CRISC Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

The best control to reduce the likelihood of a successful network attack through social engineering is security awareness training. Security awareness training is a program that educates and trains employees on the common types, techniques, and indicators of social engineering attacks, such as phishing, baiting, pretexting, and quid pro quo12. Security awareness training also teaches employees how to protect themselves and the organization from social engineering attacks, such as by verifying the identity and legitimacy of the sender or caller, avoiding clicking on suspicious links or attachments, reporting any suspicious or unusual activity, and following the organization’s security policies and procedures. Security awareness training can help to reduce the likelihood of a successful network attack through social engineering, because it can increase the employees’ knowledge, skills, and confidence in recognizing and responding to social engineering attempts, and it can also foster a culture of security and responsibility among the employees. The other options are not the best control, although they may be useful or complementary to security awareness training. Automated controls are technical or procedural controls that are performed by a system or a device without human intervention, such as firewalls, antivirus software, encryption, and backups. Automated controls can help to protect the network from external or internal threats, but they may not be effective against social engineering attacks, which rely on humaninteraction and manipulation.Multifactor authentication is a security mechanism that requires users to provide two or more pieces of evidence to verify their identity and access a system or a service, such as a password, a token, a fingerprint, or a facial recognition. Multifactor authentication can help to prevent unauthorized access to the network, but it may not prevent social engineering attacks, which may persuade users to share or compromise their authentication factors. Employee sanctions are disciplinary actions that are taken against employees who violate the organization’s security policies and procedures, such as warnings, fines, suspensions, or terminations. Employee sanctions can help to deter and punish employees who fall victim to or facilitate social engineering attacks, but they may not prevent or reduce the likelihood of social engineering attacks, and they may also create a negative or fearful work environment. References = Avoiding Social Engineering and Phishing Attacks | CISA, What is Social Engineering | Attack Techniques & Prevention Methods …, 10 Types of Social Engineering Attacks - CrowdStrike

 It is most important for a risk practitioner to have an awareness of an organization’s processes in order to identify potential sources of risk, as this enables the risk practitioner to understand the objectives, activities, resources, dependencies, and outputs of the processes, and how they may be affected by internal or external factors that create uncertainty or variability. Identifying potential sources of risk is the first step in the risk identification process, which aims to find, recognize, and describe the risks that could affect the achievement of the organization’s goals. The other options are not the most important reasons for a risk practitioner to have an awareness of an organization’s processes, although they may be related or beneficial aspects of it. Performing a business impact analysis is a part of the risk analysis process, which aims to understand the nature and extent of the risks and their consequences on the organization’s objectives and functions. Establishing risk guidelines is a part of the risk governance process, which aims to define and communicate the risk management principles, policies, and roles across the organization. Understanding control design is a part of the risk response process, which aims to select and implement the appropriate actions to modify the risk level or achieve the risk objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 47.

To help ensure all applicable risk scenarios are incorporated into the risk register, it is most important to review the risk assessment results, which are the outputs of the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that affect a project or an organization. The riskassessment results provide information on the sources, causes, impacts, likelihood, and severity of the risks, as well as the existing controls and their effectiveness. The risk assessment results help to determine the risk level and priority of each risk scenario, and to select the most appropriate risk response strategy. The risk assessment results are the basis for creating and updating the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks theidentified risks, their characteristics, responses, owners, and status12. The other options are not the most important factors to review, as they are either derived from or dependent on the risk assessment results. The risk mitigation approach is the plan and actions to reduce the impact or likelihood of the risks, and it is based on the risk assessment results. The cost-benefit analysis is the comparison of the costs and benefits of implementing the risk response strategy, and it is influenced by the risk assessment results. The vulnerability assessment results are the identification and measurement of the weaknesses or gaps in the information systems or resources, and they are part of the risk assessment results. References = Risk Assessment in Project Management | PMI; Risk Assessment Process: Definition, Steps, and Examples; Risk Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics; Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; What Is a Risk Register? | Smartsheet

According to the Gaining the competitive edge – measuring and assessing an organization’s risk culture article, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite should be aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and values, and should reflect the organization’s risk culture and capabilities. One of the main considerations when validating an organization’s risk appetite is the capacity to withstand loss, which is the ability of the organization to absorb the impact of adverse events without jeopardizing its viability or reputation. The capacity to withstand loss depends on various factors, such as the financial strength, the operational resilience, the governance structure, and the stakeholder expectations of the organization. By assessing the capacity to withstand loss, the organization can determine if its risk appetite is realistic and appropriate, or if it needs to be adjusted to match its risk profile and environment. References = Gaining the competitive edge – measuring and assessing an organization’s risk culture

A project sponsor is the person or group who provides the financial, political, or organizational support for a project, and who has the authority to approve or reject the project’s objectives, scope, budget, schedule, and deliverables.

The primary recipient of reports showing the progress of a current IT risk mitigation project should be the project sponsor, because they are ultimately responsible for the success or failure of the project, and they need to be informed of the project’s status, issues, risks, and achievements on a regular basis.

The other options are not the primary recipients of reports showing the progress of a current IT risk mitigation project. They are either secondary or not essential for project reporting.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 21

Information Technology & Security, page 15

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 13

The primary reason to update a risk register with risk assessment results is to communicate the level and priority of assessed risk to management, as this enables them to make informed decisions about risk response and allocation of resources. The risk register is a tool for documenting and reporting the current status of risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, and responses. Updating the risk register with risk assessment results ensures that the information is accurate, relevant, and timely. The risk register also helps to monitor and track the progress and effectiveness of risk management activities. The other options are not the primary reasons to update the risk register, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of doing so. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Assessment, page 109.

 The most essential content to include in an IT risk awareness program is how to comply with the organization’s IT risk and information security policies. This will help to ensure that the staff members are aware of their roles and responsibilities, and that they follow the best practices and standards to protect the organization’s information assets and systems. Compliance with the IT risk and information security policies also helps to reduce the likelihood and impact of IT-related incidents and breaches, and to align the IT activities with the organization’s objectives and strategies. Populating risk register entries, prioritizing IT-related actions, and defining the IT risk framework are important aspects of IT risk management, but they are not the most essential content to include in an IT risk awareness program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.1.1.2, page 2291

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 646.

