most significant risks and the most urgent recovery needs. SWOT analysis, cost-benefit analysis, and root cause analysis are all useful tools for different purposes, but they do not directly address the impact of risk scenarios on business continuity and resilience. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 143

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 rangesof 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 primary function of the risk register is to provide supporting information for the development of an organization’s risk profile, which is a comprehensive and structured representation of therisks that the organization faces. The risk profile helps the organization to understand its risk exposure, appetite, and tolerance, and to align its risk management strategy with its business objectives and context. The risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, owners, and status. The risk register is anessential input for creating and updating the risk profile, as it provides the data and analysis of the risks that need to be prioritized and addressed. The other options are not the primary function of the risk register, although they may be related to it. The risk strategy is the plan and approach for managing the risks, and it is based on the risk profile. The risk process is the set of activities and tasks for identifying, assessing, responding, and monitoring the risks, and it is facilitated by the risk register. The risk map is a graphical tool for displaying the risks based on their impact and likelihood, and it is derived from the risk register. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Purpose of a risk register: Here’s what a risk register is used for; Risk Register: Definition, Importance, and Elements! - Bit Blog; What is a Risk Register? A Complete Guide | Capterra; Risk Registers: What Are They, When Should You Use Them, and Why?

Unapproved changes to firewall rules can lead tocritical security vulnerabilitiesordisruptions to business services, representing adirect impact on the business. This is more critical than documentation or governance concerns.

 The greatest concern with the situation of combining the second and third lines of defense in a new department that reports to a recently appointed C-level executive is that the independence of the internal third line of defense may be compromised. The second line of defense is the function that oversees and supports the risk management activities of the first line of defense, which is the function that owns and manages the risks. The third line of defense is the function that provides independent assurance of the risk management activities, such as the internal audit function. Combining the second and third lines of defense in a new department may compromise the independence of the internal third line of defense, as it may create a conflict of interest, bias, or influence among the functions, and impair the objectivity, credibility, and quality of the assurance activities. The independence of the internal third line of defense is essential for ensuring that the risk management activities are performed in a consistent and effective manner, and that the issues and gaps are identified and reported without fear or favor. The risk governanceapproach of the second and third lines of defense may differ, cost reductions may negatively impact the productivity of other departments, and the new structure may not be aligned to the organization’s internal control framework are also concerns, but they are not as great as the compromise of the independence of the internal third line of defense, as they do not directly affect the assurance and accountability of the risk management activities. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

Risk threshold exceptions are instances when a KRI exceeds or falls below a predefined level or point that triggers an action or a warning. An increase in the number of risk threshold exceptions indicates that the KRIs are not reflecting the current risk exposure or environment accurately oreffectively. This may suggest that the KRIs are outdated, irrelevant, or poorly defined. Therefore, the KRIs should be revised to ensure that they are aligned with the organizational objectives, risk appetite, and risk management strategy.

References

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions - SolveXia

•Choosing and Using Key Risk Indicators - Institute of Risk Management

Automated asset management software is the best method to track asset inventory because it can provide real-time, accurate, and comprehensive data on the location, condition, value, and usage of assets. It can also help to optimize asset utilization, reduce costs, improve compliance, and enhance security.

References

•Free Asset Tracking Templates | Smartsheet

•5 Best Asset Management Software (2023) – Forbes Advisor

•What Is Asset Tracking? Benefits & How It Works - Forbes

•Inventory and Asset Tracking: Keep it Simple (But Powerful)

The best course of action when a risk practitioner finds that the risk level of an emerging IT risk has increased, despite having an action plan to mitigate it, is to evaluate whether the selected controls are still appropriate. This is because the increase in the risk level may indicate that the current controls are not effective or sufficient to reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk, or that the risk environment has changed and new threats or vulnerabilities have emerged. By evaluating the appropriateness of the selected controls, the risk practitioner can identify the gaps or weaknesses in the control design or implementation, and determine the need for corrective actions or improvements. The other options are not the best course of action, because they do not address the root cause of the problem, but rather assume or ignore the effectiveness of the controls, as explained below:

A. Implement the planned controls and accept the remaining risk is not the best course of action, because it assumes that the planned controls are adequate and aligned with the organization’s risk appetite, which may not be the case if the risk level has increased. Implementing the planned controls without evaluating their appropriateness may result in wasting resources, exposing the organization to more risk, or missing opportunities to enhance the risk mitigation effectiveness.

