CRISC Questions and Answers

 The business application owner should have the authority to accept the associated risk, because they are responsible for the performance and outcomes of the critical application, and they understand the business requirements, expectations, and impact of the application. The business application owner can also evaluate the trade-offs between the potential benefits and costs of the application, and the potential risks and consequences of a disruption or failure of the application. The business application owner can also communicate and justify their risk acceptance decision to the senior management and other stakeholders, and ensure that the risk is monitored and reviewed regularly. The other options are less appropriate to have the authority to accept the associated risk. The business continuity director is responsible for overseeing the planning and execution of the business continuity strategy, which includes ensuring the availability andresilience of the critical business processes and applications. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. The disaster recovery manager is responsible for managing the recovery and restoration of the IT systems and applications in the event of a disaster or disruption. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. The data center manager is responsible for managing the operation and maintenance of the data center infrastructure, which includes providing the physical and environmental security, power, cooling, and network connectivity for the IT systems and applications. However, they are not the owner of the application, and they may not have the full knowledge or authority to accept the risk on behalf of the business. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 181

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), a vulnerability is a flaw or weakness in an asset’s design, implementation, or operation and management that could be exploited by a threat. A delayed removal of employee access is a vulnerability, as it allows former employees to retain access to the organization’s IT assets and processes, which could lead to unauthorized disclosure, modification, or destruction of data or resources. A delayed removal of employee access could be caused by poor personnel management, lack of security awareness, or inadequate access control policies and procedures.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 32-331

 The results of risk analyses should be presented in quantitative or qualitative terms based primarily on the requirements of management, because they are the intended audience and users of the risk information, and they have the authority and responsibility to make risk-based decisions. The requirements of management may vary depending on the purpose, scope, and context of the risk analysis, and the level of detail, accuracy, and reliability that they need. Quantitative risk analysis uses numerical data and mathematical models to estimate theprobability and impact of risks, and to express the risk exposure and value in monetary or other measurable units. Qualitative risk analysis uses descriptive data and subjective judgments to assess the likelihood and severity of risks, and to rank the risks according to their relative importance or priority. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, and they can be used separately or together, depending on the situation and the availability of data and resources. However, the primary factor that determines the choice of the method is the requirements of management, as they are the ones who will use the risk information to support their objectives, strategies, and actions. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 141

Detailed Explanation:A high number of exceptions often indicate misalignment betweenpoliciesand business needs. Reviewing policies helps determine if they are overly restrictive or need adjustments to reduce exceptions while maintaining security.

Events exceeding risk thresholds are situations or occurrences that result in the actual level of risk exceeding the acceptable or tolerable level of risk, as defined by the organization’s risk appetite, criteria, and objectives12.

The most effective way to enable a business operations manager to identify events exceeding risk thresholds is to implement continuous monitoring, which is a process that involves collecting and analyzing data and information on the performance and status of the business processes, systems, and controls, and detecting and reporting any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate a risk event34.

Continuous monitoring is the most effective way because it provides timely and accurate visibility and insight into the risk landscape, and enables the business operations manager to identify and respond to the events exceeding risk thresholds before they escalate or cause significant harm or damage to the organization34.

Continuous monitoring is also the most effective way because it supports the risk management process and objectives, which are to identify and address the risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s goals and the delivery of value to the stakeholders34.

The other options are not the most effective ways, but rather possible tools or techniques that may complement or enhance the continuous monitoring. For example:

A control self-assessment is a technique that involves engaging and empowering the business process owners and operators to evaluate and report on the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls that are designed and implemented to mitigate the risks56. However, this technique is not the most effective way because it is periodic rather than continuous, and it may not capture or communicate the events exceeding risk thresholds in a timely or consistent manner56.

Transaction logging is a tool that involves recording and storing the details and history of the transactions or activities that are performed by the business processes or systems, and providing an audit trail for verification or investigation purposes78. However, this tool is not the most effective way because it is passive rather than active, and it may not detect or report the events exceeding risk thresholds unless they are analyzed or queried78.

Benchmarking against peers is a technique that involves comparing and contrasting the performance and practices of the business processes or systems with those of the similar or leading organizations in the same or related industry, and identifying the gaps or opportunities for improvement . However, this technique is not the most effective way because it is external rather than internal, and it may not reflect or align with the organization’s specific risk appetite, criteria, and objectives . References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA1

4: Continuous Monitoring: A New Approach to Risk Management - ISACA Journal2

5: Risk and control self-assessment - KPMG Global3

6: Control Self Assessments - PwC4

7: Transaction Log - Wikipedia5

8: Transaction Logging - IBM6

Benchmarking - Wikipedia7

Benchmarking: Definition, Types, Process, Advantages & Examples

 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.

The risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access is that the former employees or unauthorized parties may use the accounts to access or manipulate the organization’s information systems or resources, and cause harm or damage to the organization and its stakeholders, such as data loss, data breach, system failure, fraud, etc.

The first step to address the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access is to disable user access, which means to revoke or remove the permissions or privileges that allow the accounts to access or use the organization’s information systems or resources. Disabling user access can help the organization to address the risk by providing the following benefits:

It can prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and reduce or eliminate the potential harm or damage that they may cause for the organization and its stakeholders.

It can ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the organization’s information systems or resources, and protect them from unauthorized access or manipulation.

It can provide useful evidence and records for the verification and validation of the organization’s access control function, and for the compliance with the organization’s access control policies and standards.

The other options are not the first steps to address the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access, because they do not provide the same level of urgency and effectiveness that disabling user access provides, and they may not be sufficient or appropriate to address the risk.

Performing a risk assessment is a process of measuring and comparing the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their significance and urgency. Performing a risk assessment can help the organization to understand and document the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access, but it is not the first step to address the risk, because it does not prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and it may not be timely or feasible to perform a risk assessment before disabling user access.

Developing an access control policy is a process of defining and describing the rules or guidelines that specify the expectations and requirements for the organization’s access control function, such as who can access what, when, how, and why. Developing an access control policy can help the organization to establish and communicate the boundaries and objectives for the organization’s access control function, but it is not the first step to address the risk, because it does not prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and it may not be relevant or applicable to the existing or emerging risk scenarios that may affect the organization’s access control function.

Performing a root cause analysis is a process of identifying and understanding the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in a problem or incident that has occurred or may occur in the organization. Performing a root cause analysis can help the organization to address and correct the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access, and prevent or reduce its recurrence or impact, but it is not the first step to address the risk, because it does not prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and it may not be timely or feasible to perform a root cause analysis before disabling user access. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 207

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 The analysis of logs and system events will best help validate whether suspicious network activity is malicious, because they provide detailed and timely information about the source, destination, content, and context of the network traffic. Logs and system events can be collected from various sources, such as firewalls, routers, switches, servers, applications, and endpoints, and can be correlated and analyzed using tools such as security information and event management (SIEM) systems. By analyzing logs and system events, an organization can identify anomalies, patterns, trends, and indicators of compromise (IOCs) that may signal malicious network activity, such as unauthorized access, data exfiltration, malware infection, denial-of-service attack, or lateral movement. Logs and system events can also help determine the scope, impact, and root cause of the malicious network activity, and support the incident response and remediation process. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 221

Ongoing availability of data is the most important consideration when selecting key risk indicators (KRIs) to monitor risk trends over time, as it ensures that the KRIs can provide timely and reliable information on the current and future risk status and performance. KRIs are metrics that measure the level of risk exposureand the effectiveness of risk response strategies, and they should be aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and objectives. Ongoing availability of datameans that the data sources and collection methods for the KRIs are consistent, accessible, and sustainable, and that the data quality and integrity are maintained and verified. Ability to aggregate data, ability to predict trends, and availability of automated reporting systems are not the most important considerations, as they do not affect the validity and usefulness of the KRIs, but rather the presentation and analysis of the KRI data. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question213; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 213.

 When a new security vulnerability is made public, the first step is to determine whether the affected technology is used within the organization. This will help to assess the impact and exposure of the vulnerability on the organization’s assets, processes, and objectives. If the affected technology is not used within the organization, then the vulnerability does not pose a direct threat and no further action is required. However, if the affected technology is used within the organization, then the next steps are to identify the systems and components that are vulnerable, evaluate the severity and likelihood of the vulnerability being exploited, and implement appropriate mitigating controls or remediation actions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2.1, p. 240-241

Detailed Explanation:Multi-factor authentication (MFA)significantly reduces the risk of account compromise by requiring multiple forms of verification, such as a password and a one-time code, enhancing security beyond single-factor authentication methods.

The most important benefit of key risk indicators (KRIs) is providing an early warning to take proactive actions, because this helps organizations to prevent or mitigate potential risks that may impact their operations, objectives, or performance. KRIs are specific metrics that measure the level and impact of risks, and provide timely signals that something may be going wrong or needs urgent attention. By monitoring and analyzing KRIs, organizations can identify and assess emerging or existing risks, and initiate appropriate risk responses before the risks escalate into significant issues. This can enhance the organization’s resilience, competitiveness, and value creation. The other options are less important benefits of KRIs. Assisting in continually optimizing risk governance is a benefit of KRIs, but it is not the most important one. Risk governance is the framework and process that defines how an organization manages its risks, including the roles, responsibilities, policies, and standards. KRIs can help to evaluate and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of risk governance, but they are not the only factor that influences it. Enabling the documentation and analysis of trends is a benefit of KRIs, but it is not the most important one. Documenting and analyzingtrends can help organizations to understand the patterns, causes, and consequences of risks, and to learn from their experiences. However, this benefit is more relevant for historical or retrospective analysis, rather than for proactive action. Ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements is a benefit of KRIs, but it is not the most important one. Compliance is the adherence to the laws, regulations, and standards that apply to an organization’s activities and operations. KRIs can help to monitor and demonstrate compliance, but they are not the only tool or objective for doing so. References = Why Key Risk Indicators Are Important for Risk Management 1

The primary reason to perform ongoing risk assessments is that the risk environment is subject to change. The risk environment is the external and internal factors that influence the level and nature of the risks that the organization faces1. These factors include economic, political, social, technological, legal,and environmental aspects, as well as the organization’s objectives, strategies, culture, and resources2. The risk environment is dynamic and unpredictable, and may change due to various events, trends, ordevelopments that create new or modify existing risks3. Therefore, it is important to perform ongoing risk assessments to identify, analyze, and evaluate the changes in the risk environment, and to adjust the risk response and management accordingly. Ongoing risk assessments help to ensure that the organization’s risk profile is up to date and reflects the current reality, and that the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance are aligned with the changing risk environment4. The other options are not the primary reason to perform ongoing risk assessments, as they are either less comprehensive or less relevant than the changing risk environment. Emerging risk must be continuously reported to management. This option is a consequence or outcome of performing ongoing risk assessments, not a reason for doing so. Emerging risk is a new or evolving risk that has the potential to affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance5. Ongoing risk assessments can help to identify and monitor emerging risks, and to report them to management for decision making and action. However, this is not the main reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not cover the existing or modified risks that may also change due to the risk environment. New system vulnerabilities emerge at frequent intervals. This option is a specific or narrow example of a changing risk environment, not a general or broad reason for performing ongoing risk assessments. System vulnerabilities are weaknesses or flaws in the design, implementation, or operation of information systems that can be exploited by threats to cause harm or loss6. Ongoing risk assessments can help to discover and assess new system vulnerabilities that may emerge due to technological changes, cyberattacks, or human errors. However, this is not the primary reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not encompass the other types or sources of risks that may also change due to the risk environment. The information security budget must be justified. This option is a secondary or incidental benefit of performing ongoing risk assessments, not a primary or essential reason for doing so. The information security budget is the amount of money that the organization allocates for implementing and maintaining information security measures and controls7. Ongoing risk assessments can help tojustify the information security budget by demonstrating the value and effectiveness of the security measures and controls in reducing the risks, and by identifying the gaps or needs for additional or improved security measures and controls. However, this is not the main reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not address the purpose or objective of risk assessment, which is to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks and their impact on the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, Page 47.

Detailed Explanation:Theimpact to business objectivesis paramount when developing risk scenarios, as the primary purpose of risk management is to protect and support business objectives. Understanding the impact helps tailor scenarios to potential risks that could disrupt key operations or strategic goals.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), periodically reviewing controls per the risk treatment plan would best help to ensure that identified risk is efficiently managed, as it involves verifying the effectiveness and efficiency of the implemented risk response actions and identifying any gaps or changes in the risk profile. Periodically reviewing controls per the risk treatment plan helps to:

Confirm that the controls are operating as intended and producing the desired outcomes

Detect any deviations, errors, or weaknesses in the controls and their performance

Evaluate the adequacy and appropriateness of the controls in relation to the current risk environment and the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address any issues or deficiencies in the controls

Update the risk register and the risk treatment plan to reflect the current risk status and the residual risk levels

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 215-2161

Detailed Explanation:The next step is toidentify risk response optionsto address the noncompliance and mitigate its impact. This may include corrective actions, implementing controls, or negotiating terms to reduce exposure.

Detailed Explanation:A review of business processes is crucial for identifying risk owners, as risk ownership is tied to specific processes within the organization. Risk owners are accountable for managing and mitigating risks within their respective areas. This ensures that risks are effectively addressed where they arise and aligns mitigation efforts with business objectives. Properly identifying risk owners supports better governance, accountability, and alignment with the organization's risk management strategy.

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

A risk register update is a change or modification to the information or status of the risks and their responses in the risk register. It may be triggered by the occurrence or resolution of a risk event, the identification or evaluation of a new or emerging risk, the implementation or completion of a risk response, the monitoring or review of the risk performance, etc.

The most important risk register update for senior management to review is avoiding a risk that was previously accepted, which means that the organization has decided to eliminate or withdraw from the risk exposure or activity that may cause the risk, instead of tolerating or retaining the risk as before. This may indicate a significant change in the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, objectives, or environment, and it may have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value.

The other options are not the most important risk register updates for senior management to review, because they do not indicate a significant change or impact on the organization’s risk profile or performance.

Extending the date of a future action plan by two months means that the organization has postponed the implementation or completion of the planned actions or measures to address the risk, due to some reasons or constraints. This may indicate a delay or deviation from the expected or desired risk outcome, but it may not have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value, unless the risk is very urgent or critical.

Retiring a risk scenario no longer used means that the organization has removed or discarded the risk scenario that is no longer relevant or applicable to the organization’s objectives or operations, due to some changes or developments. This may indicate a reduction or improvement in the organization’s risk exposure or level, but it may not have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value, unless the risk scenario was very significant or influential.

Changing a risk owner means that the organization has assigned or transferred the responsibility and accountability for the risk and its response to a different person or role, due to some reasons or circumstances. This may indicate a change or improvement in the organization’s risk governance or culture, but it may not have a major impact on the organization’s performance and value, unless the risk owner was very ineffective or inappropriate. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 160

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

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

 A risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the risks that an organization faces in relation to its objectives, assets, and operations. A risk assessment helps to determine the likelihood and impact of potential threats, as well as the adequacy and effectiveness of existing controls. A risk assessment also provides the basis for risk treatment, which involves selecting and implementing the appropriate risk responses, such as avoiding,transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risk. The client’s best course of action in this scenario is to perform their own risk assessment, rather than relying on the third-party service provider’s risk assessment. This is because the third-party service provider may have different risk criteria, assumptions, methods, or perspectives than the client, and may not fully understand or address the client’s specific risk context, needs, and expectations. The third-party service provider’s risk assessment may also be biased, outdated, or inaccurate, and may not reflect the current or future risk environment. By performing their own risk assessment, the client can ensure that the risk of their systems being hacked is properly identified, measured, and managed, and that the risk level is acceptable and aligned with their risk appetite and tolerance. The other options are not the best courses of action for the client, as they may expose the client to unnecessary or unacceptable risk. Implementing additional controls to address the risk may be costly, ineffective, or redundant, and may not be justified by the actual risk level. Accepting the risk based on the third-party service provider’s risk assessment may be risky, as the client may not have a clear or accurate understanding of the risk exposure or consequences. Performing an independent audit of the third party may be useful, but it may not be sufficient or timely to assess and address the risk of the client’s systems being hacked. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 792

 IT risk assessments can best be used by management as input for decision-making, because they provide valuable information about the current and potential risks facing the organization’s IT systems, networks, and data, and their impact on the organization’s objectives and performance. IT risk assessments can help management to identify and prioritize the most critical and relevant risks, and to evaluate and select the most appropriate and effective risk responses. IT risk assessments can also help management to allocate and optimize the resources and budget for IT risk management, and to communicate and report the risk status and performance to the senior management, the board of directors, and other stakeholders. IT risk assessments can support management in making informed and balanced decisions that consider both the opportunities and the threats of IT-related activities and investments. References = Complete Guide to IT Risk Management 1

 A rule-based data loss prevention (DLP) tool is a software solution that identifies and helps prevent unsafe or inappropriate sharing, transfer, or use of sensitive data. It can help an organization monitor and protect sensitive information across on-premises systems, cloud-based locations, and endpoint devices. It can also help an organization comply with regulations such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). A rule-based DLP tool works by comparing content to the organization’s DLP policy, which defines how the organization labels, shares, and protects data without exposing it to unauthorized users. The tool can then apply protective actions such as encryption, access restrictions, and alerts. As a result of implementing a rule-based DLP tool, the most likely change is the reduction of risk likelihood, which is the probability of a risk event occurring. By detecting and preventing data breaches, exfiltration, or unwanted destruction of sensitive data, a rule-based DLP tool can lower the chance of such incidents happening and thus decrease the risk likelihood. The other options are less likely to change as a result of implementing a rule-based DLP tool. Risk velocity is the speed at which a risk event impacts an organization, which depends on factors such as the nature of the threat, the response time, and the recovery process. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, which depends on factors such as the organization’s culture, strategy, and stakeholder expectations. Risk impact is the potential loss or damage that a risk event can cause to an organization, which depends on factors such as the severity of the incident, the extent of the exposure, andthe resilience of the organization. While a rule-based DLP tool may have some influence on these factors, it is not the primary driver of change for them. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 13

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A risk dashboard is a graphical tool that displays the key indicators and metrics of the organization’s IT risk profile, such as the risk level, status, trend, performance, etc., using charts, graphs, tables, etc. A risk dashboard can help the organization to monitor and communicate the IT risk profile, and to support the decision making and planning for the IT risk management.

A risk dashboard is the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it provides a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and highlights the most significant and relevant IT risks that need to be addressed or monitored. A risk dashboard can also help to compare and contrast the IT risk profile with the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite, and to identify the gaps or opportunities for improvement.

The other options are not the most effective tools in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because they do not provide the same level of visibility and clarity that a risk dashboard provides, and they may not be updated or aligned with the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite.

A risk self-assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, using the input and feedback from the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the IT activities or functions. A risk self-assessment can help the organization to understand and document the IT risk profile, and to align it with the organization’s IT strategy and culture, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not reflect the current or accurate state and performance of the IT risk profile, and it may not cover all the relevant or emerging IT risks that may exist or arise.

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the information and status of the identified IT risks and their responses. It includes the IT risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, priority, response, owner, action plan, status, etc. A risk register can help the organization to identify, analyze, evaluate, and communicate the IT risks and their responses, and to align them with the organization’s IT strategy and culture, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not provide a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and it may not highlight the most significant and relevant IT risks that need to be addressed or monitored.

A risk map is a graphical tool that displays the results of the IT risk analysis in a matrix format, using colors and symbols to indicate the level and priority of the IT risks. A risk map can show the distribution and comparison of the IT risks based on various criteria, such as likelihood, impact, category, source, etc. A risk map can help the organization to assess and prioritize the IT risks, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the IT risks, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not provide a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and it may not reflect the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 180

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A baseline assessment is the first step in assessing the maturity of an organization’s internal control environment. A baseline assessment is a comprehensive evaluation of the current state of the internal control structure, processes, and activities across the organization. A baseline assessment helps to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the existing internal controls, as well as the gaps and opportunities for improvement. A baseline assessment also provides a reference point for measuring the progress and effectiveness of the internal control improvement initiatives. The other options are not the first steps in assessing the maturity of an internal control environment, although they may be part of the subsequent steps. Validating control process execution is a technique to verify that the internal control activities are performed as designed and intended. Determining if controls are effective is a process to evaluate the adequacy and efficiency of the internal controls in achieving the desired outcomes and mitigating the risks. Identifying key process owners is a task to assign the roles and responsibilities for the internal control design, implementation, and monitoring to the appropriate individuals or groups within theorganization. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 153-1541; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 742

A third-party security assessment report is the most helpful to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider, because it provides an independent and objective evaluation of the cloud provider’s security posture, policies, and practices. A third-party security assessment report can help to verify and validate the cloud provider’s compliance with the relevant standards, regulations, and best practices, such as ISO 27001, PCI DSS, NIST, or CSA. A third-party security assessment report can also help to identify and address any gaps, weaknesses, or vulnerabilities in the cloud provider’s security controls, and to provide recommendations and guidance for improvement. A third-party security assessment report can also help to increase the trust and confidence of the cloud customers, and to facilitate the due diligence and risk management processes. The other options are less helpful to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider. A control self-assessment is a process that enables the cloud provider to assess its own security controls, using a predefined framework or questionnaire. However, a control self-assessment may not be as reliable or comprehensive as a third-party security assessment report, as it may be biased, incomplete, or inaccurate, and it may not cover all the aspects or dimensions of security. Internal audit reports from the vendor are documents that provide the results and findings of the internal audits conducted by the cloud provider’s ownauditors, to verify and validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the securitycontrols. However, internal audit reports from the vendor may not be as credible or trustworthy as a third-party security assessment report, as they may be influenced by the cloud provider’s interests, objectives, or agenda, and they may not follow the same standards or criteria as the external auditors. Service level agreement monitoring is a process that measures and evaluates the performance and availability of the cloud services, based on the predefined metrics and targets agreed between the cloud provider and the cloud customer. However, service level agreement monitoring may not be sufficient or relevant to ensure effective security controls for a cloud service provider, as it may not address the security aspects or requirements of the cloud services, such as confidentiality, integrity, or accountability, and it may not reflect the actual security risks or incidents that may occur in the cloud environment. References = Cloud Security Controls: Key Elements and 4 Control Frameworks 1

Unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator is a security risk that involves altering, deleting, or inserting data on a database without proper authorization or approval, by a person who has privileged access to the database, such as a database administrator12.

The best control to detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator is to review database activity logs, which are records that capture and store the details and history ofthe transactions or activities that are performed on the database, such as who, what, when, where, and how34.

Reviewing database activity logs is the best control because it provides evidence and visibility of the database operations, and enables the detection and reporting of any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator34.

Reviewing database activity logs is also the best control because it supports the accountability and auditability of the database operations, and facilitates the investigation and resolution of any unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator34.

The other options are not the best controls, but rather possible measures or techniques that may supplement or enhance the review of database activity logs. For example:

Reviewing database access rights is a measure that involves verifying and validating the permissions and privileges that are granted or revoked to the users or roles who can access or modify the data on the database56. However, this measure is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the database administrator has legitimate access rights to the data56.

Comparing data to input records is a technique that involves matching and reconciling the data on the database with the original or source data that are entered or imported into the database, and identifying and correcting any discrepancies or errors78. However, this technique is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the input records are also modified or compromised78.