The best method for identifying vulnerabilities is periodic network scanning. Network scanning is a process of scanning and probing the network devices, systems, and applications to discover and analyze their security weaknesses, such as configuration errors, outdated software, or open ports. Network scanning can help to identify the vulnerabilities that could be exploited by attackers to gain unauthorized access, compromise data, or disrupt services. Periodic network scanning is the best method, because it can provide a regular and comprehensive view of the network security posture, and it can detect and address the new or emerging vulnerabilities in a timely manner. Periodic network scanning can also help to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements and standards for network security, such as the ISO/IEC 27001, the NIST SP 800-53, or the PCI DSS123. The other options are not the best method, although they may be useful or complementary to periodic network scanning. Batch job failure monitoring is a process of monitoring and reporting the failures or errors that occur during the execution of batch jobs, such as data processing, backup, or synchronization. Batch job failure monitoring can help to identify the operational or technical issues that affect the performance or availability of the network services, but it does not directly identify the security vulnerabilities or the potential threats. Annual penetration testing is a process of simulating a real-world attack on the network devices, systems, and applications to evaluate their security defenses and resilience. Penetration testing can help to identify and exploit the vulnerabilities that could be used by attackers to compromise the network security, and to provide recommendations for improvement. However, annual penetration testing is not the best method, because it is not frequent or consistent enough to keep up with the changing and evolving network security landscape, and it may not cover all thenetwork components or scenarios. Risk assessments are a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks associated with the network devices, systems, and applications. Risk assessments can help to estimate the probability and impact of the vulnerabilities and the threats, and to prioritize and respond to the risks accordingly. However, risk assessments are not the same as or a substitute for vulnerability identification, as they rely on the vulnerability information as an input, rather than an output. References = Vulnerability Testing: Methods, Tools, and 10 Best Practices, ISO/IEC 27001 Information Security Management, NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and owners. The owner for each risk scenario is the person or group whohas the authority and accountability to manage the risk and its response. The best way to identify the owner for each risk scenario in a risk register is to map the identified risk factors to specific business processes. Risk factors are the internal and external variables that influence the occurrence and impact of risks. Business processes are the activities that produce value for the enterprise, such as sales, marketing, production, or delivery. By mapping the risk factors to the business processes, the risk practitioner can determine which business process is affected by or contributes to the risk, and who is responsible for the business process. The owner for each risk scenario should be the person or group who is responsible for the business process that is associated with the risk. The other options are not the best way to identify the owner for each risk scenario, as they involve different criteria or methods:

Determining which departments contribute most to risk means that the risk practitioner evaluates the degree of involvement or exposure of each department to the risk. This may not be a reliable or consistent way to identify the owner for each risk scenario, as the risk may span across multiple departments, or the department may not have the authority or accountability to manage the risk.

Allocating responsibility for risk factors equally to asset owners means that the risk practitioner assigns the same level of responsibility to each person or group who owns an asset that is affected by or contributes to the risk. An asset is a resource that has value for the enterprise, such as hardware, software, data, or people. This may not be a fair or effective way to identify the owner for each risk scenario, as the asset owners may have different levels of involvement or exposure to the risk, or may not have the authority or accountability to manage the risk.

Determining resource dependency of assets means that the risk practitioner analyzes the relationship and interdependence of the assets that are affected by or contribute to the risk. This may help to identify the potential impact or likelihood of the risk, but it does not directly help to identify the owner for each risk scenario, as the resource dependency may not reflect the authority or accountability to manage the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.1, pp. 95-96.

 According to the 6 Best Practices to Ensure Software License Compliance article, the best way to determine software license compliance is to conduct regular internal compliance audits. These self-assessments can be done with the help of software license management companies. The goal is to see where compliance issues lie and to take corrective actions before they become seriousproblems. Periodic compliance reviews can help to avoid fines, penalties, lawsuits, and reputational damage that may result from software license violations. They can also help to optimize software spending and utilization, and to identify any gaps or opportunities for improvement in the software license management process. References = 6 Best Practices to Ensure Software License Compliance

The first course of action for an organization that has received notification that it is a potential victim of a cybercrime that may have compromised sensitive customer data is to invoke the incident response plan. An incident response plan is a set of procedures and guidelines that defines the roles and responsibilities of the incident response team, the communication and escalation channels, the incident identification and classification criteria, the incident containment and eradication strategies, the incident recovery and restoration activities, and the incident documentation and reporting requirements. Invoking the incident response plan as soon as possible is crucial to minimize the damage and disruption caused by the cybercrime, to preserve the evidence and facilitate the investigation, and to comply with the legal andregulatory obligations. The other options are not the first course of action, although they may be subsequent or concurrent steps in the incident response process. Determining the business impact is a part of the incident assessment and prioritization phase, which helps to evaluate the severity and scope of the incident and to allocate the appropriate resources and actions. Conducting a forensic investigation is a part of the incident analysis and evidence collection phase, which helps to identify the source and cause of the incident and to support the legal and disciplinary actions. Invoking the business continuity plan (BCP) is a part of the incident recovery and restoration phase, which helps to resume the normal operations and services and to mitigate the adverse effects of the incident. References = The National Cyber Incident Response Plan (NCIRP), Cyber Incident Response Plan | Cyber.gov.au, [Cyber Incident Response: A Framework for Preparation and Success], [Cyber Incident Response Plan: How to Create One for Your Business]

The best course of action when risk is found to be above the acceptable risk appetite is to execute the risk response plan, which is the set of actions and measures that are designed to reduce, avoid, transfer, or accept the risk. The risk response plan is based on the risk assessment results, the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and the cost-benefit analysis of the risk response options. The risk response plan helps to achieve the optimal balance between the potential benefits and threats of the risk, and to align the risk decisions with the organizational objectives and context. The other options are not the best courses of action, as they are either too passive or too reactive in dealing with the risk. Reviewing risk tolerance levels may help to adjust the acceptable variation between the risk thresholds and the business objectives, but itdoes not address the actual risk level or impact. Maintaining the current controls may help to prevent the risk from increasing further, but it does not reduce the existing risk exposure or mitigation. Analyzing the effectiveness of controls may help to identify the gaps or weaknesses in the current risk management, but it does not implement the necessary improvements or changes. References = Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips; A Practitioner’s Guide to Ethical Decision Making; How to Manage Project Risk: A 5-Step Guide

 The effectiveness of a control monitoring program can be measured by how quickly it can detect and correct any control failures that may compromise the achievement of the organization’s objectives. A shorter time between control failure and failure detection means that the control monitoring program is able to identify and report the issues promptly, and initiate the remediation actions accordingly. This can reduce the impact and likelihood of the risks associated with the control failures, and enhance the performance and reliability of the controls. The other options are not as good indicators of the effectiveness of a control monitoring program, because they do not reflect the timeliness and responsiveness of the program, but rather the scope, effort, or frequency of the program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, page 130.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the potential causes, impacts, and responses of a risk event. Risk scenarios are useful tools for identifying, analyzing, and communicating risks in a clear and understandable way. The most important factor when developing risk scenarios is to ensure that they are relevant to the organization, as this helps to capture the specific context, objectives, processes, and resources of the organization, and to reflect the actual risk exposure and appetite of the organization. Relevant risk scenarios also help to engage and involve the stakeholders, and to facilitate risk-based decision making and action planning. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 206.

 Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics used by organizations to monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their objectives and performance. KRIs also provide early warning signals that help organizations identify, analyze, and address risks before they escalate into significant issues1. The most important factor to understand when developing KRIs is stakeholder requirements, which are the needs and expectations of the persons or entities that have an interest or influence in the organization’s risk management2. By understanding stakeholder requirements, the organization can ensure that the KRIs are aligned with the organization’s strategy, vision, and mission, and that they reflect the current and emerging risks and their potential consequences. Understanding stakeholder requirements can also help to establish and communicate the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders, and to enforce the accountability and performance of the risk management. KRI thresholds, integrity of the source data, andcontrol environment are not the most important factors to understand when developing KRIs, as they do not provide the same level of insight and relevance as stakeholder requirements. KRI thresholds are the values or ranges that indicate the level of risk exposure and the need for action or escalation3. KRI thresholds can help to measure and monitor the performance and compliance of the risk management, but they do not ensure that the KRIs are appropriate and accurate for the organization’s risk profile. Integrity of the source data is the quality and reliability of the data that are used to support or enable the development of KRIs4. Integrity of the source data can enhance the validity and consistency of the KRIs, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are comprehensive and compatible with the organization’s risk environment. Control environment is the set of policies, processes, and systems that provide the foundation and structure for the risk management5. Control environment can improve the security and efficiency of the risk management, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are relevant and realistic for the organization’s risk objectives and strategies. References = 1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture2: Stakeholder Requirements - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics3: Risk Threshold: Definition, Meaning & Example - PM Study Circle4: Data Integrity - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics5: Control Environment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Key Risk Indicators, pp. 181-185.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, impact analysis is the process of estimating and evaluating the potential effects of a risk event on the organization’s objectives, processes, resources, and risks. Impact analysis helps to quantify and qualify the severity and likelihood of the risk, and to identify the possible consequences and implications for the organization. Impact analysis is the first step that should be done when a risk practitioner learns about a new threat, as it helps to assess the current level of risk exposure and the urgency of the risk response. Impact analysis also helps to communicate and report the risk to the relevant stakeholders, and to facilitate risk-based decision making and action planning. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 208.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics used to measure and evaluate the achievement of the organization’s objectives and strategies1. KPIs for critical IT assets are KPIs that focus onthe performance and value of the IT assets that are essential for the organization’s operations and functions2. KPIs for critical IT assets may include metrics such as availability, reliability, utilization, cost, and security of the IT assets3. The need to review and update KPIs for critical IT assets may be driven by various factors, such as changes in the business environment, customer expectations, or regulatory requirements. However, the most likely factor that would drive the need to review and update KPIs for critical IT assets is the outcomes of periodic risk assessments. A risk assessment is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts on the organization’s objectives and performance4. A periodic risk assessment is a risk assessment that is performed at regular intervals, such as monthly, quarterly, or annually, to capture the changes and updates in the risk environment and the risk profile5. The outcomes of periodic risk assessments would most likely drive the need to review and update KPIs for critical IT assets, as they would provide insights into the current and emerging risks that may affect the performance and value of the critical IT assets, as well as the effectiveness and efficiency of the existingand planned controls and responses. By reviewing and updating the KPIs for critical IT assets based on the outcomes of periodic risk assessments, the organization can ensure that the KPIs are relevant, realistic, and aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and that they provide accurate and timely information for decision making and reporting. The outsourcing of related IT processes, changes in service level objectives, and findings from continuous monitoring are not the most likely factors that would drive the need to review and update KPIs for critical IT assets, as they do not provide the same level of information and impact as the outcomes of periodic risk assessments. The outsourcing of related IT processes is a decision that involves transferring some or all of the IT processes that support or enable the critical IT assets to an external service provider. The outsourcing of related IT processes may affect the performance and value of the critical IT assets, but it does not necessarily require a review and update of the KPIs for critical IT assets, as the KPIs may still be valid and applicable for the outsourced IT processes. Changes in service level objectives are changes in the expected or agreed level of quality or performance of the IT services that support or enable the critical IT assets. Changes in service level objectives may affect the performance and value of the critical IT assets, but they do not necessarily require a review and update of the KPIs for critical IT assets, as the KPIs may still be consistent and compatible with the changed service level objectives. Findings from continuous monitoring are the results or outcomes of the ongoing observation and measurement of the performance and compliance of the IT processes and systems that support or enable the critical IT assets. Findings from continuous monitoring may affect the performance and value of the critical IT assets, but they do not necessarily require a review and update of the KPIs for critical IT assets, as the KPIs may still be relevant and reliable for the continuously monitored IT processes and systems. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

A risk heat map is a graphical tool that displays the level of risk for each risk area based on the impact and likelihood of occurrence. It also provides a summary of the risk assessment results, such as the number and severity of risks, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the risk response strategies. A risk heat map can help senior management to understand the risk profile of the organization, prioritize the risks that need attention, and allocate resources accordingly. A risk heat map is more effective than the other options because it can communicate complex information in a simple and visual way, and it can highlight the key risk areas and trends. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.2, page 97.

A risk management program is a set of processes, policies, and tools that enable an enterprise to identify, analyze, evaluate, treat, monitor, and communicate its risks. The maturity level of a risk management program indicates how well the program is integrated, standardized, and aligned with the enterprise’s objectives, culture, and values. The best indication that an organization’s risk management program has not reached the desired maturity level is large fluctuations in risk ratings between assessments. Risk ratings are the measures of the impact and likelihood of the risks, and they should be consistent and comparable across the enterprise and over time. Large fluctuations in risk ratings between assessments suggest that the risk management program is not stable, reliable, or effective, and that the risk identification and analysis methods are not robust, accurate, or transparent. The other options are not as indicative of the maturity level of the risk management program, as they involve different aspects or outcomes of the risk management program:

Significant increases in risk mitigation budgets means that the enterprise is spending more resources on implementing risk responses, such as controls, policies, or procedures. This may indicate that the enterprise is facing more or higher risks, or that the risk responses are more costly or complex, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the enterprise’s risk appetite, tolerance, and strategy.

