CRISC Exam Dumps - Isaca Certification Questions and Answers

Risk capacity is the amount of risk that an organization can financially afford to take, without jeopardizing its ability to meet its objectives or obligations. Risk capacity is determined by factors such as the organization’s income, assets, liabilities, and cash flow. An organization that has built up its cash reserves has increased its risk capacity, as it has more financial resources and flexibility to support additional risk. This may enable the organization to pursue more opportunities or initiatives that involve higher risk and higher reward.

Risk profile is a summary of the key risks that an organization faces, and their implications for the organization’s objectives and strategy. Risk profile may change due to factors such as new technologies, business initiatives, or external events, but not necessarily due to changes in cash reserves.

Risk indicators are metrics or indicators that help to monitor and evaluate the likelihood or impact of a risk, or the effectiveness or efficiency of a control. Risk indicators may vary depending on the risk sources, scenarios, or responses, but not necessarily due to changes in cash reserves.

Risk tolerance is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept, based on its risk appetite and risk capacity. Risk tolerance is influenced by factors such as the organization’s culture, values, and objectives, as well as the risk environment and expectations. Risk tolerance may change due to changes in cash reserves, but it is not the most likely impact, as it also depends on the organization’s risk appetite and other factors.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the security management function is responsible for ensuring that effective cybersecurity controls are established and maintained. The security management function should:

Define the cybersecurity strategy and objectives aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and business goals

Establish and maintain the cybersecurity policies, standards, procedures and guidelines

Implement and monitor the cybersecurity controls and processes

Coordinate and communicate with other stakeholders, such as risk owners, IT management, enterprise risk function, internal and external auditors, regulators and third parties

Report on the cybersecurity performance and risk posture to senior management and the board

Continuously improve the cybersecurity capabilities and maturity

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Management Roles and Responsibilities, pp. 29-301

Identifying stakeholders ensures that all perspectives are considered, contributing to a holistic view of risk and improving communication and response planning.

Generic scenarios are a good starting point, but risk owners engage and provide better input when they can clearly see how a scenario applies to their own processes, assets, and objectives.

CRISC scenario guidance notes that:

Risk scenarios are most effective in assessing business risk when they are tailored to the enterprise’s actual processes and objectives.

When developing IT-related risk scenarios with a top-down approach, practitioners identify business objectives as the most important factor.

A top-down approach driven by business objectives results in risk scenarios applicable to an enterprise’s identified risk.

That means you should translate generic scenarios into concrete, business-specific situations for each risk owner:

For HR: “Unauthorized access to employee personal data due to misconfigured cloud storage”

For Finance: “Unavailability of the payment system during month-end close”

This makes it easier for risk owners to:

Assess realistic likelihood and impact.

Identify relevant existing controls and gaps.

Commit to risk responses because they see direct relevance to their objectives.

Options A, B and C are helpful artifacts and practices after or around the tailoring step, but they do not directly solve the core issue of engagement and meaningful input.

Therefore, the MOST helpful approach is to develop scenarios applicable to each area (Option D), in line with CRISC’s emphasis that risk scenarios should be primarily based on the threats the enterprise faces and aligned to business objectives.

The business impact analysis (BIA) identifies critical services, acceptable downtime limits, and the business consequences of disruptions. CRISC emphasizes that the BIA is the foundation for deciding risk treatment strategies because it defines what must be restored first and to what level. Scenario analysis identifies risks but does not determine business priorities. Failover procedures are themselves a treatment, not a method for selecting treatments. A risk treatment plan documents chosen actions but depends entirely on the BIA to inform those decisions. Therefore, the BIA is the key input enabling proper treatment selection during disasters.

Frequent and well-documented testing of the DRP demonstrates the plan's effectiveness and readiness to handle real disruptions.