Reviewing changes to edit checks is a technique that involves examining and evaluating the modifications or updates to the edit checks, which are rules or validations that are applied to the data on the database to ensure their accuracy, completeness, andconsistency9 . However, this technique is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the edit checks are bypassed or disabled9 . References =

1: Database Security: Attacks and Solutions | SpringerLink2

2: Unauthorised Modification of Data With Intent to Cause Impairment3

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia4

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva5

5: Database Access Control - Wikipedia6

6: Database Access Control: Best Practices for Database Security7

7: Data Reconciliation - Wikipedia8

8: Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection9

9: Edit Check - Wikipedia

Edit Checks: A Data Quality Tool

 The primary consideration when implementing controls for monitoring user activity logs is ensuring that the control is proportional to the risk, because this helps to optimize the balance between the benefits and costs of the control, and to avoid over- or under-controlling the risk. User activity logs are records of the actions or events performed by users on IT systems, networks, or resources, such as accessing, modifying, or transferring data or files. Monitoring user activity logs can help to detect and prevent potential threats, such as unauthorized access, data leakage, or malicious activity, and to support the investigation and remediation of incidents. However, monitoring user activity logs also involves certain costs and challenges, such as collecting, storing, analyzing, and reporting large amounts of log data, ensuring the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of the log data, protecting the privacy and security of the log data, and complying with the relevant laws and regulations. Therefore, when implementing controls for monitoring user activity logs, the organization should consider the level and impact of the risk that the control is intended to address, and the value and effectiveness of the control in reducing the risk exposure and impact. The organization should also consider the costs and feasibility of implementing and maintaining the control, and the potential negative consequences or side effects of the control, such as performance degradation, user dissatisfaction, or legal liability. By ensuring that the control is proportional to the risk, the organization can achieve the optimal level of risk management, and avoid wasting resources or creating new risks. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 151

 Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying controls to mitigate the inherent risk. Inherent risk is the risk that exists before considering the controls. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation from the risk appetite. Improvements in the design and implementation of a control will most likely result in an update to the residual risk, because they will reduce the likelihood and impact of the risk event, and therefore lower the risk exposure and value. By improving the design and implementation of a control, the organization can enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the control, and ensure that it is aligned with the risk objectives, expectations, and outcomes. The improvement can also address any gaps, overlaps, redundancies, or conflicts among the controls, and any changes or enhancements that are needed to optimize the controls. The other options are less likely to be updated due to improvements in the design and implementation of a control. The inherent risk will not change, as it is based on the nature and value of the asset and the threats and vulnerabilities that exist. The risk appetite and the risk tolerance will also not change, as they are based on the organization’s culture, strategy, and stakeholder expectations. Therefore, the most likely factor to be updated is the residual risk, as it reflects the actual risk level that the organization faces after applying the controls. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the most important consideration when sharing risk management updates with executive management is ensuring relevance toorganizational goals, as this helps to align risk management with business strategy and performance. The risk management updates should:

Highlight the key risks that may affect the achievement of the organizational goals and objectives

Demonstrate the value and benefits of risk management in supporting decision making and enhancing business resilience

Provide clear and concise information on the current risk profile, risk appetite, risk tolerance and risk exposure of the organization

Recommend appropriate risk response actions and resource allocation to address the identified risks

Communicate the roles and responsibilities of executive management in overseeing and governing risk management

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: IT Risk Reporting, pp. 221-2221

A systems interruption caused by a personal USB device plugged into the corporate network by an IT employee who bypassed internal control procedures is a serious breach of information security and IT risk management. The person who should be accountable for this incident is the chief information officer (CIO), who is responsible for overseeing the IT function and ensuring compliance with IT policies and standards. The CIO should also ensure that appropriate corrective and preventive actions are taken to prevent such incidents from recurring and to mitigate the impact of the systems interruption on the business operations and objectives. The CIO should also report the incident to the senior management and the board of directors, and communicate with the relevant stakeholders about the incident and the actions taken. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 181

The percentage of system availability is the most important key performance indicator (KPI) to establish in the service level agreement (SLA) for an outsourced data center. This KPI measures the uptime or reliability of the systems hosted by the data center provider, and reflects the ability of the provider to meet the customer’s expectations and requirements for system performance and accessibility. A high percentage of system availability indicates that the provider is delivering consistent and quality service, while a low percentage of system availability indicates that the provider is experiencing frequent or prolonged system failures or disruptions, which can negatively affect the customer’s business operations and reputation. Therefore, the percentage of system availability is a critical factor for evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of the data center provider, and should be clearly defined and monitored in the SLA. The other options are not the most important KPIs to establish in the SLA for an outsourced data center, as they do not directly measure the quality or reliability of the service provided. The percentage of systems included in recovery processes is a measure of the scope or coverage of the disaster recovery plan (DRP) of the data center provider, but it does not indicate how well the provider can execute the DRP or restore the systems in the event of a disaster. The number of key systems hosted is a measure of the capacity or utilization of the data center provider, but it does not indicate how efficiently or securely the provider can manage the systems. The average response time to resolve system incidents is a measure of the responsiveness or agility of the data center provider, but it does not indicate how effectively or proactively the provider can prevent or mitigate system incidents. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3.4, Page 140.

The primary input when designing IT controls should be internal and external risk reports. IT controls are specific activities performed by persons or systems to ensure that business objectives are met, and thatthe confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data and the overall management of the IT function are ensured1. Designing IT controls means creating and implementing the appropriate measures or actions to reduce the likelihood or impact of the IT risks that may affect the organization2. Internal and external risk reports are documents that provide information and analysis on the current and potential IT risks that the organization faces, as well as their sources, drivers, consequences, and responses3. Internal risk reports are generated by the organization itself, such as by the IT risk management function, the internal audit function, or the business units. External risk reports are obtained from external sources, such as regulators, industry associations, or third-party service providers. Internal and external risk reports are the primary input when designing IT controls, because they help to:

Identify and prioritize the IT risks that need to be addressed by the IT controls;

Evaluate the likelihood and impact of the IT risks, and compare them against the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance;

Determine the most suitable and effective IT control objectives and activities to mitigate the IT risks;

Align the IT control design and implementation with the organization’s objectives, strategies, and values;

Monitor and measure the performance and effectiveness of the IT controls in reducing the IT risks. The other options are not the primary input when designing IT controls, as they are either less relevant or less specific than internal and external risk reports. Benchmark of industry standards is a comparison of the organization’s IT control practices and performance with those of other organizations in the same industry or sector4. Benchmark of industry standards can help to improve the quality and consistency of the IT control design and implementation, as well as to identify the best practices and gaps. However, benchmark of industry standards is not the primary input when designing IT controls, as it does not address the specific IT risks that the organization faces, or the IT control objectives and activities that are appropriate and effective for the organization. Recommendations from IT risk experts are the suggestions or advice from the professionals or specialists who have the knowledge and experience in IT risk management and IT control design and implementation5. Recommendations from IT risk experts can help to enhance the IT control design and implementation, as well as to provide guidance and support to the organization. However, recommendations from IT risk experts are not the primary inputwhen designing IT controls, as they are based on the opinions and perceptions of the experts, and may not reflect the actual or objective level and nature of the IT risks, or the IT control objectives and activities that are suitable and efficient for the organization. Outcome of control self-assessments is the result or conclusion of the evaluation and testing of the design and operation of the existing IT controls by the organization itself, such as by the IT control owners, the IT risk management function, or the business units6. Outcome of control self-assessments can help to improve the IT control design and implementation, as well as to detect and correct any issues or deficiencies. However, outcome of control self-assessments is not the primary input when designing IT controls, as it does not cover the new or emerging IT risks that the organization may face, or the IT control objectives and activities that are relevant and necessary for the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, Page 189.

When determining an appropriate risk assessment approach, the most important factor to understand is the value of information assets. This is because the value of information assets determines the potential impact of risks and the level of protection required. The value of information assets can be assessed based on their confidentiality, integrity, availability, and relevance to the business objectives and processes. A risk assessment approach should be aligned with the value of information assets and the risk appetite of the organization. The other options are not the most important factors to understand when determining a risk assessment approach, although they may influence the choice of methods and tools. The complexity of the IT infrastructure may affect the scope and depth of the risk assessment, but it does not indicate the level of risk or the priority of risk management. The management culture may affect the risk tolerance and the risk communication, but it does not reflect the value of information assets or the risk exposure. The threats and vulnerabilities may affect the likelihood and severity of risks, but they do not measure the value of information assets or the risk acceptance. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 582

A disaster recovery test is a simulation of a disaster scenario that evaluates the effectiveness and readiness of the disaster recovery plan. The main purpose of a disaster recovery test is to ensure that the organization can resume its normal operations as quickly as possible after a disaster, with minimal or no data loss. Therefore, the most important objective of a disaster recovery test from a business perspective is to verify that all critical data can be recovered within the RTOs, which are the maximum acceptable time frames for restoring the data and systems after a disaster. If the RTOs are not met, the organization may face significant financial, operational, and reputational losses. The other options are not the most important objectives of a disaster recovery test, although they may be beneficial outcomes. Gaining assurance that the organization can recover from a disaster is a subjective and qualitative goal, while recovering data within RTOs is a measurable and quantitative goal. Discovering errors in the disaster recovery process is a valuable result of a disaster recovery test, but it is not the primary objective. The objective is to correct the errors and improve the process, not just to find them. Testing all business criticalsystems is a necessary step in a disaster recovery test, but it is not the ultimate goal. The goal is to ensure that the systems can be restored and function properly within the RTOs. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 197-1981; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 572

The security risk associated with wearable technology in the workplace is the possibility and impact of unauthorized access, disclosure, or use of the data or information that are collected, stored, or transmitted by the wearable devices, such as smartwatches, fitness trackers, or glasses, that are worn or used by the employees12.

The first step in managing the security risk associated with wearable technology in the workplace is to identify the potential risk, which is the process of recognizing and describing the sources,causes, and consequences of the risk, and the potential impacts on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation34.

Identifying the potential risk is the first step because it provides the basis and input for the subsequent steps of the risk management process, such as assessing, treating, monitoring, and communicating the risk34.

Identifying the potential risk is also the first step because it enables the organization to understand and prioritize the risk, and to allocate the appropriate resources and controls for the risk management process34.

The other options are not the first step, but rather possible subsequent steps that may depend on or follow the identification of the potential risk. For example:

Monitoring employee usage is a step that involves collecting and analyzing data and information on the frequency, duration, and purpose of the wearable devices that are used by the employees, and detecting and reporting any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate a security risk5 . However, this step is not the first step because it requires theidentification of the potential risk to provide the guidance and standards for the monitoring process5 .

Assessing the potential risk is a step that involves estimating and evaluating the likelihood and impact of the risk, and the level of risk exposure or tolerance for the organization34. However, this step is not the first step because it requires the identification of the potential risk to provide the information and data for the assessment process34.

Developing risk awareness training is a step that involves educating and training the employees and other stakeholders on the security risks and best practices associated with the wearable technology, and informing them of their roles, obligations, and responsibilities for the risk management process . However, this step is not the first step because it requires the identification of the potential risk to provide the content and objectives for the training process . References =

1: Wearable Devices in the Workplace: Security Threats and Protection1

2: 10 security risks of wearables | CSO Online2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

5: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA3

Continuous Monitoring: A New Approach to Risk Management - ISACA Journal4

What Is Security Awareness Training and Why Is It Important? - Kaspersky5

Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US

A security incident handling process is a set of procedures and activities that aim to identify, analyze, contain, eradicate, recover from, and learn from security incidents that affect the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information assets12.

The maturity of a security incident handling process is the degree to which the process is defined, managed, measured, controlled, and improved, and the extent to which it meets the organization’s objectives and expectations34.

The best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the maturity of a security incident handling process is the number of recurring security incidents, which is the frequency or rate of security incidents that are repeated or reoccur after being resolved or closed56.

The number of recurring security incidents is the best KPI because it reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the security incident handling process, and the ability of the process to prevent or reduce the recurrence of security incidents through root cause analysis, corrective actions, and continuous improvement56.

The number of recurring security incidents is also the best KPI because it is directly related to the organization’s objectives and expectations, such as minimizing the impact and cost of security incidents, enhancing the security posture and resilience of the organization, and complying with the relevant standards and regulations56.

The other options are not the best KPIs, but rather possible metrics that may support or complement the measurement of the maturity of the security incident handling process. For example:

The number of security incidents escalated to senior management is a metric that indicates the severity or complexity of security incidents, and the involvement or awareness of the senior management in the security incident handling process56. However, this metric doesnot measure the effectiveness or efficiency of the process, or the ability of the process to prevent or reduce security incidents56.

The number of resolved security incidents is a metric that indicates the output or outcome of the security incident handling process, and the performance or productivity of the security incident handling team56. However, this metric does not measure the quality or sustainability of the resolution, or the ability of the process to prevent or reduce security incidents56.

The number of newly identified security incidents is a metric that indicates the input or demand of the security incident handling process, and the capability or capacity of the security incident detection and identification mechanisms56. However, this metric does not measure the effectiveness or efficiency of the process, or the ability of the process to prevent or reduce security incidents56. References =

1: Computer Security Incident Handling Guide, NIST Special Publication 800-61, Revision 2, August 2012

2: ISO/IEC 27035:2016 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security incident management

3: Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) for Services, Version 1.3, November 2010

4: COBIT 2019 Framework: Introduction and Methodology, ISACA, 2018

5: KPIs for Security Operations & Incident Response, SecurityScorecard Blog, June 7, 2021

6: Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Security Operations and Incident Response, DFLabs White Paper, 2018

Detailed Explanation:Data biasin machine learning algorithms can lead to inaccurate predictions or decisions, as biases in training data are amplified in the output. Addressing bias is essential for ethical and reliable algorithm performance.

Authentication is a control that verifies the identity of a user or a system that tries to access a computer system or network. Authentication can be based on something the user or system knows (such as a password or a PIN), something the user or system has (such as a token or asmart card), or something the user or system is (such as a fingerprint or a retina scan). Authentication is a crucial control for preventing unauthorized or malicious access to a system or network, as well as for ensuring the accountability and traceability of the actions performed by the user or system. If the authentication control is compromised, it means that the user or system can bypass or break the verification process and gain access to the system or network without being identified or authorized. This can expose the system or network to various threats, such as data theft, data corruption, data leakage, or denial of service. Therefore, the authentication control has most likely been compromised if a system administrator identifies unusual activity indicating an intruder within a firewall. A firewall is a device or a software that monitors and filters the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules and policies. A firewall can help to protect the system or network from external or internal attacks by blocking or allowing the traffic based on the source, destination, protocol, or content. However, a firewall cannot prevent an intruder from accessing the system or network if the intruder has already authenticated or impersonated a legitimate user or system. The other options are not the most likely controls to be compromised if a system administrator identifies unusual activity indicating an intruder within a firewall, although they may be affected or related. Data validation is a control that checks the accuracy, completeness, and quality of the data that is entered, processed, or stored by a system or anetwork. Data validation can help to prevent or detect data errors, anomalies, or inconsistencies that may affect the performance, functionality, or reliability of the system or network. However, data validation does not prevent or detect unauthorized or malicious access to the system or network, as it only focuses on the data, not the user or system. Identification is a control that assigns a unique identifier to a user or a system that tries to access a computer system or network. Identification can be based on a username, an email address, a phone number, or a certificate. Identification is a necessary but not sufficient control for preventing unauthorized or malicious access to a system or network, as it only declares who or what the user or system is, but does not prove it. Identification needs to be combined with authentication to verify the identity of the user or system. Data integrity is a control that ensures that the data is accurate, consistent, and complete throughout its lifecycle. Data integrity can be achieved by implementing various controls, such as encryption, hashing, checksum, digital signature, or backup. Data integrity can help to protect the data from unauthorized or accidental modification, deletion, or corruption that may affect the value, meaning, or usability of the data. However, data integrity does not prevent or detect unauthorized or malicious access to the system or network, as it only protects the data, not the user or system. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 164-1651; CRISC Review Questions, Answers &Explanations Manual, page 952; What is Authentication? - Definition from Techopedia3; What is a Firewall? - Definition from Techopedia4

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), key risk indicator (KRI) thresholds are the most likely elements of a risk register to change as a result of change in management’s risk appetite, as they reflect the acceptable levels of risk exposure for the organization. KRIthresholds are the values or ranges that trigger an alert or a response when the actual KRI values deviate from the expected or desired values. KRI thresholds help to:

Monitor and measure the current risk levels and performance of the IT assets and processes

Identify and report any risk issues or incidents that may require attention or action

Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response actions and controls

Align the risk management activities and decisions with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

If the management’s risk appetite changes, the KRI thresholds may need to be adjusted accordingly to ensure that the risk register reflects the current risk preferences and expectations of the organization.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 217-2181

 The most important element of a successful risk awareness training program is customizing content for the audience, because this ensures that the training is relevant, engaging, and effective for the learners. Customizing content for the audience means tailoring the training materials and methods to suit the specific needs, preferences, and characteristics of the target group, such as their roles, responsibilities, knowledge, skills, attitudes, and learning styles. Customizing content for the audience can help to achieve the following benefits:

Increase the motivation and interest of the learners, as they can see the value and applicability of the training to their work and goals.

Enhance the comprehension and retention of the learners, as they can relate the training content to their prior knowledge and experience, and use examples and scenarios that are familiar and realistic to them.

Improve the transfer and application of the learners, as they can practice and apply the training content to their actual work situations and challenges, and receive feedback and support that are relevant and useful to them. References = Implementing risk management training and awareness (part 1) 1

Cyber risk insurance is a type of insurance policy that provides coverage against losses and damages caused by cyber incidents such as data breaches, hacking, and other cyber attacks. When an organization decides to purchase cyber risk insurance, it transfers the risk of financial loss due to a cyber incident to the insurance company. In the scenario described in the question, the organization allowed its cyber risk insurance to lapse while seeking a new insurance provider. This means that the organization is currently not covered by any cyber risk insurance policy and is therefore exposed to financial losses due to cyber incidents. The risk practitioner should report to management that the risk has been accepted. Accepting risk means that the organization is aware of the potential consequences of the risk and has decided not to take any action to mitigate, transfer, or avoid it. The other options are not correct because they do not reflect the current situation of the organization. The organization has not transferred the risk to another party, as it has no cyber risk insurance policy in place. The organization has not mitigated the risk, as it has not implemented anycontrols or measures to reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk. The organization has not avoided the risk, as it has not eliminated the source or cause of the risk or changed its activities to prevent the risk from occurring. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 752

Detailed Explanation:When likelihood is unknown, range-based estimates from subject-matter experts provideinformed and realistic insights into potential risk exposure. This approach helps approximate the inherent risk based on experience and expertise, supporting effective decision-making.

Detailed Explanation:Residual riskrefers to the risk that remains after mitigation measures have been applied. It represents the exposure that an organization decides to accept, transfer, or further address, aligning with its risk appetite and tolerance.

Compensating controls are additional or alternative controls that are implemented when the existing controls are found to be ineffective or do not meet the required standards. Compensating controls are designed to reduce the risk exposure to an acceptable level and ensure that the organization can still comply with the relevant regulations and industry best practices. For an organization that processes credit cards, compensating controls may include enhanced encryption, monitoring, auditing, or authentication mechanisms. By having compensating controls in place, the organization can maintain an effective overall control environment despitethe deficiencies in the existing controls. The other options are not correct because they do not ensure that the overall control environment is effective. A control mitigation plan is a document that outlines the actions and resources needed to address the control deficiencies, but it does not guarantee that the compensating controls will be implemented or effective. Risk management is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating risks, but it does not directly affect the control environment. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk treatment, and it may or may not be acceptable depending on the risk appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 153-1541; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 632

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk and its associated controls1. The risk owner is also responsible for ensuring that the risk is within the acceptable level and that the risk response is effective and efficient2. Therefore, the most appropriate owner for a newly identified IT risk is the individual who has the authority to commit organizational resources to mitigate the risk, as they have the most interest and influence on the risk and its impact on the business objectives. The other options are not the most appropriate owners for a newly identified IT risk, as they may not have the authority or the accountability to manage the risk. The manager responsible for IT operations that will support the risk mitigation efforts may have the operational responsibility or the oversight of the risk management activities, but they may not have the authority to allocate the resources or approve the risk response. A project manager capable of prioritizing the risk remediation efforts may have the project management skills or the knowledge of the risk management process, but they may not have the accountability or the ownership of the risk or its outcomes. The individual with the most IT risk-related subject matter knowledge may have the technical expertise or the understanding of the risk and its causes, but they may not have the decision-making power or the responsibility to manage the risk or its controls. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 822

A critical patch is a software update that fixes a security vulnerability or a bug that may affect the performance, functionality, or reliability of a system or a network. A critical patch implementation is a process that applies the software update to the system or network in a timely and effective manner. The failure of a critical patch implementation is a situation where the software update is not applied or not applied correctly, which may expose the system or network to various threats, such as data theft, data corruption, data leakage, or denial of service. The failure of a critical patch implementation would be reflected in an organization’s risk profile by increasing the residual risk. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response, which means the risk that is not avoided, transferred, or mitigated by the existing controls or measures. The failure of a critical patch implementation would increase the residual risk, as it would reduce the effectiveness or efficiency of the existing controls or measures that are supposed to address the security vulnerability or the bug. The failure of a critical patch implementation would also increase the likelihood or impact of the potential threats, as well as the exposure or consequences of the system or network. The other options are not the correct changes that would be reflected in an organization’s risk profile after the failure of a critical patch implementation, although they may be affected or related. Risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is not willing to accept. Risk tolerance may be decreased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the organization may become more cautious or conservative in accepting the risk, but it is not a direct or immediate change in the risk profile. Inherent risk is the risk that exists in the absence of any controls or measures, which means the risk that is inherent to the system or network or the environment. Inherent risk may be increased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the system or network may become more vulnerable or susceptible to the threats, but it is not a change in the risk profile, as the risk profile considers the existing controls or measures. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite may be decreasedby the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the organization may become less willing orable to accept the risk, but it is not a change in the risk profile, as the risk profile reflects the actual or current risk level, not the desired or expected risk level. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 972; What is a Critical Patch? - Definition from Techopedia3; What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia4

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), threat analysis would be the most helpful when estimating the likelihood of negative events, as it involves identifying and evaluating the sources and causes of potential harm or loss to the IT assets and processes. Threat analysis helps to:

Determine the frequency and probability of occurrence of different types of threats, such as natural disasters, human errors, malicious attacks, system failures, etc.

Assess the impact and severity of the threats on the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the IT assets and processes

Prioritize the threats based on their likelihood and impact

Develop appropriate risk response strategies to prevent, mitigate, transfer or accept the threats

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 35-361

The risk landscape is the set of internal and external factors and conditions that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, and create or influence the risks that the organization faces. The risk landscape is dynamic and complex, and it may change over time due to various drivers or events, such as technological innovations, market trends, regulatory changes, customer preferences, competitor actions, environmental issues, etc.

The best way to identify changes to the risk landscape is threat modeling, which is the process of identifying, analyzing, and prioritizing the potential threats or sources of harm that may exploit the vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems, and cause adverse impacts or consequences for the organization. Threat modeling can help the organization to anticipate and prepare for the changes in the risk landscape, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the threats.

Threat modeling can be performed using various techniques, such as brainstorming, scenario analysis, attack trees, STRIDE, DREAD, etc. Threat modeling can also be integrated with the risk management process, and aligned with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite.

The other options are not the best ways to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they do not provide the same level of proactivity, comprehensiveness, and effectiveness of identifying and addressing the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Internal audit reports are the documents that provide the results and findings of the internal audits that are performed to assess and evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. Internal audit reports can provide useful information and recommendations on the current state and performance of the organization, and identify the issues or gaps that need to be addressed or improved, but they are not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they areusually retrospective and reactive, and they may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Access reviews are the processes of verifying and validating the access rights and privileges that are granted to the users or entities that interact with the organization’s assets, processes, orsystems, and ensuring that they are appropriate and authorized. Access reviews can provide useful information and feedback on the security and compliance of the organization’s access management, and identify and revoke any unauthorized or unnecessary access rights or privileges, but they are not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because they are usually periodic and specific, and they may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization.