A steady increase in the time to recover from incidents means that the enterprise is taking longer to restore its normal operations after a disruption or a loss. This may indicate that the enterprise is not prepared or resilient enough to deal with the incidents, or that the incidents are more frequent or severe, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the nature and source of the incidents, or the availability and effectiveness of the recovery plans.

A large number of control exceptions means that the enterprise is deviating from the established controls, policies, or procedures, either intentionally or unintentionally. This may indicate that the enterprise is not complying with the risk management program, or that the controls are not adequate or appropriate for the enterprise’s needs, but it does not necessarily reflect the maturity level of the risk management program, as it may also depend on the reasons and justifications for the exceptions, or the approval and monitoring processes for the exceptions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.3.1, pp. 14-15.

 Risk scenarios provide the MOST helpful information in identifying risk in an organization, because they describe the possible events, causes, effects, and impacts of a risk on the organization’s objectives and processes. Risk scenarios help to identify the sources, drivers, and indicators of risk, as well as the potential consequences and likelihood of occurrence. The other options are not as helpful as risk scenarios, because:

Option A: Risk registers are tools to document and track the identified risks, their characteristics, and their status, but they do not provide information on how to identify risks in the first place.

Option B: Risk analysis is a process to assess the likelihood and impact of the identified risks, and to prioritize them based on their severity, but it does not provide information on how to identify risks in the first place.

Option D: Risk responses are actions to address the identified risks, either by reducing, transferring, avoiding, or accepting them, but they do not provide information on how to identify risks in the first place. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 105.

The first thing that a risk practitioner should do upon learning that a risk treatment owner has implemented a different control than what was specified in the IT risk action plan is to reassess the risk level associated with the new control. This is because the new control may have a different effect on the likelihood and impact of the risk, and may introduce new risks or modify existing ones. The risk practitioner should evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the newcontrol, and compare the residual risk with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The risk practitioner should also communicate the results of the risk reassessment to the relevant stakeholders, and update the risk register and action plan accordingly. The other options are not the first things that a risk practitioner should do, although they may be necessary or appropriate at a later stage. Seeking approval from the control owner is important, but it does not address the potential changes in the risk level or the alignment with the risk management objectives. Updating the action plan in the risk register is a good practice, but it should be done after the risk reassessment and with the consent of the risk owner. Validating that the control has an established testing method is a part of the control assurance process, but it does not provide information on the risk level or the risk response effectiveness. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 151.

 Computer-enabled fraud is the use of information technology (IT) to commit or conceal fraudulent activities, such as theft, manipulation, or unauthorized access of data, systems, or networks. Computer-enabled fraud can pose significant risks to an organization, such as financial loss, reputational damage, legal liability, or regulatory sanctions. Therefore, an organization should establish a comprehensive and effective framework to prevent, detect, and respond to computer-enabled fraud. The framework should involve three lines of defense, which are theroles and responsibilities of different functions within theorganization to manage and control risks. The first line of defense consists of the business owners, whose role is to identify, assess, and manage risks, including computer-enabled fraud risks. The primary responsibility of the first line of defense related to computer-enabled fraud is to implement processes to detect and deter fraud. This means designing and executing controls that can prevent or reduce the occurrence of computer-enabled fraud, such as authentication, authorization, encryption, logging, or segregation of duties. This also means monitoring and reporting any suspicious or anomalous activities or transactions that may indicate computer-enabled fraud, such as unusual patterns, volumes, or frequencies of data or system access or usage. Implementing processes to detect and deter fraud can help the first line of defense to protect the organization’s assets, data, and reputation from computer-enabled fraud, and to comply with the organization’s policies and regulations. References = Three Lines of Defence, Roles of Three Lines of Defense for Information Security and Governance, THE THREE LINES OF DEFENSE IN EFFECTIVE RISK MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL, The Three Lines of Defense.

 The most likely cause for a risk practitioner to reassess risk scenarios is a change in the regulatory environment. A regulatory environment is the set of laws, rules, and standards that apply to an organization and its activities, such as data privacy, security, compliance, or governance. A change in the regulatory environment can occur due to various factors, such as new legislation, court rulings, enforcement actions, or industry trends. A change in the regulatory environment can affect the risk scenarios that the organization faces, as it may introduce new or modified risks, or alter the probability or impact of existing risks. For example, a new regulation may require the organization to implement additional or different controls, or to report or disclose more information, which may increase the cost, complexity, or vulnerability of the organization’s processes and systems. A change in the regulatory environment may also affect the risk appetite, tolerance, and capacity of the organization, as it may impose different requirements or expectations for the organization’s risk management performance and outcomes. Therefore, a risk practitioner should reassess the risk scenarios when there is a change in the regulatory environment, to ensure that the risk scenarios are accurate, complete, and relevant, and that the risk response strategies and plans are appropriate, effective, and compliant. The other options are not the most likely cause, although they may be related or influential to the riskscenarios. A change in the risk management policy is a change in the rules and guidelines that define how the organization manages its risks, such as the roles and responsibilities, the processes and procedures, the tools and techniques, or the reporting and communication. A change in the risk management policy can affect the risk scenarios, as it may change the way the organization identifies, analyzes, evaluates, and responds to the risks, but it does not directly create or modify the risks themselves. A major security incident is an event or situation that compromises the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the organization’s information or systems, such as a data breach, a denial-of-service attack, or a ransomware infection. A major security incident can affect the risk scenarios, as it may indicate or reveal the existence or severity of the risks, or trigger or escalate the consequences of the risks, but it is not a cause, rather it is an effect of the risks. An increase in intrusion attempts is an increase in the frequency or intensity of the unauthorized or malicious attempts to access or exploit the organization’s information or systems, such as phishing, malware, or brute-force attacks. An increase in intrusion attempts can affect the risk scenarios, as it may increase the likelihood or impact of the risks, or expose or exacerbate the vulnerabilities of the organization’s processes and systems, but it is not a cause, rather it is a manifestation of the risks. References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA, How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA, The Impact of Regulatory Change on Business - Deloitte