 A business impact analysis (BIA) is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects of a disaster on the critical functions and processes of an organization1. A BIA helps to forecast the operational, financial, legal, and reputational impacts of a disaster, as well as the recovery priorities and resources needed to resume normal operations2. A BIA also helps to determine the recovery time objectives (RTO), which are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the critical functions and processes after a disaster3. Therefore, developing a BIA is the most important step for an organization to forecast the effects of a disaster and plan for its recovery. Defining RTOs is a part of the BIA process, not a separate activity. Analyzing capability maturity model gaps is a method to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s processes and practices, but it does not directly forecast the effects of adisaster4. Simulating a disaster recovery is a way to test and validate the recovery plans and procedures, but it does not forecast the effects of a disaster either5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.3: Business Continuity Planning, pp. 227-238.

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks which method best enables timely detection of changes in the security control environment.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Control self-assessment (CSA):Allows for continuous monitoring and quick detection of any changes or deficiencies in controls.

B. Log analysis:Useful for detecting security incidents but not as comprehensive as CSA for overall control environment changes.

C. Security control reviews:Typically periodic and might not be as timely.

D. Random sampling checks:Not as systematic or comprehensive as CSA.



Control Self-Assessment (CSA):CSA involves regular, structured evaluations by internal staff to ensure controls are working effectively. It promotes early detection of issues by those directly responsible for the controls.

Timeliness:CSA is an ongoing process, making it more timely in identifying changes compared to periodic reviews or random checks.

The most important input into the assessment of the risk of shadow IT usage is the classification of the data that is being processed, stored, or transmitted by the unauthorized applications or devices. This determines the level of confidentiality, integrity, and availability that is required for the data and the potential impact of a breach or loss. Business benefits of shadow IT, application-related expenses, and volume of data are less important inputs that may affect the risk analysis, but not as much as the data classification. References = Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, page 28; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 98.

Performing automated code reviews throughout the development lifecycle allows early detection and remediation of vulnerabilities. This shift-left approach reduces the cost and impact of fixing issues later and improves overall code quality and security.

A vulnerability management process is a process that identifies, analyzes, prioritizes, and remediates the vulnerabilities in the IT systems and applications. The effectiveness of a vulnerability management process can be measured by the key performance indicators (KPIs) that reflect the achievement of the process objectives and the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. The best KPI to measure the effectiveness of a vulnerability management process is the percentage of vulnerabilities remediated within the agreed service level. This KPI indicates how well the process is able to address the vulnerabilities in a timely and efficientmanner, and reduce the exposure and impact of the risks associated with the vulnerabilities. The other options are not as good as the percentage of vulnerabilities remediated within the agreed service level, as they may not reflect the quality or timeliness of the remediation actions, or the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2.1, pp. 171-172.

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.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite is the most influential factor when management makes risk response decisions, as it helps to define the boundaries and thresholds for acceptable risk levels, and to align the risk responses with the organization’s strategy, goals, and culture. Risk appetite alsohelps to balance the potential benefits and costs of risk responses, and to communicate the risk expectations and preferences to the stakeholders. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 192.

When an organization restructures its business processes, the first step in revising the BCP is to identify new potentially disruptive scenarios that may affect the continuity of the critical functions and processes. This can be done by conducting a risk assessment or a business impact analysis (BIA) to determine the likelihood and impact of various threats and vulnerabilities onthe organization’s objectives and operations. By identifying new potentially disruptive scenarios, the organization can then update its recovery strategies, objectives, and plans accordingly.

Risk responses are the actions or strategies that are taken to address the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, or value creation12.

The most effective way to increase the likelihood that risk responses will be implemented is to assign ownership, which is the process of identifying and appointing the individuals or groups who are responsible and accountable for the execution and monitoring of the risk responses34.

Assigning ownership is the most effective way because it ensures the clarity and commitment of the roles and responsibilities for the risk responses, and avoids the confusion or ambiguity that may arise from the lack of ownership34.

Assigning ownership is also the most effective way because it enhances the communication and collaboration among the stakeholders involved in the risk responses, and provides the feedback and input that are necessary for the improvement and optimization of the risk responses34.

The other options are not the most effective way, but rather possible steps or tools that may support or complement the assignment of ownership. For example:

Creating an action plan is a step that involves defining and documenting the specific tasks, resources, timelines, and deliverables for the risk responses34. However, this step is not the most effective way because it does not guarantee the implementation of the risk responses, especially if there is no clear or agreed ownership for the action plan34.