Root cause analysis is the process of identifying and understanding the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in a problem or incident that has occurred or may occur in the organization. Root cause analysis can provide useful insights and solutions on the origin and nature of the problem or incident, and prevent or reduce its recurrence or impact, but it is not the best way to identify changes to the risk landscape, because it is usually retrospective and reactive, and it may not cover all the relevant or emerging threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 167

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A cost-benefit analysis is the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan. A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions or measures that are taken or planned to modifythe risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk1. Selecting an appropriate risk treatmentplan means choosing the most suitable and effective option foraddressing the risk, based on the organization’s objectives, strategies, and risk criteria2. A cost-benefit analysis is a method of comparing the benefits and costs of different alternatives or options, and selecting the one that maximizes the net benefit or value3. A cost-benefit analysis is the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, because it helps to:

Evaluate the feasibility, effectiveness, and efficiency of the risk treatment options, and compare them against the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance;

Balance the benefits and costs of the risk treatment options, and consider both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the risk and the risk response;

Optimize the use of the organization’s resources and capabilities, and ensure that the risk treatment options are aligned and integrated with the organization’s goals and values;

Support the risk decision making and prioritization, and provide a rational and transparent basis for selecting the best risk treatment option. The other options are not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as they are either less comprehensive or less relevant than a cost-benefit analysis. A risk mitigation budget is a document that allocates the financial resources for implementing and maintaining the risk mitigation actions or measures4. A risk mitigation budget can help to ensure the availability and adequacy of the funds for the risk treatment options, as well as to monitor and control the risk treatment expenditures. However, a risk mitigation budget is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the benefits or value of the risk treatment options, or the suitability or effectiveness of the risk treatment options. A business impact analysis is a method of estimating the potential effects or consequences of a risk on the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance5. A business impact analysis can help to assess the severity and priority of the risk, as well as to identify the critical assets and resources that are involved or impacted by the risk. However, a business impact analysis is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the costs or feasibility of the risk treatment options, or the alternatives or options for the risk treatment. A return on investment is a metric that measures the profitability or efficiency of an investment, project, or activity, by comparing the benefits and costs of the investment, project, or activity6. A return on investment can help to evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the risk treatment options, as well as to compare the risk treatment options with other investments, projects, or activities. However, a return on investment is not the best guidance when selecting an appropriate risk treatment plan, as it does not address the qualitative or intangible aspects of the risk and the risk response, or the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

A risk heat map is a tool that shows the likelihood and impact of different risks on a matrix, using colors to indicate the level of risk. A risk heat map is most commonly used as part of an IT risk analysis to facilitate risk assessment, which is the process of estimating the probability and consequences of the risks, and comparing them against the risk criteria1. A risk heat map can help to visualize, communicate, and prioritize the risks, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of the risk response actions2. The other options are not the best choices for describing the purpose of a risk heat map, as they are either less specific or less relevant than risk assessment. Risk communication is the process of sharing and exchanging information about the risks among the stakeholders3. A risk heat map can support risk communication by providing a clear and concise representation of the risks, but it is not the main objective of the tool. Riskidentification is the process of finding, recognizing, and describing the risks that may affect the organization4. A risk heat map can help to identify the risks by categorizing them into different domains or sources, but it is not the primary function of the tool. Risk treatment is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate measures to modify the risk5. A risk heat map can help to guide the risk treatment by showing the risk ratings and thresholds, but it is not the core purpose of the tool. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, Page 47.

The risk practitioner’s primary focus when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk should be the level of residual risk, because this indicates the amount and type of risk that remains after applying the controls, and whether it is acceptable or not. Residual risk is the risk that is left over after the risk responseactions have been taken, such as implementing or improving controls. Controls are the measures or actions that are designed and performed to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of a risk event, or to exploit the opportunities that a risk event may create. The adequacy of controls to mitigate risk depends on how well they address the root causes or sources of the risk, and how effectively and efficiently they reduce the risk exposure and value. The level of residual risk reflects the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it shows the gap between the inherent risk and the actual risk, and whether it is within the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. The risk practitioner should focus on the level of residual risk when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk, as it helps to evaluate and compare the benefits and costs of the controls, and to decide on the best risk response strategy, such as accepting, avoiding, transferring, or further reducing the risk. The other options are less important or relevant to focus on when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk. Sensitivity analysis is a technique that measures how the risk value changes when one or more input variables are changed, such as the probability, impact, or control effectiveness. Sensitivity analysis can help to identify and prioritize the most influential or critical variables that affect the risk value, and to test the robustness or reliability of the risk assessment. However, sensitivity analysis does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the risk acceptance criteria. Cost-benefit analysis is a technique that compares the expected benefits and costs of a control or a risk response action, and determines whether it is worthwhile or not. Cost-benefit analysis can help to justify and optimize the investment or resource allocation for the control or the risk response action, and to ensure that it is aligned with the organization’s objectives and value. However, cost-benefit analysis does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the risk acceptance criteria. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite can help to define and communicate the organization’s risk preferences and boundaries, and to guide the risk decision-making and behavior. However, risk appetite does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the actual risk performance. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

Detailed Explanation:An updatedrisk registerensures that decision-makers have accurate, timely information about current risks, enabling informed, risk-based decisions that align with organizational priorities and changes in the environment.

 The best way to measure the effectiveness of the subsidiary’s IT systems controls is to review metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs), as they provide quantitative and qualitative measures of the performance and outcomes of the IT systems and processes, and how well they meet the predefined standards and expectations. Metrics and KPIs can help to evaluate the efficiency, reliability, security, and quality of the IT systems and controls, and to identify any gaps, weaknesses, or issues that need to be addressed. Metrics and KPIs can also help to compare and benchmark the subsidiary’s IT systems and controls with those of the parent organization or other similar entities. The other options are not the best ways to measure the effectiveness of the subsidiary’s IT systems controls, although they may be useful or complementary methods. Implementing IT systems in alignment with business objectives is a good practice, but it does not measure the effectiveness of the IT systems controls, as it focuses on the alignment andintegration of the IT systems with the business strategy and goals. Reviewing design documentation of IT systems can provide some information on the specifications and requirements of the IT systems, but it does not measure the effectiveness of the IT systems controls, as it does not reflect the actual implementation and operation of the IT systems. Evaluating compliance with legal and regulatory requirements can ensure that the subsidiary’s IT systems and controls meet the minimum standards and obligations of the foreign country, but it does not measure the effectiveness of the IT systems controls, as it does not consider the performance and outcomes of the IT systems and processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 187.

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

The best way for a risk practitioner to help management prioritize risk response is to assess risk against business objectives. This means comparing the level and nature of the risks with the goals and strategies of the organization, and determining which risks pose the most significant threat or opportunity to the achievement of those objectives. By assessing risk against business objectives, the risk practitioner can help management identify the most critical and relevant risks, and prioritize the risk response actions accordingly. The risk response actions should be aligned with the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to take in order to meet its strategic goals1. The other options are not the best ways for a risk practitioner to help management prioritize risk response, as they are either less effective orless specific than assessing risk against business objectives. Aligning business objectives to the risk profile is a way of ensuring that the organization’s objectives are realistic and achievable, given the current and potential risks that the organization faces. However, this is not the same as prioritizing risk response, as it does not indicate which risks should be addressed first or how theyshould be managed. Implementing an organization-specific risk taxonomy is a way of creating a common language and classification system for describing and categorizing risks. This can help improve the consistency and clarity of risk communication and reporting across the organization. However, this is not the same as prioritizing risk response, as it does not measure the likelihood and impact of the risks, or their relation to the organization’s objectives. Explaining risk details to management is a way of providing information and insight on the sources, drivers, consequences, and responses of the risks. This can help increase the awareness and understanding of the risks among the decision makers and stakeholders. However, this is not the same as prioritizing risk response, as it does not suggest or recommend the best course of action for managing the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.6, Page 57.

After a risk has been identified, the risk owner is in the best position to select the appropriate risk treatment option. The risk owner is the person or entity with the accountability and authority to manage a risk1. The risk owner is responsible for evaluating the risk, choosing the most suitable risk treatment option, implementing the risk treatment plan, and monitoring and reviewing the risk and its treatment2. The risk owner has the most knowledge and stake in the risk and its impact on the objectives and activities of the organization. The other options are not the best choices for selecting the risk treatment option, as they do not have the same level of accountability and authority as the risk owner. The risk practitioner is the person or entity with the knowledge and skills to perform the risk management activities1. The risk practitioner can assist the risk owner in identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating the risk, but the final decision and responsibility lies with the risk owner. The business process owner is the person or entity with the accountability and authority to manage a business process3. The business process owner may be affected by the risk or involved in the risk treatment, but the risk owner is the one who has the overall responsibility for the risk. The control owner is the person or entity with the accountability and authority to ensure that the controls are properly designed, implemented, and operated4. The control owner can provide input and feedback on the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, but the risk owner is the one who decides which controls are needed and how they are applied. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.3, Page 51.

 The most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization is clearly defined roles and responsibilities. The three lines of defense model is a framework that outlinesthe roles and responsibilities of different functions or groups within the organization in relation to risk management and internal control1. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense, which consists of the operational management and staff who own and manage the risks associated with their activities and processes. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks, as well as designing, implementing, and operating the controls.

The second line of defense, which consists of the specialized functions or units that provide oversight, guidance, and support to the first line of defense in managing the risks and controls. They are responsible for developing and maintaining the risk management framework, policies, and standards, as well as monitoring and reporting on the risk and control performance.

The third line of defense, which consists of the internal audit function that provides independent and objective assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and internal control system. They are responsible for evaluating and testing the design and operation of the risks and controls, as well as reporting and recommending improvements to the senior management and the board. Clearly defined roles and responsibilities are essential for ensuring that the three lines of defense model works effectively and efficiently. They help to avoid confusion, duplication, or gaps in the risk management and internal control activities, as well as to ensure accountability, coordination, and communication among the different functions or groups. They also help to establish the appropriate level of independence, authority, and competence for each line of defense, as well as to align the risk management and internal control objectives and strategies with the organization’s goals and values2. The other options are not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as they are either less relevant or less specific than clearly defined roles and responsibilities. A robust risk aggregation tool set is a set of methods or techniques that enable the organization to collect, consolidate, and analyze the risk data and information from different sources, levels, or perspectives. A robust risk aggregation tool set can help to enhance the risk identification, assessment, and reporting processes, as well as to support the risk decision making and prioritization. However, a robust risk aggregationtool set is not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as it does not address the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups in relation to risk management and internal control. A well-established risk management committee is a group of senior executives or managers who are responsible for overseeing and directing the risk management activities and performance of the organization. A well-established risk management committee can help to ensure the alignment and integration of the risk management objectives and strategies with the organization’s goals and values, as well as to provide guidance and support to the different functions or groups involved in risk management and internal control. However, a well-established risk management committee is not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as it does not cover theroles and responsibilities of the operational management and staff, the specialized functions or units, or the internal audit function. Well-documented and communicated escalation procedures are the steps or actions that are taken to report and resolve any issues or incidents that may affect the risk management and internal control activities or performance of the organization. Well-documented and communicated escalation procedures can help to ensure the timely and appropriate response and resolution of the issues or incidents, as well as to inform and involve the relevant stakeholders and authorities. However, well-documented and communicated escalation procedures are not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as they do not define the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups in relation to risk management and internal control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 85.

Risk mitigation procedures are the actions and plans that an organization implements to reduce the likelihood and impact of identified risks. Risk mitigation procedures should include the deployment of counter measures, which are the specific controls or solutions that address the root causes or sources of the risks, and prevent or minimize the potential losses or damages. For example, a counter measure for therisk of data breach could be encrypting the data or implementing a firewall. The deployment of counter measures should be based on a cost-benefit analysis, a risk assessment, and a risk response strategy. The other options are not necessarily part of risk mitigation procedures. Buying an insurance policy is an example of risk transfer,which is a risk response strategy that shifts the responsibility or burden of the risk to another party, such as an insurer or a vendor. However, risk transfer does not eliminate or reduce the risk itself, and it may involve additional costs or conditions. Acceptance of exposures is an example of risk acceptance, which is a risk response strategy that acknowledges the existence and consequences of the risk, and decides not to take any action to change the risk situation. However, risk acceptance does not mitigate the risk, and it may require contingency plans or reserves to deal with the potential outcomes. Enterprise architecture implementation is an example of a business process or project that may involve or create risks, but it is not a risk mitigation procedure itself. Enterprise architecture is the design and structure of an organization’s IT systems, networks, and resources, and how they align with the organization’s goals and strategies. Enterprise architecture implementation may require risk management activities, such as risk identification, assessment, and response, but it is not a risk mitigation procedure itself. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 151

A cyber intrusion is an unauthorized or malicious access to a computer system or network by an attacker. A cyber intrusion can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the system or network, as well as the data and services that it hosts. A cyber intrusion can also cause damage, disruption, or theft to the organization or its stakeholders. One of the best ways toprevent cyber intrusion is to strengthen vulnerability remediation efforts, which means to identify and fix the weaknesses or flaws in the system or network that can be exploited by the attackers. Vulnerability remediation efforts can include conducting regularvulnerability assessments, applying security patches and updates, configuring security settings and policies, and implementing security controls and measures. By strengthening vulnerability remediation efforts, the organization can reduce the attack surface and the likelihood of cyber intrusion, as well as enhance the resilience and protection of the system or network. The other options are not the best recommendations for preventing cyber intrusion, although they may be helpful and complementary. Establishing a cyber response plan is a technique to prepare for and respond to a cyber incident, such as a cyber intrusion, by defining the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources that are needed to manage and recover from the incident. However, a cyber response plan is a reactive and contingency measure, while strengthening vulnerability remediation efforts is a proactive and preventive measure. Implementing data loss prevention (DLP) tools is a technology that tries to detect and stop sensitive data breaches, or data leakage incidents, in an organization. DLP tools can help to protect the data from being disclosed to an unauthorized person, whether it is deliberate or accidental. However, DLP tools do not prevent cyber intrusion itself, as they only focus on the data, not the system or network. Implementing network segregation is a method to divide a network into smaller segments or subnetworks, each with its own security policies and controls. Network segregation can help to isolate and contain the impact of a cyber intrusion, as well as to limit the access and movement of the attackers within the network. However, network segregation does not prevent cyber intrusion from occurring, as it does not address thevulnerabilities or flaws in the system or network. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 164-1651; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 902; What Are Security Controls? - F53; Assessing Security Controls: Keystone of the Risk Management … - ISACA4

A consolidated view into the organization’s risk profile is a comprehensive and integrated representation of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

The most helpful material to provide a consolidated view into the organization’s risk profile is the IT risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the IT-related risks, their sources, impacts, likelihoods, responses, owners, and statuses within the organization34.

The IT risk register is the most helpful material because it provides a complete and consistent overview of the IT risk landscape, and enables the identification, analysis, evaluation, treatment, monitoring, and communication of IT risks across the organization34.

The IT risk register is also the most helpful material because it supports the project prioritization and resource allocation decisions, by highlighting the most significant and relevant IT risks, and by showing the alignment of the IT risk responses with the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, and objectives34.

The other options are not the most helpful materials, but rather possible inputs or outputs of the IT risk register. For example:

A list of key risk indicators (KRIs) is a set of metrics that measure the occurrence or status of IT risks, and provide timely and relevant information and feedback to the organization56. However, a list of KRIs is not the most helpful material because it does not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a snapshot or a trend of selected IT risks56.

Internal audit reports are documents that present the findings and recommendations of the internal audit function, which evaluates the adequacy and effectiveness of the IT risk management and control processes within the organization78. However, internal audit reports are not the most helpful material because they do not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a periodic and independent assessment of specific IT risk areas78.

A list of approved projects is a document that records and tracks the IT projects that have been authorized and funded by the organization, and their objectives, scope, schedule, budget, and status . However, a list of approved projects is not the most helpful material because it does not provide a comprehensive and integrated view of the IT risk profile, but rather a summary of the IT project portfolio . References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

3: IT Risk Register Template, ISACA, 2019

4: IT Risk Register Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

5: KPIs for Security Operations & Incident Response, SecurityScorecard Blog, June 7, 2021

6: Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Security Operations and Incident Response, DFLabs White Paper, 2018

7: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

8: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

IT Project Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

IT Project Management Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2018

In addition to the risk register, which is a tool to document and monitor the risks that affect the organization, a risk practitioner should review the business objectives of the organization to develop an understanding of its risk profile. The risk profile is a description of the set of risks that the organization faces in relation to its goals and strategies. By reviewing the business objectives, the risk practitioner can identify the sources, drivers, and consequences of the risks, as well as the alignment, prioritization, and tolerance of the risks. The business objectives also provide the context and criteria for evaluating and managing the risks. The other options are not the best choices to review for developing an understandingof the organization’s risk profile, as they do not capture the full scope and nature of the risks. The control catalog is a list of the existing controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks, but it does not reflect the effectiveness, efficiency, or sufficiency of the controls. The asset profile is a description of the resources and capabilities that the organization possesses or relies on, but it does not indicate the value, vulnerability, or interdependency of the assets. The key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the level and trend of the risks, but they do not explain the causes, impacts, orresponses to the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, Page 49.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the risk register is the most useful component of the review of the overall risk profile from the targeted organization, as it provides a comprehensive and up-to-date record of the identified risks, their likelihood and impact, their risk response actions, and their residual risk levels. The risk register helps to:

Understand the current and potential threats and vulnerabilities that may affect the targeted organization’s objectives and performance

Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management processes and controls implemented by the targeted organization

Identify the gaps or weaknesses in the risk management practices and capabilities of the targeted organization

Assess the compatibility and alignment of the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the targeted organization with the acquiring organization

Estimate the value and benefits of the acquisition and the potential risks and costs involved

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 38-391

Global standards related to risk management are documents that provide the principles, guidelines, and best practices for managing risk in a consistent, effective, and efficient manner across different organizations, sectors, and regions12.

The primary reason for a risk practitioner to use global standards related to risk management is to continuously improve risk management processes, which are the activities and tasks that enable the organization to identify, analyze, evaluate, treat, monitor, and communicate the risks that may affect its objectives, performance, and value creation34.

Continuously improving risk management processes is the primary reason because it helps the organization to enhance its risk management capabilities and maturity, and to adapt to the changing risk environment and stakeholder expectations34.

Continuously improving risk management processes is also the primary reason because it supports the achievement of the organization’s goals and the delivery of value to the stakeholders, which are the ultimate purpose and outcome of risk management34.

The other options are not the primary reason, but rather possible benefits or objectives that may result from using global standards related to risk management. For example:

Building an organizational risk-aware culture is a benefit of using global standards related to risk management that involves creating and maintaining a shared understanding, attitude, and behavior towards risk among the organization’s employees and leaders, and fostering a culture of accountability, transparency, and learning34. However, this benefit is not the primary reason because it is an enabler and a consequence of continuously improving risk management processes, rather than a driver or a goal34.

Complying with legal and regulatory requirements is an objective of using global standards related to risk management that involves meeting and exceeding the expectations and obligations of the external authorities or bodies that govern or oversee the organization’s activities and operations, such as laws, regulations, standards, or contracts34. However, thisobjective is not theprimary reason because it is a constraint and a challenge of continuously improving risk management processes, rather than a motivation or a benefit34.

Identifying gaps in risk management practices is an objective of using global standards related to risk management that involves assessing and comparing the current and desiredstate of the organization’s risk management processes, and identifying the areas or aspects that need to be improved or addressed34. However, this objective is not the primary reason because it is a step and a tool of continuously improving risk management processes, rather than a reason or a result34. References =

1: ISO - ISO 31000 — Risk management1

2: Risk Management Standards2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the next course of action when there is a gap between the acceptable downtime and the actual recovery time of an application is to prepare a cost-benefit analysis of alternatives available to reduce the gap. The cost-benefit analysis should compare the costs of implementing different risk response options, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer or acceptance, with the benefits of reducing the impact and likelihood of the risk. The cost-benefit analysis should also consider the alignment of the risk response options with the enterprise’s risk appetite, business objectives and strategy. The cost-benefit analysis should help the application owner and the risk owner to select the most appropriate risk response option that optimizes the value of the application and minimizes the residual risk.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: Risk Response Process, pp. 162-1631

Detailed Explanation:A data classification program helpsidentify appropriate controlsby categorizing data based on sensitivity and criticality. This ensures that data protection measures are aligned with its value and risk level, improving overall security posture.

The organization’s risk appetite and tolerance are the most important topics to cover in a risk awareness training for senior management. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk tolerance is the level of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is prepared to accept. Senior management plays a key role in defining and communicating the risk appetite and tolerance, as well asensuring that they are aligned with the organization’s strategy, culture, and values. By covering these topics in the training session, the risk practitioner can help senior management understand and articulate the risk preferences and boundaries of the organization, as well as monitor and adjust them as needed. The other options are not the most important topics to cover in a risk awareness training for senior management, although they may be relevant and useful. The organization’s strategic risk management projects are specific initiatives or activities that aim to identify, assess, and treat risks that may affect the organization’s objectives. Senior management roles and responsibilities are the duties and expectations that senior management has in relation to risk management, such as providing leadership, oversight, and support. Senior management allocation of risk management resources is the process of assigning and prioritizing the human, financial, and technical resources that are needed to implement and maintain risk management activities. These topics are more operational and tactical than strategic and may vary depending on the context and scope of the risk management function. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 40-411; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 732

A risk map, also known as a risk heat map, is a visual tool that helps an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios by plotting them on a matrix based on their likelihood and impact. A risk map can help to compare and contrast different risk scenarios, as well as to identify the most critical and urgent risks that require attention. A risk map can also help to communicate and report the risk profile and status to the stakeholders and decision makers. Therefore, the placement on the risk map would best help an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios. The other options are not the best ways to help an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios, although they may be relevant and useful. Industry best practices are the standards or guidelines that are widely accepted and followed by the organizations in a specific industry or domain. Industry best practices can help to benchmark and improve the risk management process and performance, but they may not reflect the specific risk context and needs of the enterprise. Degree of variances in the risk is the measure of the variability or uncertainty of the risk, which may affect the accuracy or reliability of the risk assessment and response. Degree of variances in the risk can help to adjust and refine the risk analysis and treatment, but it may not indicate the priority or importance of the risk. Cost of risk mitigation is the amount of resources or expenses that are required or allocated to implement the risk response actions, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risk. Cost of risk mitigation can help to evaluate and optimize therisk response options, but it may not determine the priority or urgency of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 892

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the percentage of systems with long recovery target times has decreased is the information that would have the most impact on the overall recovery profile, as it indicates that the organization has improved its ability to restore its critical systems and processes within the acceptable time frames after a disaster. The recovery target time, also known as the recovery time objective (RTO), is the maximum acceptable time that an application, computer, network, or system can be down after an unexpected disaster, failure, or comparable event takes place. The recovery profile, also known as the recovery point objective (RPO), is the maximum acceptable amount of data loss measured in time. A lower percentage of systems with long recovery target times means that the organization has:

Reduced the gap between the business requirements and the IT capabilities for disaster recovery

Enhanced the resilience and availability of its critical systems and processes

Minimized the potential losses and damages caused by prolonged downtime

Increased the confidence and satisfaction of its stakeholders and customers

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 174-1751

 Risk impact is the potential loss or damage that a risk event can cause to an organization. Risk impact can be expressed in qualitative or quantitative terms, such as financial, reputational, operational, or legal. A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the key information about the identified risks, such as their description, likelihood, impact, response, and status. A risk register helps an organization to monitor and manage its risks effectively and efficiently. When there is a change in the external or internal environment that affects the organization’s risks, such as new regulations, the risk register should be updated to reflect this change. The most important element of the risk register to update in this case is the risk impact, because the new regulations have significantly increased the penalties for data breaches, which means that the potential loss or damage that a data breach can cause to the organization has also increased. By updating the risk impact, the organization can reassess the severity and priority of the data breach risk, and adjust its risk response accordingly. The other elements of the risk register are less important toupdate in this case. The risk trend shows the direction and rate of change of the risk over time, which may or may not be affected by the new regulations. The risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, which is unlikely to change due to the new regulations. The risk likelihood is the probability of a risk event occurring, which is also independent of the new regulations. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

A security awareness training program is an educational program that aims to equip the organization’s employees with the knowledge and skills they need to protect the organization’s data and sensitive information from cyber threats, such as hacking, phishing, or other breaches12.