B. Suspend the current action plan in order to reassess the risk is not the best course of action, because it ignores the effectiveness of the current controls, which may still provide some level ofrisk mitigation, even if they are not optimal. Suspending the current action plan may also delay the risk response and increase the risk exposure, especially if the risk is time-sensitive or dynamic. Reassessing the risk without evaluating the appropriateness of the current controls may also lead to inaccurate or incomplete risk information and analysis.

C. Revise the action plan to include additional mitigating controls is not the best course of action, because it assumes that the current controls are ineffective or insufficient, which may not be the case if the risk level has increased due to other factors, such as changes in the risk environment or the organization’s objectives. Revising the action plan without evaluating the appropriateness of the current controls may result in overcompensating, duplicating, or conflicting the controls, which may affect the risk mitigation efficiency and performance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, page 130. How to Mitigate Emerging Technology Risk - ISACA, Risk Mitigation Strategies: Types & Examples (+ Free Template), 5 Key Risk Mitigation Strategies (With Examples) | Indeed.com

The most important information to review from the acquired company to facilitate the task of updating the organization’s IT risk profile is the risk assessment and risk register. The risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT risks of the acquiredcompany. The risk register is a document that records the details of the IT risks, such as their sources, causes, consequences, likelihood, impact, and responses. By reviewing the risk assessment and risk register, the risk practitioner can gain a comprehensive and accurate understanding of the IT risk profile of the acquired company, and integrate it with the IT risk profile of the acquiring organization. Internal and external audit reports, risk disclosures in financial statements, and business objectives and strategies are other possible sources of information, but they are not as important as the risk assessment and risk register. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

The most important factor for management to consider when deciding whether to invest in an IT initiative that exceeds management’s risk appetite is C. Risk tolerance1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that management is willing to allow for any specific risk as the enterprise pursues its objectives. Risk tolerance reflects the degree of uncertainty that an organization is prepared to accept in relation to achieving its goals2

When an IT initiative exceeds management’s risk appetite, it means that the potential benefits of the initiative are outweighed by the potential negative consequences or losses that could result from the initiative. However, management may still decide to invest in the initiative if the level of uncertainty or variation is within the organization’s risk tolerance. For example, management may accept a higher level of risk for a strategic or innovative initiative that could provide a competitive advantage or a significant return on investment3

 Configuration updates are changes made to the settings, parameters, or components of an IT system or network. Configuration updates can affect the functionality, performance, security, and reliability of the system or network. Therefore, configuration updates should follow formal change control, which is a process that ensures that changes are authorized, documented, tested, and implemented in a controlled manner. Formal change control can help prevent errors, conflicts, disruptions, and vulnerabilities that may arise from configuration updates. Configuration updates that do not follow formal change control should be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner when determining the effectiveness of IT controls, as they can introduce newrisks or compromise existing controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.5: Control Monitoring and Reporting, p. 161-162.

Updating a risk register with assessment results for a key project must primarily capture action plans to address risk scenarios requiring treatment.

Risk Register Purpose:

Documentation of Risks:The risk register is a central repository for all identified risks and their respective treatment plans. It ensures that all risks are documented, tracked, and managed throughout the project lifecycle.

Action Plans:It is crucial to document action plans for risks that require treatment. This ensures that there are clear strategies in place to mitigate or manage these risks.

Importance of Action Plans:

Mitigation and Management:Action plans detail the steps necessary to mitigate identified risks, providing a clear path for risk management. This is vital for ensuring that risks do not negatively impact the project.