Reviewing progress reports is a tool that involves collecting and analyzing the information and data on the status and performance of the risk responses, and identifying the issues or gaps that need to be addressed34. However, this tool is not the most effective way because it does not ensure the implementation of the risk responses, especially if there is no ownership for the progress reports or the corrective actions34.

Performing regular audits is a tool that involves conducting an independent and objective assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk responses, and providing the findings and recommendations for improvement56. However, this tool is not the most effective way because it does not ensure the implementation of the risk responses,especially if there is no ownership for the audit results or the follow-up actions56. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips1

4: ProjectManagement.com - How to Implement Risk Responses2

5: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

6: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, probabilities, responses, and owners. It is a living document that should be updated regularly to reflect the changes in therisk environment and the status of the risk responses12. The best way to improve a risk register is to ensure that it is updated based upon significant events, such as:

New risks are identified or existing risks are eliminated

Risk probabilities or impacts change due to internal or external factors

Risk responses are implemented or modified

Risk owners or stakeholders change

Risk incidents or issues occur

Risk thresholds or appetite change

Risk reporting or communication requirements change

Updating the risk register based upon significant events can help to:

Maintain the accuracy and relevance of the risk information

Enhance the risk awareness and accountability of the risk owners and stakeholders

Support the risk monitoring and reporting activities

Facilitate the risk evaluation and decision-making processes

Improve the risk management performance and maturity

References =

Risk Register - Project Management Knowledge

How to Create a Risk Register: A Step-by-Step Guide - ProjectManager.com

The best recommendation to address an organization’s need to secure multiple systems with limited IT resources is to perform a vulnerability analysis. A vulnerability analysis is a process of identifying, assessing, and prioritizing the weaknesses or flaws in the systems that could be exploited by threats or risks. A vulnerability analysis helps to determine the level and nature of the exposure and impact of the systems, and to select and implement the appropriate security controls or mitigations. Performing a vulnerability analysis is the best recommendation, as it helps to optimize the use of the limited IT resources, by focusing on the most critical or significant vulnerabilities, and by applying the most effective or efficient security solutions.Performing a vulnerability analysis also helps to improve the security posture and performance of the systems, and to reduce the likelihood and consequences of security incidents or breaches. Applying available security patches, scheduling a penetration test, and conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) are not the best recommendations, as they are either the outputs or the inputs of the vulnerability analysis process, and they do not address the primary need of securing the systems with limited IT resources. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

The best indicator of the condition of a risk management program is the amount of residual risk. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses. Residual risk reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management program in reducing the risk exposure to an acceptable level, and in aligning the risk profile with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. A low amount of residual risk indicates that the risk managementprogram is performing well, and that the controls are adequate and appropriate. A high amount of residual risk indicates that the risk management program is not functioning properly, and that the controls are insufficient or ineffective. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2, page 191

The risk management framework defines the structure, objectives, roles, processes, and tools used by an organization to manage risk. It provides a comprehensive overview of how the enterprise governs and implements risk management.

According to the CRISC Review Manual and ISACA’s Risk IT Framework:

“A risk management framework establishes and maintains a common risk language, defines principles and responsibilities, and ensures consistency of approach across the enterprise.”

While risk scenarios and assessment results are components of the program, they focus on specific areas. The framework gives a holistic view—showing policies, processes, oversight mechanisms, governance linkages, and continuous improvement processes.

Hence, the Risk Management Framework (Option B) best provides an overview of the entire program.

CRISC Reference: Domain 1 – IT Risk Governance, Topic: Risk Management Framework and Governance Alignment.

Tracking opened phishing emails provides a real-time behavioral indicator of how well employees follow security awareness and email policies. It is a leading metric of adherence and risk awareness.