A risk-aware culture is a culture that values and promotes the understanding and management of risks, and encourages the behaviors and actions that support the organization’s risk objectives and strategy34.

The best indication of an improved risk-aware culture following the implementation of a security awareness training program for all employees is an increase in the number of incidents reported, which is the frequency or rate of security incidents that are detected and communicated by the employees to the appropriate authorities or channels56.

An increase in the number of incidents reported is the best indication because it shows that the employees have gained the awareness and confidence to recognize and report the security incidents that may affect the organization, and that they have the responsibility and accountability to contribute to the organization’s risk management and security posture56.

An increase in the number of incidents reported is also the best indication because it enables the organization to respond and recover from the security incidents more quickly and effectively, and to prevent or reduce the recurrence or escalation of similar incidents in the future56.

The other options are not the best indication, but rather possible outcomes or consequences of an improved risk-aware culture or a security awareness training program. For example:

A reduction in the number of help desk calls is an outcome of an improved risk-aware culture or a security awareness training program that indicates the employees have become more self-reliant and proficient in solving or preventing the common or minor IT issues or problems . However, this outcome does not measure the employees’ awareness or reporting of security incidents, which may be more serious or complex .

An increase in the number of identified system flaws is a consequence of an improved risk-aware culture or a security awareness training program that indicates the employees have become more vigilant and proactive in finding and reporting the vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the IT systems or processes . However, this consequence does not measure the employees’ awareness or reporting of security incidents, which may exploit or leverage the system flaws .

A reduction in the number of user access resets is an outcome of an improved risk-aware culture or a security awareness training program that indicates the employees have become more careful and responsible in managing and protecting their user credentials or accounts . However, this outcome does not measure the employees’ awareness or reporting of security incidents, which may compromise or misuse the user access . References =

1: Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US5

2: What Is Security Awareness Training and Why Is It Important? - Kaspersky6

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

5: Security Incident Reporting and Response, University of Toronto, 2017

6: Security Incident Reporting and Response, ISACA, 2019

IT Help Desk Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 2, 2018

IT Help Desk Best Practices, ISACA Now Blog, February 12, 2018

System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, University of Toronto, 2017

System Flaw Reporting and Remediation, ISACA, 2019

User Access Management and Control, University of Toronto, 2017

User Access Management and Control, ISACA, 2019

Detailed Explanation:Real-time monitoring is adetective control, as it is designed to identify and report suspicious or unauthorized activities as they occur. Detective controls provide feedback to mitigate ongoing risks and serve as an integral part of incident response plans.

An IT risk management framework is a set of principles, processes, and practices that guide and support the identification, analysis, evaluation, treatment, monitoring, and communication of IT-related risks within an organization12.

The primary advantage of implementing an IT risk management framework is the establishment of a reliable basis for risk-aware decision making, which enables the organization to balance the potential benefits and adverse effects of using IT, and to allocate resources and prioritize actions accordingly12.

A reliable basis for risk-aware decision making consists of the following elements12:

A common language and understanding of IT risk, its sources, impacts, and responses

A consistent and structured approach to IT risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment

A clear and transparent governance structure and accountability for IT risk management

A comprehensive and up-to-date IT risk register and profile that reflects the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

A regular and effective IT risk monitoring and reporting process that provides relevant and timely information to stakeholders

A continuous and proactive IT risk improvement process that incorporates feedback and lessons learned

The other options are not the primary advantage, but rather possible outcomes or benefits of implementing an IT risk management framework. For example:

Compliance with relevant legal and regulatory requirements is an outcome of implementing an IT risk management framework that ensures the organization meets its obligations and avoids penalties or sanctions12.

Improvement of controls within the organization and minimized losses is a benefit of implementing an IT risk management framework that reduces the likelihood and impact of IT-related incidents and events12.

Alignment of business goals with IT objectives is a benefit of implementing an IT risk management framework that ensures the IT strategy and activities support the organization’s mission and vision12. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

An organization’s account provisioning process is the process of creating, modifying, or deleting user accounts and access rights for the organization’s information systems and resources. It involves defining the access requirements, policies, and standards, and implementing and enforcing them across the organization.

The best evidence of the effectiveness of an organization’s account provisioning process is entitlement reviews, which are the periodic or regular reviews and validations of the user accounts and access rights that are granted or assigned to the users or entities that interact with the organization’s information systems and resources. Entitlement reviews can provide assurance and verification that the account provisioning process is accurate, consistent, and compliant, and that it meets the organization’s security and business objectives and requirements.

Entitlement reviews can be performed using various techniques, such as automated tools, reports, audits, surveys, etc. Entitlement reviews can also be integrated with the organization’s governance, risk management, and compliance functions, and aligned with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the best evidence of the effectiveness of an organization’s account provisioning process, because they do not provide the same level of assurance and verification that the account provisioning process is accurate, consistent, and compliant, and that it meets the organization’s security and business objectives and requirements.

User provisioning is the process of creating, modifying, or deleting user accounts and access rights for a specific user or entity, based on their identity, role, or function in the organization. User provisioning is an important part of the account provisioning process, but it is not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because it does not indicate whether the user accounts and access rights are appropriate and authorized, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

Role-based access controls are the controls that grant or restrict user accounts and access rights based on the predefined roles or functions that the users or entities perform or assume in the organization. Role-based access controls are an important part of the account provisioningprocess, but they are not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because they do not indicate whether the roles or functions are defined and assigned correctly and consistently, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

Security log monitoring is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the security events or activities that are recorded or logged by the organization’s information systems and resources. Security log monitoring is an important part of the account provisioning process, but it is not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because it does not indicate whether the security events or activities are legitimate or authorized, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 173

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are quantifiable measures of progress toward an intended result, such as a strategic objective or a desired outcome12.

The most important factor when developing KPIs is the alignment to risk responses, which are the actions taken to address the risks that may affect the achievement of the intended result12.

Alignment to risk responses means that the KPIs should reflect the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk responses, and provide feedback and guidance for improving the risk responses12.

Alignment to risk responses also means that the KPIs should be consistent and compatible with the risk responses, and support the risk management process and objectives12.

The other options are not the most important factor, but rather possible aspects or features of KPIs that may vary depending on the context and purpose of the KPIs. For example:

Alignment to management reports is an aspect of KPIs that relates to the communication and presentation of the KPIs to the relevant stakeholders, such as senior management,board members, or external parties12. However, this aspect does not determine the quality or validity of the KPIs, or the alignment to the intended result12.

Alerts when risk thresholds are reached is a feature of KPIs that relates to the monitoring and control of the KPIs, and the triggering of actions or decisions when the KPIs exceed or fall below a certain level or range12. However, this feature does not define the content or scope of the KPIs, or the alignment to the intended result12.

Identification of trends is a feature of KPIs that relates to the analysis and interpretation of the KPIs, and the identification of patterns or changes in the KPIs over time or across different dimensions12. However, this feature does not specify the criteria or methodology of the KPIs, or the alignment to the intended result12. References =

1: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? Guide & Examples - Qlik3

2: What is a Key Performance Indicator (KPI)? - KPI.org4

A change management process is a set of procedures and activities that aim to ensure that changes in an organization’s IT systems and services are implemented in a controlled and coordinated manner. The effectiveness of a change management process can be measured by how well it reduces the risks and costs associated with changes, and how well it supports the business objectives and customer expectations. One of the best metrics to demonstrate the effectiveness of a change management process is the percent of unauthorized changes. Unauthorized changes are changes that are made without following the established change management process, such as obtaining approval, documenting the change, testing the change, and communicating the change. Unauthorized changes can introduce errors, defects, security breaches, and disruptions to the IT systems and services, and can negatively affect the business performance and customer satisfaction. Therefore, a low percent of unauthorized changes indicates that the change management process is effective in ensuring that changes are properly planned, approved, executed, and monitored. The other options are not the best metrics to demonstrate the effectiveness of a change management process, as they do not directly reflect the quality and control of the changes. An increase in the frequency of changes may indicate that the organization is agile and responsive to the changing business needs and customer demands, but it does not necessarily mean that the changes are well-managed and beneficial. An increase in the number of emergency changes may indicate that the organization is able to handle urgent and critical situations, but it may also suggest that the organization is reactive and lacks proper planning and analysis of the changes. The average time to complete changes may indicate the efficiency and speed of the change management process, but it does not measure the effectiveness and value of the changes. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 156-1571; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 712

 The next step after determining that a key control does not meet design expectations is to document the finding in the risk register, because this helps to record and track the information about the identified risk, such as its description, likelihood, impact, response, and status. A key control is a control that addresses a significant risk or supports a critical business process or objective. A control design expectation is a criterion or requirement that defines how the control should operate or perform to achieve its objective. If a key control does not meet its design expectation, it means that there is a gap, weakness, or deficiency in the control that may compromise its effectiveness or efficiency, and increase the risk exposure or impact. By documenting the finding in the risk register, the risk practitioner can communicate and report the risk issue to the relevant stakeholders, such as the risk owner, the management, or the auditor, and initiate the appropriate risk response actions, such as modifying the design of the control, implementing a compensating control, or accepting the risk. The other options are not the best next steps after determining that a key control does not meet design expectations. Invoking the incident response plan is a reactive measure that is triggered when a risk event occurs or is imminent, and requires immediate action to contain, mitigate, or recover from the incident. However, in this case, the risk event has not occurred yet, and there may be time to prevent or reduce it by improving the control design. Re-evaluating key risk indicators is a monitoring activity that measures and evaluates the level and impact of risks, and provides timely signals that something may be going wrong or needs urgent attention. However, in this case, the risk practitioner has already identified the risk issue, and needs to document and address it, rather than re-evaluate it. Modifying the design of the control is a possible risk response action that may be taken to improve the control and reduce the risk, but it is not the next step after determining that the key control does not meet design expectations. The next step is to document the finding in the risk register, and then decide on the best risk response action, which may or may not be modifying the design of the control, depending on the cost-benefit analysis, the risk assessment, and the risk response strategy. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 13

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the percentage of successful changes is the most effective key performance indicator (KPI) for change management, as it measures thequality and effectiveness of the change management process and its alignment with the organization’s objectives and requirements. The percentage of successful changes helps to:

Evaluate the extent to which the changes have met the expected outcomes and benefits

Identify and analyze the root causes of any failed or problematic changes and implement corrective actions or improvement measures

Monitor and report the performance and progress of the change management process and its impact on the organization

Enhance the confidence and satisfaction of the stakeholders and customers with the change management process and its results

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Scenarios, pp. 107-1081

The control environment is the set of internal and external factors and conditions that influence and shape the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. It includes the organization’s culture, values, ethics, structure, roles, responsibilities, policies, standards, etc.

Uncontrolled changes are changes or modifications to the control environment that are not planned, authorized, documented, or monitored, and that may have unintended or adverse consequences for the organization. Uncontrolled changes may be caused by various drivers or events, such as technological innovations, market trends, regulatory changes, customer preferences, competitor actions, environmental issues, etc.

The greatest concern when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment is an increase in the level of residual risk, which is the amount and type of risk that remains after the implementation and execution of the risk responses or controls. An increase in the level of residual risk means that the risk responses or controls are not effective or sufficient to mitigate or prevent the risks, and that the organization may face unacceptable or intolerable consequences if the risks materialize.

An increase in the level of residual risk is the greatest concern when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment, because it indicates that the organization’s risk profile and performance have deteriorated, and that the organization may not be able to achieve its objectives or protect its value. It also indicates that the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance have been violated, and that the organization may need to take corrective or compensating actions to restore the balance between risk and return.

The other options are not the greatest concerns when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment, because they do not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the organization.

A decrease in control layering effectiveness means a decrease in the extent or degree to which the organization uses multiple or overlapping controls to address the same or related risks, and to provide redundancy or backup in case of failure or compromise of one or more controls. A decrease in control layering effectiveness may indicate a weakness or gap in the organization’s control design or implementation, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the control layering is required or recommended by the organization’s policies or standards.

An increase in inherent risk means an increase in the amount and type of risk that exists in the absence of any risk responses or controls, and that is inherent to the nature or characteristics of the risk source, event, cause, or impact. An increase in inherent risk may indicate a change or variation in the organization’s risk exposure or level, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the inherent risk exceeds the organization’s risk appetite or tolerance.

An increase in control vulnerabilities means an increase in the number or severity of the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s risk responses or controls that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. An increase in control vulnerabilities may indicate a weakness or gap in the organization’s control design or implementation, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the control vulnerabilities are exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm. References =

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

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 174

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 The best method to identify unnecessary controls is reviewing system functionalities associated with business processes, because this can help to determine whether the controls are relevant, effective, and efficient for the current business needs and objectives. System functionalities are the capabilities and features of IT systems that support the execution and performance of business processes. Business processes are the set of interrelated activities that transform inputs into outputs to deliver value to customers or stakeholders. By reviewing system functionalities associated with business processes, an organization can assess whether the controls are aligned with the process requirements, expectations, and outcomes, and whether they add value or create waste. The review can also identify any gaps, overlaps, redundancies, or conflicts among the controls, and any changes or improvements that are needed to optimize the controls. The other options are less effective methods to identify unnecessary controls. Evaluating the impact of removing existing controls can help to measure the benefits and costs of the controls, but it does not address the root causes or sources of the unnecessary controls. Evaluating existing controls against audit requirements can help to ensure compliance and assurance, but it does not consider the business context or purpose of the controls. Monitoring existing key risk indicators (KRIs) can help to measure the level and impact of risks, but it does not evaluate the suitability oradequacy of the controls. References = Surveying Staff to Identify Unnecessary Internal Controls - Methodology and Results 

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), risk management strategies are primarily adopted to achieve acceptable residual risk levels, which are the remaining risk levels after implementing risk response actions. Residual risk levels should be aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance, which are the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives and the acceptable variation in outcomes related to specific performance measures linked to objectives. Risk management strategies are the approaches or methods used to address risks, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, sharing, or acceptance. Risk management strategies should be based on a cost-benefit analysis of the alternatives available and the value of the assets at risk.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 166-1691

Data processing is the activity of collecting, organizing, transforming, and analyzing data to produce useful information for decision making or other purposes12.

The role of the internal IT team in this situation is data processors, which are the people or entities that process data on behalf of the data controllers, who are the people or entities that determine the purposes and means of the data processing34.

Data processors are the role of the internal IT team because they are responsible for managing information through the applications that are used by the organization, and they act under the instructions and authority of the organization, which is the data controller34.

Data processors are also the role of the internal IT team because they have to comply with the data protection laws and regulations that apply to the data processing, and they have to ensure the security and confidentiality of the data34.

The other options are not the role of the internal IT team, but rather possible roles or terms that are related to data processing. For example:

Data custodians are the people or entities that have physical or logical control over the data, and they are responsible for implementing and maintaining the technical and administrative safeguards to protect the data56. However, this role is not the role of theinternal IT team because it is a subset or function of the data processor role, and it does not reflect the full scope of the data processing activities that the internal IT team performs56.

Data owners are the people or entities that have legal rights or authority over the data, and they are responsible for defining and enforcing the policies and rules for the data access, use, and quality . However, this role is not the role of the internal IT team because it is a different or separate role from the data processor role, and it does not reflect the relationship or agreement between the organization and the internal IT team . References =

1: Data Processing - Wikipedia1

2: Data Processing: Definition, Steps, and Types2

3: Data Controller vs Data Processor: What’s the Difference?3

4: Data controller vs data processor: What are the differences and responsibilities?4

5: Data Custodian - Wikipedia5

6: Data Custodian: Definition, Role & Responsibilities6

Data Owner - Wikipedia

Data Owner: Definition, Role & Responsibilities

A risk response action plan is a document that outlines the specific tasks, resources, timelines, and deliverables for the risk responses, which 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 useful tool when measuring the progress of a risk response action plan is an up-to-date risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the significant risks that the organization faces, and the responses and actions that are taken to address them34.

An up-to-date risk register is the most useful tool because it provides a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and the status and performance of the risk responses and actions34.

An up-to-date risk register is also the most useful tool because it enables the monitoring and evaluation of the risk response action plan, and the identification and communication of any issues or gaps that need to be resolved or improved34.

The other options are not the most useful tools, but rather possible metrics or indicators that may be used to measure the progress of a risk response action plan. For example:

Percentage of mitigated risk scenarios is a metric that measures the proportion of risk scenarios that have been reduced or eliminated by the risk responses and actions56. However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not capture the residual or emerging risks that may arise after the risk responses and actions56.

Annual loss expectancy (ALE) changes is a metric that measures the difference between the expected annual losses before and after the risk responses and actions78. However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not reflect the qualitative or intangible impacts of the risks or the risk responses and actions78.

Resource expenditure against budget is a metric that measures the amount of resources and funds that have been spent or allocated for the risk responses and actions, compared to the planned or estimated budget . However, this metric is not the most useful tool because it does not provide acomprehensive and consistent view of the risk landscape, and it may not indicate the effectiveness or efficiency of the risk responses and actions . References =

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

2: How to Create the Ultimate Risk Response Plan | Wrike2

3: Risk Register Template and Examples | Prioritize and Manage Risk3

4: Risk Register Examples for Cybersecurity Leaders4

5: Risk Scenarios Toolkit, ISACA, 2019

6: Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, ISACA, 2019

7: Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) - Definition and Examples5

8: Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) Calculator6

Project Budgeting: How to Estimate Costs and Manage Budgets7

Project Budget Template - Download Free Excel Template8

Control testing is the process of verifying that the risk mitigation controls are designed and operating effectively, and that they achieve the intended objectives and outcomes. Control testing can involve various methods, such as observation, inspection, inquiry, re-performance, or simulation. Control testing results can provide evidence and assurance that the implementation of a risk mitigation control has been completed as intended, and that the control is functioning properly and consistently. Control testing results can also identify any issues or deficiencies in the control design or operation, and recommend corrective actions or improvements. The other options are not as helpful as control testing results, because they do not provide a direct and objective verification of the control implementation, but rather focus on other aspects or outputs of the risk management process, as explained below:

A. An updated risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their characteristics, and their status. An updated risk register can reflect the changes in the risk profile and exposure after the implementation of a risk mitigation control, but it does not verify that the control implementation has been completed as intended, or that the control is effective and reliable.

B. Risk assessment results are the outputs of the risk analysis and evaluation process, which measure the impact and likelihood of the risks, and assign a risk rating and priority. Risk assessment results can indicate the level of risk exposure and the need for risk mitigation controls, but they do not verify that the control implementation has been completed as intended, or that the control is effective and reliable.

C. Technical control validation is the process of ensuring that the technical aspects of a control, such as hardware, software, or network components, are configured and functioning correctly. Technical control validation can verify that the control implementation meets the technical specifications and requirements, but it does not verify that the control implementation has been completed as intended, or that the control is effective and reliable from a business perspective. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.3, page 130.

A recovery time objective (RTO) is the maximum acceptable time or duration that a business process or function can be disrupted or unavailable due to a disaster or incident, before it causes unacceptable or intolerable consequences for the organization. It is usually expressed in hours, days, or weeks, and it is aligned with the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements.

The primary factor in determining a RTO is the cost of downtime due to a disaster, which is the estimated loss or damage that the organization may suffer if a business process or function is disrupted or unavailable for a certain period of time. The cost of downtime can be expressed in terms of financial, operational, reputational, or legal consequences, and it can help the organization to assess the impact and urgency of the disaster, and to decide on the appropriate recovery strategy and resources.

The other options are not the primary factors in determining a RTO, because they do not address the fundamental question of how long the organization can tolerate the disruption or unavailability of a business process or function.

The cost of offsite backup premises is the cost of acquiring, maintaining, or using an alternative or secondary location or facility that can be used to resume or continue the business process or function in case of a disaster or incident. The cost of offsite backup premises is important to consider when selecting or implementing a recovery strategy, but it is not the primary factor in determining a RTO, because it does not indicate the impact or urgency of the disaster, and it may not reflect the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements.

The cost of testing the business continuity plan is the cost of conducting, evaluating, or improving the tests or exercises that are performed to verify or validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the business continuity plan, which is the document that describes the actions and procedures that the organization will take to recover or restore the business process or function in case of a disaster or incident. The cost of testing the business continuity plan is important to consider when developing or updating the business continuity plan, but it is not the primary factor in determining a RTO, because it does not indicate the impact or urgency of the disaster, and it may not reflect the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements.

The response time of the emergency action plan is the time or duration that it takes for the organization to initiate or execute the emergency action plan, which is the document that describes the immediate actions and procedures that the organization will take to protect the life, health, and safety of the people, and to minimize the damage or loss of the assets,in case of a disaster or incident. The response time of the emergency action plan is important to consider when preparing or reviewing the emergency action plan, but it is not the primary factor in determining a RTO, because it does not indicate the impact or urgency of the disaster, and it may not reflect the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery objectives and requirements. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 62-63, 66-67, 70-71, 74-75, 78-79

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 165

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The GREATEST concern associated with business end users developing their own applications on end user spreadsheets and database programs is:

B. Controls are not applied to the applications.

When end users create their own applications, there is often a lack of formal controls that would typically be applied in a structured development environment. This can lead to issues with data integrity, security vulnerabilities, and non-compliance with organizational policies and standards.

 The most effective way to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan would be to perform a root cause analysis. A root cause analysis is a method of identifying and addressing the underlying factors or causes that led to the occurrence of a problem or incident1. In this case, the problem or incident is the malware infection that affected the organization. By performing a root cause analysis, the organization can determine how and why the malware was able to infect the systems, what vulnerabilities or weaknesses were exploited, what controls or processes failed or were missing, and what actions or decisions contributed to the situation. A root cause analysis can help the organization to prevent or reduce the recurrence of similar incidents, as well as to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process. A root cause analysis can also help the organization to define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, which is a set of actions or measures that are taken to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk2. Based on the findings and recommendations of the root cause analysis, the organization can select and implement the most appropriate risk treatment option for the malware risk, as well as for any other related or emerging risks. The risk treatment plan should also include the roles and responsibilities, resources, timelines, and performance indicators for the risk treatmentactions3. The other options are not the most effective ways to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as they are either less thorough or less relevant than a root cause analysis. A gap analysis is a method of comparing the current state and the desired state of a process, system, or organization, and identifying the gaps or differences between them4. A gap analysis can help the organization to identify the areas of improvement or enhancement, as well as the opportunities or challenges for achieving the desired state. However, a gap analysis is not the most effective wayto resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as it does not address the causes or consequences of the malware infection, or the actions or measures to mitigate the risk. An impact assessment is a method of estimating the potential effects or consequences of a change, decision, or action on a process, system, or organization5. An impact assessment can help the organization to evaluate the benefits and costs, as well as the risks and opportunities, of a proposed or implemented change, decision, or action. However, an impact assessment is not the most effective way to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as it does not investigate the origin or nature of the malware infection, or the solutions or alternatives to manage the risk. A vulnerability assessment is a method of identifying and analyzing the weaknesses or flaws in a process, system, or organization that can be exploited by threats to cause harm or loss6. A vulnerability assessment can help the organization to discover and prioritize the vulnerabilities, as well as to recommend and implement the controls or measures to reduce or eliminate them. However, a vulnerability assessment is not the most effective way to resolve the situation and define a comprehensive risk treatment plan, as it does not consider the root causes or impacts of the malware infection, or the risk treatment options or plans to address the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

A technical vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in the design or implementation of an information system or resource that can be exploited or compromised by a threat or source of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A technical vulnerability may be caused byvarious factors, such as human error, system failure, process inefficiency, resource limitation, etc.

A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the technical vulnerabilities that exist or may arise in the organization’s information systems or resources, and determining their severity and impact. A vulnerability assessment can help the organization to assess and prioritize the risks, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the risks.

The best response to the scenario of a recently discovered technical vulnerability being actively exploited is to conduct a vulnerability assessment, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:

What is the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how does it affect the functionality or security of the information system or resource?