 A control is an action or measure that reduces the likelihood or impact of a risk to an acceptable level. Controls can be classified into different types based on their purpose or function, such asdetective, compensating, corrective, or preventive. Performing a background check on a new employee candidate before hiring is an example of a preventive control. A preventive control is a control that aims to prevent the occurrence or manifestation of a risk, such as by avoiding, removing, or reducing the risk sources, causes, or drivers. A background check is a process that verifies the identity, qualifications, and history of a potential employee, and helps to ensure that the employee is suitable and trustworthy for the job. A background check can prevent the risk of hiring an unqualified, fraudulent, or malicious employee, who could compromise the performance, security, or compliance of the enterprise. The other options are not examples of preventive controls, as they involve different types of controls:

A detective control is a control that aims to detect the occurrence or manifestation of a risk, such as by monitoring, measuring, or reporting the risk events, indicators, or outcomes. An example of a detective control is a log review, which is a process that analyzes the records of the activities or transactions on the IT systems or applications, and helps to identify any anomalies, errors, or violations that could indicate a risk.

A compensating control is a control that aims to compensate for the weakness or deficiency of another control, such as by providing an alternative or additional level of protection or assurance. An example of a compensating control is a firewall, which is a device or software that filters the network traffic and blocks the unauthorized or malicious access to the IT systems or applications, and helps to compensate for the lack or failure of other security controls, such as encryption, authentication, or authorization.

A corrective control is a control that aims to correct the occurrence or manifestation of a risk, such as by restoring, repairing, or improving the affected assets, processes, or functions. An example of a corrective control is a backup, which is a copy or replica of the data or information on the IT systems or applications, and helps to correct the loss or damage of the data or information due to a risk, such as a hardware failure, a software error, or a cyberattack. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3.1, pp. 62-63.

According to the Section 4: Quiz 40 - Business Continuity Plan Flashcards, the best indication of the effectiveness of a business continuity program is the successful performance of business continuity tests and the resolution of any issues that arise. Business continuity tests are exercises that simulate various scenarios of disruption or disaster and evaluate the organization’s ability to recover and resume its critical functions. Business continuity tests can help to validate the assumptions, objectives, and strategies of the business continuity program, as well as to identify and address any gaps, weaknesses, or errors in the business continuity and disaster recovery plans. By performing business continuity tests regularly and effectively, the organization can ensure that its business continuity program is aligned with its needs andexpectations, and that it can cope with any potential crisis. References = Section 4: Quiz 40 - Business Continuity Plan Flashcards

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk nomenclature and taxonomy is the set of terms and definitions that are used to describe and classify risks and their attributes. Risk nomenclature and taxonomy is the most important consideration when aligning IT risk management with the enterprise risk management (ERM) framework, as it helps to ensure a common and consistent understanding and communication of risks across the organization. Risk nomenclature and taxonomy also helps to integrate and harmonize the IT risk management processes and activities with the ERM framework, and to facilitatethe aggregation and reporting of risks at different levels of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 197.

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk mitigation plans have been implemented. Residual risk reflects the effectiveness of the risk response in reducing the likelihood or impact of the risk. The best evidence that risk mitigation plans have been implemented effectively is the change in the level of residual risk. A change in the level of residual risk can be measured by comparing the risk level before and after the risk mitigation plans have been executed. A change in the level of residual risk can also be evaluated by comparing the actual residual risk with the target or acceptable residual risk. A change in the level of residual risk can demonstrate how well the risk mitigation plans have achieved the risk objectives and met the risk criteria. A change in the level of residual risk can also provide feedback and lessons learned for future risk management activities. References = Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management, Residual Risk: What It Is and How to Manage It, Residual Risk: How to Calculate and Manage It.

 Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging the existence and potential impact of a risk, but deciding not to take any action to reduce or eliminate it. Risk acceptance can be appropriate when the cost or effort of implementing a risk response outweighs the benefit, or when there are no feasible or effective risk responses available. An organization has identified that terminated employee accounts are not disabled or deleted within the time required by corporate policy, which poses a security risk to the organization. The organization is unsure of the reason for this issue, and has decided to monitor the situation for three months to obtain more information, rather than taking any immediate action to resolve the issue. As a result of this decision, the risk has been accepted, as the organization has chosen to tolerate the risk exposure for a certain period of time, and has not implemented any controls or measures to prevent or reduce the risk occurrence or impact. References = Risk Response Strategies: Avoid, Transfer, Mitigate, Accept, Risk Response Strategies: What They Are and How to Use Them, Risk Response Strategy: Definition, Types, and Examples.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks.

The most important data attribute of KRIs is that the data is relevant. This means that the data reflects the current state of the risk, the potential impact of the risk, and the effectiveness of the risk response. Relevant data helps to monitor and measure the risk performance and to make informed decisions about risk management.

The other options are not the most important data attributes of KRIs. They are either secondary or not essential for KRIs.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

The most relevant information to include in a risk management strategy is the organizational goals, because they provide the direction and purpose for the risk management activities. A risk managementstrategy is a document that outlines the objectives, scope, approach, roles, and responsibilities for managing risks in an organization. A risk management strategy should align with the organizational goals, which are the desired outcomes or results that the organization wants to achieve. The organizational goals should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART), and they should reflect the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy. By including the organizational goals in the risk management strategy, the risk practitioner can ensure that the risk management process supports and enables the achievement of the organizational goals. The risk practitioner can also use the organizational goals as a basis for identifying, assessing, prioritizing, and responding to the risks that may affect the organization’s performance and success. The risk practitioner can also monitor and measure the progress and effectiveness of the risk management process by comparing the actual results with the expected results based on the organizational goals. Therefore, the organizational goals are themost relevant information to include in a risk management strategy, as they provide the foundation and framework for the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Strategy, pp. 3-61