Accountability and Tracking:Including action plans in the risk register assigns responsibility and timelines for risk treatment, which is essential for accountability and tracking progress.

The risk owner is the person who should be accountable for any related losses to the organization, because they are the person who has the authority and responsibility to manage the risk and its associated controls.The risk owner is also the person who accepts the risk and its residual level, and who monitors and reports on the risk status and performance. The IT risk manager, the server administrator, and the risk practitioner are all involved in the riskmanagement process, but they are not the person who should be accountable for the risk and its outcomes, as they do not have the ultimate decision-making power and accountability for therisk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, page 79

Restricting access to the risk register on a need-to-know basis is important because it contains vulnerabilities and threats that could expose the organization to potential harm or loss if they are disclosed or exploited by unauthorized parties. The risk register is a tool that captures and documents the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes1. The risk register contains sensitive information such as the sources and causes of risk, the potential impacts and consequences of risk, the likelihood and frequency of risk occurrence, and the risk response actions and plans1. If this information is accessed by unauthorized parties, such as competitors, hackers, or malicious insiders, they could use it to launch attacks, sabotageoperations, or gain an unfair advantage over the organization. Therefore, access to the risk register should be limited to those who have a legitimate need and authorization to view, modify, or use the information, such as the risk owners, managers, or practitioners

Determining the business purpose of the application is the first thing that a risk practitioner should do when a shadow IT application is identified in a business owner’s business impactanalysis (BIA), because it helps to understand the rationale and value of the application, and the potential risks and issues that it may introduce or affect. A shadow IT application is an IT system or application that is used by the business units or employees without the knowledge or approval of the IT department or management. A shadow IT application may offer benefits such as convenience, efficiency, or innovation, but it may also pose risks such as security breaches, data loss, compatibility issues, or regulatory non-compliance. A BIA is a process of analyzing the potential impact of disruption to the critical business functions or processes, and identifying the recovery priorities and requirements. A BIA may reveal the existence of ashadow IT application, as it may be used to support or enable a critical business function or process. Determining the business purpose of the application is the first thing to do, as it helps to evaluate the necessity and suitability of the application, and to plan the appropriate actions to address the shadow IT application. Including the application in the business continuity plan (BCP), segregating the application from the network, and reporting the finding to management are all possible things to do after determining the business purpose of the application, but they are not the first thing to do, as they depend on the results of the evaluation of the application. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 143

The risk practitioner’s next step after learning of an incident that has affected a competitor is to develop risk scenarios, as it involves identifying and describing the potential sources, events, impacts, and responses of the risk that may affect the organization in a similar way as the competitor, and assessing the likelihood and magnitude of the risk. Activating the incident response plan, implementing compensating controls, and updating the risk register are not the next steps, as they are more related to the reaction, mitigation, or reporting of the risk, respectively, rather than the identification and assessment of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

 A risk portfolio is a collection of risks that an organization faces or may face in the future. Analyzing trends in key control indicators (KCIs) best enables a risk practitioner to proactively identify impacts on an organization’s risk portfolio, as KCIs measure and monitor the performance and effectiveness of the risk controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks. By analyzing the trends in KCIs, a risk practitioner can assess the current and potential risk exposure of the organization, and identify any changes or emerging risks that may affect the risk portfolio. Analyzing trends in KCIs can also help to evaluate the cost and benefit of the risk controls, and to determine the need for enhancing, modifying, or implementing new controls. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 246. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10. ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 246. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

 The greatest benefit of identifying appropriate risk owners is that accountability is established for risk treatment decisions. Risk owners are the individuals or groups who are responsible and accountable formanaging a specific risk and its associated actions and outcomes. By identifying appropriate risk owners, the organization can ensure that the risk treatment decisions are made by the people who have the authority, knowledge, and interest in the risk. Stakeholders beingconsulted, risk owners being informed, and responsibility being established are other possible benefits, but they are not as great as accountability being established. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

The best course of action to address the risk associated with data transfer if the relationship is terminated with the vendor is to ensure the language in the contract explicitly states who is accountable for each step of the data transfer process. This can help to avoid ambiguity, confusion, or disputes over the ownership, responsibility, and liability of the data and the data transfer process. Meeting with the business leaders, collecting requirements, and working with the information security officer are important activities, but they are not as effective as ensuring the contractual agreement is clear and enforceable. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the information and status of the identified risks and their responses. It includes the risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, priority, response, owner, action plan, status, etc.

Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors primarily helps to provide a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions, which are the decisions that are made based on the consideration and evaluation of the risks and their responses. Providing a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions helps to ensure that the decisions are consistent, appropriate, and proportional to the level and nature of the risks, and that they support the organization’s objectives and values. It also helps to optimize the balance between risk and return, and to create and protect value for the organization and its stakeholders.

The other options are not the primary benefits of periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of a risk register, which is to provide a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions.

Minimizing the number of risk scenarios for risk assessment means reducing the scope and depth of risk analysis and reporting, and impairing the organization’s ability to identify and respond to emerging or changing risks. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details onidentified risk factors does not necessarily minimize the number of risk scenarios for risk assessment, and it may not be a desirable or beneficial outcome for the organization.

Aggregating risk scenarios identified across different business units means combining or consolidating the risks that are identified by different parts or functions of the organization, and creating a holistic or integrated view of the organization’s risk profile. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors does not necessarily aggregate risk scenarios identified across different business units, and it may not be a sufficient or effective way to achieve a holistic or integrated view of the organization’s risk profile.

Building a threat profile of the organization for management review means creating or developing a summary or representation of the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, and presenting or reporting it to the senior management for their awareness and approval. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors does not necessarily build a threat profile of the organization for management review, and it may not be a comprehensive or reliable way to create or develop a summary or representation of the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 172

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The best way to justify the risk mitigation actions recommended in a risk assessment would be to focus on the business drivers, which are the factors that influence the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

Focusing on the business drivers means aligning the risk mitigation actions with the organization’s strategic goals, priorities, and values, and demonstrating how the actions will support or enhance the organization’s capabilities, opportunities, and competitive advantage12.

Focusing on the business drivers also means communicating the benefits, costs, and trade-offs of the risk mitigation actions to the relevant stakeholders, and showing how the actions will address the organization’s risk appetite, tolerance, and exposure12.

The other options are not the best way to justify the risk mitigation actions, but rather possible sources of information or guidance that may support the justification. For example:

Aligning with audit results is a way to validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk mitigation actions, and to identify any gaps or weaknesses that need improvement34. However, audit results may not reflect the organization’s current or future business drivers, and may not capture the full scope or impact of the risk mitigation actions34.

Benchmarking with competitor’s actions is a way to compare the organization’s risk mitigation actions with the best practices or standards of the industry or market, and to identify any areas of improvement or differentiation56. However, competitor’s actions may not be suitable or applicable for the organization’s specific context, needs, or challenges, and may not align with the organization’s business drivers56.

Referencing best practice is a way to adopt the proven or accepted methods or techniques for risk mitigation, and to ensure the quality and consistency of the risk mitigation actions78. However, best practice may not be the most optimal or innovative solution for the organization’s unique situation, and may not address the organization’s business drivers78. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

2: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

3: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

4: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

5: Benchmarking IT Risk Management Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 4, 2017

6: Benchmarking: A Tool for Improving IT Risk Management, ISACA Now Blog, March 27, 2017

7: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2018

8: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Now Blog, January 9, 2018

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.

The management’s primary consideration when approving risk response action plans should be the changes in residual risk after implementing the plans. Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses1. It indicates the degree of exposure or uncertainty that the organization still faces, and the potential impact or consequences of the risk events. The management should evaluate the effectiveness and adequacy of the risk responses, and decide whether the residual risk is acceptable or not2. The management should also compare the residual risk with the risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives3. The management should ensure that the residual risk is aligned with the risk appetite, and that the risk responses are consistent and proportional to the risk level4.