How is the technical vulnerability being exploited or compromised, and by whom or what?

What are the potential consequences or impacts of the exploitation or compromise of the technical vulnerability for the organization and its stakeholders?

How can the technical vulnerability be detected and reported, and what are the available or feasible options or solutions to address or correct it?

Conducting a vulnerability assessment can help the organization to improve and optimize the information system or resource quality and performance, and to reduce or eliminate the technical vulnerability. It can also help the organization to align the information system or resource with the organization’s objectives and requirements, and to comply with the organization’s policies and standards.

The other options are not the best responses to the scenario of a recently discovered technical vulnerability being actively exploited, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of conducting a vulnerability assessment, which is to identify and evaluate the technical vulnerability, and to determine its severity and impact.

Assessing the vulnerability management process is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the process that is used to identify, analyze, evaluate, and communicate the technical vulnerabilities, and to align them with the organization’s objectives and requirements. Assessing the vulnerability management process can help the organization to improve and optimize the process, and to reduce or eliminate the gaps or weaknesses in the process, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders.

Conducting a control self-assessment is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls that are intended to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the information systems and resources, using the input and feedback from the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the information systems activities or functions. Conducting a control self-assessment can help the organization to identify and document the control deficiencies, and to align them with the organization’s objectives and requirements, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate thenature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders.

Reassessing the inherent risk of the target is a process of reevaluating and recalculating the amount and type of risk that exists in the absence of any controls, and that is inherent to the nature or characteristics of the target, which is the information system or resource that is affected by the technical vulnerability. Reassessing the inherent risk of the target can help the organization to understand and document the risk exposure or level, and to align it with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 195

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

Corporate culture is the set of values, beliefs, and norms that shape the behavior and attitude of an organization and its people. Corporate culture alignment is the degree of consistency and compatibility between the corporate culture and the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, and objectives. Corporate culture misalignment is the situation where the corporate culture is not aligned with the organization’s goals and expectations, and may hinder or undermine the achievement of those goals. The acceptance of control costs that exceed risk exposure is most likely an example of corporate culture misalignment, as it indicates that the organization is not following a rational and optimal approach to risk management. The organization is spending more resources on controlling risks than the potential benefits or losses that the risks entail, which may result in inefficiency, waste, or opportunity cost. The organization may also be overemphasizing the importance of risk avoidance or mitigation, and neglecting the potential value creation or innovation that may arise from taking or accepting some risks. The other options are not the best answers, as they do not explain the situation of accepting control costs that exceed risk exposure. Low risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is not willing to accept. Low risk tolerance may lead to excessive or unnecessary controls, but it does not necessarily mean that the control costs exceed the riskexposure. High risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is willing to accept. High risk tolerance may lead to insufficient or ineffective controls, but it does not imply that the control costs exceed the risk exposure. Corporate culture alignment is the situation where the corporate culture is aligned with the organization’s goals and expectations, and supports and facilitates the achievement of those goals. Corporate culture alignment would not result inaccepting control costs thatexceed risk exposure, as it would imply a balanced and rational approach to risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 812

The risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk and its associated controls. The risk owner is also responsible for ensuring that the risk is within the acceptable level and that the risk response is effective and efficient. In this case, the risk owner is also the owner of the business service that depends on the managed hosting service. Therefore, the risk owner should be notified of the new information about the flood risk first, as they have the most interest and influence on the risk and its impact on the business objectives. The risk owner can then decide on the appropriate actions to take, such as reviewing the contract terms, requesting additional controls, or changing the service provider. The other options are not the correct answers because they are not the primary stakeholders of the risk and its consequences. The data center manager is an employee of the managed hosting service provider, not the organization that procured the service. The data center manager may not have the authority or the incentive to address the flood risk or inform the organization. The site manager is also an employee of the managed hosting service provider, and their role is to conduct annual risk assessments under the contract. The site manager may not be aware of the new information or have the responsibility to communicate it to the organization. The CIO is the senior executive who oversees the IT strategy and operations of the organization. The CIO may have a general interest in the managed hosting service and its risks, but they are not the direct owner or managerof the specific risk or the business service that relies on the service. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 702

The process owner is the stakeholder who is responsible for the business process that will be supported by the new IT solution. The process owner has the best knowledge of the business requirements, objectives, and risks associated with the process. The process owner can provide the most relevant information for analyzing the risk associated with the new IT solution, such as the expected benefits, costs, performance, functionality, security, and compliance of the solution. The process owner can also help to identify and evaluate the potential impact and likelihood of the risk scenarios related to the new IT solution. The other stakeholders may have some information or insights, but they are not as directly involved or affected by the new IT solution as the process owner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1.1, pp. 58-59.

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, peer reviews are the process of evaluating the quality and validity of risk analysis by independent experts or colleagues. Peer reviews are conducted to ensure that the risk analysis is consistent, objective, and reliable, and that it follows the established standards and methods. The primary reason for conducting peer reviews of risk analysis is to minimize subjectivity of assessments, as peer reviews can help to reduce personal biases, preferences, and assumptions that may affect the risk analysis outcomes. Peer reviews can also help to identify and correct any errors, gaps, or inconsistencies in the risk analysis, and to improve the risk analysis skills and knowledge of the reviewers and the reviewees. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 209.

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

To make well-informed cybersecurity risk decisions, it is most important to determine and understand the risk rating of scenarios. A risk rating is a measure of the severity and priority of a risk, based on the combination of its impact and likelihood. A risk scenario is a description of a potential event or situation that could adversely affect the organization’s objectives, assets, or processes. By determining and understanding the risk rating of scenarios, the organization can identify the most critical and urgent risks, and select the appropriate risk response strategies accordingly. The other options are not as important as determining and understanding the risk rating of scenarios, because they do not provide a clear and comprehensive view of the risk, but rather focus on specific or partial aspects of the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 45.

A risk register is a document that is used as a risk management tool to identify and track risks that may affect a project or an organization1. A risk register should be updated regularly to reflect the current status and changes of the risks, as well as the actions taken to mitigate or resolve them2. The most comprehensive information for updating a risk register would come from the results of the latest risk assessment, which is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts3. A risk assessment provides a detailed and systematic overview of the risks, theirsources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences, as well as the existing and planned controls andresponses4. A risk assessment also helps to prioritize the risks based on their level of exposure and urgency, and to align them with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance5. Therefore, the results of the latest risk assessment would provide the most relevant and complete information for updating a risk register and ensuring that it reflects the current risk profile and situation of the project or the organization. Results of a risk forecasting analysis are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a complete picture of the risks and their impacts. A risk forecasting analysis is a technique that uses historical data, trends, and scenarios to estimate the potential outcomes and impacts of future events that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance6. A risk forecasting analysis can help to anticipate and prepare for the risks, but it does not provide specific information on the sources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. A review ofcompliance regulations is not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as it does not cover all the aspects and dimensions of risk management. A review of compliance regulations is a process that involves checking and verifying that the organization’s activities, processes, and systems are in accordance with the applicable laws, rules, and standards7. A review of compliance regulations can help to identify and mitigate the risks related to legal or regulatory violations, but it does not provide specific information on the other types and sources of risks, such as operational, strategic, financial, or reputational risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. Findings of the most recent audit are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a current and holistic view of the risks and their impacts. An audit is an independent examination and evaluation of the organization’s activities, processes, and systems, to provide assurance and advice on their adequacy and effectiveness. An audit can help to identify and report the issues or gaps in the organization’s risk management, but it does not provide specific information on the current status and changes of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

Encrypting the data would MOST effectively reduce the risk associated with inadvertent disclosure of database records from a public cloud service provider (CSP), because it is a control that protects the confidentiality and integrity of the data by transforming it into an unreadable and unmodifiable form, using a secret key or algorithm. Encrypting the data can prevent or minimize the unauthorized or accidental access, modification, or leakage of the data, especially when the data is stored, transmitted, or processed in a public cloud environment, which may have less security and control than a private or on-premise environment. The other options are not as effective as encrypting the data, because:

Option B: Including a nondisclosure clause in the CSP contract is a legal measure that can deter or penalize the CSP from disclosing the data to any third party, but it does not reduce the risk of inadvertent disclosure of the data, which may occur due to human error, system failure, or malicious attack, and it does not protect the data from unauthorized or accidental access, modification, or leakage.

Option C: Assessing the data classification scheme is a process that can help to identify and categorize the data according to its sensitivity, value, and criticality, and to determine the appropriate level of protection and handling for the data, but it does not reduce the risk of inadvertent disclosure of the data, which may affect any type or class of data, and it does not provide the specific or effective control to protect the data from unauthorized or accidental access, modification, or leakage.

Option D: Reviewing CSP access privileges is a procedure that can help to monitor and verify the access rights and permissions of the CSP to the data, and to ensure that they are aligned with the business needs and expectations, but it does not reduce the risk of inadvertent disclosure of the data, which may occur even with the legitimate or authorized access of the CSP, and it does not protect the data from unauthorized or accidental access, modification, or leakage by otherparties. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 211.

 According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the business significance of the information is the most important criterion when developing a response to an attack that would compromise data, as it determines the impact and severity of the attack on the organization’s objectives and performance. The business significance of the information helps to:

Assess the value and sensitivity of the data that is compromised or at risk of compromise

Evaluate the potential losses or damages that the organization may incur due to the data compromise

Prioritize the data recovery and restoration activities based on the criticality and urgency of the data

Communicate and coordinate the data breach response and notification with the relevant stakeholders, such as the data owners, the customers, the regulators, and the media

Enhance the data protection and security measures to prevent or mitigate future data compromise incidents

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 174-1751

When updating a risk register with the results of an IT risk assessment, the risk practitioner should log the known risk scenarios, because they are the risk scenarios that have been identified and assessed in the IT risk assessment process. The risk register should document and track the known risk scenarios, their characteristics, their status, and their responses. The other options are not the ones that should be logged, because:

Option A: High impact scenarios are the risk scenarios that have a high potential impact on the business objectives and processes, but they are not the only ones that should be logged. The risk register should include all the known risk scenarios, regardless of their impact level.

Option B: High likelihood scenarios are the risk scenarios that have a high probability of occurrence, but they are not the only ones that should be logged. The risk register should include all the known risk scenarios, regardless of their likelihood level.

Option C: Treated risk scenarios are the risk scenarios that have been addressed by the risk response actions, but they are not the only ones that should be logged. The risk register shouldinclude all the known risk scenarios, regardless of their treatment status. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 108.

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. Effective KRIs are thosethat are relevant, measurable, predictable, comparable, and informational2. The most important factor for developing effective KRIs is including input from risk and business unit management, as they are the persons who have the best understanding of the risk environment, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the risk factors and impacts of the organization. By including input from risk and business unit management, 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. Engaging sponsorship by senior management, utilizing data and resources internal to the organization, and developing in collaboration with internal audit are not the most important factors for developing effective KRIs, as they do not provide the same level of insight and relevance as including input from risk and business unit management. Engaging sponsorship by senior management is a factor that involves obtaining the support and approval of the senior leaders who have the authority and accountability for the organization’s performance and governance. Engaging sponsorship by senior management can help to promote the importance and value of KRIs, and to ensure their communication and implementation across the organization, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are appropriate and accurate for the organization’s risk profile. Utilizing data and resources internal to the organization is a factor that involves using the information and assets that are available within the organization to support or enable the development of KRIs. Utilizing data and resources internal to the organization can help to enhance the quality and reliability of KRIs, and to reduce the cost and complexity of obtaining external data and resources, but it does not ensure that the KRIs are comprehensive and consistent with the organization’s risk environment. Developing in collaboration with internal audit is a factor that involves working with the internal audit function that provides independent and objective assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s risk management. Developing in collaboration with internal audit can help to improve the validity and compliance of KRIs, and to provide feedback and recommendations for improvement, 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: KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva3: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Key Risk Indicators, pp. 181-185.]

Control ownership is the assignment of roles and responsibilities for the design, implementation, monitoring, and improvement of controls that mitigate risks. Control ownership can help ensure that the controls are effective, efficient, and aligned with the business objectives and risk appetite. Control ownership can also help facilitate the communication, coordination, and accountability among the stakeholders involved in the risk management process. One of the factors that would present the greatest challenge when assigning accountability for control ownership is unclear reporting relationships. Reporting relationships are the formal or informal lines of authority and communication that define who reports to whom, and who is accountable for what. Unclear reporting relationships can create confusion, ambiguity, and conflict among the control owners and other stakeholders, such as the risk owners, the business owners, the auditors, the regulators, etc. Unclear reporting relationships can also hinder the performance evaluation, feedback, and recognition of the control owners, and affect their motivation and commitment. Unclear reporting relationships can also increase the risk of duplication, inconsistency, or gaps in the control activities, and compromise the quality and reliability of the control environment. References = Defining, Assigning and Measuring: Accountability Challenges in 21st Century Governance, CRISC 351-400 topic3, Foundations of Project Management : Week 2.

Project Delta should be deferred by management, as it has the lowest return on investment (ROI) among the four competing projects. ROI is a measure of the profitability or efficiency of a project, calculated by dividing the net benefits by the total costs. Project Delta has a net benefit of $100,000 and a total cost of $200,000, resulting in an ROI of 0.5. The other projects have higher ROIs: Project Alpha has an ROI of 1.0, Project Bravo has an ROI of 0.8, and Project Charlie has an ROI of 0.6. Therefore, Project Delta is the least attractive option for reducingoverall IT risk, and management should prioritize the other projects instead. References = How to Manage Project Risk: A 5-Step Guide; Matching the right projects with the right resources; Risk Types in Project Management

The MOST important thing to review when determining whether a potential IT service provider’s control environment is effective is an independent audit report, because it provides an objective and reliable assessment of the service provider’s controls and compliance with standards and regulations. The other options are not as important as an independent audit report, because:

Option B: Control self-assessment is a subjective and voluntary process that may not reflect the actual effectiveness of the service provider’s controls.

Option C: This option is incomplete and irrelevant to the question.

Option D: Service level agreements (SLAs) are contractual agreements that specify the expected performance and availability of the service provider, but they do not necessarily indicate the effectiveness of the service provider’s controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 195.

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), reviewing the business impact analysis (BIA) will best help an organization select a recovery strategy for critical systems, as it provides an assessment of the potential impact and consequences of a disruption to the organization’s critical business functions and processes. Reviewing the BIA helps to:

Identify and prioritize the critical systems and their dependencies that support the critical business functions and processes

Estimate the maximum tolerable downtime (MTD) and the recovery time objective (RTO) for each critical system

Evaluate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of various recovery strategies and options for each critical system

Select the most appropriate recovery strategy and option for each critical system based on the organization’s objectives and requirements

Develop and implement the recovery plan and procedures for each critical system

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 174-1751

The risk practitioner’s BEST course of action is to validate the transfer of risk and update the register to reflect the change, because outsourcing the backup and recovery procedures to a third-party cloud provider does not eliminate the risk, but rather transfers it to the service provider. The risk practitioner should verify that the service provider has adequate controls and capabilities to handle the backup and recovery procedures, and that the contractual agreement specifies the roles and responsibilities of both parties. The risk practitioner should also update the risk register to reflect the new risk owner and the residual risk level. The other options are not the best course of action, because:

Option A: Accepting the risk and documenting contingency plans for data disruption is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk practitioner is still responsible for the risk, even though it has been transferred to the service provider. Contingency plans are also reactive measures, rather than proactive ones.

Option B: Removing the associated risk scenario from the risk register due to avoidance is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk has been eliminated, which is not the case. The risk still exists, but it has been transferred to the service provider. The risk register should reflect the current risk status and ownership.

Option C: Mitigating the risk with compensating controls enforced by the third-party cloud provider is not the best course of action, because it implies that the risk practitioner is still involved in the risk management process, even though the risk has been transferred to the service provider. The risk practitioner should rely on the service provider’s controls and capabilities, and monitor their performance and compliance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 196.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, a third-party audit is an independent and objective examination of an organization’s security controls by an external auditor or organization. A third-party audit provides the most objective assessment of the effectiveness of an organization’s security controls, as it helps to avoid any conflicts of interest, biases, or assumptions that may affect the internal audit, review, or testing. A third-party audit also helps to ensure that the security controls comply with the relevant standards, regulations, and best practices, and that they meet the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders, such as customers, partners, or regulators. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 224.

 A risk practitioner’s best course of action when a business manager wants to leverage an existing approved vendor solution from another area within the organization is to assess the risk associated with the new use case. This is because the new use case may introduce different or additional risks that were not considered or addressed in the original approval. For example, the new use case may involve different data types, volumes, or sensitivities; different business processes, functions, or objectives; different regulatory or contractual requirements; or different technical or operational dependencies. Therefore, the risk practitioner should perform a vendor risk assessment (VRA) to identify, evaluate, and mitigate the potential risks of the new use case and ensure that the vendor solution meets the organization’s riskappetite and tolerance12. Recommending allowing the new usage based on prior approval is not the best course of action, as it may overlook or underestimate the risks of the new use case and expose the organization to unacceptable levels of risk. Requesting a new third-party review is not the best course of action, as it may be unnecessary or redundant if the vendor solution has already been reviewed and approved for another use case within the organization. Requesting revalidation of the original use case is not the best course of action, as it may not address the specific risks of the new use case and may also delay or disrupt the existing use case. References = Risk and Information SystemsControl Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures the changes in the level of risk exposure, such as by monitoring the risk drivers, triggers, or events. A KRI indicates a reduction in the percentage of appropriately patched servers means that the enterprise is not applying the latest security updates or fixes to its servers, which could expose them to vulnerabilities or threats. The best course of action for the risk practitioner when a KRI indicates a reduction in the percentage of appropriately patched servers is to determine changes in the risk level. The risk level is the measure of the impact and likelihood of the risk, and it should be consistent and comparable across the enterprise and over time. By determining changes in the risklevel, the risk practitioner can assess the current or emerging risks, and decide on the appropriate risk response strategy and actions. The other options are not the best course of action, as they involve different aspects or outcomes of the risk management process:

Outsource the vulnerability management process means that the enterprise transfers the responsibility or burden of identifying, analyzing, prioritizing, and remediating the vulnerabilities in the IT systems and applications to a third party, such as a vendor or a contractor. This may not be a feasible or effective way to address the risk of unpatched servers, as it may not reduce the exposure or impact of the risk, or may introduce new risks, such as contractual disputes, quality issues, or intellectual property rights.

Review the patch management process means that the enterprise evaluates the existing procedures and practices for applying the security updates or fixes to the servers, and identifies the gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. This may be a useful step in the risk management process, but it is not the best course of action, as it may not provide immediate or sufficient information or action to address the risk of unpatched servers, or may not account for the uncertainties or complexities of the risk.

Add agenda item to the next risk committee meeting means that the enterprise communicates the risk of unpatched servers to the senior executives who oversee the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provide guidance and direction to the risk owners and practitioners. This may be a helpful step in the risk management process, but it is not the best course of action, as it may not provide timely or adequate information or action to address the risk of unpatched servers, or may not reflect the urgency or priority of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2.1, pp. 171-172.

 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 CRISC Review Manual1, vendor risk mitigation action items are the specific tasks and activities that are assigned to the vendors or the organization to address the identified risks and implementthe risk responses. The percentage of vendor risk mitigation action items completed on time is the best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the effectiveness of a vendor risk management program, as it helps to evaluate the timeliness and quality of the vendor performance, the alignment of the vendor activities with the organization’s risk appetite and objectives, and the achievement of the expected outcomes and benefits of the risk responses. The percentage of vendor risk mitigation action items completed on time also helps to identify andresolve any issues or gaps in the vendor risk management process, and to improve the vendor relationship and communication. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 230.

The best course of action when an audit reveals that there are changes in the environment that are not reflected in the risk profile is to review the risk identification process. This is because the risk identification process is the first step in the risk management process and it is responsible for identifying and assessing the potential risks that may affect the organization’s objectives. If the risk identification process is not effective, it may result in incomplete, inaccurate, or outdated risk profiles that do not reflect the current environment and the associated risks. Therefore, reviewing the risk identification process will help to ensure that the risk profile is updated and aligned with the changes in the environment and the organization’s strategy. References = Responding to Audit Findings

The first thing that the risk practitioner should do upon learning that a new third-party system on the corporate network has introduced vulnerabilities that could compromise corporate IT systems is to notify information security management. This will help to escalate the issue to the appropriate authority and responsibility level, and to initiate the incident response process. Information security management can also coordinate with the third party, the IT department, and other stakeholders to assess the impact and severity of the vulnerabilities, and to implement the necessary actions to contain, eradicate, and recover from the incident. Confirming the vulnerabilities with the third party, identifying procedures to mitigate the vulnerabilities, and requesting IT to remove the system from the network are not the first things that the risk practitioner should do, as they may not address the urgency and priority of the issue, and may not involve the relevant decision makers and responders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.2, page 1931

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 659.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that management is willing to allow for any particular risk as it pursues its objectives. Risk tolerance provides a helpful reference point when communicating the results of a risk assessment to stakeholders, as it helps to compare the current level of risk exposure with the desired level of risk exposure, and to prioritize and allocate resources for risk response. Risk tolerance also helps to align the risk assessment results with the stakeholder expectations and preferences, and to facilitate risk-based decision making. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 192.

A vendor risk assessment is a process of evaluating and managing the risks associated with outsourcing IT services or functions to a third-party provider, such as a cloud service provider.

One of the most important documents to request from a cloud service provider during a vendor risk assessment is an independent audit report. This is a report that provides an objective and reliable assurance on the quality, security, and performance of the cloud service provider’s operations, processes, and controls, based on the standards and criteria established by an independent auditor or a recognized authority, such as ISACA, ISO, NIST, etc.

An independent audit report helps to verify the compliance and effectiveness of the cloud service provider’s risk management practices, identify any gaps or issues that may affect the service delivery or security, and recommend improvements or corrective actions.

The other options are not the most important documents to request from a cloud service provider during a vendor risk assessment. They are either secondary or not essential for vendor risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 22

Information Technology & Security, page 16

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 14

 The organization’s risk tolerance should be defined and approved by the board of directors, as they are the highest governing body of the organization and have the ultimate responsibility and accountability for the strategic direction and oversight of the risk management process. The board of directors should establish and communicate the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and ensure that they are aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, values, and goals. The board of directors should also monitor and review the risk management performance and outcomes, and provide guidance and support to the management and staff. The other options are not the correct answers, as they do not have the authority or responsibility to define and approve the organization’s risk tolerance, although they may have some roles or involvement in the risk management process. The chief risk officer (CRO) is the senior executive who leads and coordinates the risk management activities across the organization, and reports to the board of directors and the chief executive officer (CEO). The CRO should advise and assist the board of directors in defining and approving the risk tolerance, but they cannot do it on their own. The chief executive officer (CEO) is thehighest-ranking manager of the organization and has the responsibility and accountability for the execution and implementation of the risk management process. The CEO should support and communicate the risk tolerance defined and approved by the board of directors, but they cannot do it on their own. The chief information officer (CIO) is the senior executive who oversees and manages the information and technology functions and resources of the organization. The CIO should ensure that the IT risks and controls are aligned with the risk tolerance defined and approved by the board of directors, but they cannot do it on their own. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, page 24.

 The PRIMARY objective of the board of directors periodically reviewing the risk profile is to help ensure that the risk strategy is appropriate, because the risk strategy defines the enterprise’s risk appetite, tolerance, and objectives, and guides the risk management process and activities. The board of directors should review the risk profile to ensure that it reflects the current internal and external environment, and that it aligns with the enterprise’s strategy and goals. The other options are not the primary objective, because:

Option B: KRIs and KPIs are aligned is a desirable outcome of the risk strategy, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. KRIs and KPIs are indicators that measure and monitor the risk exposure and performance of the enterprise, respectively, and they should be consistent with the risk strategy and objectives.

Option C: Performance of controls is adequate is a result of the risk response, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. Performance of controls is the degree to which the controls are effective and efficient in mitigating the risks, and it should be evaluated and reported by the risk management function and the internal audit function.