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the most comprehensive approach to capture the risk scenario of collecting and storing credit card information is event tree analysis (ETA). ETA is a forward, top-down, logical modeling technique that explores the responses and outcomes of a single initiating event, such as a data breach or a cyberattack. ETA can help to identify all possible consequences of the scenario, such as financial losses, reputational damages, legal liabilities, regulatory penalties, and customer dissatisfaction. ETA can also help to assess the probabilities of the outcomes and the effectiveness of the controls and mitigation strategies12

1: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Study Guide, 4th Edition, page 33 2: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Handbook, 1st Edition, page 25

An effective risk management program is a systematic and consistent process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and communicating risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives12.

The best indication of an effective risk management program is that the residual risk, which is the risk remaining after risk treatment, is within the organizational risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives12.

This indicates that the organization has successfully implemented appropriate risk responses that align with its risk strategy and criteria, and that the organization is able to balance the potential benefits and costs of taking risks12.

The other options are not the best indication, but rather components or outcomes of an effective risk management program. For example:

Risk action plans are approved by senior management is an outcome of an effective risk management program that demonstrates the commitment and accountability of the leadership for risk management12.

Mitigating controls are designed and implemented is a component of an effective risk management program that involves reducing the likelihood or impact of a risk event12.

Risk is recorded and tracked in the risk register is a component of an effective risk management program that involves documenting and updating the risk information and status12. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks what the most important update for keeping the risk register current is.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Modifying organizational structures when lines of business merge:Reflects significant changes in the organization that impact risk profiles.

B. Adding new risk assessment results annually:Important but periodic.

C. Retiring risk scenarios that have been avoided:Necessary but not as impactful as major organizational changes.

D. Changing risk owners due to employee turnover:Important but secondary to major structural changes.



Organizational Changes:When lines of business merge, it can significantly alter the risk landscape, introducing new risks and changing the impact and likelihood of existing ones. Updating the risk register to reflect these changes is crucial for accurate risk management.

Impact on Risk Profiles:Mergers and acquisitions can affect every aspect of an organization, from operational processes to regulatory compliance, making it essential to update the risk register accordingly.

Updating the BCP to align with real-time recovery requirements ensures the organization’s resilience to disruptions while meeting regulatory standards. This action reflectsBusiness Continuity and Disaster Recovery Planningbest practices.

Integrity is the property of data that ensures its accuracy, completeness, and consistency2. If concurrent update transactions to an account are not processed properly, the integrity of the data may be compromised, as it may lead to concurrency problems such as lost update, unrepeatable read, or phantom read3. These problems can cause the data to be incorrect, incomplete, or inconsistent, which may affect the reliability and validity of the data. Therefore, option D is the correct answer, as it reflects the impact of improper concurrent update transactions on the data integrity. The other options are not correct, as they do not directly relate to the effect of concurrent update transactions on the data. Option A, confidentiality, is the property of data that ensures its protection from unauthorized access or disclosure2. Concurrent update transactions do not necessarily affect the confidentiality of the data, as they do not involve exposing the data to unauthorized parties. Option B, accountability, is the property of data that ensures its traceability and auditability2. Concurrent update transactions do not necessarily affect the accountability of the data, as they do not involve losing the records or logs of the data transactions. Option C, availability, is the property of data that ensures its accessibility and usability2. Concurrent update transactions do not necessarily affect the availability of the data, as they do not involve preventing the access or use of the data.

The greatest concern for the risk practitioner when a big data project has resulted in the creation of an application used to support important investment decisions is the data quality. Data quality is the degree to which the data is accurate, complete, consistent, reliable, relevant, and timely. Data quality is essential for the success of any big data project, as it affects the validity and reliability of the analysis and the outcomes. Poor data quality could lead to erroneous or misleading results, which could have negative consequences for the investment decisions and the organization’s performance and reputation. The other options are not as concerning as the data quality, although they may also pose some challenges or risks for the big data project. Maintenance costs, data redundancy, and system integration are all factors that could affect the efficiency and effectiveness of the big data project, but they do not directly affect the accuracy and reliability of the analysis and the outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-20.

Risk events are specific occurrences or changes that have a potential impact on the achievement of objectives. They can be positive or negative, and they can be internal or external to the organization. Risk events provide the basis for developing realistic risk scenarios, which are hypothetical situations that illustrate the possible consequences of a risk event. Risk scenarios help to understand and communicate the nature, sources, and causes of risk, as well as the potential impact and likelihood of risk occurrence. Risk scenarios can also be used to test the effectiveness of risk responses and controls.

The other options are not as useful as risk events for developing realistic risk scenarios. A balanced scorecard (A) is a strategic management tool that measures the performance of the organization against its objectives, vision, and strategy. It does not provide specific information about risk events or their consequences. A risk appetite (B) is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. It does not describe the risk events or their scenarios, but rather the level of risk tolerance and acceptance. A risk map © is a graphical representation of the risk profile of the organization, showing the relationship between the likelihood and impact of different risks. It does not provide the details or context of the risk events or their scenarios, but rather the relative ranking and prioritization of risks.

Control processes are the procedures and activities that aim to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s operations, the reliability of its information, and the compliance with its policies and regulations12.

The ongoing efficiency of control processes is the degree to which the control processes achieve their intended results with minimum resources, costs, or waste34.

The best way to determine the ongoing efficiency of control processes is to analyze key performance indicators (KPIs), which are quantifiable measures of progress toward an intended result, such as a strategic objective or a desired outcome56.

Analyzing KPIs is the best way because it provides a systematic and consistent method of evaluating the performance of the control processes, and identifying the areas of improvement or optimization56.

Analyzing KPIs is also the best way because it enables the organization to monitor and report the efficiency of the control processes to the relevant stakeholders, and to take corrective or preventive actions when necessary56.

The other options are not the best way, but rather possible sources of information or inputs that may support or complement the analysis of KPIs. For example:

Performing annual risk assessments is a way to identify and evaluate the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, and to determine the adequacy and effectiveness ofthe control processes in mitigating those risks12. However, this way is not the best because it is periodic rather than continuous, and may not capture the changes or trends in the efficiency of the control processes12.

Interviewing process owners is a way to collect and verify the information and feedback from the people who are responsible for designing, implementing, and operating the control processes12. However, this way is not the best because it is subjective and qualitative, and may not provide reliable or comparable data on the efficiency of the control processes12.

Reviewing the risk register is a way to examine and update the documentation and status of the risks and the control processes that are associated with them12. However, this way is not the best because it is descriptive rather than analytical, and may not measure or evaluate the efficiency of the control processes12. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: The Control Process | Principles of Management4

4: Control Management: What it is + Why It’s Essential | Adobe Workfront5

5: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? Guide & Examples - Qlik1

6: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? - KPI.org2

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.

Aggregating risk assessment results helps evaluate the total exposure and provides a consolidated view of risk, supporting enterprise-wide decision-making.

The most appropriate action when a tolerance threshold is exceeded is to communicate the potential impact to the decision makers. A tolerance threshold is the acceptable level of variation or deviation from the expected or planned performance or outcome of a risk response. When a tolerance threshold is exceeded, it means that the risk response is not effective or efficient enough to reduce the risk to an acceptable level, and that the enterprise is exposed to unacceptable levels of risk that could impair its ability to achieve its objectives. Therefore, the potential impact of the risk should be communicated to the decision makers, such as senior management, risk owners, or risk committee, who have the authority and responsibility to decide on the appropriate actions to address the risk situation. Communicating the potential impact can help to raise the awareness and urgency of the risk issue, and to facilitate the risk-based decision making process. Researching the root cause of similar incidents, verifying the response plan isadequate, and increasing human resources to respond in the interim are not as appropriate as communicating the potential impact, as they do not address the primary need of informing and involving the decision makers, and may not be feasible or effective in resolving the risk issue. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 41.

Managing IT regulatory compliance risk in the same manner as other operational risks ensures a consistent and integrated approach to risk management. This involves identifying, assessing, mitigating, and monitoring compliance risks using the organization's established risk management framework. Such an approach promotes efficiency and ensures that compliance risks are not siloed but are considered within the broader context of enterprise risk management.

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.

A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses or gaps in an application that may expose it to potential threats or attacks.

When vulnerability assessment results identify a weakness in an application, the first thing that a risk practitioner should do is to assess the risk to determine mitigation needed. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the likelihood and impact of the weakness being exploited, the existing controls that are in place to prevent or reduce the exploitation, and the residual risk that remains after applying the controls.

Assessing the risk to determine mitigation needed helps to prioritize the actions that are required to address the weakness, such as implementing new or additional controls, accepting the risk, transferring the risk, or avoiding the risk.

The other options are not the first things that a risk practitioner should do when vulnerability assessment results identify a weakness in an application. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 18

Information Technology & Security, page 12

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 10

The primary consideration for determining recovery priorities in a disaster recovery situation is the impact of business disruption on the organization’s mission, objectives, and stakeholders. Business disruption can result in loss of revenue, reputation, customer satisfaction, market share, and competitive advantage. Therefore, the recovery priorities should be based on the criticality of the business processes and functions that support the organization’s value proposition and strategic goals. Data security (A), recovery costs (B), and recovery resource availability (D) are important factors, but they are secondary to the impact of business disruption. Data security should be ensured throughout the recovery process, but it does not determine the recovery order. Recovery costs should be balanced with the benefits of restoring the business operations, but they do not reflect the urgency of the recovery. Recovery resource availability should be assessed and allocated according to the recovery priorities, but it does not define the recovery sequence. (Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 5th Edition, page 982)

Implementing mock phishing exercises is the most effective way to validate organizational awareness of cybersecurity risk, because it helps to measure and test the knowledge and behavior of the employees regarding the detection and prevention of phishing attacks, which are one of the most common and dangerous forms of cybersecurity risk. A phishing attack is a fraudulent attempt to obtain sensitive or confidential information, such as usernames, passwords, or credit card details, by impersonating a legitimate or trusted entity, such as a bank, a government agency, or a colleague, through email, phone, or other communication channels. A mock phishing exercise is a simulated phishing attack that is conducted by the organization or a thirdparty to assess the level of awareness and readiness of the employees to recognize and respond to phishing attacks, and to provide feedback and training to improve their skills andknowledge. Implementing mock phishing exercises is the most effective way, as it helps to validate the actual and practical awareness of cybersecurity risk, and to identify and address the gaps or weaknesses in the employees’ awareness and behavior. Conducting security awareness training, updating the information security policy, and requiring two-factor authentication are all useful ways to enhance organizational awareness of cybersecurity risk, but they are not the most effective way, as they do not directly validate the awareness and behavior of the employees regarding phishing attacks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

A retention policy is a set of rules and guidelines that define how long and under what conditions the information should be kept or disposed of by the organization, based on its value, sensitivity, and legal or regulatory requirements.

When information is no longer required to support business objectives, the first thing that should be done is to assess the information against the retention policy. This means that the information should be reviewed and evaluated to determine if it should be retained or deleted, and for how long and by whom.

Assessing the information against the retention policy helps to ensure that the information is managed and disposed of in a consistent and compliant manner, that the information is protected from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction, and that the information is available for future reference or audit purposes if needed.

The other options are not the first things that should be done when information is no longer required to support business objectives. They are either secondary or not essential for information management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 28

Information Technology & Security, page 22

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 20

A risk map is a visual tool that helps to communicate risk to management by showing the likelihood and impact of different risks on a matrix1. A risk map can help to:

Identify the most critical risks that need immediate attention or action

Compare and prioritize risks based on their severity and probability

Align risk management strategies with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

Communicate risk information in a clear and concise way that is easy to understand and interpret2

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Assessment Process3

Using a common risk taxonomy is the most important factor to consider when creating a separate IT risk register for a large organization with regard to the existing corporate risk register, as it ensures consistency, clarity, and alignment of the IT risk identification, classification, and reporting with the corporate risk management framework and strategy. Leveraging business risk professionals, relying on generic IT risk scenarios, and describing IT risk in business terms are not the most important factors, as they are more related to the resources, inputs, or outputs of the IT risk register, respectively, rather than the structure or format of the IT risk register. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

Risk scenarios must be regularly reviewed and updated to remain relevant, especially given changing threat landscapes and business processes. A set of scenarios developed five years ago without update is likely outdated and may fail to capture current risks effectively. Ongoing remediation and external involvement are not inherently concerns if properly managed. The number of scenarios depends on scope and is less critical than currency and relevance【5:7, 5:256, 5:168†CRISC_SentenceinNOTE30.pptx】.