The other options are not the primary consideration when approving risk response action plans, because:

Ability of the action plans to address multiple risk scenarios is a desirable but not essential criterion for approving risk response action plans. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how a risk event could occur and what the consequences could be5. They can help to understand and communicate the nature and impact of the risks, and to design and evaluate the risk responses6. However, not all risk scenarios are equally likely or relevant, and some risk scenarios may be too complex or improbable to address. Therefore, the ability of the action plansto address multiple risk scenarios is not the primary consideration, but rather a secondary or supplementary one.

Ease of implementing the risk treatment solution is a practical but not critical criterion for approving risk response action plans. Risk treatment is the process of selecting and applying appropriate measures to modify the risk7. It can involve different strategies, such as avoid, reduce, transfer, or accept the risk8. The ease of implementing the risk treatment solution depends on various factors, such as the availability of resources, the feasibility of the solution, or the cooperation of the stakeholders. However, the ease of implementation is not the primary consideration, but rather a supporting or facilitating one.

Prioritization for implementing the action plans is a useful but not vital criterion for approving risk response action plans. Prioritization is the process of ranking the action plans according to their importance, urgency, or impact. It can help to allocate the resources, schedule the activities, and monitor the progress of the action plans. However, prioritization is not the primary consideration, but rather a subsequent or follow-up one.

References =

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite: What It Is and Why It Matters - Gartner

Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack - ISACA

Risk Treatment - CIO Wiki

Risk Treatment Plan - CIO Wiki

[Prioritization - CIO Wiki]

 The best way to address the request for IT risk profile reports associated with specific departments would be to use key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given operational risk1. KRIs can help to monitor the changes in risk levels over time, identify emerging risks, and trigger risk response actions when the risk exceeds the acceptable thresholds2. KRIs can also help to allocate resources for risk mitigation by prioritizing the risks that pose the greatest threat to the business objectives and performance of each department. The other options are not the best ways to address the request, as they do not provide the same level of insight and guidance as KRIs. The cost associated with each control may indicate the efficiency of the risk mitigation, but not the effectiveness or the necessity. Historical risk assessments may provide some baseline data, but not the current or future risk trends. Information from the risk register may include too much detail or irrelevant information, and not the key risk factors that need to be monitored and reported. References = Key Risk Indicators; Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that helps organizations monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their operations, objectives, or performance. A good KRI should have certain characteristics that make it effective for risk management. One of these characteristics is repeatability, which means that the KRI can be measured consistently over time and across different situations. A repeatable KRI ensures that the risk data is reliable, comparable, and meaningful, and that the risk trends and patterns can be identified and analyzed. A repeatable KRI also supports the decision-making process by providing timely and accurate information on the risk level and status. Therefore, repeatability is the most important attribute of a KRI. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 441

 The best control to help reduce the risk of fraudulent internal transactions in several business applications is the segregation of duties. Segregation of duties is the principle of dividing the roles and responsibilities of different individuals or groups involved in a business process or an IT service, so that no one person or group has complete control over the entire process or service. Segregation of duties can help to prevent or detect fraud, errors, conflicts of interest, or misuse of resources, by ensuring that there are checks and balances, and that there is adequate oversight and accountability. Segregation of duties can also help to reduce the risk of collusion, compromise, or coercion among the internal staff, by limiting their access and authority to thebusiness applications and data. Periodic user privileges review, log monitoring, and periodic internal audits are also useful controls, but they are not as effective as segregation of duties, as they are reactive and detective measures, rather than proactive and preventive measures. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

Software as a Service (SaaS) is a cloud computing model that provides software applications over the internet, without requiring the users to install or maintain them on their own devices. SaaS vendors are responsible for hosting, managing, and updating the software applications, and providing technical support and security to the users. The key performance indicator (KPI) that would best measure the risk of a service outage when using a SaaS vendor is the frequency and duration of unplanned downtime, which is the amount and length of time that the software applications are unavailable or inaccessible due to unexpected events, such as network failures, server crashes, power outages, cyberattacks, etc. The frequency and duration of unplanned downtime indicate the reliability and availability of the SaaS vendor, and the potential impact of the service outage on the users’ business operations and productivity. References = 3