Option D: The risk monitoring process has been established is a prerequisite for the risk profile, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. The risk monitoring process is the process of tracking and reporting the risk status and performance, and it should be implemented and executed by the risk management function and the business process owners. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 119.

The MOST important stakeholders to include during the initial risk identification process for a business application are the business process owners, because they are the ones who have the authority and responsibility for the business processes that are supported or enabled by the business application. The business process owners can provide valuable input and feedback on the business objectives, requirements, and expectations of the business application, as well as thepotential risks, impacts, and opportunities that may affect the business processes and outcomes. The other options are not as important as the business process owners, because:

Option B: Business process consumers are the ones who use or benefit from the business processes that are supported or enabled by the business application, such as customers, employees, or partners. They can provide useful information and perspectives on the user needs, preferences, and satisfaction of the business application, but they are not as important as the business process owners, who have the ultimate accountability and authority for the business processes and outcomes.

Option C: Application architecture team is the one who designs and develops the technical architecture and components of the business application, such as the hardware, software, network, and data. They can provide technical expertise and guidance on the feasibility, functionality, and security of the business application, but they are not as important as the business process owners, who have the primary stake and interest in the business application and its alignment with the business processes and objectives.

Option D: Internal audit is the one who provides independent assurance and consulting services on the governance, risk management, and control processes of the organization, including the business application. They can provide objective and impartial evaluation and recommendation on the effectiveness and efficiency of the business application and its compliance with the internal and external standards and regulations, but they are not as important as the business process owners, who have the direct involvement and influence on the business application and its performance and value. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 103.

The most important factor for the risk practitioner to understand when creating an initial IT risk register is the organizational objectives. The organizational objectives are the specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that the organization aims to accomplish. The organizational objectives should be aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, as well as the stakeholder expectations and needs. The organizational objectives should also reflect the desired outcomes and benefits of the organization, such as increasing revenue, reducing costs, improving quality, or enhancing customer satisfaction. Understanding the organizational objectives is the most important factor when creating an initial IT risk register, because it provides the context, scope, and criteria for identifying, analyzing, and prioritizing the IT risks that may affect or be affected by the organizational objectives. Understanding the organizational objectives also helps to align the IT risk management process with the organizational risk management process, and to communicate the value and impact of the IT risks and the IT risk responses to the senior management and other stakeholders. The other options are not the most important factor, although they may be relevant or influential to the IT risk register. Enterprise architecture (EA) is a conceptual blueprint that defines the structure and operation of an organization. EA describes the current and future state of the organization in terms of its business processes, information systems, and technology infrastructure, and the relationships and dependencies among them. EA also provides the principles, standards, and guidelines for designing, developing, and implementing the organization’s solutions and services. EA can help to understand the IT risk sources, causes, and effects, as well as the IT risk mitigation options and opportunities, but it does not define the purpose or the scope of the IT risk register. Control environment is the set of policies, procedures, and mechanisms that ensure the reliability, security, and quality of the organization’s activities and information. Control environment includes the tone and culture at the top, the roles and responsibilities for governance and oversight, the internal control framework and methodology, and the monitoring and reporting systems. Control environment can help to assess the IT risk levels and the IT risk responses, as well as to ensure the compliance and accountability of the IT risk management process, but it does not provide the context or the criteria for the IT risk register. IT objectives are the specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that the IT function aims to accomplish. IT objectives should be aligned and consistent with the organizational objectives, as well as the IT strategy and IT governance. IT objectives should also reflect the expected outcomes and benefits of the IT function, such as delivering value, enabling innovation, or supporting transformation. IT objectives can help to identify and prioritize the IT risks that may affect or be affected by the IT objectives, but they are not the same as or more important than the organizational objectives. References = Three Steps to Creating a Simple IT Risk Register - Gartner, Risk Register Template and Examples | Prioritize and Manage Risk, IT Resources | Knowledge & Insights | ISACA

Risk aggregation in a complex organization will be MOST successful when using the same scales in assessing risk, because it can help to ensure the consistency and comparability of the risk assessment results across different units, levels, and domains of the organization. Using the same scales in assessing risk can also help to avoid the potential errors or biases that may arise from using different scales, such as overestimating or underestimating the risk exposure, or misaligning the risk appetite and tolerance. The other options are not as important as using the same scales in assessing risk, because:

Option B: Utilizing industry benchmarks is a good way to improve the quality and validity of the risk assessment results, but it does not ensure the success of the risk aggregation, which is the process of combining and consolidating the risk assessment results into a holistic and comprehensive view of the risk profile and exposure of the organization.

Option C: Using reliable qualitative data for risk items is a useful way to capture and describe the risk items, which are the sources and causes of the risks, but it does not ensure the success of the risk aggregation, which is the process of quantifying and measuring the risk items, and their likelihood and impact on the business objectives and processes.

Option D: Including primarily low-level risk factors is a necessary way to identify and assess the risk factors, which are the characteristics and attributes of the risks, but it does not ensure the success of the risk aggregation, which is the process of prioritizing and ranking the risk factors, and their significance and relevance to the organization’s strategy and goals. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 105.

A business continuity plan (BCP) is a system of prevention and recovery from potential threats to a company. The plan ensures that personnel and assets are protected and are able to function quickly in the event of a disaster1. The first task when developing a BCP should be to identify critical business functions and resources, because this will help to determine the scope, objectives, and priorities of the plan. Critical business functions and resources are those that are essential for the continuity of the company’s operations, and that would cause significant disruption or damage if they were interrupted or lost. By identifying critical business functions and resources, the company can focus its efforts and resources on protecting and restoring them, and minimizing the impact of a disaster. The other options are not the first task when developing a BCP, because they depend on the identification of critical business functions and resources, as explained below:

A. Determine data backup and recovery availability at an alternate site is a task that relates to the recovery strategy of the BCP, which aims to restore the data and information systems that support the critical business functions and resources. However, this task cannot be performed without first identifying which data and information systems are critical, and what level of availability and recovery they require.

C. Define roles and responsibilities for implementation is a task that relates to the organization and governance of the BCP, which aims to assign and communicate the duties and expectations of the personnel involved in the plan. However, this task cannot be performed without first identifying which personnel are critical, and what functions and resources they are responsible for.

D. Identify recovery time objectives (RTOs) for critical business applications is a task that relates to the analysis and evaluation of the BCP, which aims to measure the acceptable downtime and recovery speed of the critical business functions and resources. However, this task cannot be performed without first identifying which business applications are critical, and what impact and likelihood they have. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. What Is a Business Continuity Plan (BCP), and How Does It Work?, Business continuity plan (BCP) in 8 steps, with templates | BDC.ca, How Develop a Business Continuity Plan - Invenio IT, Business Continuity Planning | Ready.gov, Develop a Robust Business Continuity Plan | Wrike

A risk owner should be the person accountable for the business process that is affected by the risk, as they have the authority, responsibility, and knowledge to manage the risk effectively. The risk owner should collaborate with the risk practitioner, who facilitates the risk management process, and the risk action owners, who implement the risk response actions. The risk owner should also ensure that the controls are adequate and functioning properly to mitigate the risk. The other options are not the best description of what a risk owner should be accountable for, as they are either too broad (the risk management process), too narrow (managing controls or implementing actions), or not directly related to the risk (the businessprocess). References = Why Assigning a Risk Owner is Important and How to Do It Right; Definition of Risk Owner; What Is a Risk Owner in Project Management?

The effectiveness of an IT risk management function depends on how well it can identify, analyze, evaluate, and treat the IT-related risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance. To achieve this, the IT risk management function needs to have processes that are updated and monitored on a continuous basis, so that they can capture the changes in the IT environment, the business context, the risk appetite and tolerance, and the regulatory requirements. Updating and monitoring the IT risk management processes also helps to ensure that they are consistent, reliable, and efficient, and that they provide timely and accurate information for decision making and reporting12. Aligning the IT risk management processes to an industry-accepted framework is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. A framework provides a common language, structure, and methodology for IT risk management, but it does not guarantee that the processes are updated and monitored on a continuous basis. A framework also needs to be customized and adapted to the specific needs and context of theorganization3. Reviewing and approving the IT risk management processes by senior management is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. Senior management support and endorsement are essential for establishing the tone and culture of IT risk management, as well as for allocating the necessary resources and authority for the function. However, senior management review and approval alone do not ensure that the processes are updated and monitored on a continuous basis. Senior management also need to oversee and evaluate the performance and outcomes of the IT risk management function4. Periodically assessing the IT risk management processes against regulatory requirements is important, but not the most important factor for the effectiveness of the function. Regulatory compliance is one of the objectives and drivers of IT risk management, and it requires the function to adhere to the applicable laws, rules, and standards. However, regulatory requirements are not the only source of IT risk, and they may not cover all the aspects and dimensions of IT risk management.Moreover, periodic assessment may not be sufficient to capture the dynamic and evolving nature of IT risk. Therefore, the IT risk management processes need to be updated and monitored on a continuous basis, not only to meet the regulatoryrequirements, but also to address the other sources and impacts of IT risk5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Process, pp. 121-123.

 A risk profile is a summary of the key risks that affect an organization, a business unit, a process, or a project. A risk profile can help stakeholders understand the current and potential exposure to various sources of uncertainty, and prioritize the risk response accordingly. A risk profile should be aligned with the business objectives, which are the desired outcomes or results that the organization or the business unit wants to achieve. Updating the risk profile with risk assessment results best enables the risk profile to serve as an effective resource to support business objectives, because it ensures that the risk profile reflects the most accurate and up-to-date information about the risks and their impacts. Risk assessment is the process of analyzing and evaluating the likelihood and consequences of the identified risks, and comparing them with the risk criteria and appetite. Risk assessment results can provide valuable insights into the risk level, trend, and exposure, and help identify the most critical and relevant risks that need attention and action. Updating the risk profile with risk assessment results can help align the risk profile with the business objectives, by showing how the risks may affect the achievement of the objectives, and how the risk response can support or enhance the objectives. Updating the risk profile with risk assessment results can also help communicate and justify the risk profile to the business stakeholders, and obtain their feedback and approval. References = Risk Management Essentials: How to Develop a Risk Profile (TRN2-J07), Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA, Using Risk Assessment to Support Decision Making - ISACA.

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.

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite provides the most important information to facilitate a risk response decision, because it reflects the organization’s risk tolerance, preferences, and expectations, which guide the selection and implementation of the risk response strategies. Risk appetite helps the organization to balance the potential benefits and costs of taking risks, and to align the risk management process with the organizational strategy and culture. The other options are not as important as risk appetite, because they do not indicate the organization’s desired level of risk exposure, but rather provide supplementary or partial information for the risk response decision, as explained below:

A. Audit findings are the results and recommendations of the internal or external audit activities that evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes. Audit findings provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can identify the gaps or weaknesses in the current risk response strategies, and suggest corrective actions or improvements. However, audit findings do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the optimal risk response strategies.

C. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the impact and likelihood of the risks, and provide early warning signs of changes in the risk exposure. KRIs provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can monitor and report the performance and effectiveness of the current risk response strategies, and trigger corrective actions or adjustments. However, KRIs do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the acceptable level of risk exposure and performance.

D. Industry best practices are the standards, norms, and expectations for risk management that are established and followed by the peers or competitors in the same industry or sector. Industry best practices provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can benchmark and compare the organization’s risk response strategies with those of the leading or successful organizations, and identify areas for improvement or innovation. However, industry best practices do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the unique and customized risk response strategies that suit the organization’s needs and goals. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 40. Risk Appetite: What It Is and How to Use It, Risk Appetite: How Hungry Are You?, Risk Appetite: The Strategic Balancing Act

 According to the 10 Tips for Secure Online Transactions - SmartAsset article, multi-factor authentication is a security measure that requires users to provide more than one piece of evidence to verify their identity when logging in to an online account. For example, users may need to enter a password and a code sent to their phone or email, or use a biometric feature such as a fingerprint or a face scan. Multi-factor authentication can help secure online financial transactions from improper users, as it makes it harder for hackers to access the account even if they have the password. Multi-factor authentication can also alertusers to any suspicious login attempts and prevent unauthorized transactions. References = 10 Tips for Secure Online Transactions - SmartAsset

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), assessing changes in residual risk is the best approach for determining whether a risk action plan is effective, as it measures the impact and value of the risk response actions and controls on the risk level. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response actions and controls have been implemented. Assessing changes in residual risk helps to:

Evaluate the extent to which the risk response actions and controls have reduced the likelihood and/or impact of the risk to an acceptable level

Identify and report any deviations, errors, or weaknesses in the risk response actions and controls and their performance

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address any issues or deficiencies in the risk response actions and controls

Monitor and measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response actions and controls and their alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

Update the risk register and the risk treatment plan to reflect the current risk status and the residual risk levels

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: Risk Response Process, pp. 161-1621

 A common risk taxonomy is a framework that defines and categorizes the sources, types, and impacts of risks within an organization1. It helps to establish a consistent and shared understanding of risk across the organization, and to facilitate effective risk identification, assessment, reporting, and communication2. A common risk taxonomy also enables comparison and aggregation of risks at different levels and domains, and supports alignment of risk management with business objectives and strategies3. Using key performance indicators (KPIs) and key risk indicators (KRIs) are important for measuring and monitoring risk and performance, but they are not the most important factor when discussing risk within an organization. KPIs and KRIs should be derived from the common risk taxonomy and aligned with theorganization’s riskappetite and tolerance4. Creating a risk communication policy is also important for ensuring that risk information is communicated to the right stakeholders at the right time and in the right format, but it is not the most important factor either. A risk communication policy should be based on the common risk taxonomy and the risk roles and responsibilities within the organization5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: Risk Taxonomy, pp. 25-29.

A risk assessment indicates the residual risk associated with a new bring your own device (BYOD) program is within organizational risk tolerance. This means that the potential benefits of BYOD outweigh the potential risks, and that the controls in place are adequate to mitigate those risks.

The next step for the risk practitioner is to identify log sources to monitor BYOD usage and risk impact. Log sources are records of events or activities that occur in a system or network, such as file access, network traffic, user behavior, etc. Log sources can provide valuable information about how BYOD devices are used, what data they access, what applications they run, what threats they encounter, etc.

By monitoring log sources, the risk practitioner can track and measure the actual performance and security of BYOD devices, compare them with the expected outcomes and standards, identify any deviations or anomalies that may indicate a breach or a vulnerability, and take appropriate actions to address them.

Therefore, identifying log sources to monitor BYOD usage and risk impact is a recommended action after a successful risk assessment.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 10

Information Technology & Security, page 4

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 2

 When reporting risk assessment results to senior management, the most important information to include to enable risk-based decision making is the potential losses compared to treatment cost. This information helps to quantify the impact and likelihood of the risks, and to evaluate the cost and benefit of the risk responses. This information also helps to prioritize and allocate resources for the risk management program, and to align the risk management program with the enterprise’s objectives, strategy, and risk appetite. The other options are not as important as the potential losses compared to treatment cost, as they provide different types of information for the risk management process:

Risk action plans and associated owners are the documents that specify the actions to be taken to address the identified risks, the resources required, the timelines, the owners, and the expected outcomes. This information helps to implement and monitor the risk management program, and to assign the authority and accountability for the risk management activities.

Recent audit and self-assessment results are the outcomes of the independent and objective examination of the risk management program, such as by internal or external auditors, or by the risk owners or practitioners themselves. This information helps to provide assurance and feedback on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management program, and to identify the gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed.

A list of assets exposed to the highest risk are the resources that have the most value for the enterprise, such as hardware, software, data, or services, and that are affected by or contribute to the highest risks. This information helps to identify and protect the critical assets of the enterprise, and to reduce the exposure and impact of the risks to the assets. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1.1, pp. 58-59.

= Change management is the process of planning, implementing, and monitoring changes to IT systems, services, or infrastructure in a controlled and coordinated manner1. Change management controls are the policies, procedures, and tools that ensure changes are authorized, documented, tested, and reviewed before they are deployed to the production environment2.

Change-related exceptions are the deviations or violations from the established change management controls, such as unauthorized, untested, or failed changes3. Change-related exceptions pose a high risk to theorganization, as they can cause system instability, performance degradation, security breaches, data loss, or compliance issues3.

An increase in change-related exceptions per month would be the greatest concern for an IT risk practitioner, as it indicates a lack of effectiveness, efficiency, or compliance of the change management process and controls. An increase in change-related exceptions per month could result from:

Poor change planning, prioritization, or scheduling

Insufficient change approval, review, or communication

Inadequate change testing, validation, or verification

Lack of change monitoring, reporting, or auditing

Low change awareness, training, or support

An IT risk practitioner should investigate the root causes of the increase in change-related exceptions per month, and recommend corrective and preventive actions to improve the change management process and controls, such as:

Aligning the change management process with the organization’s goals, strategies, and risk appetite

Implementing a standardized and consistent change management methodology, such as ITIL or COBIT

Defining clear roles and responsibilities for change management stakeholders, such as change owners, change managers, change advisory boards, change implementers, and change users

Establishing clear and measurable criteria and thresholds for change authorization, classification, and evaluation

Leveraging tools and technologies to automate and streamline the change management process and controls, such as change management software, configuration management databases, or change management dashboards

Enhancing the change management culture and capabilities, such as change management awareness, training, support, or feedback

The other options are not as concerning as an increase in change-related exceptions per month, because they do not directly imply a risk to the organization’s IT systems, services, or infrastructure. Rolled backchanges below management’s thresholds, which are the changes that are reversed or undone due to errors, defects, or issues, may indicate a need for improvement in the change testing, validation, or verification processes, but they do not necessarily cause harm or damage to the production environment, as long as they are within the acceptable limits set bythe management. The average implementation time for changes, which is the duration of the change deployment process, may affect the organization’s agility, efficiency, or productivity, but it does not necessarily compromise the quality, security, or reliability of the changes, as long as they are implemented according to the change management controls. The number of user stories approved for implementation, which are the requirements or features that are expressed from the perspective of the end users, may reflect the organization’s demand, innovation, or customer satisfaction, but it does not necessarily increase the risk of the changes, as long as they are managed and controlled by the change management process.

References = What is Change Management? | ITIL | AXELOS, Change Management Controls: Definition, Types, and Best Practices, Change Management Exceptions: Definition, Causes, and Impacts, ITIL Change Management: Best Practices & Processes - BMC Software, COBIT 2019: Change Enablement

The programming project leader solely reviewing test results before approving the transfer to production would be a weakness in procedures for controlling the migration of changes to production libraries, because it violates the principle of segregation of duties, and it exposes the production libraries to the risk of unauthorized or erroneous changes. The programming project leader is responsible for developing and testing the changes, but not for approving and deploying them. The approval and deployment of the changes should be done by an independent and authorized party, such as the change control board or the operations manager. The other options are not weaknesses, but rather good practices, because:

Option B: Test and production programs being in distinct libraries is a good practice, because it prevents the accidental or intentional overwriting or mixing of the test and production programs, and it ensures the integrity and security of the production libraries.

Option C: Only operations personnel being authorized to access production libraries is a good practice, because it restricts the access and modification of the production libraries to the qualified and accountable staff, and it prevents the unauthorized or inappropriate access or modification of the production libraries by other parties.

Option D: A synchronized migration of executable and source code from the test environment to the production environment being allowed is a good practice, because it ensures the consistency and completeness of the changes, and it avoids the potential errors or discrepancies that may arise from the manual or partial migration of the changes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 215.

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 greatest security risk in this scenario is that data may be commingled with other tenants’ data on the public cloud infrastructure. Data commingling occurs when data from different sources or customers are mixed together without proper segregation or encryption. This may result in data leakage, unauthorized access, or loss of confidentiality and integrity. Data commingling is a common challenge in public cloud environments, where multiple customers share the same physical resources and network. System downtime, infrastructure management, and cloud provider certification are also potential risks in this scenario, butthey are not as great as data commingling. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.1, page 2451

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 638.

The BEST way to demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives is through risk scenarios, because they are the descriptions and illustrations of the potential events or situations that may affect the achievement of the business objectives and processes. Risk scenarios can help to demonstrate how the risk profile, which is the summary and representation of the identified and assessed risks, is relatedand relevant to the business objectives and processes, and how the risk responses and controls are designed and implemented to support and enable the business objectives and processes. The other options are not the best way, because:

Option B: Risk tolerance is the level of variation or deviation from the expected or desired outcome that the organization is willing to accept or endure, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of ensuring that the risk profile and the business objectives are consistent and compatible with each other.

Option C: Risk policy is the document that defines the principles, guidelines, and requirements for the risk management process and activities in the organization, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of showing and proving that the risk profile and the business objectives are coherent and integrated with each other.

Option D: Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to take or pursue in order to achieve its objectives and goals, but it does not demonstrate alignment of the risk profile with business objectives, which is the process of establishing and maintaining that the risk profile and the business objectives are aligned and balanced with each other. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 104.

The best answer is D. Escalation triggers. Escalation triggers are predefined thresholds or conditions that indicate when a key risk indicator (KRI) has reached a critical level that requires immediate attention or action. Escalation triggers can be based on quantitative or qualitative measures, such as percentages, scores, ratings, or colors. Escalation triggers can help to ensure appropriate action is taken to mitigate risk, because they provide clear and timely signals that alert the risk owners, managers, and other stakeholders of the need to review and revise the risk response plan, or to implement additional or alternative controls. Escalation triggers can also help to communicate and report the risk status and the risk response actions to the senior management and the board, and to obtain their support and approval, if needed. The otheroptions are not the best answer, although they may be related or influential to the KRI and the risk mitigation. Management intervention is a part of the risk response process, which involves the actions and decisions taken by the management to address the risk, such as approving, implementing, or monitoring the controls. Management intervention can help to mitigate risk, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a consequence or a result of the escalation triggers. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite can help to define and align the KRI and the escalation triggers with the organizational strategy and culture, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a factor or a driver of the KRI. Board commentary is a part of the risk reporting process, which involves the feedback and guidance provided by the board on the risk management process and performance. Board commentary can help to improve and enhance the KRI and the risk mitigation, but it is not a component of the KRI, rather it is a source or a resource of the KRI. References = Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture, KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva

 An IT risk appetite statement is a document that expresses the amount and type of IT risk that an organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. An IT risk appetite statement can help guide the IT risk management process, by setting the boundaries, criteria, and targets for IT risk identification, assessment, response, and reporting. An IT risk appetite statement should be aligned with the organization’s overall risk appetite and strategy, and should be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect the changes in the internal and external environment. One of the factors that would most likely result in updates to an IT risk appetite statement is changes in senior management. Senior management is the group of executives who have the authority and responsibility for the strategic direction and performance of the organization. Changes in senior management can affect the IT risk appetite statement, as they may introduce new perspectives, priorities, expectations, or preferences for IT risk taking or avoidance. Changes in senior management can also affect the IT risk appetite statement, as they may require new or revised IT objectives, goals, or initiatives, which may entail different levelsor types of IT risk. Therefore, changes in senior management should trigger a review and update of the IT risk appetite statement, to ensure that it is consistent and compatible with the new leadership and direction of the organization. References = Organisations must define their IT risk appetite and tolerance, Risk Appetite Statements - Institute of Risk Management, Develop Your Technology Risk Appetite - Gartner.

Outsourcing a web application and storing customer data in the vendor’s public cloud involves transferring some of the organization’s data processing and storage functions to a third-party service provider. This can bring benefits such as cost savings, scalability, and flexibility, but it also introduces risks such as data breaches, unauthorized access, compliance violations, and loss of control12.

To protect customer data, it is most important to ensure that the vendor’s responsibilities are defined in the contract. A contract is a legally binding agreement that specifies the terms and conditions of the outsourcing relationship, such as the scope, duration, quality, and cost of the services, as well as the rights and obligations of both parties. A contract should also address the following aspects of data protection :

Data ownership: The contract should clearly state that the organization retains the ownership and control of its customer data, and that the vendor has no rights to use, disclose, or retain the data for any purpose other than providing the agreed services.