 Business Impact Assessment (BIA):

BIA identifies and evaluates the potential effects of interruptions to critical business operations. It helps determine the priority of risk mitigation efforts based on the potential impact on business functions.

BIA provides detailed information on which processes and systems are most critical to the organization's operations and their respective impact levels.

 Prioritizing Risk Mitigation:

The results of a BIA guide decision-makers in prioritizing which risks to address first based on their potential to disrupt critical business operations.

Risks that could cause significant operational, financial, or reputational damage are prioritized higher.

 Comparing Other Factors:

Cost of Risk Mitigation:Important but secondary to understanding the impact on business operations.

Asset Criticality:Relevant but typically part of the BIA process.

Acceptable Risk Level:Defines the threshold but does not prioritize specific risks.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses how BIA facilitates risk prioritization by identifying critical processes and their impacts (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.7 Business Impact Analysis)​​.

Free-form fields in public forums increase the risk of accidental or intentional disclosure of sensitive or proprietary information. This creates legal and reputational exposure. Monitoring or disabling such features is essential to mitigating data leakage risks.

The best way to determine the potential organizational impact of emerging privacy regulations is to conduct a privacy impact assessment (PIA). A PIA is a systematic process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the privacy risks and impacts of a new or existing system, process, program, or initiative that involves the collection, use, storage, or disclosure of personal information. A PIA can help to ensure that the enterprise complies with the emerging privacyregulations, and that the privacy rights and expectations of the individuals are respected and protected. A PIA can also help to identify the gaps, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement in the enterprise’s privacy policies, procedures, and controls. Evaluating the security architecture maturity, mapping the new requirements to the existing control framework, and chartering a privacy steering committee are not as comprehensive and effective as conducting a PIA, as they do not address the specific privacy risks and impacts of the enterprise’s activities. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 192.

Even if the residual risks are low, an ineffective key control warrants proposing additional mitigating controls to strengthen risk management. Accepting the risks without controls may expose the enterprise to unnecessary vulnerabilities. Targeted assessments may follow but addressing control weaknesses is the immediate priority. Risk tolerance is relevant but secondary in this context.

The most useful information for a risk practitioner when planning response activities after risk identification is the risk priorities. Risk priorities are the order or ranking of the risks based on their level of importance or urgency. Risk priorities help the risk practitioner to focus on the most critical risks, and allocate the resources and efforts accordingly. Risk priorities are usuallydetermined by using a combination of factors, such as the likelihood and impact of the risks, the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and the cost and benefit of the risk responses. Theother options are not as useful as the risk priorities, although they may provide some input or context for the risk response planning. The risk register is the document that records the details of all identified risks, but it does not necessarily indicate the risk priorities. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take, but it does not specify the risk priorities. The risk heat maps are graphical tools that display the risk level of each risk based on the likelihood and impact, but they do not show the risk priorities. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

A possible action that a risk practitioner should do next when an increased industry trend of external cyber attacks is identified is A. Conduct a threat and vulnerability analysis. A threat and vulnerability analysis is a process of identifying and assessing the potential sources and methodsof cyber attacks, as well as the weaknesses and gaps in the organization’s information systems and security controls12 By conducting a threat and vulnerability analysis, a risk practitioner can determine the level of exposure and risk that the organization faces from external cyber attacks, and prioritize the actions and resources needed to mitigate or prevent them3 A threat and vulnerability analysis can also help to update the risk impact rating and the key risk indicator in the risk register, as well as to notify senior management of the new risk scenario, but these are subsequent steps that follow after the analysis is completed. Therefore, the first action that a risk practitioner should do next is to conduct a threat and vulnerability analysis.