The IT control environment is the set of standards, processes, and structures that provide the basis for carrying out IT internal control across the organization1. The IT control environment comprises the IT governance, IT policies and procedures, IT organizational structure, IT roles and responsibilities, IT competencies and training, and IT culture and ethics2. The effectiveness of the IT control environment can be measured by how well it supports the achievement of the organization’s IT objectives, such as IT reliability, security, compliance, and performance3.

One of the best ways to provide the most up-to-date information about the effectiveness of the organization’s overall IT control environment is to perform periodic penetrationtesting. Penetration testing is the process of simulating real-world cyberattacks on the organization’s IT systems, networks, and applications, to identify and exploit any vulnerabilities, weaknesses, or gaps in the IT control environment4. Penetration testing can help to:

Evaluate the current state and maturity of the IT control environment and its alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

Detect and prioritize the most critical and urgent IT risks and threats that may compromise the organization’s IT objectives or assets

Test and validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing IT controls and their ability to prevent, detect, or respond to cyberattacks

Provide recommendations and feedback for improving the IT control environment and enhancing the IT security posture and resilience of the organization

References = COSO – Control Environment - Deloitte, How to use COSO to assess IT controls - Journal of Accountancy, What is Penetration Testing?, [Penetration Testing: A Guide for Business Leaders]

Vulnerable firmware that lacks updates is a significant security risk, as it can be exploited by attackers. Addressing this issue aligns withSecure IoT Deployment Practicesto reduce exposure.

Alignment to business objectives is the most important factor when developing a business case for a proposed security investment, because it demonstrates how the investment will support the enterprise’s mission, vision, and goals. A business case should show how the security investment will contribute to the value creation, risk reduction, and performance improvement of the enterprise. The other options are not the most important factors, although they may also be included in the business case. The identification of control requirements, the consideration of new business strategies, and the inclusion of strategy for regulatory compliance are secondary factors that depend on the alignment to business objectives. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers

Completing a gap analysis identifies discrepancies between current controls and the requirements of the IT control framework, ensuring a focused approach to compliance. This supportsRisk Assessment for Compliance Requirements.

The most important thing to include in a risk assessment of an emerging technology is the impact and likelihood ratings of the risks associated with the technology. Impact and likelihood ratings are the measures of the potential consequences and probabilities of the risk events that could affect the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives. Impact and likelihood ratings can help to evaluate the level andnature of the risk exposure, and to prioritize the risks for further analysis and response. Impact and likelihood ratings can also help to communicate the risk profile and appetite of the enterprise, and to support the risk-based decision making. Risk response plans, risk and control ownership, and key controls are not as important as impact and likelihood ratings, as they are the outputs or outcomes of the risk assessment process, and not the inputs or components of the risk assessment process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

The greatest risk associated with inappropriate classification of data is users having unauthorized access to sensitive information. Proper data classification ensures that access controls are applied appropriately, protecting sensitive data from unauthorized access.

Importance of Data Classification

Data classification involves categorizing data based on its level of sensitivity and the impact that unauthorized access, disclosure, modification, or destruction would have on the organization.

It ensures that appropriate security measures are applied according to the data's classification.

Risks of Inappropriate Classification

Unauthorized Access: If data is not classified correctly, sensitive information may not receive the necessary protections, leading to unauthorized access.

Lack of Accountability: Misclassification can result in unclear responsibilities for data protection, but the primary concern remains unauthorized access.

Inaccurate Recovery Time Objectives (RTOs): While important, this is secondary to the risk of unauthorized access.

Inaccurate Record Management Data: This can affect operational efficiency but is not as critical as unauthorized access.

Implementing Effective Classification

Organizations must have a clear data classification policy and ensure it is followed consistently.