Data security: The contract should define the minimum security standards and controls that the vendor must implement and maintain to protect the customer data from unauthorized or accidental access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction. The contract should also specify the security certifications or audits that the vendor must comply with or undergo to demonstrate its security posture.

Data privacy: The contract should ensure that the vendor complies with the applicable data privacy laws and regulations that govern the collection, processing, and transfer of customer data, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). The contract should also require the vendor to obtain the consent of the customers before collecting or sharing their data, and to respect their rights to access, correct, delete, or restrict their data.

Data breach notification: The contract should establish the procedures and timelines for the vendor to notify the organization and the relevant authorities in the event of a data breach or security incident that affects the customer data. The contract should also define the roles and responsibilities of both parties in responding to and resolving the incident, as well as the remedies and penalties for the vendor’s failure or negligence.

Data backup and recovery: The contract should outline the backup and recovery policies and practices that the vendor must follow to ensure the availability and integrity of the customer data in case of a disaster or system failure. The contract should also specify the frequency and format of the backups, the location and security of the backup storage, and the testing and restoration procedures.

Data retention and disposal: The contract should stipulate the retention period and disposal method for the customer data, in accordance with the organization’s data retention policy and the legal or regulatory requirements. The contract should also require the vendor to return or destroy the customer data at the end of the contract or upon the organization’s request, and to provide proof of the data deletion.

By defining the vendor’s responsibilities in the contract, the organization can ensure that the customer data is protected in a consistent and compliant manner, and that the vendor is accountable and liable for any data protection issues or breaches that may arise from the outsourcing arrangement .

The other options are not as important as defining the vendor’s responsibilities in the contract, because they do not address the core issue of establishing a clear and enforceable data protection framework between the organization and the vendor. Updating the organization’s incident response procedures, which are the plans and actions to be taken in the event of a data breach or security incident, may help to mitigate the impact and consequences of such events, but it does not prevent or reduce the likelihood of them occurring in the first place. Storing the data in the same jurisdiction, which means keeping the data within the same geographic or legal boundaries as the organization, may help to avoid some of the data privacy and sovereignty challenges that arise from cross-border data transfers, but it does not guarantee the security and confidentiality of the data. Restricting the administrative access to the vendor, which means limiting the ability to view, modify, or delete the data to the vendor’s personnel only, may help to reduce the risk of unauthorized or accidental access by the organization’s staff, but it does not ensure that the vendor’s staff are trustworthy and competent, and it may also impair the organization’s oversight and control over the data.

References = Consumer data protection and privacy | McKinsey, 9 Tips for Protecting Consumer Data (& Why It’s Important to Keep It …, [Outsourcing Contracts: Key Issues and Best Practices], [Data Protection in Cloud Services: A Guide for Businesses], [Incident Response Planning: Best Practices for Businesses], [Data Localization: What is it and Why is it Important?], [Administrative Access: Definition, Risks, and Best Practices]

 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.]

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.

The best way to test the operational effectiveness of a data backup procedure is to perform a complete restoration of every file to a clean system and verify that there has not been any data corruption or loss. This will ensure that the backup procedure can successfully recover the data in the event of a disaster or incident. The other options are not sufficient to test the operational effectiveness of a data backup procedure, as they do not involve actually restoring the data and verifying its integrity and usability. References = How to review and test backup procedures to ensure data restoration; HOW TO TEST DATA BACKUPS: A BRIEF GUIDE; How to Test a Database Backup

Commitment to controls is the degree to which the organization and its stakeholders support and adhere to the controls that are designed and implemented to manage or mitigate the risks1. Commitment to controls is essential for ensuring the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, as well as the achievement of the organization’s objectives and strategies2. The best way to promote commitment to controls is to assign control ownership, which is the process ofidentifying and assigning the person or entity that has the authority and accountability for a control and its management3. By assigning control ownership, the organization can ensure that the controls are properly and promptly designed, implemented, monitored, and maintained, and that the issues or gaps in the controls are identified andresolved4. Assigning control ownership also helps to establish and communicate the roles and responsibilities of the control owners and the other stakeholders, and to enforce the accountability and performance of the control owners5. Assigning appropriate resources, assigning a quality control review, and performing regular independent control reviews are not the best ways to promote commitment to controls, as they do not provide the same level of authority and accountability as assigning control ownership. Assigning appropriate resources is the process of allocating and providing the necessary funds, staff, equipment, or technology that are required to support or enable the controls. Assigning appropriate resources can enhance the quality and performance of the controls, but it does not ensure that the controls are managed or maintained by a specific person or entity. Assigning a quality control review is the process of conducting and documenting a systematic and objective examination and evaluation of the controls, to ensure that they meet the established standards and requirements. Assigning a quality control review can improve the reliability and compliance of the controls, but it does not ensure that the controls are owned or operated by a specific person or entity. Performing regular independent control reviews is the process of performing and reporting an independent and impartial assessment and verification of the controls, to provide assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls. Performing regular independent control reviews can provide feedback and recommendations for the controls, but it does notensure that the controls are implemented or improved by a specific person or entity. References = 1: Commitment Controls - IMF2: 17 COSO Principles of Effective Internal Control | Weaver3: [Control Ownership - ISACA] 4: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] 5: [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : Resource Allocation - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : Quality Control Review - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : IT Risk Resources | ISACA : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control 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 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

According to the CRISC 351-400 topic3 Flashcards, the administrative access represents a segregation of duties conflict, which should be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner. Segregation of duties is a principle that aims to prevent fraud, errors, or abuse of power by ensuring that no single person can perform incompatible functions, such as development, testing, and production. By having administrative access to a production application, a software developer can potentially modify the code, bypass the testing and approval process, and deploy the changes without proper authorization or documentation. This can compromise the integrity, availability, and security of the application, and expose the organization to operational, financial, legal, or reputational risks. Therefore, the answer is D. The administrative access represents a segregation of duties conflict. *References

Inherent risk rating is a measure of the natural level of risk that is part of an application, before any controls are applied1. Inherent risk rating helps to identify and prioritize the applications that pose the highest risk to the organization and require the most attention and resources for risk management2. The responsibility for determining the inherent risk rating of an application should belong to the risk practitioner, as they have the expertise and knowledge to perform a comprehensive and consistent risk assessment of the application, using a standard methodology and criteria3. The risk practitioner should also communicate and report the inherent risk rating of the application to the relevant stakeholders, such as the application owner, senior management, and business process owner, and provide recommendations for risk mitigation4. The application owner, senior management, and business process owner are not the best choices for determining the inherent risk rating of an application, as they may not have the same level of skill and objectivity as the risk practitioner. The application owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the application and its performance5. The application owner may be involved in providing input and feedback to the risk practitioner during the risk assessment process, but they may not be able to assess the inherent risk rating of the application independently and impartially, as they may have a vested interest in the application’s success and reputation6. Senior management is the group of executives who set the strategic direction and objectives of the organization and oversee its performance7. Senior management may be involved in approving and endorsing the risk assessment process and its results, but they may not be able to assess the inherent risk rating of the application in detail and depth, as they may have a broader and higher-level perspective of the organization’s risk profile and priorities8. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for a business process that is supported or enabled by the application. The business process owner may be involved in providing input and feedback to the risk practitioner during the risk assessment process, but they may not be able to assess the inherent risk rating of the application accuratelyand comprehensively, as they may have a limited and specific view of the application’s functionality and value. References = 2: Introduction toapplication risk rating & assessment | Infosec3: Application Security Risk: Assessment and Modeling - ISACA4: Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.1: Inherent Risk Rating - Shared Assessments - Third Party Risk Management5: [Application Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] 6: Perform Inherent Risk Analysis - Oracle7: [Senior Management - Definition, Roles and Responsibilities] 8: Rating Inherent and Residual Risk - Barn Owl : [Business Process Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] : [Business Process Owner - Roles and Responsibilities]

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

 The PRIMARY basis for selecting a security control is the ability to mitigate risk, because it is the measure of how well the control can prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk, and how effectively the control can achieve the desired level of security and protection for the system and the data. The ability to mitigate risk is the most important criterion for selecting a security control, as it directly relates to the purpose and value of the control. The other options are not the primary basis, because:

Option A: To achieve the desired level of maturity is a goal of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The desired level of maturity is the state or condition of the security control that reflects its quality, consistency, and reliability, and it should be aligned with the organization’s security objectives and standards. The desired level of maturity is a result of selecting a security control, not a reason for selecting it.

Option B: The materiality of the risk is a factor of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The materiality of the risk is the degree or extent of the risk that affects the organization’s performance, reputation, and value, and it should be considered when selecting a security control, but it is not the only or the most important factor. The materiality of the risk is an input to selecting a security control, not an output of selecting it.

Option D: The cost of the control is a constraint of selecting a security control, but not the primary basis. The cost of the control is the amount of resources and expenditure that are required to implement and maintain the control, and it should be balanced with the benefit and effectiveness ofthe control, but it is not the only or the most important constraint. The cost of the control is a limitation of selecting a security control, not a motivation for selecting it. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 211.

The business process owner is the stakeholder who is responsible for the business process that is supported by the IT system, such as the CRM system. The business process owner has the authority and accountability to manage the risk and its response associated with the business process and the IT system. The business process owner should own the risk of customer data leakage caused by insufficient IT security controls for the new system, as it directly affects the performance, functionality, and compliance of the business process. The other options are not the correct answer, as they involve different roles or responsibilities in the risk management process:

The chief information security officer is the senior executive who oversees the enterprise-wide information security program, and provides guidance and direction to the information security managers and practitioners. The chief information security officer may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk.

The chief risk officer is the senior executive who oversees the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provides guidance and direction to the risk managers and practitioners. The chief risk officer may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk.

The IT controls manager is the person who designs, implements, and monitors the IT controls that mitigate the IT risks, such as the IT security controls for the new system. The IT controls manager may advise or support the business process owner in managing the risk of customer data leakage, but does not own the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.1, pp. 95-96.

 The most important requirement to include in an outsourcing contract to help ensure sensitive data stored with a service provider is secure is a third-party assessment report of control environment effectiveness. This will help to verify that the service provider has implemented adequate security controls and practices to protect the data, and that they comply with the enterprise’s security policies and standards. A third-party assessment report also provides an independent and objective assurance of the service provider’s security posture and performance. Incidents related to data loss, risk assessment results, and cyber insurance policy are also important requirements to include in an outsourcing contract, but they are not as important as a third-party assessment report. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.2, page 2461

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 643.

A digital certificate is a document that contains the public key and the identity of the owner of the public key, and is signed by a trusted third party called a certificate authority (CA)1. A digital certificate can be used to ensure the message reaches the intended recipient without alteration, by using the following steps2:

The sender encrypts the message with the recipient’s public key, which can only be decrypted by the recipient’s private key. This ensures the confidentiality of the message, as only the intended recipient can read it.

The sender signs the message with their own private key, which can be verified by anyone who has their public key. This ensures the integrity and authenticity of the message, as it proves that the message has not been tampered with and that it comes from the sender.

The sender attaches their digital certificate to the message, which contains their public key and their identity, and is signed by a CA. This ensures the validity and trustworthiness of the sender’s public key and identity, as it confirms that they have been verified by a CA.

The recipient receives the message and the digital certificate, and verifies the signature of the CA on the digital certificate. This ensures that the digital certificate is genuine and has not been forged or revoked.

The recipient uses the public key from the digital certificate to verify the signature of the sender on the message. This ensures that the message has not been altered and that it comes from the sender.

The recipient uses their own private key to decrypt the message. This ensures that they can read the message.

Therefore, adding a digital certificate is the best way to ensure the message reaches the intended recipient without alteration, as it provides encryption, digital signature, and certificate verification, which are the three main components of secure email communication3. Applying multi-factor authentication, adding a hash to the message, and adding a secret key are not the best ways to ensure the message reaches the intended recipient without alteration, as they do not provide all the components of secure email communication. Applying multi-factor authentication is a technique that requires the user to provide two or more pieces of evidence to prove their identity, such as a password, a code, or a biometric factor4. Multi-factor authentication can enhance the security of the email account, but it does not protect the message itselffrom being intercepted, modified, or impersonated. Adding a hash to the message is a technique that involves applying a mathematical function to the message to generate a fixed-length value, called a hash or a digest, that uniquely represents the message5. A hash can be used to verify the integrity of the message, as any change in the message will result in a different hash. However, ahash does not provide confidentiality or authenticity of the message, as it does not encrypt the message or identify the sender. Adding a secret key is a technique that involves using a single key, known only to the sender and the recipient, to encrypt and decrypt the message6. A secret key can provide confidentiality of the message, as only the sender and the recipient can read it. However, a secret key does not provide integrity or authenticity of the message, as it does not prevent the message from being altered or spoofed. Moreover, a secret key requires a secure way of exchanging the key between the sender and the recipient, which may not be feasible or reliable over email. References = 1: What is a digital certificate? | Norton2: How to Send Secure Emails in 2023 | A Guide to Secure Email - ProPrivacy3: Secure Email: A Complete Guide for 2023 - StartMail4: What is Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA)? | Duo Security5: What is a Hash Function? | Definition and FAQs6: [What is Symmetric Encryption? | Definition and FAQs]

Requiring a risk assessment with change requests is the most effective way to integrate business risk management with IT operations because it ensures that any changes to the IT environment are aligned with the business objectives and risk appetite. A risk assessment with change requests involves identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating the potential risks that may arise from the proposed changes, as well as monitoring and reviewing the outcomes of the changes. This way, the IT operations can support the business goals and mitigate the IT risks in a proactive and consistent manner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.2: Change Management, pp. 121-1231

When collecting information to identify IT-related risk, a risk practitioner should first focus on IT risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its IT objectives, before action is deemed necessary to reduce the risk1. IT risk appetite reflects the organization’s IT risk attitude and its willingness to accept risk in specific scenarios, with a governance model in place for IT risk oversight. IT risk appetite helps to guide the organization’s approach to IT risk and IT risk management, and to align its IT risk decisions with its business objectives and context. The other options are not the best answers, as they are either derived from or dependent on the IT risk appetite. IT security policies are the rules and guidelines that define the organization’s IT security objectives, requirements, and responsibilities, and they are based on the IT risk appetite. IT process maps are the graphical representations of the IT processes, activities, and tasks that support the organization’s IT objectives, and they are influenced by the IT risk appetite. IT risk tolerance level is the acceptable variation between the IT risk thresholds and the IT objectives, and it is determined by the IT risk appetite. References = IT Risk Resources | ISACA; RiskAppetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference?; IT Risk Management - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics; IT Risk Management Framework - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

The risk likelihood is the element of the risk register that should be updated to reflect the change of implementing encryption on all databases that host customer data. The risk likelihood is the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring, and it is one of the factors that determine the risk level and priority. By implementing encryption, the organization reduces the risk likelihood of unauthorized access, disclosure, or breach of the customer data, as encryption protects the data from being read or modified by anyone who does not have the decryption key. Therefore, the risk likelihood should be updated to reflect the lower probability of the risk event after applying the encryption control. The other options are not the elements that should be updated, as they are either not affected by or not related to the change of implementing encryption. The inherent risk is the level of risk before applying any controls or mitigation measures, and it does not change after implementing encryption. The risk appetite is the amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, and it is not influenced by the change ofimplementing encryption. The risk tolerance is the acceptable variation between the risk thresholds and thebusiness objectives, and it is not determined by the change of implementing encryption. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Risk Assessment in Project Management | PMI; Risk Assessment Process: Definition, Steps, and Examples; Risk Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Evaluating risk scenarios and assessing current controls is the most helpful in identifying gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment, because it allows the risk practitioner to compare the actual and expected outcomes of the IT processes and activities under different situations. A risk scenario is a hypothetical situation that describes a possible event or sequence of events that may affect the IT objectives and performance. A risk scenario can be based on various factors, such as the sources of risk, the risk drivers, the risk events, the risk impacts, and the risk responses. A risk scenario can also include the likelihood and severity of the risk, as well as the assumptions and uncertainties involved. Evaluating risk scenarios helps the risk practitioner to understand the nature and extent of the IT risks, as well as the potential consequences and opportunities that may arise from them. Assessing current controls is the process of examining and testing the existing controls that are implemented to manage the IT risks. A control is a measure or action that reduces the likelihood or impact of a risk, or enhances the benefits or opportunities of a risk. Assessing current controls helps the risk practitioner to determine the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, as well as their alignment with the IT objectives and requirements. By evaluating risk scenarios and assessing current controls, the risk practitioner can identify the gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment. The gaps can be related to the following aspects: - The IT objectives and performance: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and expected results of the IT processes and activities, as well as the deviation from the IT goals and targets. - The IT risk exposure and appetite: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actualand acceptable level of risk that the organization faces or is willing to take in pursuit of the IT objectives. - The IT risk management process and practices: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and expected performance of the IT risk management process, as well as the compliance with the IT risk management policies and standards. - The IT risk culture and awareness: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and desired level of risk awareness,understanding, and communication among the IT stakeholders, as well as the alignment with the organizational values and culture. Identifying the gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment is important for the risk practitioner, as it can help to prioritize and address the IT risks, as well as to improve and optimize the IT risk management process and practices. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Risk Scenarios, pp. 63-681

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 data owner is accountable for the confidentiality of the data that is outsourced to a third party with servers located in a foreign country. The data owner is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility to classify, label, and protect the data according to the organization’s policies and standards. The data owner is also responsible for defining the data access rights and privileges, and for ensuring that the data is handled in compliance with the applicable laws and regulations. The data owner retains the accountability for the data even when it is outsourced to a third party, and must monitor and evaluate the security performance and compliance of the service provider. The third-party data custodian, the data custodian, and the regional office executive are not accountable for the confidentiality of the data, as they have different roles and responsibilities in the outsourcing process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.2, page 2461

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 654.

Key risk indicator (KRI): A metric that measures the level of risk exposure or the likelihood of a risk event1.

KRI threshold: A predefined value or range that triggers an alert or action when the KRI reaches or exceeds it2.

Loss expectancy: The estimated amount of loss that an organization may incur due to a risk event3.

The most helpful thing in developing KRI thresholds is loss expectancy information. Loss expectancy information provides an estimate of the potential or expected impact of a risk event on the organization’s operations, reputation, or objectives. Loss expectancy information can help an organization to:

Quantify and prioritize the risks that pose the greatest threat to the organization

Determine the acceptable level of risk exposure or tolerance for each risk

Set the appropriate value or range for the KRI threshold that reflects the risk appetite and the risk mitigation strategy

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

Loss expectancy information can be derived from various sources, such as historical data, statistical analysis, expert judgment, or simulation models3.

The other options are not as helpful as loss expectancy information in developing KRI thresholds, because they do not directly address the potential or expected impact of a risk event. Control performance predictions, which are the forecasts or estimates of how well the risk management controls will perform in preventing, detecting, or mitigating risks, may help to evaluate the adequacy and efficiency of the risk management process and controls, but they do not provide a clear and quantifiable measure of the risk impact. IT service level agreements (SLAs), which are the contracts or agreements that define the quality and availability of IT services, may help to establish the standards and expectations for IT service delivery and performance, but they do not provide a comprehensive and current view of the risk exposure or likelihood. Remediation activity progress, which is the status or outcome of the actions taken to address and resolve a risk event, may help to monitor and report the effectiveness and compliance of the risk management process and controls, but it is usually done after the risk event has occurred and resolved, not before.

References = Key Risk Indicators: Definition, Examples, and Best Practices, KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva, Loss Expectancy: Definition, Calculation, and Examples

 Scenario analysis is a technique that helps to identify significant events that could impact an organization by creating and exploring plausible alternative futures. Scenario analysis can help anticipate and prepare for potential changes, opportunities, or threats in the internal or external environment, such as technological, economic, social, political, legal, or environmental factors.Scenario analysis can also help evaluate the impact and likelihood of different risk scenarios, and test the effectiveness and robustness of various risk response strategies. Scenario analysis can provide a comprehensive and holistic view of risks and their interrelationships, and support the decision making and planning process for risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Scenarios, p. 49-50.

A loss event is an occurrence that results in a negative consequence or damage for an organization, such as a data breach, a cyberattack, or a natural disaster. The impact of a loss event is the extent or magnitude of the harm or loss caused by the event, such as financial losses, reputational damage, operational disruptions, or legal liabilities. A newly enacted information privacy law that significantly increases financial penalties for breaches of personally identifiable information (PII) will most likely increase the impact of a loss event for an organization affected by the new law, because it will increase the potential cost and severity of a data breach involving PII. The other options are not as likely as an increase in loss event impact, because they do not directly result from the new law, but rather depend on other factors, such as the organization’s risk management capabilities, as explained below:

A. Increase in compliance breaches is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will not comply with the new law, which would expose it to more risks and penalties. A rational organization would try to comply with the new law by implementing appropriate controls and measures to protect PII and prevent data breaches.

C. Increase in residual risk is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will not adjust its risk response strategies to account for the new law, which would leave it with more risk exposure than desired. A prudent organization would try to reduce its residual risk by enhancing its risk mitigation controls or transferring its risk to a third party, such as an insurance company.

D. Increase in customer complaints is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will experience more data breaches involving PII, which would affect its customer satisfaction and loyalty. A responsible organization would try to avoid data breaches by improving its security posture and practices, and by communicating transparently and effectively with its customers about the new law and its implications. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 32.

The organization’s information security manager is responsible for IT security controls that are outsourced to an external service provider. The information security manager is accountable for ensuring that the security policies and standards of the organization are followed by the service provider, and that the security objectives and requirements are met. The information security manager is also responsible for monitoring and evaluating the security performance and compliance of the service provider, and for managing the security risks and incidents that may arise from the outsourcing arrangement. The organization’s risk function, the service provider’s IT management, and the service provider’s information security manager are not responsible for IT security controls that are outsourced, as they have different roles and responsibilities in the outsourcing process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.2, page 2461

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 651.

The risk appetite of an organization is the amount and type of risk that it is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives1. Technology risk is the risk related to the use of information and technology in theorganization2. If an organization has raised its risk appetite for technology risk, it means that it is willing to accept more risk in exchange for more potential benefits from technology initiatives. This would likely result in lower risk management cost, as the organization would spend less on implementing and maintaining controls to mitigate technology risk. The other options are not the most likely results of raising the risk appetite for technology risk. Increased inherent risk is the risk before considering the effect of controls3, and it is not directly affected by the risk appetite. Higher risk management cost would be the opposite of the expected outcome, as the organization would reduce its risk management efforts. Decreased residual risk is the risk after considering the effect of controls3, and it would also be the opposite of the expected outcome, as the organization would accept more risk exposure. References = Organisations must define their IT risk appetite and tolerance; IT Risk Resources; CRISC | What Accurate CRISC Free Download Is

Prioritizing risk responses helps to balance the costs and benefits of managing IT risk by ensuring that the most significant risks are addressed first and that the resources allocated to risk management are used efficiently and effectively. Evaluating risk based on frequency and probability is a part of risk analysis, not risk response. Considering risk factors that can be quantified is also a part of risk analysis, and it does not necessarily capture all the relevant aspects of risk. Managing the risk by using controls is a possible risk response, but it does not guarantee that the costs and benefits of risk management are balanced, as some controls may be too expensive or ineffective for the level of risk they mitigate. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 145.

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

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

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

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

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 main purpose of a risk register is to enable well-informed risk management decisions by providing a comprehensive and up-to-date record of all the identified risks, their analysis, and their responses. A risk register is a tool that helps to document, monitor, and communicate the status and outcome of risk management activities. A risk register also facilitates the review and evaluation of the effectiveness of risk management processes and controls. Documenting the risk universe, promoting an understanding of risk,and identifying stakeholders are possible benefits of a risk register, but they are not the main purpose. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.3, page 531

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 640.