 A review of a third-party vendor is a process that involves examining and evaluating the performance, quality, and compliance of the vendor that provides a product or service to the organization1. A review of a third-party vendor can help to identify and address the risks and issues that may arise from the vendorrelationship, such as data breaches, service disruptions, contract violations, or reputation damage2. Following a review of a third-party vendor, it is most important for an organization to ensure that the results of the review are accurately reported to management, as this will enable the management to make informed and timely decisions and actions based on the findings and recommendations of the review. Accurate reporting of the results of the review will also help to establish and maintain the trust and transparency between the organization and the vendor, and to demonstrate the accountability and responsibility of the organization for its vendor risk management3. Identified findings are reviewed by the organization, results of the review are validated by internal audit, and identified findings are approved by the vendor are not the most important things to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as they do not provide the same level of impact and value as accurate reporting of the results of the review. Identified findings are reviewed by the organization is a process that involves analyzing and interpreting the outcomes and implications of the review of a third-party vendor, and determining the appropriate risk responses and actions to address the findings4. This is an important step in the vendor risk management process, but it is not the most important thing to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as it does not communicate or inform the management or the vendor of the results of the review. Results of the review are validated by internal audit is a process that involves verifying and confirming the accuracy and reliability of the review of a third-party vendor, and providing assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the vendor risk management. This is an important step in the vendor risk management process, but it is not the most important thing to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as it does not report or share the results of the review with the management or the vendor. Identified findings are approved by the vendor is a process that involves obtaining the consent and agreement of the vendor on the outcomes and recommendations of the review of a third-party vendor, and ensuring their cooperation and compliance with the risk responses and actions. This is an important step in the vendor risk management process, but it is not the most important thing to ensure following a review of a third-party vendor, as it does not report or inform the management of the results of the review. References = 1: The guide to third-party vendor reviews - TerraTrue HQ | TerraTrue2: 4 Tips For Organizations To Evaluate Third-Party Vendors – Forbes Advisor3: Vendor Risk Management: Best Practices for 2023 - Venminder4: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Options, pp. 113-115.] : [IT Risk Resources | ISACA] : Who Is Considered a Third Party or Vendor? - Venminder : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information SystemsControl Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1:Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

The potential impact of events is the estimated magnitude and likelihood of the consequences that may result from a risk scenario. The potential impact of events can help key stakeholders understand the severity and urgency of the risk, and prioritize the appropriate response actions. The potential impact of events can be expressed in quantitative or qualitative terms, such as financial loss, operational disruption, reputational damage, legal liability, etc. The potential impact of events is the most important information to include when reporting on an increasing trend of ransomware attacks in the industry, as it can help stakeholders assess the level of risk exposure and the adequacy of the existing controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Risk Analysis, p. 87-89.

The first activity that should be performed when the time required to complete daily processing for a legacy application is approaching a risk threshold is to conduct a root-cause analysis. This will help to identify the source of the problem and the factors that are contributing to the increased processing time. By conducting a root-cause analysis, the enterprise can determine the most appropriate and effective solution to address the problem and prevent it from recurring. Temporarily increasing the risk threshold, suspending processing to investigate the problem, and initiating a feasibility study for a new application are not the first activities that should be performed, as they may not resolve the underlying issue and may introduce additional risks or costs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.2, page 193.

An IT risk register is a document that records and tracks the IT risks that have been identified and assessed by the risk practitioner. It contains information such as the risk description, the risk owner, the risk level, the risk response, the risk status, and the risk monitoring and reporting activities. An IT risk register is a dynamic document that needs to be updated regularly to reflect the changes in the IT environment and the risk landscape. When a software upgrade renders an existing key control ineffective, the risk practitioner should update the IT risk register to indicate the new risk level, the new risk response, and the new risk monitoring and reporting activities. This will ensure that the IT risk register remains accurate, relevant, and useful for IT risk management. Updating the IT risk register is more important than updating the audit engagement letter, the risk profile, or the change control documentation, because the IT risk register is the primary source of information and guidance for managing IT risks. The audit engagement letter is a formal agreement between the auditor and the auditee that defines the scope, objectives, and terms of the audit. The risk profile is a summary of the organization’s risk appetite, risk tolerance, and risk exposure. The change control documentation is a record of the changes that have been made to the IT systems and processes. These documents are important for IT risk management, but they are not as critical as the IT risk register for updating when a key controlbecomes ineffective. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: Risk Register, pp. 69-711

A business case will BEST communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives to senior management, because it provides a clear and concise justification of the objectives, benefits, costs, and risks of the proposed initiatives. A business case helps to align the risk mitigation initiatives with the enterprise’s strategy and goals, and to obtain the necessary approval and support from senior management. The other options are not as effective as a business case, because:

Option B: A balanced scorecard is a tool to measure and monitor the performance of the enterprise across four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth. It does not communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives, but rather the outcomes and impacts of them.

Option C: Industry standards are benchmarks or best practices that define the minimum requirements or expectations for a certain domain or activity. They do not communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives, but rather the compliance or alignment of them with the external environment.

Option D: A heat map is a tool to visualize and prioritize the risks based on their likelihood and impact. It does not communicate the importance of risk mitigation initiatives, but rather the severity and distribution of the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 118.

Project risk register: A document that records the identified risks, their likelihood, impact, and mitigation strategies for a project1.

Project steering committee: A group of senior stakeholders and experts who oversee and support a project from a higher level2.

Risk mitigation actions: The measures taken to prevent, reduce, or transfer the risks that may affect a project3.

The most important objective of regularly presenting the project risk register to the project steering committee is to track the status of risk mitigation actions. Tracking the status of risk mitigation actions can help the project steering committee to:

Monitor and measure the performance and effectiveness of the risk management process and controls

Evaluate the progress and outcomes of the risk mitigation actions against the project goals and objectives

Identify and resolve any issues, challenges, or gaps in the risk mitigation actions

Provide guidance, feedback, and support to the project manager and the project team

Adjust or revise the risk mitigation actions as needed to reflect the changes in the project scope, schedule, budget, or environment

The other options are not the most important objective of regularly presenting the project risk register to the project steering committee, although they may be relevant or beneficial. Allocating budget for resolution of risk issues, which means assigning financial resources to address and resolve the risks that may affect a project, may be a part of the risk management process, but it is not the primary purpose of presenting the project risk register, which is more focused on tracking and reporting the risk status and actions. Determining if new risk scenarios have been identified, which means finding out if there are any additional or emerging risks that may impact a project, may be a useful outcome of presenting the project risk register, but it is not the main objective, which is more concerned with tracking and reporting the existing risk status and actions. Ensuring the project timeline is on target, which means verifying that the project is progressing according to the planned schedule and milestones, may be a benefit of presenting the project risk register, but it is not the key objective, which is more related to tracking and reporting the risk status and actions.

References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana, Project Steering Committee: Roles, Best Practices, Challenges, Risk Mitigation: Definition, Strategies, and Examples

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.

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a measurable value that demonstrates how effectively an organization is achieving its key objectives. A KPI should be relevant, specific, measurable, achievable, and time-bound. The number of identified system vulnerabilities is a KPI that measures the security posture and performance of the organization’s information systems. It also helps to identify the areas that need improvement or remediation. The number of identified system vulnerabilities is relevant to the organization’s objective of protecting its information assets, specific to the system level, measurable by using tools or methods, achievable by implementing security controls or practices, and time-bound by setting a target or threshold. Aggregate risk of the organization, number of exception requests processed in the past 90 days, and number of attacks against the organization’s website are not KPIs, as they are either too broad, not relevant, or not measurable. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.1.1, page 1741

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 647.

 The average time to identify critical information security incidents is the best indicator of effective information security incident management, as it measures how quickly the organization can detect and respond to the most severe threats to its information assets. The faster the organization can identify critical incidents, the lower the potential impact and damage they can cause. The average time to identify critical incidents also reflects the efficiency and accuracy of the monitoring and reporting mechanisms, as well as the awareness and training of the staff and stakeholders. The other options are not the best indicators of effective information security incident management, as they do not directly measure the performance or quality of the incident response process. The monthly trend of information security-related incidents may show the frequency or severity of the incidents, but not how well they are managed. The frequency of information security incident response plan testing may show the preparedness or maturity of the organization, but not the actual effectiveness of the plan. The percentage of high-risk security incidents may show the risk exposure or appetite of the organization, but not the risk mitigationor treatment. References = 7 Types of Information Security Incidents and How to Respond; Annex A.16: Information Security Incident Management - ISMS.online; CISM Isaca Exam Questions and Answers - CertLibrary.com

Code review could BEST detect an in-house developer inserting malicious functions into a web-based application, because it is a process that involves examining and verifying the source code of the application for any errors, vulnerabilities, or malicious functions. Code review can help toidentify and remove any unauthorized or harmful code that the developer may have inserted, either intentionally or unintentionally, and to ensure that the application meets the quality and security standards and requirements. The other options are not as effective as code review, because:

Option A: Segregation of duties is a control that involves separating the roles and responsibilities of the developer from those of the tester, the approver, and the deployer, to prevent any conflict of interest or misuse of authority. Segregation of duties can help to reduce the risk of the developer inserting malicious functions into the web-based application, but it does not detect them.

Option C: Change management is a process that involves controlling and documenting any changes to the web-based application, such as new features, enhancements, or bug fixes, to ensure that they are authorized, tested, and approved. Change management can help to track and monitor the changes that the developer may have made to the web-based application, but it does not detect the malicious functions.

Option D: Audit modules are components that are embedded in the web-based application to record and report the activities and transactions that occur within the application, such as user login, data input, or data output. Audit modules can help to audit and review the performance and functionality of the web-based application, but they do not detect the malicious functions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 214.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, data selection is the process of choosing the appropriate data sources and variables for data analysis. Data selection is the most critical step in data analytics, as it determines the quality and validity of the results and insights derived from the analysis. Incorrect data selection is the greatest risk associated with the use of data analytics, as it can lead to inaccurate, incomplete, irrelevant, or biased outcomes that can adversely affect the decision making and performance of the organization. Incorrect data selection can also cause legal, regulatory, ethical, or reputational issues for the organization, if the data used for analysis is not authorized, reliable, or compliant. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 255.

The risk practitioner should verify the cost-benefit of the new controls being implemented to ensure that they are aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and strategy, and that they provide value to the business. The other options are not as important as verifying the cost-benefit of the new controls, because:

Option A: Updating the risk register is a good practice, but it does not provide assurance that the new controls are effective and efficient.

Option B: Ensuring risk monitoring for the project is initiated is also a good practice, but it is not as urgent as verifying the cost-benefit of the new controls, which should be done before the project is closed.

Option C: Conducting and documenting a BIA is not relevant to the scenario, as the project is already completed and the new controls are implemented. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 184.

 According to the IT Risk Management - Basics and Best Practices article, one of the best practices for IT risk management is to keep the risk register up to date. A risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, andstatus. A risk register is a vital tool for IT risk management, as it helps to track and monitor the risks throughout their lifecycle, and to communicate the risks to the relevant stakeholders. However, a risk register is only useful if it reflects the current situation and environment of the organization. Therefore, the risk register should be regularly updated to capture any changes in the risk profile, such as new risks, resolved risks, modified risks, or escalated risks. Updating the risk register will help to ensure that the risk management process is effective and efficient, and that the risk responses are appropriate and timely. References = IT Risk Management - Basics and Best Practices

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, cost of controls is the amount of money or resources that an organization is willing to spend to implement and maintain risk responses. Cost of controls is one of the factors that influences the risk appetite of an organization, as it reflects thetrade-off between the benefits and costs of risk responses. Cost of controls helps to determine the optimal level of risk that an organization can accept in pursuit of its objectives, and to align the risk responses with the organization’s strategy, goals, and culture. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 193.

The risk practitioner’s best course of action is to review the design of the machine learning model against the control objectives, because this will help to evaluate the suitability, effectiveness, and reliability of the model as a control measure. A machine learning model is a type of artificial intelligence that can learn from data and make predictions or decisions based on the data. A machine learning model can be used to automate or enhance the access management process, such as by identifying excessive access privileges, detecting unauthorized access, or recommending access rights. However, a machine learning model also introduces new risks and challenges, such as data quality, model accuracy, model bias, model explainability, model security, and model governance. Therefore, the risk practitioner should review the design of the machine learning model against the control objectives, which are the specific goals or outcomes that the control is intended to achieve. The control objectives can be derived from the IT risk management strategy, the IT governance framework, the IT policies and standards, and the regulatory requirements. The review of the machine learning model should cover the following aspects: - The data sources and inputs: The risk practitioner should verify that the data used to train and test the machine learning model is relevant, complete, accurate, consistent, and representative of the access management process and the access rights. The risk practitioner should also check that the data is collected, stored, processed, and transmitted in a secure and compliant manner, and that the data privacy and confidentiality are protected. - The model algorithms and outputs: The risk practitioner should validate that the model algorithms are appropriate, robust, and transparent for the access management process and the control objectives. The risk practitioner should also evaluate that the model outputs are accurate, reliable, and interpretable, and that they provide meaningful and actionable insights orrecommendations for the access management process and the control objectives. - The model performance and monitoring: The riskpractitioner should measure and monitor the model performance and effectiveness against the control objectives and the predefined metrics and indicators. The risk practitioner should also ensure that the model is updated and maintained regularly to reflect the changes in the access management process and the access rights, and that the model is audited and reviewed periodically to ensure its compliance and quality. By reviewing the design of the machine learning model against the control objectives, the risk practitioner can ensure that the model is fit for purpose and adds value to the access management process and the control objectives. The risk practitioner can also identify and mitigate any potential risks or issues that may arise from the use of the machine learning model as a control measure. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.3: Control Design and Implementation, pp. 124-1271, Manage roles in your workspace - Azure Machine Learning2, Dataset Inference: Ownership Resolution in Machine Learning3

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, authorizing user access requests is the process of granting or denying access to IT resources based on the user’s role, responsibilities, and business needs. Authorizing user access requests is a key control accountability that should be retained within the organization, as it helps to ensure that the principle of least privilege is applied, and that the access rights are aligned with the organization’s policies, standards, and risk appetite. Authorizing user access requests also helps to prevent unauthorized access, data leakage, fraud, and other potential risks associated with user access provisioning and termination. Therefore, the best control accountability to retain within the organizationwhen a third-party vendor offers to perform user access provisioning and termination is authorizing user access requests. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 240.

 The ratio of emergency fixes to total changes is the best metric to determine if the change management program is performing as expected, because it reflects the quality and stability of the changes that are implemented in the production environment. A high ratio of emergency fixes to total changes indicates that the change management program is not effective, as it means that many changes are causing problems or failures that require urgent correction. A low ratio of emergency fixes to total changes indicates that the change management program is effective, as it means that most changes are well-planned, tested, and approved, and do not cause significant disruptions or defects. The ratio of emergency fixes to total changes can also help identify the root causes of the problems, the gaps in the change management process, and the areas for improvement. For example, if the ratio of emergency fixes to total changes is high, it may indicate that the change management program has issues with the following aspects: - Change request and approval: The change management program may not have a clear and consistent process for requesting, reviewing, and approving changes, or the process may not be followed by all stakeholders. - Change impact analysis: The change management program may not have acomprehensive and systematic method for assessing the potential impact of the changes on the business processes, the IT systems, the users, and the customers. - Change testing and validation: The change management program may not have adequate testing and validation procedures to ensure that the changes meet the requirements and specifications, and do not introduce errors or vulnerabilities. - Change communication and training: The change management program may not have effective communication and training strategies to inform and educate the affected parties about the changes and their implications. - Change implementation and monitoring: The change management program may not have proper implementation and monitoring plans or tools to ensure that the changes are executed smoothly and successfully, and that any issues or incidents are detected and resolved promptly. Therefore, the ratio of emergency fixes to total changes is the best metric to determine if the change management program is performing as expected, as it can provide valuable feedback and insights for the change management program and its improvement. References = How to Measure Change Management Effectiveness: Metrics, Tools & Processes1, Metrics for Measuring Change Management2, Driving Value with Change Management Metrics3, Must-Know Organizational Change Management Metrics

The control evaluation phase of a risk assessment is the phase where the risk practitioner evaluates the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing or planned controls that mitigate the identified risks. Controls are the actions or measures that reduce the likelihood or impact of the risks to an acceptable level. The control evaluation phase involves testing, reviewing, and auditing the controls, and identifying any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. If the control evaluation phase reveals that multiple controls are ineffective, the risk practitioner’s first course of action should be to determine the root cause of the control failures. The root cause is the underlying or fundamental reason that leads to the problem or issue, such as the controlfailure. By determining the root cause of the control failures, the risk practitioner can understand why the controls are not working as intended, and what factors or variables are influencing the control performance. This will help the risk practitioner to identify and implement the most appropriate and effective risk response strategy and actions, such as recommending risk remediation, comparing the residual risk, or escalating the control failures. The other options are not the first course of action, as they involve different steps or outcomes of the risk management process:

Recommend risk remediation of the ineffective controls means that the risk practitioner suggests the actions or measures that can improve or restore the effectiveness of the controls, such as by modifying, replacing, or adding the controls. This may be a useful step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not address the root cause of the control failures, or may not be feasible or efficient for the enterprise’s needs.

Compare the residual risk to the current risk appetite means that the risk practitioner evaluates the level of risk that remains after considering the existing or planned controls, and compares it with the amount and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. This may be a helpful step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not reflect the true or current level of risk exposure, or may not account for the uncertainties or complexities of the risks or the controls.

Escalate the control failures to senior management means that the risk practitioner communicates the control failures to the senior leaders of the enterprise, who oversee the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provide guidance and direction to the risk owners and practitioners. This may be a necessary step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not provide sufficient or timely information or action to address the control failures, or may not reflect the urgency or priority of the control failures. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3.1, pp. 62-63.

According to the What To Look For When Assessing Your Organization’s Security Risk Posture article, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite should be aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and values, and should reflect the organization’s risk culture and capabilities. When reviewing a risk response strategy, senior management’s primary focus should be placed on the alignment with risk appetite, as this indicates how well the risk response strategy supports the organization’s objectives and expectations, and how consistent it is with the organization’s risk tolerance and risk profile. By ensuring the alignment with risk appetite, senior managementcan evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response strategy, and determine if any adjustments or improvements are needed. References = What To Look For When Assessing Your Organization’s Security Risk Posture

The primary focus of an independent review of a risk management process is to evaluate the maturity of the process, which means the extent to which the process is aligned with the organization’s objectives, culture, and governance, and how well it is integrated, implemented, and monitored across the organization. A mature risk management process is one that is consistent, effective, efficient, and adaptable to changing circumstances and environments. A maturity assessment can help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the risk management process, as well as the opportunities and challenges for improvement. The other options are not the primary focus, but they may be secondary or tertiary aspects of the review. Accuracy of risk tolerance levels is a measure of how well the organization defines and communicates its risk appetite and risk limits, which are important inputs for the risk management process, but not the main outcome. Consistency of risk process results is a measure of how reliable and repeatable the risk management process is, which reflects the quality and validity of the data, assumptions, methods, and tools used in the process, but not the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the process. Participation of stakeholders is a measure of how well the organization engages and involves its internal and external stakeholders in the risk management process, which enhances the awareness, ownership, andaccountability of the process, but not the alignment and integration of the process. References = Assessing the Risk Management Process, p. 9-10.