Regular audits and reviews should be conducted to verify that data is classified appropriately and that access controls are enforced.

References

CISM Review Manual Full text.html, emphasizing the importance of proper data classification and the risks associated with misclassification, especially unauthorized access to data​​.

 The most important consideration for protecting data assets in a business application system is to ensure that the application controls are aligned with the data classification rules. Data classification rules define the level of sensitivity, confidentiality, and criticality of the data, andthe corresponding security requirements and controls. Application controls are the policies, procedures, and technical measures that are implemented at the application level to ensure the security, integrity, and availability of the data. Application controls should be designed and configured to match the data classification rules, so that the data is protected according to its value and risk. For example, if the data is classified as highly confidential, the application controls should enforce strong authentication, encryption, access control, logging, and auditing mechanisms. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 214.

 The BEST way to enable mitigation of newly identified risk factors related to internet of Things (loT) is to introduce control procedures early in the life cycle, because it can help to prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk factors, and to ensure that the loT devices and systems are designed and developed with security and quality in mind. The control procedures should include requirements analysis, design review, testing, validation, and verification of the loT devices and systems. The other options are not as effective as introducing control procedures early in the life cycle, because:

Option B: Implementing loT device software monitoring is a good way to detect and respond to the risk factors related to loT, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors, which is the proactive and preventive approach. Software monitoring is a reactive and corrective measure that may not be able to prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk factors, especially if they are embedded in the hardware or firmware of the loT devices.

Option C: Performing periodic risk assessments of loT is a necessary way to identify and evaluate the risk factors related to loT, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors, which is the action-oriented and solution-focused approach. Risk assessment is an analytical and descriptive process that may not provide the specific and effective measures to address or mitigate the risk factors, especially if they are complex or dynamic.

Option D: Performing secure code reviews is a useful way to verify and improve the security and quality of the software of the loT devices and systems, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors related to loT, which may involve more than just the software aspect. The risk factors related to loT may also include the hardware, firmware, network, communication, data, andintegration aspects, which may not be covered or resolved by the code reviews. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 214.

According to the ISACA CRISC Review Manual, an enterprise risk management (ERM) process is a holistic approach to identifying, analyzing, responding to, and monitoring all types of risk that affect the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives. The ERM process should consider all types of risk, including strategic, operational, financial, compliance, and reputational risks. Among these, strategic risks are the most important, as they have the potential to affect the enterprise’s mission, vision, and goals. Therefore, risk with strategic impact should be includedin the ERM process. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 17.

 IT risk owners are the most appropriate people to review the completed list of potential key risk indicators (KRIs) and select the ones that should be implemented. IT risk owners are the individuals who have the authority and accountability to manage the IT risks within their scope of responsibility. They are also responsible for defining the risk appetite, tolerance, and thresholds for their IT operations, and for ensuring that the KRIs are aligned with the business objectives and risk management strategy. IT security managers, IT control owners, and IT auditors are also involved in the risk management process, but they do not have the same level of authority and accountability as IT risk owners, and they may have different perspectives and priorities on the selection of KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 1-13.

The risk profile of an organization is a summary of the key risks that affect its objectives, operations, and performance. The risk profile can help senior management understand the current and potential exposure of the organization to various sources of uncertainty, and prioritize the risk response accordingly. An external security audit can reveal multiple findings related to control noncompliance, which indicate that the existing controls are not adequate, effective, or aligned with the organization’s risk appetite. These findings can have a significant impact on the organization’s risk profile, as they can increase the likelihood and/or impact of adverse events, such as data breaches, cyberattacks, regulatory fines, reputational damage, etc. Therefore, the most important information that the risk practitioner should communicate to senior management is the impact to the organization’s risk profile, as it can help them make informed decisions about the risk response and allocation of resources. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Risk Profile, p. 193-195.