Senior management interviews would offer the MOST insight with regard to an organization’s risk culture, because they can reveal the attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors of the senior management towards risk management, and how they influence and support the risk management process and activities in the organization. Senior management interviews can also provide information on the risk appetite, tolerance, and objectives of the organization, and how they are communicated and implemented across the organization. The other options are not as insightful as senior management interviews, because:

Option A: Risk management procedures are the steps and methods that define how the risk management process and activities are performed in the organization, but they do not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the human and behavioral aspects of risk management.

Option C: Benchmark analyses are the comparisons of the performance and practices of the organization with those of similar or successful organizations, but they do not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the internal and unique aspects of risk management.

Option D: Risk management framework is the set of rules and standards that guide and support the risk management process and activities in the organization, but it does not necessarily reflect the risk culture of the organization, which is more about the leadership and commitment aspects of risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 82.

The risk scenario chart shows the initial and residual risk ratings, and the project cost, for four projects named Sierra, Tango, Uniform, and Victor. The initial risk rating is the level of risk before applying any controls or mitigation measures, while the residual risk rating is the level of risk after applying the controls or measures. The project cost is the amount of resources required to implement the project. These three factors can be used to determine the relative positions of the projects on a risk map, which is a graphical tool for displaying the risks based on their impact and likelihood. The risk map can help to prioritize and compare the risks, and to select the most appropriate risk response strategy. The other options are not the best answers, as they are not directly shown or derived from the risk scenario chart. The risk treatment options are the possible actions that can be taken to address the risks, such as accept, avoid, mitigate, or transfer. The capability of enterprise to implement is the ability of the organization to execute the risk response plan,considering the available resources, skills, and constraints. The multiple risk factors addressed by a chosen response are the various elements that contribute to or affect the risk, such as the threat sources, events, vulnerabilities, assets, and impacts. These factors are not explicitly stated or measured in the risk scenario chart, and may require further analysis or information. References = How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA; Identifying the Right Risk Scenarios to Measure with FAIR; How to write good risk scenarios and statements

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control documents, implementing record retention tools and techniques is the best solution in this scenario. Record retention involves managing the lifecycle of records, including their creation, usage, storage, and disposal. By implementing record retention policies, organizations can define how long emails and other data should be retained before being deleted. This helps in efficiently managing storage space and reducing unnecessary storage costs.

Establishing e-discovery and data loss prevention (DLP) (Option B) focuses more on legal and compliance aspects and may not directly address the issue of reducing storage costs. Sending notifications when near storage quota (Option C) is a reactive approach and may not prevent the exponential increase in storage costs. Implementing a bring your own device (BYOD) policy (Option D) is unrelated to the issue of email storage costs.

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual

A risk factor is a condition or event that may increase the likelihood or impact of a risk, which is the effect of uncertainty on objectives1. An information systems review is a process that involves examining and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of the information systems and their related controls, policies, and procedures2. The purpose of an information systems review is to identify and report the risk factors that may affect the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and performance of the information systems and their outputs3. The best way to ensure that the risk factors identified during an information systems review are addressed is to assign action items and deadlines to specific individuals, who are responsible and accountable for implementing the appropriate risk responses. A risk response is an action taken or plannedto mitigate or eliminate the risk, such as avoiding, transferring, reducing, or accepting the risk4. By assigning action items and deadlines to specific individuals, the organization can ensure that the risk factors are properly and promptly addressed, and that the progress and results of the risk responses are monitored and reported5. Informing business process owners of the risk, reviewing and updating the risk register, and implementing new control technologies are not the best ways to ensure that the risk factors identified during an information systems review are addressed, as they do not provide the same level of accountability and effectiveness as assigning action items and deadlines to specific individuals. Informing business process owners of the risk is a process that involves communicating and sharing the risk information with the persons who have the authority and accountability for a business process that is supported or enabled by the information systems6. Informing business process owners of the risk can help to raise their awareness and understanding of the risk, but it does not ensure that they will take the necessary actions to address the risk. Reviewing and updating the risk register is a process that involves checking and verifying that the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the risks and their related information, is current, complete, and consistent7. Reviewing and updating the risk register can help to reflect the changes and updates in the risk factors and their status, but it does not ensure that the risk factors are resolved or reduced. Implementing new control technologies is a process that involves introducing or applying new software or hardware that can help to prevent, detect, or correct the risk factors affecting the information systems8. Implementing new control technologies can help to improve the security and performance of the information systems, but it does not ensure that the risk factors are eliminated or mitigated. References = 1: Risk Factors - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics2: InformationSystems Audit and Control Association (ISACA) - ISACA3: Information Systems Audit: The Basics4: Risk Response Strategy and Contingency Plans - ProjectManagement.com5: Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.1: Risk Response Options, pp. 113-115.6: [Business Process Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] 7: Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana8: Technology Control Automation: Improving Efficiency, Reducing … - ISACA : [Business Process Owner - Roles and Responsibilities] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.]

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.

 The PRIMARY purpose of using control metrics is to evaluate the variance against objectives, because control metrics are measures that indicate the performance and effectiveness of the controls in achieving the desired outcomes and goals. Control metrics can help to identify and quantify the gaps or deviations between the actual and expected results of the controls, and to provide feedback and improvement for the control design and implementation. The other options are not the primary purpose, because:

Option A: Amount of risk reduced by compensating controls is a result of using control metrics, but not the primary purpose. Compensating controls are controls that provide an alternative or additional level of protection or assurance when the primary or preferred controls are not feasible or effective. Control metrics can help to measure and monitor the amount of risk reduced by compensating controls, but they are not the only or the most important measure of the control performance and effectiveness.

Option B: Amount of risk present in the organization is an input to using control metrics, but not the primary purpose. The amount of risk present in the organization is the level of exposure and uncertainty that the organization faces in pursuing its objectives and goals. Control metrics can help to assess and report the amount of risk present in the organization, but they are not the only or the most important measure of the risk profile and exposure.

Option D: Number of incidents is a source of using control metrics, but not the primary purpose. Incidents are events or occurrences that disrupt or threaten the normal operations or security of the organization. Control metrics can help to analyze and respond to the number of incidents, but they are not the only or the most important measure of the incident management and resolution. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 120.

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]

 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.

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

The best risk response for an identified high probability risk scenario involving a critical, proprietary business function with an annualized cost of control higher than the annual loss expectancy is to accept the risk. Accepting the risk means acknowledging the risk but choosing not to take any specific action to address it. This strategy is suitable when the cost of implementing controls exceeds the potential loss, as in this scenario. The organization recognizes the risk, but the cost-benefit analysis suggests that the potential loss is acceptable given the higher cost of control. The other options are not the best risk responses, as they may not befeasible, practical, or cost-effective in this scenario. Mitigating the risk means reducing the risk by implementing controls or measures to minimize its potential impact, but this would increase the cost of control, which is already higher than the annual loss expectancy. Transferring the risk means shifting the risk to another party, typically through insurance or contracts, but this may not be possible or advisable for a critical, proprietary business function, and it may also increase the overall cost burden. Avoiding the risk means eliminating the risk entirely by not engaging in the activity that poses the risk, but this may disrupt essential business operations and potentially result in other adverse consequences. References = CRISC Exam: Best Risk Response for High Probability Risk Scenario; Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips; Chapter 19: Summarizing Risk Management Concepts

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.

 The best answer is D. Organizational policy. An organizational policy is a set of rules and guidelines that defines how the organization operates and conducts its activities. Anorganizational policy should direct how the employee monitoring system is used, because it can specify the purpose, scope, methods, and limitations of the monitoring, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved, the data protection and privacy measures, and the consequences of non-compliance. An organizational policy can also help to ensure that the employee monitoring system is aligned with the organization’s objectives, values, and culture, and that it complies with the relevant laws and regulations. The other options are not the best answer, although they may be related or influential to the organizational policy. Organizational strategy is a plan of action that outlines the organization’s vision, mission, goals, and initiatives, but it does not provide the details or the rules of how the employee monitoring system is used. Employee code of conduct is a document that describes the expected behavior and ethics of the employees, but it does not address the specific aspects or the procedures of the employee monitoring system. Industry best practices are the proven methods and standards that are adopted by the leading organizations in a specific field or sector, but they may not be applicable or suitable for every organization or situation. References = Workplace Monitoring Policy Template - CurrentWare, The All-In-One Guide to Employee Monitoring - G2

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 course of action for the risk practitioner when an organization has decided to expand into new product areas is to identify any new business objectives with stakeholders. Business objectives are the specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that the organization aims to accomplish through its products and services. Stakeholders are the parties who have an interest or influence in the organization and its products and services, such as customers, employees, shareholders, suppliers, regulators, or competitors. Identifying any new business objectives with stakeholders is the first course of action, because it helps to understand and define the purpose, scope, and criteria of the new product areas, and to align them with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy. Identifying any new business objectives with stakeholders also helps to establish the expectations, needs, and requirements of the stakeholders, and to ensure their engagement and support for the new product areas. Identifying any newbusiness objectives with stakeholders is the basis for the subsequent risk management activities, such as identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and responding to the risks associated with the new product areas. The other options are not the first course of action, although they may be related or subsequent steps in the risk management process. Presenting a business case for new controls to stakeholders is a part of the risk response process, which involves selecting and executing the appropriate actions to reduce, avoid, share, or exploit the risks associated with the new product areas. Presenting a business case for new controls to stakeholders can help to justify and communicate the value and impact of the new controls, and to obtain the approval and resources for implementing them. However, this is not the first course of action, as it depends on the identification and prioritization of the business objectives and the risks. Revising the organization’s risk and control policy is a part of the risk governance process, which involves defining and updating the rules and guidelines for managing the risks and the controls associated with the new product areas. Revising the organization’s risk and control policy can help to ensure the consistency and effectiveness of the risk management process, and to comply with the relevant laws and regulations. However, this is not the first course of action, as it follows the identification and assessment of the business objectives and the risks. Reviewing existing risk scenarios with stakeholders is a part of the risk monitoring and review process, which involves evaluating and improving the performance and outcomes of the risk management process for the new product areas. Reviewing existing risk scenarios with stakeholders can help to identify and address any changes or issues in the risk levels or the risk responses, and to provide feedback and learning for the risk management process. However, this is not the first course of action, as it requires the identification and analysis of the business objectives and the risks. References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA, How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA, The Role of Executive Management in ERM - Corporate Compliance Insights

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the risk register is a tool that records the results of risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment. The risk register should be populated as soon as possible in the risk management process, to capture and document the risks and their attributes. The best time for the risk practitioner to start populating the risk register is when identifying risk scenarios, as this is the first step in the risk identification process. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the potential causes, impacts, and responses of a risk event. Identifying risk scenarios helps to generate a comprehensive and relevant list of risks that can be recorded in the risk register. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 191, 206.

The best way to identify changes in the risk profile of an organization is to monitor key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given operational risk1. KRIs can help to monitor the changes in risk levels over time, identify emerging risks, and trigger risk response actions when the risk exceeds the acceptable thresholds2. KRIs can also help to align the risk management strategy with the business objectives and context. The other options are not the best ways to identify changes in the risk profile of an organization, as they do not provide the same level of insight and guidance as KRIs. Monitoring key performance indicators (KPIs) may show the results or outcomes of the business processes, but not the risks or uncertainties that affect them. Interviewing the risk owner may provide some subjective or qualitative information on the risk perception or attitude, but not the objective or quantitative data on the risk exposure or impact. Conducting a gap analysis may show the difference between the current and desired state of the organization, but not the causes or sources of the risk. References = Key Risk Indicators; Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide

A preventive control is a type of control that aims to avoid or reduce the occurrence of an undesirable event or risk. A preventive control can be implemented through technical, administrative, or physical means. A new policy that forbids copying of data onto removablemedia is an example of a preventive control, because it prevents unauthorized data exfiltration or leakage through removable devices, such as flash drives or external hard disk drives. A preventive control is different from the other types of controls, as explained below:

A detective control is a type of control that aims to discover or identify the occurrence of an undesirable event or risk. A detective control can be implemented through monitoring, auditing, or reporting activities. An example of a detective control is a log analysis tool that detects any unauthorized access or modification of data on a system.

A directive control is a type of control that aims to guide or instruct the behavior or actions of individuals or groups. A directive control can be implemented through policies, procedures, standards, or rules. An example of a directive control is a training program that teaches employees how to handle sensitive data securely and appropriately.

A deterrent control is a type of control that aims to discourage or dissuade individuals or groups from performing an undesirable event or risk. A deterrent control can be implemented through sanctions, penalties, or consequences. An example of a deterrent control is a warning message that informs users of the legal implications of copying data onto removable media without authorization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 38.

The most effective way for a large and diversified organization to minimize risk associated with unauthorized software on company devices is to scan end points for applications not included in the asset inventory. An asset inventory is a document that records and tracks all the hardware and software assets that are owned, used, or managed by the organization, such as laptops, tablets, smartphones, servers, applications, etc. An asset inventory helps to identify and classify the assets based on their type, model, location, owner, status, etc. An asset inventory also helps to monitor and control the assets, such as enforcing security policies, applying patches and updates, detecting and resolving issues, etc. Scanningend points for applications not included in the asset inventory helps to minimize the risk of unauthorized software, because it helps to discover and remove any software that is not approved, authorized, or licensed by the organization, and that may pose security, legal, or operational risks, such as malware, spyware, pirated software, etc. The other options are not as effective as scanning end points for applications not included in the asset inventory, although they may provide some protection or compliance for the software assets. Prohibiting the use of cloud-based virtual desktop software, conducting frequent reviews of software licenses, and performing frequent internal audits of enterprise IT infrastructure are all examples of preventive or detective controls, which may help to prevent or deter the installation or use of unauthorized software, or to verify or validate the software assets, but they do not necessarily discover or remove the unauthorized software. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 3-11.

The most helpful source in providing an overview of an organization’s risk management program is the risk management framework. The risk management framework is a set of components that provide the foundations and organizational arrangements for designing, implementing, monitoring, reviewing, and continually improving risk management throughout the organization. The framework includes the risk management principles, policies, processes, procedures, roles, responsibilities, and resources that enable the organization to manage risk effectively. Risk management treatment plan, risk assessment results, and risk register are other sources that may provide some information about the risk management program, but they are not as comprehensive as the risk management framework. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

 The best way to facilitate the implementation of data classification requirements is to assign a data owner. A data owner is a person who has the authority and responsibility for defining, classifying, and protecting the data. A data owner can help to facilitate the implementation of data classification requirements by providing the criteria, categories, roles, and procedures for classifying the data according to its sensitivity, value, and criticality. A data owner can also ensure that the data is handled and stored appropriately, and that the data classification policy is enforced and monitored. The other options are not as effective as assigning a data owner, as they are related to the prevention, audit, or control of the data, not the classification or protection of the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

 A source code review is the process of examining and analyzing the source code of an application to identify any vulnerabilities, errors, or flaws that may compromise the security, functionality, or performance of the application. A source code review is the most effective way to identify an application backdoor prior to implementation, as it can detect any hidden or unauthorized code that may allow unauthorized access, bypass security controls, or execute malicious commands. A source code review can also help to improvethe quality and reliability of the application, and ensure compliance with the coding standards and best practices. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 181.

 Risk tolerance is the best term to describe the situation where an organization has agreed to a 99% availability for its online services and will not accept availability that falls below 98.5%. Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk tolerance defines the acceptable variation in outcomes related to specific performance measures, such as availability, reliability, or security. Risk tolerance is usually expressed as a range, such as 99% +/- 0.5%. Risk mitigation, risk evaluation, and risk appetite are not the correct terms to describe this situation, because they refer to different aspects of risk management, such as reducing, assessing, or pursuing risk, respectively. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

 The best control to minimize the risk associated with scope creep in software development is an established process for project change management. Scope creep is the uncontrolled expansion of the project scope due to changes in requirements, specifications, or expectations. A project change management process can help to prevent or reduce scope creep by defining the procedures for requesting, reviewing, approving, and implementing changes in the project. Retention of test data and results, business management review of functional requirements, and segregation between development, test, and production are other possible controls, but they are not as effective as a project change management process. References = ISACA Certified in Riskand Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

Implementing a data masking process is the best method to mitigate the risk of an unauthorized employee viewing confidential data in a database. Data masking is the process of replacing sensitive data with fictitious but realistic data, such as changing names, addresses, phone numbers, etc. Data masking protects the privacy and confidentiality of the data, while still allowing for testing, analysis, or training purposes. Implementing role-based access control, including sanctions in NDAs, and installing a DLP tool are also useful methods to reduce the risk of data exposure, but they are not as effective as data masking, which prevents the data from being accessed in the first place. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

The primary risk management responsibility of the first line of defense is to implement risk treatment plans. The first line of defense is the operational management and staff who are directly involved in the execution of the business activities and processes. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks that affect their objectives and performance. Implementing risk treatment plans means applying the appropriate risk response strategies and actions to address the identified risks, and monitoring and reporting the results and outcomes of the risk treatment. The other options are not as primary as implementing risk treatment plans, as they are related to the validation, establishment, or review of the risk management process, not the execution of the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Process, page 15.

The most important information to review when developing plans for using emerging technologies is the organizational strategic plan. The organizational strategic plan is a document that defines the vision, mission, goals, and objectives of the organization. It also outlines the strategies, actions, and resources that are needed to achieve them. The organizational strategic plan provides the direction, alignment, and guidance for the use of emerging technologies, and ensures that they are aligned with and support the organizational needs and priorities. The other options are not as important as the organizational strategic plan, as they are related to the current state, specific area, or potential issues of the use of emerging technologies, not the overall purpose and value of the use of emerging technologies. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: IT Risk Identification Methods, page 19.

The most concerning factor for a risk practitioner reviewing risk action plans for documented IT risk scenarios is that many action plans were discontinued after senior management accepted the risk. Risk action plans are documents that define the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for implementing the risk responses and strategies for the IT risk scenarios. Risk action plans help to reduce, transfer, avoid, or accept the IT risks, and to monitor and report on the IT risk performance and improvement. Discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk is a major concern, because it may indicate that the risk acceptance decision was not based on a proper risk analysisor evaluation, or that the risk acceptance decision was not communicated or coordinated with the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk may also create challenges or risks for the organization, such as compliance, legal, reputational, or operational risks, or conflicts or inconsistencies with the organization’s risk appetite, risk objectives, or risk policies. The other options are not as concerning as discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the risk management process. Individuals outside IT managing action plans for the risk scenarios, target dates for completion missing from some action plans, and senior management approving multiple changes to several action plans are all factors that could affect the quality and timeliness of the risk management process, but they do not necessarily indicate a lack of risk management accountability or oversight. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-32.

The primary objective of collecting information and reviewing documentation when performing periodic risk analysis is to identify new or emerging risk issues that may affect the enterprise’s objectives, processes, or resources. This helps to update the risk profile and prioritize the risk responses accordingly. Satisfying audit requirements, surveying and analyzing historical risk data, and understanding internal and external threat agents are secondary objectives that support the primary objective of risk identification. References = Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, page 22; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 64.

The best method to maintain a common view of IT risk within an organization is to establish and communicate the IT risk profile. An IT risk profile is a document that summarizes the key IT risks that the organization faces or accepts, and their likelihood, impact, and priority. An IT risk profile helps to identify and prioritize the most critical or relevant IT risks, and to align them with the organization’s objectives, strategy, and risk appetite. Establishing and communicating the IT risk profile is the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk, because it helps to create a shared understanding and awareness of the IT risks among the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Establishing and communicating the IT risk profile also helps to facilitate the IT risk decision-making and reporting processes, and to monitor and control the IT risk performance and improvement. Theother options are not the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk, although they may be part of or derived from the IT risk profile. Collecting data for IT risk assessment, utilizing a balanced scorecard, and performing and publishing an IT risk analysis are all activitiesthat can help to support or update the IT risk profile, but they are not the best method to maintain a common view of IT risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 1-15.

The most helpful input to develop risk scenarios associated with hosting an organization’s key IT applications in a cloud environment is conducting a risk workshop with key stakeholders. A risk workshop is a facilitated session that involves brainstorming, discussing, and analyzing the potential risks and opportunities related to a specific topic or project. A risk workshop helps to identify and prioritize the most relevant and significant risk scenarios, as well as to explore the possible causes, impacts, and responses. A risk workshop also helps to engage and align the key stakeholders, such as the business owners, IT managers, cloud providers, and risk experts, and to leverage their knowledge, experience, and perspectives. The other options are not as helpful as conducting a risk workshop, although they may provide some inputor information for the risk scenario development. Reviewing the results of independent audits, performing a site visit to the cloud provider’s data center, and performing a due diligence review are all activities that can help to assess the current state and performance of the cloud environment, but they do not necessarily generate or evaluate the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

The greatest challenge to assigning of the associated risk entries when an organization has used generic risk scenarios to populate its risk register is that the risk scenarios are not applicable. Generic risk scenarios are risk scenarios that are based on common or typical situations that may affect many organizations or industries. They are useful for providing a general overview or reference of the potential risks, but they may not be relevant, specific, or realistic for a particular organization or context. Therefore, using generic risk scenarios may result in inaccurate, incomplete, or misleading risk entries that do not reflect the actual risk profile or appetite of the organization. The other options are not as challenging as the risk scenarios being not applicable, as they are related to the quantity, quality, or aggregation of the risk scenarios, not the suitability or validity of the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

The best way to mitigate an identified risk scenario is to execute a risk response plan. A risk response plan is a document that describes the actions and resources that are needed to address the risk scenario. A risk response plan can include one or more of the following strategies: avoid, transfer, mitigate, accept, or exploit. By executing a risk response plan, the organization can reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk scenario, or take advantage of the opportunities that the risk scenario may present. The other options are not as effective as executing a riskresponse plan, as they are related to the awareness, assessment, or monitoring of the risk scenario, not the actual treatment of the risk scenario. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

The greatest concern when establishing key risk indicators (KRIs) is using ineffective methods to assess risk. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. To establish effective KRIs, the risk assessment methods should be reliable, valid, consistent, and timely. Ineffective methods to assess risk could lead to inaccurate or misleading KRIs, which could result in poor risk management decisions and outcomes. The other options are not as significant as using ineffective methods to assess risk, although they may also affect the quality and usefulness of KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

Open communication of risk reporting is the most important factor for promoting a risk-aware culture, because it fosters trust, transparency, and accountability among all stakeholders. It also enables timely and informed decision-making, feedback, and learning from risk events. Regular testing of risk controls, communication of audit findings, and procedures for security monitoring are all important aspects of risk management, but they do not necessarily create a risk-aware culture, which requires a shared understanding and commitment to risk management across the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2, page 1-9.

The most concerning issue when reviewing the results of an independent control assessment to determine the effectiveness of a vendor’s control environment is that the controls had recurring noncompliance. This indicates that the vendor’s controls are not operating as intended or designed, and that the vendor is not taking corrective actions to address the control deficiencies. This can increase the risk exposure and liability for the organization that outsources the service or function to the vendor. The report being provideddirectly from the vendor, the risk associated with multiple control gaps being accepted, and the control owners disagreeing with the auditor’s recommendations are other possible issues, but they are not as critical as the recurring noncompliance. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

 The key performance indicator (KPI) that best measures the effectiveness of an organization’s disaster recovery program is the percentage of critical systems recovered within the recovery time objective (RTO). The RTO is the acceptable timeframe within which a business process or system must be restored after a disruption. The percentage of critical systems recovered within the RTO indicates how well the disaster recovery program can meet the business continuity requirements and minimize the impact of the disruption. The other options are not as good as the percentage of critical systems recovered within the RTO, as they are related to the efficiency, quality, or scope of the disaster recovery program, not the effectiveness of the disaster recovery program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control StudyManual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

The best way to ensure key risk indicators (KRIs) provide value to risk owners is to provide timely notification of the changes in the risk exposure. KRIs are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. By providing timely notification of the KRI values, the risk owners can be alerted of the risk situation and take appropriate actions to manage the risk. Ongoing training, return on investment (ROI), and cost minimization are other possible ways to ensure KRIs provide value, but they are not as effective as timely notification. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 10; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 140.