The primary focus of a risk owner once a decision is made to mitigate a risk is to ensure that the control design reduces the risk to an acceptable level. This means that the risk owner shouldverify that the control objectives, specifications, and implementation are aligned with the risk mitigation plan, and that the control is effective in reducing the risk exposure to within the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. The risk owner should also ensure that the control design is consistent with the enterprise’s policies, standards, and procedures, and that it complies with any relevant laws, regulations, or contractual obligations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.4, page 185.

According to the FIC Article by FSCA, accountable institutions remain fully accountable, responsible and liable for any compliance failures that may result from or be associated with an outsourcing arrangement and as such, liability and/or culpability for non-compliance with the FIC Act obligations cannot be transferred to a third-party service provider2. Therefore, even if a business process is outsourced to a cloud service provider, the organization still has the ultimate responsibility and accountability for the risk associated with the outsourced process. The other options are not correct, as they imply that the cloud service provider can take over the accountability or responsibility for the risk, or that the organization can mitigate the risk by acquiring insurance, which is not the case.

The most helpful activity for a risk practitioner when ensuring that mitigated risk remains within acceptable limits is to implement a process for ongoing monitoring of control effectiveness. This would enable the risk practitioner to track the performance of the controls, identify any deviations or gaps, and take corrective actions as needed. Ongoing monitoring of control effectiveness would also provide assurance that the risk responses are working as intended, and that the residual risk is aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 188.

A web-based service provider is an organization that offers online services or applications to its customers or users, such as e-commerce, social media, cloud computing, etc. A web-based service provider depends on the availability, reliability, and security of its web servers, networks, and systems to deliver its services or applications.

A low risk appetite for system outages means that the organization is not willing to accept a high level or frequency of system outages, which are interruptions or disruptions in the normal operation or functionality of the web servers, networks, or systems. System outages can cause customer dissatisfaction, revenue loss, reputation damage, or legal liability for the web-based service provider.

A current risk profile for online security is the current state or condition of the online security risks that may affect the web-based service provider’s objectives and operations. It includes the identification, analysis, and evaluation of the online security risks, and the prioritization and response to them based on their significance and urgency.

The most relevant observation to escalate to senior management is an increase in attempted distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, which are malicious attacks that aim to overwhelm or overload the web servers, networks, or systems with a large volume or frequency of requests or traffic, and prevent them from responding to legitimate requests or traffic. An increase in attempted DDoS attacks indicates a high likelihood and impact of system outages, and a high level of threat or vulnerability for the web-based service provider’s online security. Escalating this observation to senior management can help them to understand the severity and urgency of the risk, and to decide on the appropriate risk response and allocation of resources.

The other options are not the most relevant observations to escalate to senior management, because they do not indicate a high likelihood or impact of system outages, and they may not be relevant or actionable for senior management.

An increase in attempted website phishing attacks means an increase in malicious attempts to deceive or trick the web-based service provider’s customers or users into providing their personal or financial information, such as usernames, passwords, credit card numbers, etc., by impersonating the web-based service provider’s website or email. An increase in attemptedwebsite phishing attacks indicates a high level of threat or vulnerability for the web-based service provider’s online security, but it may not directly cause system outages, unless thephishing attacks are used to compromise the web servers, networks, or systems. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval.

A decrease in achievement of service level agreements (SLAs) means a decrease in the extent or degree to which the web-based service provider meets or exceeds the agreed or expected standards or criteria for the quality, performance, or availability of its services or applications, as specified in the contracts or agreements with its customers or users. A decrease in achievement of SLAs indicates a low level of customer satisfaction, retention, or loyalty, and a low level of competitiveness or profitability for the web-based service provider. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval.

A decrease in remediated web security vulnerabilities means a decrease in the number or percentage of web security vulnerabilities that have been identified and resolved or mitigated by the web-based service provider. Web security vulnerabilities are weaknesses or flaws in the web servers, networks, or systems that can be exploited by malicious attackers to compromise or damage the web-based service provider’s online security. A decrease in remediated web security vulnerabilities indicates a low level of effectiveness or efficiency for the web-based service provider’s web security controls or processes. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 161

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep