CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Questions and Answers

• Artificial intelligence (AI) is a branch of computer science that aims to create machines or systems that can perform tasks that normally require human intelligence, such as learning, reasoning, decision making, etc.
• An organization that is considering adopting AI should be aware of the potential risks and challenges that may arise from using AI, such as ethical, legal, social, technical, operational, or security issues.
• The most important course of action for the risk practitioner is to identify applicable risk scenarios. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the context and objectives of the AI adoption, the stakeholders and their expectations, the data and information sources and quality, the AI models and algorithms and their reliability, the AI outputs and outcomes and their impact, and the AI governance and oversight mechanisms and their effectiveness.
• Identifying applicable risk scenarios helps to assess the likelihood and impact of the risks, prioritize the risks, design and implement appropriate risk responses, monitor and evaluate the risk performance, and report and communicate the risk status and issues.
• The other options are not the most important courses of action for the risk practitioner. They are either secondary or not essential for AI risk management.

The references for this answer are:

• Risk IT Framework, page 24
• Information Technology & Security, page 18
• Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 16

 Testing a disaster recovery plan is essential to ensure its effectiveness and identify any gaps or weaknesses that might hinder the recovery process. Without testing, the organization may face longer service interruptions than anticipated, which could result in loss of revenue, customer dissatisfaction, reputational damage, and regulatory penalties. Some of the best practices for disaster recovery testing are1:

• Test many scenarios
• Test regularly
• Document everything
• Keep everyone updated
• Define metrics
• Evaluate the results
• Test your disaster recovery plan

References = Best Practices For Disaster Recovery Testing | Snyk

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 should include all the known risk scenarios, regardless of their treatment status. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 108.

The risk register element that is most likely to be updated if the attack surface or exposure of an asset is reduced is the likelihood rating, as this reflects the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring. The attack surface or exposure of an asset is the measure of the extent and accessibility of the asset to potential threats or attackers. If the attack surface or exposure of an asset is reduced, the likelihood of the asset being compromised or damaged by a risk event is also reduced. Therefore, the likelihood rating of the risk should be updated accordingly. The other options are not the risk register elements that are most likely to be updated if the attack surface or exposure of an asset is reduced, although they may be affected or influenced by it. Control effectiveness is the measure of how well the risk controls reduce the risk level or achieve the control objectives. Assessment approach is the method or technique used to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks. Impact rating is the measure of the magnitude or severity of the consequences of a risk event on the asset or the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 54.

 The most important reason to create risk scenarios is to assist with risk identification. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how a risk event could occur and what the consequences would be. By creating risk scenarios, the enterprise can identify potential sources, causes, and impacts of risk, as well as the likelihood and severity of the risk. Risk scenarios also help to communicate and visualize the risk to stakeholders and decision makers. Determining risk tolerance, risk appetite, and risk responses are important outcomes of risk scenarios, but they are not the primary reason for creating them. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.2, page 521

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 639.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the risk register is a tool that records the results of risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment. It should be updated whenever there is a change in the risk profile, such as when a vulnerability is closed or a new threat is identified. Updating the risk register allows the organization to monitor the current status of risks and the effectiveness of risk responses. Therefore, the next course of action after implementing changes to close an identified vulnerability is to update the risk register with the new information. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 191.

 The average gap between actual and agreed response times is the best measure of the efficiency of an incident response process, as it indicates how well the process meets the service level agreements (SLAs) and the expectations of the stakeholders. A smaller gap means that the process is more efficient and effective in resolving incidents within the agreed time frame. The other options are not the best measures of the efficiency of an incident response process, as they do not directly reflect the performance of the process against the SLAs. The number of incidents escalated to management may indicate the complexity or severity of the incidents, but not the efficiency of the process. The average time between changes and updating of escalation matrix may indicate the agility or flexibility of the process, but not the efficiency of the process. The number of incidents lacking responses may indicate the capacity or availability of the process, but not the efficiency of the process. References = Top 5 Incident Response Metrics with Real-World Examples & Impact; Mastering Incident Response: Best Practices for Effective Handling; The Five Steps of Incident Response

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and owners. The greatest concern when maintaining a risk register is that significant changes in risk factors are excluded. Risk factors are the internal and external variables that influence the occurrence and impact of risks. Risk factors can change over time due to changes in the business environment, the IT landscape, the threat landscape, or the regulatory requirements. If the risk register does not reflect the significant changes in risk factors, it may not provide an accurate and current view of the enterprise’s risk profile and may not support effective risk management decisions and actions. The other options are not as concerning as the exclusion of significant changes in risk factors, as they involve different aspects of the risk register:

• Impacts are recorded in qualitative terms means that the risk register uses descriptive scales, such as low, medium, and high, to measure the potential consequences of the risks. This may not be as precise or consistent as quantitative measures, such as monetary values or percentages, but it does not necessarily affect the validity or usefulness of the risk register.
• Executive management does not perform periodic reviews means that the risk register is not regularly evaluated and updated by the senior leaders of the enterprise. This may indicate a lack of management commitment or oversight for risk management, but it does not directly affect the quality or completeness of the risk register.
• IT risk is not linked with IT assets means that the risk register does not associate the identified risks with the specific IT resources, such as hardware, software, data, or services, that are affected by or contribute to the risks. This may limit the visibility and traceability of the risks, but it does not necessarily affect the identification or assessment of the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2.2, pp. 21-22.

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

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

Risk appetite is defined as "the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, before action is deemed necessary to reduce the risk."1 It represents a balance between the potential benefits of innovation and the threats that change inevitably brings. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk attitude and its willingness to accept risk in specific scenarios, with a governance model in place for risk oversight. Risk appetite helps to guide the organization’s approach to risk and risk management, and to align its risk decisions with its business objectives and context. The other options are not the best descriptions of risk appetite, as they are either too vague (the effective management of risk and internal control environments), too narrow (acceptable variation between risk thresholds and business objectives), or confusing (the acceptable variation relative to the achievement of objectives). References = Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference?

 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 alert users to any suspicious login attempts and prevent unauthorized transactions. References = 10 Tips for Secure Online Transactions - SmartAsset

A maturity model is a tool that assesses the level of development and performance of key processes within an organization. A maturity model typically defines a set of criteria, standards, and best practices for each process, and assigns a rating or score based on the degree of compliance or achievement. A maturity model can help compare the current state of key processes to their desired state, by identifying the strengths, weaknesses, gaps, and opportunities for improvement. A maturity model can also help establish a roadmap for process improvement, by setting realistic and measurable goals and objectives, and monitoring the progress and results. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Scenarios, p. 49-50.

An anti-virus program is a software that detects and removes malicious software, such as viruses, worms, or ransomware, from the IT assets, such as computers, servers, or networks. The effectiveness of an anti-virus program can be measured by the key performance indicators (KPIs) that reflect the achievement of the program objectives and the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. The best KPI to measure the effectiveness of an anti-virus program is the percentage of IT assets with current malware definitions. Malware definitions are the files or databases that contain the signatures or patterns of the known malicious software, and they are used by the anti-virus program to scan and identify the malware. The percentage of IT assets with current malware definitions indicates how well the anti-virus program is able to protect the IT assets from the latest or emerging threats, and reduce the exposure and impact of the risks associated with the malware. The other options are not as good as the percentage of IT assets with current malware definitions, as they may not reflect the quality or timeliness of the protection, 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.

After identifying new risk events during a project, the project manager’s next step should be to record the scenarios into the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, owners, and status. Recording the scenarios into the risk register helps to document and communicate the risks to the project team and stakeholders, and to facilitate the subsequent risk analysis and response processes. The other options are not the next steps, but rather the subsequent steps after recording the scenarios into the risk register. Determining if the scenarios need to be accepted or responded to is part of the risk evaluation and treatment process, which requires a prior risk analysis. Continuing with a qualitative or quantitative risk analysis is part of the risk assessment process, which requires a prior risk identification and documentation. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Risk Identification in Project Management; 6.3. The 5 Steps of the Risk Management Process

 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.

A managed security service provider (MSSP) is a third-party entity that offers network security services to an organization, such as firewall operation, administration, monitoring, and maintenance1. A firewall is a device or software that controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules2. A firewall administrator is a person or entity that manages and maintains the firewall configuration, rules, and policies3. When an organization uses an MSSP as a firewall administrator, the greatest concern is the exposure of log data, because log data contains sensitive and valuable information about the organization’s network activity, such as source and destination IP addresses, ports, protocols, timestamps, and user identities4. If the log data is not protected properly by the MSSP, it could be accessed, modified, or stolen by unauthorized parties, such as hackers, competitors, or regulators, which could result in data breaches, compliance violations, reputational damage, or legal liabilities for the organization5. The other options are not as concerning as the exposure of log data, because they do not pose a direct and immediate threat to the organization’s data security and privacy, but rather affect the quality and efficiency of the firewall management, as explained below:

• B. Lack of governance is a concern when an organization uses an MSSP as a firewall administrator, because it could lead to misalignment or inconsistency between the organization’s and the MSSP’s objectives, policies, and standards for firewall management. However, this concern can be mitigated by establishing a clear and comprehensive service level agreement (SLA) with the MSSP, which defines the roles, responsibilities, expectations, and performance indicators for the firewall management service6.
• C. Increased number of firewall rules is a concern when an organization uses an MSSP as a firewall administrator, because it could create complexity, confusion, or duplication in the firewall configuration, which could affect the firewall performance and security. However, this concern can be mitigated by conducting regular firewall audits and reviews with the MSSP, which can help to rationalize, optimize, and update the firewall rules, and to ensure that they are relevant, effective, and efficient for the organization’s network environment.
• D. Lack of agreed-upon standards is a concern when an organization uses an MSSP as a firewall administrator, because it could result in gaps or weaknesses in the firewall design and implementation, which could compromise the firewall functionality and security. However, this concern can be mitigated by adopting and following industry best practices, norms, and expectations for firewall management, such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) guidelines, the Center for Internet Security (CIS) benchmarks, or the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) requirements . References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. What Is A Managed Security Service Provider (MSSP)? - Fortinet, What is a Firewall? - Definition from Techopedia, Firewall Administrator Job Description - Betterteam, What is a Firewall Log? - Definition from Techopedia, Firewall Log Management: Why It’s Important and How to Do It Right, How to Write a Service Level Agreement (SLA) for an MSSP, [Firewall Auditing: Best Practices for Security and Compliance], [Guidelines on Firewalls and Firewall Policy | CSRC], [CIS Firewall Benchmark - CIS], [PCI DSS and Firewalls - PCI Security Standards Council]

A risk register is a document that contains information about potential cybersecurity risks that could threaten a project’s success, or even the business itself2. Therefore, it is important to protect the confidentiality and integrity of the risk register from unauthorized or inappropriate access, modification, or disclosure. One way to do this is to implement role-based access, which is a method of restricting access to the risk register based on the roles or responsibilities of the users1. This way, only authorized users who need to view or edit the risk register for legitimate purposes can do so, and the access rights can be revoked or modified as needed. This would most effectively reduce the potential for inappropriate exposure of vulnerabilities documented in the risk register. The other options are not as effective or feasible as option C, as they do not address the need to balance the security and availability of the risk register. Option A, limiting access to senior management only, would compromise the availability and usefulness of the risk register, as other stakeholders such as project managers, risk owners, or auditors may need to access the risk register for risk identification, analysis, response, or monitoring purposes3. Option B, encrypting the risk register, would enhance the security of the risk register, but it would not prevent authorized users from exposing the vulnerabilities to unauthorized parties, either intentionally or unintentionally. Encryption also adds complexity and cost to the risk register management process, and may affect the performance or usability of the risk register4. Option D, requiring users to sign a confidentiality agreement, would rely on the compliance and ethics of the users, but it would not prevent or detect any breaches of the agreement. A confidentiality agreement also does not specify the access rights or roles of the users, and may not be legally enforceable in some cases5.

Continuous monitoring of key risk indicators (KRIs) will provide an early warning so that proactive action can be taken, because it helps to detect and measure the changes or trends in the risk level or performance, and to alert the risk owners and stakeholders when the risk exceeds the predefined thresholds or targets. A KRI is a metric or indicator that helps to monitor and evaluate the likelihood or impact of a risk, or the effectiveness or efficiency of a control. A KRI can be quantitative or qualitative, and can be derived from internal or external sources. Continuous monitoring is a process of collecting and analyzing data on a regular or real-time basis, to provide timely and relevant information for decision making or action taking. Continuous monitoring of KRIs will provide an early warning, as it helps to identify and address the risk issues or incidents before they escalate or cause significant damage or disruption. Ensuring that risk will not exceed the defined risk appetite of the organization, providing a snapshot of the risk profile, and ensuring that risk tolerance and risk appetite are aligned are all possible outcomes of continuous monitoring of KRIs, but they are not the best answer, as they do not reflect the main purpose and benefit of continuous monitoring of KRIs, which is to provide an early warning. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 97

The best metric to verify adherence to the policy that requires critical security patches to be deployed in production within three weeks of patch availability is the maximum time gap between patch availability and deployment, as it measures the longest duration that the organization takes to apply the patches, and ensures that it does not exceed the policy limit. The other options are not the best metrics, as they may not reflect the actual or optimal compliance with the policy, or may not be relevant or measurable for the policy, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

The primary objective of aggregating the impact of IT risk scenarios and reflecting the results in the enterprise risk register is to ensure IT risk impact can be compared to the IT risk appetite, as it enables the organization to measure and evaluate the overall level and exposure of the IT risk, and to align and prioritize the IT risk response and strategy with the organizational objectives and regulations. The other options are not the primary objectives, as they are more related to the communication, assignment, or assessment of the IT risk scenarios, respectively, rather than the aggregation or reflection of the IT risk scenarios. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

Social engineering exercises are simulations of real-world attacks that exploit human vulnerabilities, such as phishing, baiting, pretexting, or quid pro quo. Conducting social engineering exercises can help assess the risk associated with data loss due to human vulnerabilities by measuring the employees’ susceptibility to such attacks, their awareness of security policies and procedures, and their response to incidents. Reviewing password change history, performing periodic access recertifications, and reviewing the results of security awareness surveys are also useful, but they do not directly test the employees’ behavior and resilience in the face of social engineering attacks.

Risk mitigation is most effective when the residual risk is optimized, as it means that the risk exposure and impact have been reduced to the level that is aligned with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization, and that the risk response is cost-effective and optimal. The other options are not the factors that determine the effectiveness of risk mitigation, as they are more related to the types or sources of risk, respectively, rather than the level or outcome of risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

 The best course of action for a risk practitioner upon learning that a control under internal review may no longer be necessary is to obtain approval to retire the control. This will help to ensure that the control is removed in a controlled and documented manner, and that the relevant stakeholders are informed and agree with the decision. Retiring unnecessary controls can also help to optimize the control environment, reduce costs and complexity, and improve efficiency and performance. Updating the status of the control as obsolete, consulting the internal auditor for a second opinion, and verifying the effectiveness of the original mitigation plan are not the best courses of action, as they may not address the root cause of the control’s obsolescence, and may delay or complicate the control retirement process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.2, page 1071

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 649.

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures the level of risk exposure or the likelihood of a risk event1. A KRI threshold is a predefined value or range that triggers an alert or action when the KRI reaches or exceeds it2. A data leakage incident is an unauthorized or accidental exposure of sensitive or confidential data to external parties3.

When a KRI threshold reaches the alert level, indicating that data leakage incidents are highly probable, the risk practitioner’s first course of action should be to review the incident handling procedures. Incident handling procedures are the plans and actions to be taken in the event of a data breach or security incident, such as data leakage4. Reviewing the incident handling procedures can help the risk practitioner to:

• Verify the roles and responsibilities of the incident response team and other stakeholders
• Confirm the communication and escalation channels and protocols
• Identify the tools and resources available for incident detection, containment, analysis, eradication, recovery, and reporting
• Evaluate the readiness and preparedness of the organization to respond to a data leakage incident
• Update or revise the procedures as needed to reflect the current situation and risk level

Reviewing the incident handling procedures can help the risk practitioner to ensure that the organization can respond to a data leakage incident effectively and efficiently, minimizing the potential or expected impact on the organization’s operations, reputation, or objectives.

The other options are not the first course of action for the risk practitioner, although they may be relevant or necessary at later stages of the risk management process. Updating the KRI threshold, which means adjusting the value or range that triggers an alert or action, may be appropriate if the KRI threshold is too high or too low, but it does not address the imminent risk of data leakage or the response plan. Recommending additional controls, which means suggesting new or improved measures to prevent, detect, or mitigate data leakage, may be useful for reducing the risk exposure or impact, but it does not ensure that the organization is ready or capable to handle a data leakage incident. Performing a root cause analysis, which means finding and identifying the underlying factors that contributed to the risk event, may be helpful for learning from the incident and improving the risk management strategy, but it is usually done after the incident has occurred and resolved, not before.

References = Key Risk Indicators: Definition, Examples, and Best Practices, KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva, What is Data Leakage? Definition, Causes, and Prevention, Incident Response Planning: Best Practices for Businesses

Risk treatment is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate risk response strategy and actions to address the identified risks. Risk treatment can involve different strategies, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Risk owner is the person or group who has the authority and accountability to manage the risk and its response. Risk owner is accountable for risk treatment, as they are responsible for deciding, approving, and executing the risk treatment plan, and for monitoring and reporting the results and outcomes of the risk treatment. The other options are not accountable for risk treatment, as they have different roles or responsibilities in the risk management process:

• Enterprise risk management team is the group of risk managers and practitioners who support the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provide guidance and direction to the risk owners and stakeholders. Enterprise risk management team may advise or assist the risk owner in risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment.
• Risk mitigation manager is the person who designs, implements, and monitors the risk mitigation actions or measures that reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk to an acceptable level, such as controls, policies, or procedures. Risk mitigation manager may advise or assist the risk owner in risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment.
• Business process owner is the stakeholder who is responsible for the business process that is supported by the IT system or application, such as the CRM system. Business process owner may be affected by or contribute to the risk, and may be involved in the risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment, unless they are also the risk owner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.1, pp. 95-96.

Avoiding the risk means eliminating the source of the risk or changing the likelihood or impact to zero. In this case, the source of the risk is the collection of customers’ personally identifiable information (Pll), which could be exposed to unauthorized parties and result in severe fines. Therefore, the best action to avoid the risk is to modify the business processes to stop collecting Pll, as this would eliminate the possibility of data leakage and the associated consequences. The other options are not as effective as modifying the business processes, because they do not avoid the risk, but rather mitigate or transfer the risk, as explained below:

• A. Reduce retention periods for Pll data is a mitigation action, as it reduces the impact of the risk by minimizing the amount of data that could be leaked and the duration of exposure.
• B. Move Pll to a highly-secured outsourced site is a transfer action, as it shifts the responsibility of protecting the data to a third party, but does not eliminate the risk of data leakage.
• D. Implement strong encryption for Pll is a mitigation action, as it reduces the likelihood of the risk by making the data unreadable to unauthorized parties, but does not eliminate the risk of data leakage. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 40.

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

• Determining which departments contribute most to risk means that the risk practitioner evaluates the degree of involvement or exposure of each department to the risk. This may not be a reliable or consistent way to identify the owner for each risk scenario, as the risk may span across multiple departments, or the department may not have the authority or accountability to manage the risk.
• Allocating responsibility for risk factors equally to asset owners means that the risk practitioner assigns the same level of responsibility to each person or group who owns an asset that is affected by or contributes to the risk. An asset is a resource that has value for the enterprise, such as hardware, software, data, or people. This may not be a fair or effective way to identify the owner for each risk scenario, as the asset owners may have different levels of involvement or exposure to the risk, or may not have the authority or accountability to manage the risk.
• Determining resource dependency of assets means that the risk practitioner analyzes the relationship and interdependence of the assets that are affected by or contribute to the risk. This may help to identify the potential impact or likelihood of the risk, but it does not directly help to identify the owner for each risk scenario, as the resource dependency may not reflect the authority or accountability to manage the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.1, pp. 95-96.

According to the 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.

An IT policy is a document that defines the rules, standards, and procedures for the use, management, and security of IT resources within an organization. An IT policy should be aligned to the business requirements, which are the needs, expectations, and objectives of the business stakeholders, such as customers, employees, managers, partners, regulators, etc. An IT policy that is aligned to the business requirements can help support the business strategy, improve the business performance, and enhance the business value. A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that measures the achievement of a specific goal or objective. A KPI should be relevant, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound. The best KPI for determining how well an IT policy is aligned to the business requirements is the number of exceptions to the policy. An exception to the policy is a deviation or violation of the policy rules, standards, or procedures, which may be intentional or unintentional, authorized or unauthorized, justified or unjustified. The number of exceptions to the policy can indicate how well the policy is understood, communicated, implemented, and enforced within the organization. The number of exceptions to the policy can also indicate how well the policy reflects the current and future business needs and expectations, and how flexible and adaptable the policy is to the changing business environment. A low number of exceptions to the policy can suggest that the policy is well aligned to the business requirements, while a high number of exceptions to the policy can suggest that the policy is misaligned or outdated, and may need to be reviewed or revised. References = Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Definition, Types, and Examples, Business KPIs: 5 important characteristics to be effective, What is a KPI? How To Choose the Best KPIs for Your Business - HubSpot Blog.

• Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks.
• Reviewing KRIs is the most helpful way to determine the effectiveness of an organization’s IT risk mitigation efforts. This means that the organization monitors and evaluates the actual results and outcomes of the risk responses, compares them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identifies any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and reports them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.
• The other options are not the most helpful ways to determine the effectiveness of an organization’s IT risk mitigation efforts. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

• Risk IT Framework, page 15
• Information Technology & Security, page 9
• Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

 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 also includes information about the risk responses, which are the actions taken or planned to mitigate or eliminate the risks2. Therefore, a risk register provides the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it shows the status and progress of the risk responses, the results and outcomes of the risk responses, and the feedback and lessons learned from the risk responses3. A risk policy review is not the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it does not provide specific information on the risk responses. A risk policy review is a process that involves checking and verifying that the organization’s risk management policies are up to date, relevant, and effective4. A risk policy review can help to identify and address any gaps or issues in the risk management policies, but it does not show the details and performance of the risk responses. A business impact analysis (BIA) is not the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it does not provide specific information on the risk responses. A BIA is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential effects of a disruption on the critical functions and processes of an organization5. A BIA can help to forecast the impacts of a risk event, but it does not show the actions and outcomes of the risk responses. A control catalog is not the best evidence that risk responses have been executed according to their risk action plans, as it does not provide specific information on the risk responses. A control catalog is a document that lists and describes the controls that are implemented or planned to manage the risks within an organization6. A control catalog can help to document and communicate the controls, but it does not show the status and results of the risk responses. References = 1: Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana2: Risk Response Strategy and Contingency Plans - ProjectManagement.com3: Risk Register: Examples, Benefits, and Best Practices4: A brief guide to assessing risks and controls | ACCA Global5: Using Business Impact Analysis to Inform Risk Prioritization and Response6: [Control Catalogue - ISACA]

 Changes in methods used to calculate probability present the greatest challenge for an IT risk practitioner who wants to report on trends in historical IT risk levels, as they may introduce inconsistency and incomparability in the risk assessment results over time. Probability is a key factor in determining the level and priority of IT risks, and different methods may produce different values for the same risk scenario. For example, some methods may use historical data, expert judgment, or simulation techniques to estimate the likelihood of a risk event. If the methods used to calculate probability change frequently or vary across different business units or processes, the IT risk practitioner may face difficulty in aggregating, normalizing, and reporting the risk levels and trends. The other options are not the greatest challenges for reporting on trends in historical IT risk levels, although they may pose some difficulties or limitations. Qualitative measures for potential loss events are subjective and imprecise, but they can still provide a relative ranking of risks and their impacts. Changes in owners for identified IT risk scenarios may affect the accountability and responsibility for managing the risks, but they do not necessarily affect the risk levels or trends. Frequent use of risk acceptance as a treatment option may indicate a high risk appetite or tolerance, but it does not prevent the IT risk practitioner from reporting on the risk levels or trends. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 181.

The best action for the risk practitioner to take when business areas within an organization have engaged various cloud service providers directly without assistance from the IT department is to recommend a risk assessment be conducted. A risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks associated with the use of cloud services, such as financial, privacy, compliance, security, performance, quality, and technical risks12. A risk assessment can help to determine the current and potential risk exposure and impact of the cloud services, as well as the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing or proposed controls. A risk assessment can also help to prioritize the risks and to develop and implement appropriate risk response strategies and plans, such as risk avoidance, reduction, sharing, or acceptance. Recommending a risk assessment is the best action, because it can provide valuable information and guidance to the business areas and the IT department for managing the cloud services in a consistent, effective, and efficient manner, and for aligning the cloud services with the organizational objectives, strategy, and risk appetite. The other options are not the best action, although they may be related or subsequent steps in the risk management process. Recommending the IT department remove access to the cloud services is a drastic and impractical action, as it may disrupt the business operations and services, and it may not address the underlying causes or drivers of the cloud service adoption. Engaging with the business area managers to review controls applied is a useful and collaborative action, as it can help to understand and evaluate the current state and practices of the cloud service usage, and to identify and address any gaps or issues in the control environment. However, this action should be based on or supported by a risk assessment, rather than preceding or replacing it. Escalating to the risk committee is a reporting and communication action, as it can help to inform and involve the senior management and other stakeholders in the risk management process, and to obtain their support and approval for the risk response actions. However, this action should be done after or along with a risk assessment, rather than before or instead of it. References = Best Practices to Manage Risks in the Cloud - ISACA, Cloud Risk Management - PwC UK

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 be feasible, 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

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.

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, their sources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences, as well as the existing and planned controls and responses4. 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 of compliance 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.

 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

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.

The first step in assessing the current risk level of data loss is to identify where the sensitive data is stored, such as servers, databases, laptops, mobile devices, etc. This will help to determine the scope and boundaries of the risk assessment, as well as the potential exposure and impact of data loss. Identifying staff members who have access to the data, risk scenarios and owners, and existing controls are important steps, but they should be done after identifying the data locations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.1, page 51.

Personally identifiable information (PII) is any information that can be used to identify, contact, or locate an individual, such as name, address, phone number, email, social security number, etc1. PII is subject to various laws and regulations that aim to protect the privacy and security of individuals’ data1. Organizations that collect, store, process, or transmit PII have a responsibility to safeguard it from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction1.

One of the best practices for protecting PII is to implement access controls, which are mechanisms that restrict access to PII based on the principle of least privilege2. Access controls ensure that only authorized personnel who have a legitimate need to access PII can do so, and that they can only perform the actions that are necessary for their roles and responsibilities2. Access controls can be implemented at different levels, such as network, system, application, or data level, and can use various methods, such as passwords, tokens, biometrics, encryption, etc2.

If an organization’s shared drive contains PII that can be accessed by all personnel, this poses a high risk of data breach, theft, loss, or misuse, which could result in legal, financial, reputational, or operational consequences for the organization and the individuals whose data is compromised3. Therefore, the most effective risk response is to protect the sensitive information with access controls, such as:

• Classify the PII according to its sensitivity and impact level, and assign appropriate labels and permissions to the data files and folders2.
• Restrict access to the shared drive to only those personnel who have a valid business reason to access the PII, and grant them the minimum level of access required to perform their tasks2.
• Implement strong authentication and authorization mechanisms, such as multifactor authentication, role-based access control, or attribute-based access control, to verify the identity and privileges of the users who access the shared drive2.
• Encrypt the PII stored on the shared drive, and use secure protocols and channels to transmit the data over the network2.
• Monitor and audit the access and activities on the shared drive, and generate logs and reports to detect and respond to any unauthorized or anomalous events2.

The other options are not as effective as access controls, because they do not directly address the root cause of the risk, which is the lack of access restrictions on the shared drive. Implementing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution, which is a tool that monitors and prevents the leakage of sensitive data, may help to detect and block some unauthorized data transfers, but it does not prevent unauthorized access or viewing of the PII on the shared drive4. Re-communicating the data protection policy, which is a document that defines the rules and responsibilities for handling PII, may help to raise awareness and compliance among the personnel, but it does not enforce or verify the actual implementation of the policy. Implementing a data encryption solution, which is a technique that transforms the PII into an unreadable format, may help to protect the confidentiality of the data, but it does not prevent unauthorized access or modification of the data, and it may introduce additional complexity and overhead to the data management process.

References = Guide to Protecting the Confidentiality of Personally Identifiable Information (PII), Best Practices for Protecting PII, How to Secure Personally Identifiable Information against Loss or Compromise, Data Loss Prevention (DLP) | Microsoft 365 security, [Protecting Personal Information: A Guide for Business], [Encryption - Wikipedia]

 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.

According to the Operational Risk: Overview, Importance, and Examples article, operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people, and systems. One of the factors that can increase operational risk is the complexity of IT infrastructure, which refers to the number, variety, and interdependence of IT components, such as hardware, software, networks, and data. A complex IT infrastructure can pose challenges for IT management, such as increased costs, reduced performance, lower reliability, higher vulnerability, and more difficulty in troubleshooting and maintenance. Therefore, minimizing the complexity of IT infrastructure can help reduce IT operational risk, as it can simplify IT operations, improve IT efficiency and effectiveness, enhance IT security and resilience, and facilitate IT innovation and adaptation. References = Operational Risk: Overview, Importance, and Examples

The annualized loss expectancy (ALE) method of risk analysis is a quantitative method that estimates the expected monetary loss that can result from a risk over a one year period. The ALE is calculated by multiplying the single loss expectancy (SLE), which is the monetary loss from a single occurrence of a risk, by the annualized rate of occurrence (ARO), which is the frequency of the risk occurring in a year. The ALE can be used in a cost-benefit analysis to compare the cost of implementing a control or a risk response with the expected benefit of reducing the loss. The ALE can help to justify the investment in risk management and to prioritize the risks based on their financial impact. The other options are not accurate descriptions of the ALE method of risk analysis, as they involve different aspects or methods of risk analysis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2.1, pp. 60-61.

• A payroll manager discovers that fields in certain payroll reports have been modified without authorization. This indicates that there is a risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction of sensitive data, such as employee information, payroll records, tax returns, etc.
• A control weakness that could have contributed most to this problem is that the programmer had access to the production programs. This means that the programmer could potentially alter the source code or configuration of the payroll software without proper authorization or approval.
• The other options are not control weaknesses that could have contributed most to this problem. They are either irrelevant or less likely to cause unauthorized changes in the payroll software.

The references for this answer are:

• Risk IT Framework, page 12
• Information Technology & Security, page 6
• Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 4

The most effective way to limit the impact of a ransomware attack is to have data backups. Data backups are copies of the data that are stored in a separate location or device, and can be used to restore the data in case of a loss or corruption. Data backups can help to recover the data that is encrypted or deleted by the ransomware, and to avoid paying the ransom to the attackers. Data backups also help to reduce the downtime and disruption caused by the ransomware attack, and to maintain the business continuity and availability of the data. Cyber insurance, cryptocurrency reserve, and end user training are not the most effective ways to limit the impact of a ransomware attack, as they may not prevent or recover the data loss, and may incur additional costs or risks for the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.1.1.1, page 2281

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 657.

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.

A control assessment is the process of evaluating the design and effectiveness of controls that are implemented to mitigate risks. A control assessment can help identify the root causes of data loss, the gaps in the existing controls, and the potential solutions to improve the control environment. A control assessment should be conducted after identifying a high probability of data loss in a system, as it can provide valuable information for risk response and reporting. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.2: Control Assessment, p. 147-149.

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 best time to evaluate current control effectiveness when implementing an IT risk management program is during the risk assessment, as it involves measuring and testing the performance and adequacy of the existing controls, and identifying any control gaps or deficiencies that may affect the risk level and response. Before defining a framework, when evaluating risk response, and when updating the risk register are not the best times, as they are more related to the design, selection, or reporting of the controls, respectively, rather than the evaluation of the control effectiveness. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

Involve the development team in planning is the best recommendation to help reduce IT risk associated with scheduling overruns when starting a new application development project. This is because involving the development team in planning can help ensure that the project scope, requirements, resources, and timeline are realistic, feasible, and agreed upon by all stakeholders. It can also help improve the communication, collaboration, and commitment of the development team, as well as identify and mitigate potential risks and issues early in the project life cycle. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk identification techniques for IT projects is to involve the project team and other relevant parties in the risk assessment process1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, involving the development team in planning is the correct answer to this question2.

Implementing a tool to track the development team’s deliverables, reviewing the software development life cycle, and assigning more developers to the project team are not the best recommendations to help reduce IT risk associated with scheduling overruns. These are possible actions that can be taken during or after the planning phase, but they do not address the root cause of the risk, which is the lack of involvement of the development team in planning. Implementing a tool to track the development team’s deliverables can help monitor the project progress and performance, but it does not guarantee that the deliverables are aligned with the project objectives and expectations. Reviewing the software development life cycle can help ensure that the project follows a structured and standardized process, but it does not account for the specific needs and challenges of the project. Assigning more developers to the project team can help increase the project capacity and productivity, but it can also introduce new risks such as coordination, communication, and quality issues.

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

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

Data encryption is the best method to protect organizational data within a production cloud environment, as it ensures the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data. Data encryption is the process of transforming data into an unreadable format using a secret key or algorithm, so that only authorized parties can access and decrypt the data. Data encryption can protect data at rest (stored in the cloud) and data in transit (transferred over the network) from unauthorized access, modification, or deletion by malicious actors or accidental errors. Data encryption can also help organizations comply with legal, regulatory, and contractual requirements for data protection and privacy, such as GDPR, CCPA, and PCI DSS.

References:

•The Complexity Conundrum: Simplifying Data Security1

•Practical Data Security and Privacy for GDPR and CCPA2

 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 of the 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.

According to the Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses. Residual risk is most commonly compared against the risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives. By comparing the residual risk with the risk appetite, the organization can determine if the risk response is adequate and effective, or if additional actions are needed to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Residual risk should be monitored and reported regularly to ensure that it stays within the risk appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, Page 222. A Comprehensive Guide to Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance

The observation that would be of GREATEST concern to a risk practitioner reviewing the implementation status of management action plans is that management has not begun the implementation, because it indicates that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored, and that the risks are not being addressed or mitigated. The lack of implementation may also imply that the management action plans are not realistic, feasible, or aligned with the enterprise’s strategy and objectives. The other options are not as concerning as the lack of implementation, because:

• Option A: Management has not determined a final implementation date is a concern, but not the greatest one, because it may affect the timely completion and delivery of the management action plans, but it does not necessarily mean that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored.
• Option B: Management has not completed an early mitigation milestone is a concern, but not the greatest one, because it may indicate a delay or deviation in the progress and performance of the management action plans, but it does not necessarily mean that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored.
• Option C: Management has not secured resources for mitigation activities is a concern, but not the greatest one, because it may affect the quality and effectiveness of the management action plans, but it does not necessarily mean that the management action plans are not being executed or monitored. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 123.

A spear phishing attack is a type of cyberattack that targets a specific individual or organization with a fraudulent email that appears to be from a trusted source, and attempts to trick the recipient into clicking a malicious link, opening a malicious attachment, or providing sensitive information. A spear phishing attack can compromise the security, confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the information systems and data of the individual or organization. The most effective way to mitigate the risk associated with spear phishing attacks is to implement a security awareness program, which is a program that educates and trains the employees and stakeholders of the organization about the security policies, procedures, and best practices, and the potential threats and risks that may affect the organization. A security awareness program can help to prevent or reduce the success of spear phishing attacks, as it can increase the knowledge and skills of the employees and stakeholders to recognize and avoid the fraudulent emails, and to report and respond to any suspicious or malicious activities. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 181.

An independent review is typically sought to provide an objective assessment of the IT risk management program, ensuring that it aligns with the organization’s overall strategy and objectives. The reviewer can identify areas where the program may not be effectively addressing the organization’s strategic goals or where improvements can be made to better manage IT risks.

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

References:

•ISACA, Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, 2019, p. 761

•ISACA, IT Business Continuity/Disaster Recovery Audit Program, 2021, p. 52

Updating the risk likelihood in the risk register is appropriate when an improved control, such as an automated interface, is implemented. This change affects the probability of the risk occurring, thus reflecting the enhanced control environment.

The vendor must host data in a specific geographic location to ensure that the data is protected by the applicable data protection laws of the EU or the country where the data originates. This is especially important for SaaS customers who transfer personal data from the EU to third countries, as they need to comply with the GDPR and the new Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) that regulate such transfers. The vendor must also provide adequate security measures and guarantees to protect the data from unauthorized access, disclosure, or loss. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: IT Risk Mitigation, Section 5.3: IT Risk Mitigation Strategies and Approaches, Page 253; Data Protection – New EU Standard Contractual Clauses - Bodle Law.

The most important characteristic of a key risk indicator (KRI) to enable decision-making is illustrating changes in risk trends, as it provides a clear and timely indication of the direction and magnitude of the risk level and exposure, and enables the stakeholders to take proactive and appropriate actions to address the risk. The other options are not the most important characteristics, as they are more related to the monitoring, measurement, or identification of the risk, respectively, rather than the illustration of the risk trends. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

The primary concern when IT decides to develop an in-house replacement application for a critical business application is that the business process owner is not an active participant. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for the business process that is supported by the application, and who understands the business requirements, objectives, and expectations of the application. The business process owner should be involved in all stages of the application development lifecycle, from planning, analysis, design, testing, implementation, to maintenance, to ensure that the application meets the business needs and delivers value. Without the active participation of the business process owner, the application development project may face risks such as scope creep, miscommunication, user dissatisfaction, poor quality, or failure.

References:

•ISACA, Auditing IT Risk Associated With Change Management and Application Development1

•ISACA, Auditing Applications, Part 12

A risk awareness program is a set of activities that aim to educate and inform employees about the organization’s risk culture, policies, and procedures. A risk awareness program can help improve an organization’s risk culture by enhancing the employees’ understanding of risk, their roles and responsibilities in risk management, and the benefits of risk mitigation. A risk awareness program can also foster a culture of openness, trust, and collaboration among employees, managers, and stakeholders, which can improve the organization’s risk performance and resilience.

Maintaining a documented risk register, rewarding employees for reporting security incidents, and allocating resources for risk remediation are also important aspects of risk management, but they do not directly address the organization’s risk culture, which is the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes that influence how risk is perceived and handled within the organization.

The primary objective of risk management is to achieve business objectives, as risk management involves identifying, assessing, responding, and monitoring the risks that may affect the desired outcomes and performance of the organization, and aligning them with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. Identifying and analyzing risk, minimizing business disruptions, and identifying threats and vulnerabilities are not the primary objectives, as they are more related to the process, outcome, or source of risk management, respectively, rather than the purpose or value of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

The source that provides the most reliable evidence to support conclusions after completing an information systems controls assessment is the information generated by the systems, as it reflects the actual and objective data and results of the system operations and performance, and can be verified and tested against the control objectives and criteria. The other options are not the most reliable sources, as they may be subjective, biased, or incomplete, and may not reflect the actual or current state of the system controls, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

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

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures the exposure to a given risk at a particular time. A threshold is a level or point that triggers an action or a warning when a KRI reaches or exceeds it. Therefore, the most likely cause of a KRI exceeding a threshold is the occurrence of specific events that increase the likelihood or impact of the risk. For example, a KRI for cyber risk could be the number of phishing attempts per month, and a threshold could be 10. If more than 10 phishing attempts occur in a month, the KRI would exceed the threshold and indicate a higher level of cyber risk.

References

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva

•Key risk indicators (KRIs) definition - Risk.net

The second line of defense is responsible for challenging the risk decision making of the first line of defense, which is the business process owners and managers. The second line of defense also provides oversight, guidance, and support to the first line of defense in implementing and maintaining effective risk management practices. The second line of defense includes functions such as risk management, compliance, quality assurance, and internal audit. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: IT Risk Management Roles and Responsibilities, Page 14.

Reporting the activity to the supervisor is the first thing that the risk practitioner should do when learning that a risk owner has been accepting gifts from a supplier of IT products. This is because accepting gifts from a supplier of IT products can create a conflict of interest, compromise the integrity and objectivity of the risk owner, and violate the organizational ethics policies. Reporting the activity to the supervisor can help ensure that the issue is escalated to the appropriate authority, investigated, and resolved in a timely and transparent manner. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk response techniques is to report the risk to the relevant stakeholders, such as the supervisor1. According to the web search results, reporting the activity to the supervisor is a common and recommended action when encountering a potential ethical violation in the workplace

Assessing risk scenarios is the starting point when performing a risk analysis for an asset. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could cause harm or loss to an asset. Assessing risk scenarios involves identifying the sources and causes of risk, the potential impacts and consequences of risk, and the likelihood and frequency of risk occurrence. Assessing risk scenarios can help establish the risk context, scope, and criteria for the asset, and provide the basis for further risk analysis steps, such as evaluating threats, assessing controls, and updating the risk register. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, assessing risk scenarios is the first step in the IT risk assessment process1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, assessing risk scenarios is the correct answer to this question

Introducing recovery control procedures is the best way to address the risk of an outage of the fraud detection system for an online payment processor, because it helps to restore the functionality and availability of the system as quickly and effectively as possible, and to minimize the impact and disruption to the business operations and customers. A fraud detection system is a system that monitors and analyzes the transactions and activities of an online payment processor, and detects and prevents any fraudulent or suspicious behavior, such as identity theft, money laundering, or chargebacks. An outage is a situation where the system is unavailable or inaccessible, due to factors such as technical failure, human error, or malicious attack. An outage of the fraud detection system may have severe consequences for the online payment processor, such as financial losses, reputational damage, customer dissatisfaction, or regulatory penalties. A recovery control procedure is a procedure that defines the steps and actions to be taken to recover the system from an outage, such as identifying the root cause, isolating the affected components, restoring the data and functionality, testing the system, and reporting the incident. Introducing recovery control procedures is the best way to address the risk, as it helps to ensure that the system is back online and operational as soon as possible, and that the risk exposure and impact are reduced and contained. Implementing continuous control monitoring, communicating the risk to management, and documenting a risk response plan are all possible ways to address the risk, but they are not the best way, as they do not directly address the recovery of the system from an outage, and they may not be sufficient or effective to mitigate the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 208

Ensuring segregation of duties are implemented within key systems or processes is the best strategy employed by risk management to prevent internal fraud, because it reduces the opportunity for a single person to manipulate or misuse the system or process for fraudulent purposes. Segregation of duties is a control that assigns different roles and responsibilities to different individuals, such that no one person can perform all the steps of a transaction or process. Requiring control owners to conduct an annual control certification, conducting regular internal and external audits on the systems supporting financial reporting, and requiring the information security officer to review unresolved incidents are all useful strategies to detect or deter internal fraud, but they are not the best strategy to prevent it, as they do not directly address the root cause of fraud. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, page 197

The effectiveness of a control refers to how well it achieves its intended purpose of reducing the risk of material misstatement or error in a process or activity2. One way to measure the effectiveness of a control is to monitor the number of control deviations detected, which are instances where the control fails to operate as designed or is not applied consistently or correctly3. A high number of control deviations indicates a low effectiveness of the control, while a low number of control deviations indicates a high effectiveness of the control. The other options are not good indicators of the effectiveness of a control, as they do not directly relate to the performance or outcome of the control. The scope of the control coverage, the number of exceptions granted, and the number of steps necessary to operate the process are more relevant to the design or efficiency of the control, not its effectiveness

The most useful tool for measuring the existing risk management process against a desired state is the capability maturity model, as it provides a structured and standardized way to assess the current and target levels of maturity, performance, and effectiveness of the risk management process, and to identify the gaps and improvement opportunities. The balanced scorecard, the risk management framework, and the risk scenario analysis are not the most useful tools, as they are more related to the evaluation, design, or identification of the risk management process, respectively, rather than the measurement of the risk management process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

•External sources of emerging threats are sources that provide information about the latest cyberattacks, hacking techniques, malware, and vulnerabilities that can affect an organization’s IT systems and data. Examples of external sources are security blogs, forums, newsletters, reports, and alerts from reputable organizations such as ISACA, Imperva, Aura, and BitSight123.

•The most useful information an organization can obtain from external sources is the indicators for detecting the presence of threats. Indicators are observable signs or patterns that can help identify, prevent, or mitigate cyberattacks. Examples of indicators are IP addresses, domain names, file hashes, network traffic, system logs, and user behavior4.

•Indicators for detecting the presence of threats are more useful than the other options because they can help an organization to:

oMonitor and analyze its IT environment for any suspicious or malicious activity

oRespond quickly and effectively to any potential or actual incidents

oReduce the impact and damage of cyberattacks

oImprove its security posture and resilience

•Solutions for eradicating emerging threats are not the most useful information because they may not be applicable or effective for every organization, depending on its specific context, needs, and resources. Moreover, solutions may not be available or known for some new or sophisticated threats.

•Cost to mitigate the risk resulting from threats is not the most useful information because it does not help an organization to identify or prevent cyberattacks. Cost is only one factor to consider when deciding how to manage IT risk, and it may not reflect the true value or impact of the threats.

•Source and identity of attackers are not the most useful information because they may not be relevant or accurate for every organization. Source and identity of attackers are often difficult to trace or verify, and they may not affect the organization’s risk level or response strategy.

References =

•Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Risk Identification, pp. 83-84

•Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 12 Month Subscription, ISACA, 2020, Question ID: 100000

Capacity management is crucial when transitioning employees to remote work during a crisis. It involves ensuring that the IT infrastructure can handle increased loads and that resources are available to support remote operations effectively.

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that measures the achievement of a specific goal or objective. A KPI for the internal control that requires all access for employees be removed within 15 days of their termination date could be the percentage of employees whose access was removed within the specified time frame. This KPI would help the risk practitioner to monitor the compliance and effectiveness of the control and identify any deviations or issues.

References

•Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) - ISACA

•How to Improve Risk Awareness in the Workplace [+ Template] - AlertMedia

•[SITXWHS

A vulnerability assessment is a process that identifies and quantifies vulnerabilities in a system. It is the most effective process to determine the relevance of threats for risk scenarios as it helps in identifying potential security threats and vulnerabilities, quantifying the seriousness of each, and prioritizing techniques to mitigate attack and protect IT resources1.

References

2Identifying and Estimating Cybersecurity Risk for Enterprise Risk Management

3Threat Modeling Process | OWASP Foundation

1Threat modeling explained: A process for anticipating cyber attacks

4Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment: A Guide - SafetyCulture

5How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA

 A change in the risk profile would be the most important information to communicate to stakeholders after an annual risk assessment is completed, as it indicates how the risk landscape of the organization has changed over time, and how it affects the achievement of the business goals and objectives. A decrease in threats, an increase in reported vulnerabilities, and an increase in identified risk scenarios are also important information, but they are not the most important, as they are specific aspects of the risk profile, and do not provide a holistic view of the risk exposure and appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

The next thing that the risk practitioner should do from a risk management perspective when the organization is considering the adoption of an aggressive business strategy to achieve desired growth is to identify new threats resulting from the new business strategy. A threat is a potential cause of an unwanted incident that may affect the achievement of the objectives. An aggressive business strategy is a strategy that involves pursuing high-risk, high-reward opportunities or initiatives to gain a competitive advantage or a significant market share. An aggressive business strategy may introduce new threats or increase the likelihood or impact of existing threats, such as market volatility, regulatory changes, customer dissatisfaction, or competitor retaliation. Therefore, the risk practitioner should identify the new threats resulting from the new business strategy, and assess their potential consequences and implications for the organization. The other options are not as immediate as identifying new threats resulting from the new business strategy, as they are related to the update, information, or measurement of the risk management process, not the identification or analysis of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

Peak bandwidth usage is the most helpful in defining an early-warning threshold associated with insufficient network bandwidth. Peak bandwidth usage is the maximum amount of data that is transferred over a network connection at a given time. It indicates the highest demand and stress on the network resources and capacity. By monitoring the peak bandwidth usage, the organization can identify the potential bottlenecks, slowdowns, and disruptions that may occur due to insufficient network bandwidth. The organization can also plan and allocate the network bandwidth accordingly to meet the peak demand and avoid service degradation. The other options are not as helpful as peak bandwidth usage, as they do not reflect the actual or potential network performance issues that may arise due to insufficient network bandwidth. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.3: Key Risk Indicators, page 197.

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner with the use of a vulnerability scanning tool is the inaccurate reporting of results. A vulnerability scanning tool is a software that scans the network or system for known vulnerabilities and generates a report of the findings. However, the tool may produce false positives (reporting vulnerabilities that do not exist) or false negatives (missing vulnerabilities that do exist). This can lead to incorrect risk assessment, ineffective risk response, and wasted resources. Increased time to remediate vulnerabilities, increased number of vulnerabilities, and network performance degradation are other possible concerns, but they are not as critical as the inaccurate reporting of results. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, a cable lock is a physical security device that attaches a laptop to a fixed object, such as a desk or a wall, to prevent unauthorized removal or theft. A cable lock is the best option to reduce the probability of laptop theft, as it acts as a deterrent and a barrier for potential thieves. A cable lock also helps to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data stored on the laptop, as well as the laptop itself. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 253.

The most effective approach to prioritize risk scenarios is by assessing the impact to the strategic plan, because this will help to align the risk management process with the organization’s vision, mission, and goals. The strategic plan is the document that defines the organization’s direction, priorities, and objectives, and guides the allocation of resources and efforts. By assessing the impact to the strategic plan, the organization can determine which risk scenarios pose the greatest threat or opportunity to the achievement of the strategic objectives, and prioritize them accordingly. The other options are not as effective as assessing the impact to the strategic plan, because they do not directly relate to the organization’s specific context, needs, and expectations, as explained below:

• B. Aligning with industry best practices is an approach that involves following the standards, norms, and expectations for risk management that are established and followed by the peers or competitors in the same industry or sector. Aligning with industry best practices can help to benchmark and compare the organization’s risk management performance and maturity, and identify areas for improvement or innovation. However, this approach is not as effective as assessing the impact to the strategic plan, because it does not account for the organization’s unique and customized risk scenarios, which may differ from the industry average or standard.
• C. Soliciting input from risk management experts is an approach that involves seeking advice, guidance, or feedback from the professionals or specialists who have the knowledge, experience, or skills in risk management. Soliciting input from risk management experts can help to enhance the quality and validity of the risk analysis and evaluation, and provide insights and recommendations for risk mitigation. However, this approach is not as effective as assessing the impact to the strategic plan, because it does not reflect the organization’s risk appetite, preferences, and expectations, which may differ from the risk management experts’ opinions or perspectives.
• D. Evaluating the cost of risk response is an approach that involves estimating the resources and efforts required to implement the risk response strategies, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Evaluating the cost of risk response can help to optimize the risk management efficiency and effectiveness, and balance the potential benefits and costs of taking risks. However, this approach is not as effective as assessing the impact to the strategic plan, because it does not consider the potential consequences and outcomes of the risk scenarios, which may affect the organization’s performance and reputation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 45. The Ultimate Guide to Risk Prioritization - Hyperproof, Risk Prioritization: What Is It? [2021 Guide & Matrix] - ERM Software, What is Risk Prioritization | Centraleyes, Scenario Planning in Risk Management: Why It is Needed - SmartCompliance

The primary responsibility of senior management in risk management is to prioritize the risk scenarios based on severity. Risk scenarios are hypothetical events or situations that could affect the achievement of the objectives. Risk severity is a measure of the overall level of risk, based on the combination of the probability and impact of the risk scenario. Prioritizing the risk scenarios based on severity is the primary responsibility of senior management, because it helps to allocate the resources and actions to the most critical and urgent risks, and to align the risk management process with the organizational strategy and risk appetite. Senior management also has the authority and accountability to make the final decisions and approve the risk response plans for the prioritized risks. The other options are not the primary responsibility of senior management, although they may be involved or consulted in these activities. Bottom-up identification of emerging risks is a process of identifying and reporting the new or changing risks that may arise from the operational or tactical level of the organization. This is usually the responsibility of the risk owners or the risk practitioners, who have the knowledge and experience of the specific functions and processes. Categorization of risk scenarios against a standard taxonomy is a process of classifying and organizing the risk scenarios into predefined categories or groups, based on their nature, source, or impact. This is usually the responsibility of the risk analysts or the risk coordinators, who have the skills and tools to perform the risk analysis and assessment. Review of external loss data is a process of collecting and analyzing the data and information on the losses or incidents that occurred in other organizations or industries, due to similar or related risks. This is usually the responsibility of the risk researchers or the risk consultants, who have the access and expertise to obtain and interpret the external data and information. References = The Role of Executive Management in ERM - Corporate Compliance Insights, Guidelines on Risk Management Practices – Board and Senior Management, Risk Manager Job Description [+2023 TEMPLATE] - Workable

A risk response action plan is a document that specifies the actions to be taken to address the identified risks, the resources required, the timelines, the owners, and the expected outcomes. The risk response action plan should be aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance, and should be approved by the relevant stakeholders. The best way to ensure the implementation of an effective risk response action plan is to assign clear roles and responsibilities to the individuals or groups who will execute the actions, monitor the progress, and report the results. This will help to avoid confusion, ambiguity, duplication, or omission of tasks, and will ensure accountability and ownership of the risk responses. The other options are not as directly related to the implementation of the risk response action plan, although they may be involved in some aspects of it. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1.1, pp. 121-122.

 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 information to support risk decisions, such as selecting and implementing the appropriate risk response strategies. The best way to provide executive management with the best information to make risk decisions as a result of a risk assessment is to present a comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state. The desired state is the optimal level of risk exposure that the organization wants to achieve, based on its risk objectives, goals, and strategy. A comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state can help executive management understand the current and potential gap between the actual and target risk levels, and prioritize the most critical and relevant risks that need attention and action. A comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state can also help executive management evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing risk response, and identify the opportunities and challenges for improvement. A comparison of risk assessment results to the desired state can also help communicate and justify the risk decisions to other stakeholders, and obtain their feedback and approval. References = Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA, Risk Management Essentials: How to Develop a Risk Profile (TRN2-J07), Risk Response Strategies: Avoid, Transfer, Mitigate, Accept.

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 control becomes ineffective. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: Risk Register, pp. 69-711

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, and accountability of the process, but not the alignment and integration of the process. References = Assessing the Risk Management Process, p. 9-10.

The best input to assess the inherent risk impact of leakage of customer data is the number of customer records held. Inherent risk impact is a measure of the potential severity or consequence of a risk event, before considering the existing controls. Inherent risk impact can be based on quantitative or qualitative factors, such as financial, operational, reputational, or legal factors. The number of customer records held is the best input, because it directly reflects the amount and type of data that could be leaked, and the potential harm or loss that could result from the leakage. The number of customer records held can also help to estimate the probability and frequency of the leakage, as well as the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls. The more customer records the organization holds, the higher the inherent risk impact of leakage, and the more controls the organization needs to implement and maintain. The other options are not the best input, although they may be related or influential to the inherent risk impact. The number of databases that host customer data is a measure of the complexity or diversity of the data storage and management systems, but it does not directly indicate the amount or type of data that could be leaked, or the potential harm or loss that could result from the leakage. The number of databases that host customer data may also vary depending on the design and configuration of the systems, which may not reflect the inherent risk impact. The number of encrypted customer databases is a measure of the security or protection of the data storage and management systems, but it is not an input to the inherent risk impact, rather it is an output or a result of the control implementation. The number of encrypted customer databases may also depend on the quality and reliability of the encryption methods and keys, which may not indicate the inherent risk impact. The number of staff members having access to customer data is a measure of the exposure or vulnerability of the data to internal threats, such as unauthorized or malicious actions by the staff members. The number of staff members having access to customer data can affect the inherent risk impact, but it is not the best input, as it does not account for the external threats, such as hackers or competitors, or the amount or type of data that could be leaked, or the potential harm or loss that could result from the leakage. References = What is Inherent Risk? You Could Be at Risk of a Data Breach | UpGuard, Data leakage: A data leak is an unintentional exposure of sensitive data on the internet. For example, an employee might upload customer data files to an unsecured server. Lack of encryption: This is the storing, sending, or transferring information without converting it into ciphertext first.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, impact assessment is the process of identifying and evaluating the potential effects of changes to IT services on the organization’s business objectives, processes, resources, and risks. Impact assessment is essential for ensuring that the changes are aligned with the organization’s strategy, goals, and risk appetite, and that the benefits of the changes outweigh the costs and risks. Impact assessment also helps to prioritize, plan, and implement the changes effectively and efficiently, and to monitor and measure the outcomes of the changes. Therefore, the most important factor for a risk practitioner to consider when evaluating plans for changes to IT services is the impact assessment of the change. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 224.

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

 A risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and status. A risk register can help manage and communicate risks throughout the risk management process. A risk register should be updated regularly to reflect the current state of risks and their responses. Due to a change in business processes, an identified risk scenario may no longer require mitigation, as the risk level may have decreased or the risk may have been eliminated. However, the risk should remain in the risk register, as the most important reason is to monitor for potential changes to the risk scenario. This means keeping track of the internal and external factors that may affect the risk scenario, such as new threats, vulnerabilities, opportunities, or controls. Monitoring for potential changes to the risk scenario can help identify and respond to any emerging or reoccurring risks, and ensure that the risk register is accurate and complete. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: Risk Register, p. 41-43.

 The interdependency of information systems means that the failure or disruption of one system can affect the performance or availability of other systems. Therefore, it is important to aggregate the results from multiple risk assessments on interdependent information systems to understand the overall impact to the organization. By aggregating the results, the risk manager can identify the potential cascading effects, the cumulative consequences, and the worst-case scenarios of interdependent risks. This can help the organization to prioritize the risks, allocate the resources, and implement the risk response strategies accordingly. The other options are not as important as the overall impact to the organization, because they do not capture the full extent of the interdependency of information systems. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.3, page 99.

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

A risk profile report is a document that summarizes the current status and trends of the risks that an organization faces, as well as the actions taken or planned to manage them1. A risk profile report is a useful tool for senior management to monitor and oversee the organization’s risk management performance and to make informed decisions and adjustments as needed2. One of the key components of a risk profile report is the key performance indicators (KPIs), which are metrics used to measure and evaluate the achievement of the organization’s objectives and strategies3. KPIs are aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and they have specific targets or benchmarks that indicate the desired level of performance4. Therefore, if the KPIs are outside of targets, it means that the organization is not meeting its objectives and strategies, and that there may be gaps or issues in the risk management process or the risk response actions. This is a cause for further action by senior management, as they need to investigate the root causes of the deviation, assess the impact and implications of the underperformance, and take corrective or preventive measures to improve the situation and bring the KPIs back to the targets. Incomplete KPI trend data, new KRIs, and lagging KRIs are not the most critical statements in a risk profile report that require further action by senior management, as they do not directly indicate a failure or a problem in the risk management performance or the achievement of the objectives and strategies. Incomplete KPI trend data means that there is missing or insufficient information on the historical or projected changes in the KPIs over time. This may affect the accuracy and reliability of the risk profile report, but it does not necessarily mean that the KPIs are outside of targets or that the objectives and strategies are not met. Senior management may need to request or obtain the complete KPI trend data, but this is not as urgent or important as addressing the KPIs that are outside of targets. New KRIs means that there are additional or revised metrics used to measure and monitor the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system within the organization. This may reflect the changes or updates in the risk environment, the risk appetite and tolerance, or the risk assessment methodology. However, new KRIs do not directly indicate a failure or a problem in the risk management performance or the achievement of the objectives and strategies. Senior management may need to review and approve the new KRIs, but this is not as urgent or important as addressing the KPIs that are outside of targets. Lagging KRIs means that there are metrics that measure and monitor the level of risk after a risk event has occurred or a risk response has been implemented. This may provide useful feedback and lessons learned for the risk management process, but it does not directly indicate a failure or a problem in the risk management performance or the achievement of the objectives and strategies. Senior management may need to analyze and evaluate the lagging KRIs, but this is not as urgent or important as addressing the KPIs that are outside of targets. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.3: Risk Reporting, pp. 201-205.

The MOST critical requirement to include in the contract is the confidentiality of customer data, because it is a legal and ethical obligation of the bank to protect the privacy and security of its customers’ personal and financial information. Outsourcing the statement printing function to an external service provider exposes the customer data to potential unauthorized access, disclosure, or misuse by the service provider or its sub-contractors. Therefore, the contract should specify the terms and conditions for the handling, storage, and disposal of the customer data, as well as the penalties for any breach of confidentiality. The other options are not as critical as the confidentiality of customer data, because:

• Option A: Monitoring of service costs is an important requirement to ensure that the service provider delivers the statement printing function within the agreed budget and scope, but it is not as critical as the confidentiality of customer data, which has legal and reputational implications for the bank.
• Option B: Provision of internal audit reports is a useful requirement to verify that the service provider complies with the internal and external standards and regulations for the statement printing function, but it is not as critical as the confidentiality of customer data, which is a core value of the bank and its customers.
• Option C: Notification of sub-contracting arrangements is a relevant requirement to ensure that the service provider does not delegate the statement printing function to another party without the bank’s consent and oversight, but it is not as critical as the confidentiality of customer data, which is the primary responsibility of the bank and its service provider. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 197.

 The greatest risk associated with the transition of a sensitive data backup solution from on-premise to a cloud service provider is inadequate data encryption. Data encryption is a key security measure that protects the confidentiality and integrity of data, especially when it is stored or transmitted over a network. If the data encryption is inadequate, the data backup solution may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, modification, or disclosure by malicious actors or third parties. This could result in data breaches, regulatory fines, reputational damage, or legal liabilities for the enterprise. More complex test restores, inadequate service level agreement (SLA) with the provider, and more complex incident response procedures are also potential risks associated with the transition, but they are not as great as inadequate data encryption. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.1, page 245.

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

The application risk profile should be updated when reviewing functional requirements. This will help to identify and assess the potential risks that may arise from the changes to the application, and to plan and implement appropriate risk responses. Updating the application risk profile at this stage will also help to ensure that the changes are aligned with the organization’s objectives, policies, and standards, and that they meet the stakeholders’ expectations and needs. Updating the application risk profile after user acceptance testing, upon release to production, or during backlog scheduling are not the best points to update the risk profile, as they may be too late or too early to capture the relevant risks and their impacts. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.1, page 511

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 655.

The BEST information when determining whether to accept residual risk of a critical system to be implemented is the potential business impacts are within acceptable levels, because it indicates that the residual risk, which is the risk that remains after the risk response actions, does not exceed the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization, and that it does not pose a significant threat or disruption to the business objectives and processes. The potential business impacts are the consequences or outcomes of the residual risk on the organization’s performance, reputation, and value. The other options are not as informative as the potential business impacts, because:

• Option A: Single loss expectancy (SLE) is a measure of the monetary loss that is expected from a single occurrence of a risk event, but it does not provide the best information when determining whether to accept residual risk, because it does not consider the frequency or probability of the risk event, or the qualitative aspects of the risk impact, such as customer satisfaction, employee morale, or regulatory compliance.
• Option B: Cost of the information system is a measure of the total expenditure that is required to acquire, develop, operate, and maintain the information system, but it does not provide the best information when determining whether to accept residual risk, because it does not reflect the value or benefit of the information system, or the risk exposure or variation that the information system may introduce or encounter.
• Option C: Availability of additional compensating controls is a measure of the alternative or supplementary controls that can be implemented to reduce the residual risk, but it does not provide the best information when determining whether to accept residual risk, because it does not indicate the effectiveness or efficiency of the compensating controls, or the cost-benefit analysis of implementing them. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 122.

The risk associated with data loss from a website which contains sensitive customer information is best owned by the business process owner, as they are ultimately responsible for the business objectives and outcomes that depend on the website. The business process owner should ensure that the website is adequately protected and that the customer data is handled in compliance with the relevant laws and regulations. The third-party website manager, IT security, and the compliance manager are all involved in managing the risk, but they are not the owners. The third-party website manager is responsible for the technical aspects of the website, such as hosting, maintenance, and performance. IT security is responsible for implementing and monitoring the security controls and policies for the website. The compliance manager is responsible for ensuring that the website meets the regulatory and contractual requirements. However, none of these roles have the authority or accountability to own the risk, as they are not directly affected by the business impact of the data loss. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 47.

• 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

 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 risk appetite 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 Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

Ineffective control implementation can result in increased risk exposure, reduced compliance, and diminished performance for the organization. Therefore, the most relevant information for stakeholders is the impact of ineffective control implementation on the business objectives, processes, and outcomes. The impact on business can include financial losses, reputational damage, operational inefficiencies, customer dissatisfaction, and legal liabilities. The other options are not as relevant as the impact on business, because they do not directly link the control effectiveness to the business value. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 128.

First-hand direct observation of the controls in operation is the best way to confirm the existence and operating effectiveness of information systems controls because it provides the auditor with the most reliable and persuasive evidence. Direct observation involves inspecting the physical and logical aspects of the controls, such as the hardware, software, network, data, procedures, and personnel involved in the information systems. Direct observation also allows the auditor to verify that the controls are functioning as intended, and to identify any deviations or weaknesses that may affect the reliability of the information systems. Direct observation can be performed by using various techniques, such as walkthroughs, inquiries, inspections, reperformance, and analytical procedures1. References = Auditing Standard No. 13, The Auditor’s Responses to the Risks of Material Misstatement, PCAOB, 20101

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given operational risk1. KRIs have upper and lower acceptable risk limits (warning thresholds) that trigger actions when exceeded2. These thresholds are based on the organization’s risk appetite or tolerance, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives3. Therefore, changes in risk appetite or tolerance would prompt changes in KRI thresholds, as the organization would need to adjust its risk monitoring and response accordingly. The other options are not the primary factors that would prompt changes in KRI thresholds, although they may have some influence on the risk management process. References = Risk IT Framework; IT Risk Resources; ISACA Risk Starter Kit; Key Risk Indicators; Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, threat impact analysis is the process of estimating and evaluating the potential effects of a threat event on the organization’s objectives, processes, resources, and risks. Threat impact analysis helps to quantify and qualify the severity and likelihood of the threat, and to identify the possible consequences and implications for the organization. Communicating the results of the threat impact analysis is the most effective way to improve stakeholders’ understanding of the effect of a potential threat, as it helps to inform and educate the stakeholders about the nature and magnitude of the threat, and to solicit their feedback and input for the risk response. Communicating the results of the threat impact analysis also helps to align the stakeholder expectations and preferences, and to facilitate risk-based decision making and action planning. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 208.

According to Wikipedia1, a maturity model is a framework for measuring an organization’s maturity, or that of a business function within an organization, with maturity being defined as a measurement of the ability of an organization for continuous improvement in a particular discipline. A maturity model will best indicate the effectiveness and efficiency of an organization or a business function, as it helps to evaluate how well they achieve their intended objectives with minimum resources, time, and cost. A maturity model also helps to identify and prioritize the areas and opportunities for improvement, and to establish and communicate the standards and best practices for the discipline. References = Wikipedia1

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 related and 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.

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 business process). 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?

Strategic decisions on risk management are the decisions that involve setting the direction, objectives, and priorities for risk management within an organization, as well as aligning them with the organization’s overall strategy, vision, and mission1. Strategic decisions on risk management also involve defining the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, which are the amount and level of risk that the organization is willing and able to accept to achieve its goals2. The responsibility for strategic decisions on risk management should belong to the executive management team, which is the group of senior leaders who have the authority and accountability for the organization’s performance and governance3. The executive management team has the best understanding of the organization’s strategic context, environment, and stakeholders, and can make informed and balanced decisions that consider the benefits and costs of risk-taking4. The executive management team also has the ability and responsibility to communicate and cascade the strategic decisions on risk management to the rest of the organization, and to monitor and evaluate their implementation and outcomes5. The chief information officer (CIO), the audit committee, and the business process owner are not the best choices for being responsible for strategic decisions on risk management, as they do not have the same level of authority and accountability as the executive management team. The CIO is the senior leader who oversees the organization’s information and technology strategy, resources, and systems6. The CIO may be involved in providing input and feedback to the executive management team on the strategic decisions on risk management, especially those related to IT risk, but they do not have the final say or the overall responsibility for them. The audit committee is a subcommittee of the board of directors that oversees the organization’s financial reporting, internal controls, and external audits7. The audit committee may be involved in reviewing and approving the strategic decisions on risk management, as well as ensuring their compliance with the relevant laws and standards, but they do not have the authority or the expertise to make or implement them. The business process owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for a business process that supports or enables the organization’s objectives and functions. The business process owner may be involved in executing and reporting on the strategic decisions on risk management, as well as identifying and mitigating the risks related to their business process, but they do not have the perspective or the influence to make or communicate them. References = 1: Strategic Risk Management: Complete Overview (With Examples)2: [Risk Appetite and Tolerance - ISACA] 3: [Senior Management - Definition, Roles and Responsibilities] 4: Stanford Strategic Decision and Risk Management | Stanford Online5: A 7-Step Process for Strategic Risk Management — RiskOptics - Reciprocity6: [Chief Information Officer (CIO) - Gartner IT Glossary] 7: [Audit Committee - Overview, Functions, and Responsibilities] : [Business Process Owner - Gartner IT Glossary] : [Business Process Owner - Roles and Responsibilities] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Concepts, pp. 17-19.]

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.

The primary reason to establish the root cause of an IT security incident is to avoid recurrence of the incident. By identifying and addressing the underlying cause of the incident, the organization can prevent or reduce the likelihood of similar incidents in the future. This can also help to improve the security posture and resilience of the organization. The other options are not the primary reason, but they may be secondary or tertiary reasons. Preparing a report for senior management is an important step in communicating the incident and its impact, but it does not address the root cause. Assigning responsibility and accountability for the incident is a way to ensure that the appropriate actions are taken to remediate the incident and prevent recurrence, but it is not the reason to establish the root cause. Updating the risk register is a part of the risk management process, but it does not necessarily prevent recurrence of the incident. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4: Risk Response and Reporting, Section 4.3: Incident Management, p. 223-224.

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

• A. Potential severity of impact is an output of the risk analysis process, as it is the result of estimating the consequences of a risk event on the organization’s objectives, assets, or processes. The potential severity of impact is influenced by the magnitude of loss, but also by other factors, such as the timing, duration, and scope of the risk event.
• C. Control deficiencies are an input of the risk analysis process, as they are the gaps or weaknesses in the existing controls that may increase the risk exposure or reduce the risk mitigation effectiveness. Control deficiencies are identified by comparing the current control environment with the desired control environment, and by evaluating the design and operation of the controls.
• D. Threats and vulnerabilities are inputs of the risk analysis process, as they are the sources and causes of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, assets, or processes. Threats are external or internal factors that have the potential to exploit the vulnerabilities, while vulnerabilities are internal or external weaknesses that increase the susceptibility to the threats. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 45. What is Risk Analysis? Process, Types, Examples & Methods, Risk Analysis Tutorial - The Process | solver, What is the goal of a risk assessment? - Creative Safety Supply

 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 levels or 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.

• Once a risk owner has decided to implement a control to mitigate risk, it is most important to develop a process for measuring and reporting control performance. This process helps to monitor and evaluate the actual results and outcomes of the control, compare them with the expected or desired objectives and standards, identify any gaps or issues that may affect the control’s effectiveness or efficiency, and report them to the relevant stakeholders for decision making or improvement actions.
• An alternate control design in case of failure of the identified control is a contingency plan that can be used to reduce the impact of a control failure or breakdown. It is not the most important thing to develop after implementing a control, but rather a backup option that can be activated when needed.
• A process for bypassing control procedures in case of exceptions is a mechanism that allows authorized users to override or circumvent a control in certain situations, such as emergencies, errors, or special requests. It is not the most important thing to develop after implementing a control, but rather a risk response that can be applied when necessary.
• Procedures to ensure the effectiveness of the control are the steps or actions that are required to implement, operate, and maintain the control in accordance with the risk owner’s expectations and requirements. They are not the most important thing to develop after implementing a control, but rather a part of the control design and implementation process.

The references for this answer are:

• Risk IT Framework, page 13
• Information Technology & Security, page 7
• Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 5

 The chief information officer (CIO) is the most likely person to be responsible for the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, because the CIO is the senior executive who oversees the information technology (IT) function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy, objectives, and operations. The CIO is also responsible for ensuring that the IT function delivers value, supports innovation, and manages IT risks effectively and efficiently. The CIO can coordinate the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy by communicating and collaborating with other business leaders, establishing and implementing IT governance frameworks and policies, and monitoring and reporting on IT performance and risk indicators. The other options are not as likely as the CIO to be responsible for the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, because they have different or limited roles and responsibilities in relation to IT and business risk management, as explained below:

• A. Chief financial officer (CFO) is the senior executive who oversees the financial function and manages the financial risks of the organization. The CFO may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to budgeting, funding, or reporting on IT-related projects and initiatives, but the CFO is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives.
• B. Information security director is the senior manager who oversees the information security function and manages the information security risks of the organization. The information security director may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information assets and systems, but the information security director is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives.
• C. Internal audit director is the senior manager who oversees the internal audit function and provides independent assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes. The internal audit director may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to auditing, reviewing, or testing the IT-related processes and controls, but the internal audit director is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.1, page 7. The Strategic CIO: Balancing Business and IT Priorities, Technology’s Role in Enterprise Risk Management, Aligning Enterprise Cyber Risk and Business Strategy

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

 Cost-benefit analysis is the most helpful tool to show risk reduction based on when developing risk treatment alternatives for a business case, because it compares the expected costs and benefits of each alternative and helps to select the most optimal and feasible one. Cost-benefit analysis also helps to justify the investment and resources required for the risk treatment plan and to demonstrate the value and return of the risk reduction. The other options are not the most helpful tools, although they may also be considered when developing risk treatment alternatives. Risk appetite, regulatory guidelines, and control efficiency are examples of factors or criteria that influence the selection of risk treatment alternatives, but they do not show the risk reduction based on the alternatives. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

 Risk is inefficiently controlled when the annual cost of the control exceeds the annual loss expectancy (ALE) of the risk, as this means that the organization is spending more on the control than the potential loss that the control is supposed to prevent or reduce. This indicates that the control is not cost-effective or optimal, and that the organization should consider alternative or complementary controls that can lower the cost or increase the benefit of the risk management. Control is ineffective and should be strengthened when the control does not reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk to an acceptable level, regardless of the cost. Risk is efficiently controlled when the annual cost of the control is equal to or less than the annual loss expectancy (ALE) of the risk, as this means that the organization is spending less or equal on the control than the potential loss that the control is supposed to prevent or reduce. Control is weak and should be removed when the control does not provide any benefit or value to the risk management, regardless of the cost. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question205; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 205.

A vulnerability report for the IT infrastructure is a document that identifies and evaluates the weaknesses or gaps in the IT systems, networks, or devices that could be exploited by threats or cause incidents. By analyzing the latest vulnerability report, one can conclude the existence and extent of control weaknesses in the IT infrastructure, because control weaknesses are the deficiencies or failures of the controls that are supposed to prevent, detect, or correct the vulnerabilities. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not directly concluded by analyzing the latest vulnerability report. The likelihood of a threat, the impact of technology risk, and the impact of operational risk are examples of risk factors or consequences that depend on the vulnerability and the threat, but they are not determined by the vulnerability report alone. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

An independent security audit report is a document that provides an objective and comprehensive assessment of the security posture and practices of a cloud service provider (CSP), based on a set of standards, criteria, or frameworks1. An independent security audit report can help an organization to evaluate the risks and benefits of using a CSP, and to ensure that the CSP meets the organization’s security and compliance requirements2.

If an organization receives an independent security audit report of its CSP that indicates significant control weaknesses, the next step that should be done in response to this report is to analyze the impact of the provider’s control weaknesses to the business. This means that the organization should:

• Identify and prioritize the business processes, functions, or objectives that depend on or are affected by the CSP’s services
• Assess the potential consequences and likelihood of the control weaknesses leading to security incidents, breaches, or losses
• Estimate the financial, operational, reputational, or legal impacts of the security incidents, breaches, or losses
• Compare the impacts with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and determine the level of risk exposure and acceptance
• Communicate the results of the analysis to the relevant stakeholders and decision-makers3

References = What is a Security Audit?, Cloud Security Audit: A 10-Step Checklist, Independent security audits are essential for cloud service providers. Here’s why

A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing is the best option to inform stakeholders risk decision-making, as it provides an accurate and timely assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s control environment. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing is a document that summarizes the results of the testing activities performed on the organization’s internal controls, such as design, implementation, operation, and monitoring. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing should include the following elements:

• The scope, objectives, and methodology of the controls testing
• The criteria and standards used to evaluate the controls
• The findings and observations of the testing process
• The root causes and impacts of the identified deficiencies
• The recommendations and action plans to address the deficiencies
• The roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders involved in the remediation process

A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing helps to inform stakeholders risk decision-making by providing them with relevant and reliable information on the current state of the organization’s control environment. It also helps to identify and prioritize the areas for improvement and enhancement of the control environment. A report of deficiencies noted during controls testing also facilitates the communication, collaboration, and accountability among the stakeholders involved in the risk management and control processes.

The other options are not the best options to inform stakeholders risk decision-making. The audit plan for the upcoming period is a document that outlines the scope, objectives, and methodology of the planned audit activities, but it does not provide any information on the actual performance of the organization’s control environment. Spend to date on mitigating control implementation is a measure of the resources and costs incurred to implement the risk response actions, but it does not indicate the effectiveness or efficiency of the control environment. A status report of control deployment is a document that tracks and monitors the progress and performance of the control implementation process, but it does not evaluate the quality or adequacy of the control environment. References = Internal Control Deficiencies: Identification, Reporting and Communication, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Internal Control Testing: Techniques, Types, and Examples

 Performing a post-implementation review is the best way to confirm whether appropriate automated controls are in place within a recently implemented system, as it helps to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the system and its controls after they have been deployed and operationalized. A post-implementation review is a process of assessing and validating the system and its controls against the predefined criteria and objectives, such as functionality, performance, security, compliance, and user satisfaction. A post-implementation review can help to confirm whether appropriate automated controls are in place within a recently implemented system by providing the following benefits:

• It verifies that the system and its controls meet the design specifications and standards, and comply with the relevant laws, regulations, and contractual obligations.
• It identifies and measures the actual or potential benefits and value of the system and its controls, such as improved efficiency, reliability, or quality.
• It detects and analyzes any issues, gaps, or weaknesses in the system and its controls, such as errors, inconsistencies, or vulnerabilities.
• It provides recommendations and action plans to address the identified issues, gaps, or weaknesses, and to improve or enhance the system and its controls.
• It communicates and reports the results and findings of the review to the relevant stakeholders, and solicits their feedback and suggestions.

The other options are not the best ways to confirm whether appropriate automated controls are in place within a recently implemented system. Conducting user acceptance testing is an important step to ensure that the system and its controls meet the user requirements and expectations, but it is usually performed before the system is implemented and operationalized, and it may not cover all aspects of the system and its controls. Reviewing the key performance indicators (KPIs) is a useful method to measure and monitor the performance of the system and its controls, but it may not provide a comprehensive or objective evaluation of the system and its controls. Interviewing process owners is a possible technique to collect and analyze information on the system and its controls, but it may not provide sufficient or reliable evidence to confirm the appropriateness of the system and its controls. References = Post-Implementation Review: The Key to a Successful Project, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Post Implementation Review (PIR) - Project Management Knowledge

 Reduced ability to evaluate key risk indicators (KRIs) will have the greatest impact on the ability to monitor risk when an information system for a key business operation is moved from an in-house application to a Software as a Service (SaaS) vendor, as it may limit the visibility and control over the risk exposure and performance of the system. KRIs are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the effectiveness of risk response strategies, and they should be aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and objectives. When the system is moved to a SaaS vendor, the enterprise may lose access to the data and processes that are used to calculate and report the KRIs, or the KRIs may become irrelevant or inconsistent with the vendor’s environment and standards. This may impair the ability to monitor risk and to take timely and appropriate actions to manage risk. Reduced access to internal audit reports, dependency on the vendor’s key performance indicators (KPIs), and dependency on service level agreements (SLAs) are not the greatest impacts on the ability to monitor risk, as they do not affect the measurement and reporting of the risk status and performance, but rather the assurance and evaluation of the system quality and reliability. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question221; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 221.

 A RACI chart is a matrix that defines the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders in relation to the IT risk management process. RACI stands for Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed. A RACI chart would be most helpful when communicating roles associated with the IT risk management process, as it clarifies who is responsible for performing the tasks, who is accountable for the outcomes, who is consulted for input and feedback, and who is informed of the progress and results. A RACI chart can help to avoid confusion, duplication, and conflict among the stakeholders, and to ensure that the IT risk management process is executed effectively and efficiently. A skills matrix, job descriptions, and an organizational chart are not as helpful as a RACI chart, as they do not specify the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders in relation to the IT risk management process, and may not reflect the actual involvement and contribution of the stakeholders. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 35.

 A vulnerability is a weakness or gap in a system, application, or network that can be exploited by a threat to cause harm or gain unauthorized access1. A vulnerability can be caused by various factors, such as design flaws, coding errors, configuration errors, or outdated software2.

Among the four options given, only option C (a standard procedure for applying software patches two weeks after release) represents a vulnerability. This is because software patches are updates or fixes that address security weaknesses or bugs in software applications or systems3. By applying software patches two weeks after release, the organization is exposing itself to the risk of being attacked or compromised by malicious actors who may exploit the known vulnerabilities in the software before they are patched. This risk is especially high if the software is internet-facing or critical to the organization’s operations4.

References = What is a Vulnerability?, Vulnerability Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster, Vulnerability Patching: A Resource Guide - Rezilion, Why is Software Vulnerability Patching Crucial for Your Software and …

According to the CRISC Review Manual, performing the assessment as it would normally be done is the best approach when a risk practitioner has been asked by a business unit manager for special consideration during a risk assessment of a system, because it ensures that the risk practitioner maintains their objectivity, integrity, and professionalism. The risk practitioner should not compromise the quality or accuracy of the risk assessment, regardless of any external pressure or influence. The risk practitioner should follow the established risk assessment methodology and standards, and report the risk results and recommendations based on the facts and evidence. The other options are not the best approaches, because they may affect the credibility or reliability of the risk assessment. Conducting an abbreviated version of the assessment may result in incomplete or insufficient risk information, which may lead to poor risk decisions or actions. Reporting the business unit manager for a possible ethics violation may escalate the situation or create a conflict of interest, which may hinder the risk assessment process or outcome. Recommending an internal auditor perform the review may transfer the responsibility or accountability of the risk practitioner, which may undermine their role or authority. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 74.

• Production data is the data that is used in the actual operation of a system or application, such as customer information, financial records, transactions, etc.
• Test data is the data that is used in the testing or development of a system or application, such as dummy data, sample data, simulated data, etc.
• A risk practitioner has become aware of production data being used in a test environment. This indicates that there is a risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction of the production data, which may affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data.
• The primary concern of the risk practitioner in this situation is the sensitivity of the data. This means that the risk practitioner should assess how valuable, critical, or confidential the data is, and what would be the impact or consequence if the data is compromised or lost.
• The sensitivity of the data helps to determine the level of protection and control that is needed to safeguard the data, and the priority and urgency of the risk response actions.
• The other options are not the primary concerns of the risk practitioner in this situation. They are either secondary or not essential for data protection.

The references for this answer are:

• Risk IT Framework, page 32
• Information Technology & Security, page 26
• Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 24

Managing cyber risk according to the organization’s risk management framework is the best recommendation to help ensure cyber risk is assessed and reflected in the enterprise-level risk profile, as it helps to integrate and align the cybersecurity risk management (CSRM) and the enterprise risk management (ERM) processes. A risk management framework is a set of principles, policies, and practices that guide and support the risk management activities within an organization. A risk management framework helps to establish a consistent, comprehensive, and coordinated approach to risk management across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

Managing cyber risk according to the organization’s risk management framework helps to ensure cyber risk is assessed and reflected in the enterprise-level risk profile by providing the following benefits:

• It enables a holistic and comprehensive view of the cyber risk landscape and its interdependencies with the business processes and functions.
• It facilitates the communication and collaboration among the business and IT stakeholders and enhances their understanding and awareness of the cyber risk exposure and control environment.
• It supports the development and implementation of effective and efficient cyber risk response and mitigation strategies and actions that are aligned with the business risk appetite and objectives.
• It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the cyber risk management and control processes and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best recommendations to help ensure cyber risk is assessed and reflected in the enterprise-level risk profile. Defining cyber roles and responsibilities across the organization is a good practice to clarify and assign the duties and accountabilities for the cyber risk management and control processes, but it does not directly address the cyber risk assessment and integration with the enterprise-level risk profile. Conducting cyber risk awareness training tailored specifically for senior management is a useful method to educate and engage the senior management in the cyber risk management and control processes, but it does not provide a systematic or consistent way to assess and reflect the cyber risk in the enterprise-level risk profile. Implementing a cyber risk program based on industry best practices is a possible action to improve and enhance the cyber risk management and control processes, but it does not ensure the alignment or integration with the organization’s risk management framework or the enterprise-level risk profile. References = Integrating Cybersecurity and Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) - NIST, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Identifying and Estimating Cybersecurity Risk for Enterprise Risk …

• Several network user accounts were recently created without the required management approvals. This indicates that there is a risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction of the network resources or data, which may affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the network.
• The best recommendation to address this situation is to investigate the root cause of noncompliance. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the factors or reasons that led to the creation of the network user accounts without the required management approvals, such as human error, negligence, malice, system failure, process flaw, etc.
• Investigating the root cause of noncompliance helps to identify and correct the source of the problem, prevent or reduce the recurrence of the problem, and improve the compliance and security of the network user accounts.
• The other options are not the best recommendations to address this situation. They are either secondary or not effective for noncompliance.

The references for this answer are:

• Risk IT Framework, page 31
• Information Technology & Security, page 25
• Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 23

Fraudulent transactions are those that involve deception, manipulation, or misrepresentation of information or data to obtain an unauthorized or improper benefit or advantage1. Fraudulent transactions can pose significant risks and losses for an organization, such as financial damages, legal liabilities, reputational damages, or operational disruptions2.

Enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems are integrated software applications that support the core business processes and functions of an organization, such as accounting, finance, human resources, supply chain, inventory, or customer relationship management3. ERP systems can facilitate the efficiency, accuracy, and security of business transactions, but they can also be vulnerable to fraudulent transactions, such as:

• Creating fake vendors or customers and processing false invoices or payments
• Manipulating or falsifying financial or accounting data or reports
• Changing or deleting critical or sensitive information or records
• Abusing or misusing access privileges or credentials
• Bypassing or compromising the system controls or security measures4

The design of procedures to prevent fraudulent transactions within an ERP system should be based on the control environment. The control environment is the set of standards, processes, and structures that provide the basis for carrying out internal control across the organization. The control environment comprises the following elements:

• The tone at the top, which reflects the leadership’s commitment and attitude towards internal control and ethical conduct
• The organizational structure, which defines the roles and responsibilities, reporting lines, and authority levels for internal control
• The human resource policies and practices, which ensure that the staff have the appropriate skills, competencies, and incentives for internal control
• The risk assessment process, which identifies and evaluates the potential risks and threats to the organization’s objectives and transactions
• The control activities, which are the specific policies, procedures, and mechanisms that prevent, detect, or correct errors or fraud in transactions
• The information and communication systems, which provide reliable and timely data and information for internal control and decision-making
• The monitoring and evaluation activities, which measure and report the performance and effectiveness of internal control and ensure continuous improvement

By basing the design of procedures to prevent fraudulent transactions within an ERP system on the control environment, the organization can:

• Ensure that the procedures are aligned with the organization’s objectives, values, and expectations regarding internal control and fraud prevention
• Provide clear and consistent guidance and instructions for the staff and stakeholders involved in the transactions and the ERP system
• Implement adequate and appropriate controls and safeguards to mitigate the risks and vulnerabilities of the transactions and the ERP system
• Monitor and evaluate the compliance and effectiveness of the procedures and the ERP system, and identify and address any issues or gaps

References = What is Fraud?, Fraud Risk Management - AICPA, What is ERP?, ERP Fraud: How to Prevent It - ERP Focus, [COSO – Control Environment - Deloitte], [How to use COSO to assess IT controls - Journal of Accountancy]

Data leakage is the unauthorized or accidental disclosure of sensitive or confidential data to unauthorized parties. Data leakage can cause serious damages or losses to the organization, such as data breaches, fines, lawsuits, reputational harm, or loss of customer trust. Data leakage can occur due to various reasons, such as human errors, malicious attacks, or inadequate controls1.

An organization that uses a vendor to destroy hard drives faces a risk of data leakage, as the vendor may not properly or securely destroy the hard drives, or may access or misuse the data stored on them. The best way to reduce this risk is to use an accredited vendor to dispose of the hard drives, because it means that the vendor:

• Has been certified or verified by a reputable or recognized authority or organization, such as ISACA, NAID, or R2, to provide hard drive destruction services
• Follows the industry standards and best practices for hard drive destruction, such as NIST 800-88 or DoD 5220.22-M, and ensures the compliance with the legal and regulatory requirements, such as HIPAA, PCI DSS, or GDPR
• Provides a secure and transparent process for hard drive destruction, such as using a specialized shredder, issuing a certificate of destruction, or allowing the customer to witness the destruction
• Maintains a high level of professionalism and integrity, and does not compromise the confidentiality or security of the customer’s data234

The other options are not the best ways to reduce the risk of data leakage, but rather some of the steps or aspects of hard drive destruction. Require the vendor to degauss the hard drives is a step that can help to erase the data on the hard drives by using a strong magnetic field. However, degaussing may not be effective or reliable for some types of hard drives, such as solid state drives (SSDs), and it may not prevent the vendor from accessing or misusing the data before degaussing5. Implement an encryption policy for the hard drives is an aspect that can help to protect the data on the hard drives by using a cryptographic algorithm to make it unreadable without a key. However, encryption may not be sufficient or applicable for some types of data, such as metadata, and it may not prevent the vendor from accessing or misusing the key or the encrypted data6. Require confirmation of destruction from the IT manager is a step that can help to verify that the hard drives have been destroyed by the vendor, and to document the process and the outcome. However, confirmation of destruction may not be accurate or authentic, and it may not prevent the vendor from accessing or misusing the data before destruction7. References =

• Data Leakage - ISACA
• Hard Drive Shredding Services | Hard Drive Destruction & Disposal
• Hard Drive Shredding and Destruction Service | CompuCycle
• Electronic Destruction & Recycling | Shred Nations
• Degaussing - ISACA
• Encryption - ISACA
• Certificate of Destruction - ISACA
• [CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

Information security metrics are quantitative or qualitative measures that indicate the performance and effectiveness of the information security processes, controls, and objectives. The primary goal of developing information security metrics is to enable continuous improvement of the information security program and to align it with the business goals and strategy. Information security metrics can help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the security program, to monitor and report on the progress and outcomes of the security initiatives, to evaluate the return on investment and value of the security activities, and to provide feedback and guidance for improvement actions. Information security metrics should be relevant, reliable, consistent, and actionable. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, p. 116-117

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the organization’s culture is the most critical element to maximize the potential for a successful security implementation, because it influences the behavior, attitude, and perception of the stakeholders towards security. The organization’s culture includes the values, beliefs, norms, and practices that are shared by the members of the organization. A positive and supportive culture can foster the awareness, commitment, and collaboration of the stakeholders in achieving the security objectives and complying with the security policies and standards. The other options are not the most critical elements, as they are less influential or less challenging than the organization’s culture. The organization’s knowledge is the collective understanding and expertise of the organization regarding security, which can be enhanced through training and education. Ease of implementation is the degree of difficulty and complexity of implementing security, which can be reduced by using appropriate methods and tools. Industry-leading security tools are the best-in-class solutions and technologies that can provide effective and efficient security, which can be acquired through market research and evaluation. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 32.

A balanced scorecard is a strategic management tool that helps to measure and communicate the performance of an organization or a program against its goals and objectives. A balanced scorecard typically consists of four perspectives: financial, customer, internal process, and learning and growth. Each perspective has a set of key performance indicators (KPIs) that reflect the critical success factors and desired outcomes of the organization or the program1.

A balanced scorecard is most useful for reporting on the overall status and effectiveness of the IT risk management program, because it can provide a comprehensive and balanced view of the program’s performance across multiple dimensions. A balanced scorecard can help to align the IT risk management program with the business strategy and vision, and to demonstrate the value and impact of the program to the stakeholders. A balanced scorecard can also help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the IT risk management program, and to monitor and improve the program’s processes and outcomes2.

The other options are not as useful as a balanced scorecard for reporting on the overall status and effectiveness of the IT risk management program. A capability maturity level is a measure of the maturity and quality of a process or a practice, based on a predefined set of criteria and standards. A capability maturity level can help to assess and benchmark the IT risk management program’s processes and practices, but it does not provide a holistic view of the program’s performance and results3. An internal audit plan is a document that outlines the scope, objectives, and methodology of an internal audit activity. An internal audit plan can help to evaluate and verify the IT risk management program’s controls and compliance, but it does not provide a strategic view of the program’s goals and outcomes4. A control self-assessment (CSA) is a technique that involves the participation of the process owners and the staff in assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of their own controls. A CSA can help to enhance the awareness and ownership of the IT risk management program’s controls, but it does not provide an objective and independent view of the program’s performance and impact. References =

• Balanced Scorecard Basics - Balanced Scorecard Institute
• Using the Balanced Scorecard to Measure and Manage IT Risk
• Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Overview
• Internal Audit Planning: The Basics - The IIA
• [Control Self-Assessment - ISACA]

A RACI matrix is a tool that assigns the roles and responsibilities for each risk, such as who is responsible, accountable, consulted, and informed. A RACI matrix helps to clarify the expectations and accountabilities for each risk owner and stakeholder, and to ensure that the risk is managed and monitored effectively and efficiently.

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their likelihood, impact, and mitigation strategies. A risk register does not assign the accountability for each risk, but rather the ownership and response.

A risk catalog is a collection of risks that have been identified and categorized based on common attributes, such as source, type, or impact. A risk catalog does not assign the accountability for each risk, but rather the classification and description.

A risk scenario is a technique that simulates the possible outcomes of different risk events and assesses their impact on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. A risk scenario does not assign the accountability for each risk, but rather the analysis and evaluation.

References: CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question216; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 216.

Automated data indicating that risk has been reduced provides the most tenable evidence that a business process control is effective, because it shows the actual impact and outcome of the control on the risk level. A demonstration that the control is operating as designed, a successful walk-through of the associated risk assessment, and a management attestation that the control is operating effectively are not the most tenable evidence, because they are based on subjective judgments, assumptions, or expectations, not on objective facts or results. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The best indicator that additional or improved controls are needed in the environment is when risk events and losses exceed risk tolerance. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation in performance or outcomes relative to the achievement of objectives. Risk events and losses are the negative consequences of risk that have occurred or are expected to occur. When risk events and losses exceed risk tolerance, it means that the existing controls are not sufficient or effective to prevent or mitigate the risk, and that the organization is exposed to unacceptable levels of risk that could impair its ability to achieve its objectives. Therefore, additional or improved controls are needed to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Management decreasing organizational risk appetite, the risk register and portfolio not including all risk scenarios, and emerging risk scenarios being identified are not as clear and direct indicators that additional or improved controls are needed in the environment, as they do not necessarily reflect the actual performance or outcomes of the risk management process. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 41.

Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying risk responses, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, or acceptance. It represents the level of exposure that the organisation is willing to tolerate or assume. Residual risk should be aligned with the organisation’s risk appetite and risk tolerance, which are determined by senior management. Therefore, the best way to obtain senior management support for investment in a control implementation would be to articulate the reduction in residual risk that the control would achieve. This would demonstrate how the control would help the organisation meet its risk objectives and reduce the likelihood or impact of adverse events. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 25.

 The primary objective for requiring an independent review of an organization’s IT risk management process should be to assess gaps in IT risk management operations and strategic focus, as this helps to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current process, and to provide recommendations for improvement and alignment with the enterprise’s objectives and environment. An independent review is an objective and unbiased evaluation of the IT risk management process by a qualified and competent party that is not involved in the process. An independent review can help to ensure the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of the IT risk management process, as well as to enhance the credibility and confidence of the process. Confirming that IT risk assessment results are expressed as business impact, verifying implemented controls to reduce the likelihood of threat materialization, and ensuring IT risk management is focused on mitigating potential risk are not the primary objectives for requiring an independent review of an organization’s IT risk management process, but rather the expected outcomes or benefits of the independent review. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question219; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 219.

The most helpful way to mitigate the risk associated with an application under development not meeting business objectives is to include key stakeholders in the review of user requirements, because this ensures that the application is designed and developed according to the needs and expectations of the end users and the business owners. Including key stakeholders in the review of user requirements also helps to avoid scope creep, requirement changes, or miscommunication that may affect the quality, functionality, or usability of the application. The other options are not the most helpful ways to mitigate the risk, although they may also be useful in reducing the likelihood or impact of the risk. Identifying threats that may compromise enterprise architecture (EA), including diverse business scenarios in user acceptance testing (UAT), and performing risk assessments during the business case development stage are examples of preventive or detective controls that aim to identify and address the potential issues or problems that may arise during the application development process, but they do not address the alignment of the application with the business objectives. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

Periodically reviewing big data strategies is the best option to minimize the risk of inaccurate data, because it allows the organization to assess the quality, validity, and reliability of the data sources and the analytics methods. It also enables the organization to identify and address any gaps, errors, or inconsistencies in the data and the results. By reviewing the big data strategies, the organization can ensure that the data analytics are aligned with the business objectives and the risk appetite.

Establishing an intellectual property agreement is not relevant to the risk of inaccurate data, as it is a legal measure to protect the ownership and use of the data, not its quality or accuracy.

Evaluating each of the data sources for vulnerabilities is a good practice, but it is not sufficient to minimize the risk of inaccurate data, as it only focuses on the security aspect of the data, not the validity or reliability of the data itself.

Benchmarking to industry best practice is a useful way to compare the performance and results of the data analytics, but it does not directly address the risk of inaccurate data, as it assumes that the data and the methods are already valid and reliable. References = Risk IT Framework, 2nd Edition, ISACA, 2019, page 62-63.

The best way to facilitate the alignment of IT risk management with enterprise risk management (ERM) is to link IT risk scenarios to enterprise strategy, because this ensures that the IT risks are considered in the context of the enterprise’s mission, vision, and goals. Linking IT risk scenarios to enterprise strategy also helps to prioritize the IT risks based on their impact and relevance to the enterprise’s objectives, and to select the appropriate risk responses and resources. The other options are not the best ways to facilitate the alignment of IT risk management with ERM, because they do not address the integration or alignment of the IT and enterprise perspectives. Adopting qualitative or quantitative enterprise risk assessment methods, and linking IT risk scenarios to technology objectives are examples of techniques or tools that can be used to perform IT risk management or ERM, but they do not ensure the alignment or consistency of the two processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.3, p. 22.

The primary concern for an organization planning to transfer and store its customer data with an offshore cloud service provider is data privacy. Data privacy is the protection of personal information from unauthorized or unlawful access, use, disclosure, or transfer. Data privacy is governed by various laws, regulations, and standards that vary across different jurisdictions and sectors. An organization that transfers and stores its customer data with an offshore cloud service provider should ensure that the data privacy rights and obligations of the customers, the organization, and the cloud service provider are clearly defined and agreed upon, and that the data is protected according to the applicable data privacy requirements. An organization should also conduct due diligence and risk assessment on the offshore cloud service provider, and monitor and audit its performance and compliance on a regular basis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 127123

• An internal data access policy is a set of rules and guidelines that define who, how, when, and why the users can access, use, share, or modify the data stored in a business application system, based on the data classification, sensitivity, and ownership.
• Enforcing an internal data access policy is the most appropriate way to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system. This means that the organization implements and maintains effective controls to ensure that only the authorized users can access the confidential information, and that the access is logged and monitored for compliance and security purposes.
• The other options are not the most appropriate ways to prevent unauthorized retrieval of confidential information stored in a business application system. They are either secondary or not essential for data access control.

The references for this answer are:

• Risk IT Framework, page 28
• Information Technology & Security, page 22
• Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 20

The primary benefit of conducting continuous monitoring of access controls is the ability to identify possible noncompliant activities that lead to data disclosure. Continuous monitoring of access controls is a process that involves collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the performance and effectiveness of the access controls on a regular basis. Continuous monitoring of access controls helps to detect and prevent any unauthorized or inappropriate access to information assets, and to ensure that the access controls are aligned with the enterprise’s security policies and standards. Continuous monitoring of access controls also helps to identify possible noncompliant activities that lead to data disclosure, such as data leakage, data theft, data tampering, or data breach. By identifying these activities, the enterprise can take timely and appropriate actions to mitigate the risk and protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information assets. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 1411

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

The most helpful factor for an information security management team when allocating resources to mitigate exposures is the risk assessment results. The risk assessment results provide a comprehensive and objective analysis of the risks facing the enterprise, including their likelihood, impact, and root causes. The risk assessment results also help to identify the gaps and weaknesses in the existing controls, and to prioritize the risks based on their severity and urgency. The risk assessment results enable the information security management team to allocate the resources in a cost-effective and risk-based manner, and to implement the most appropriate risk responses to reduce the exposures to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.1, page 1751

The business process owner should own the risk of customer data leakage caused by the service provider, as they have the responsibility and authority over the design, execution, and performance of the business process. The business process owner is also accountable for the risks and controls associated with their process, and they can provide valuable input and feedback on the likelihood and impact of customer data leakage on the process outcomes and objectives.

The other options are not the best choices for owning the risk of customer data leakage caused by the service provider. The service provider is responsible for delivering and supporting the billing function and ensuring the security and privacy of the customer data, but they may not have the full visibility or understanding of the business process and objectives. The vendor risk manager is responsible for managing and monitoring the vendor relationship and performance, but they may not have the direct involvement or influence on the business process and its risks and controls. The legal counsel is responsible for providing legal advice and guidance on the contractual and regulatory obligations and implications of the outsourcing arrangement, but they may not have the detailed knowledge or experience of the business process and its risks and controls. References = Guide to Vendor Risk Assessment | Smartsheet, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Data Ownership: Considerations for Risk Management - ISACA

 The number of projects going live without a security review is the best key control indicator (KCI) to indicate whether security requirements are identified and managed throughout a project life cycle, because it measures the compliance and effectiveness of the security review process. A security review is a process that ensures that the security requirements are defined, implemented, tested, and verified for each project, and that any security risks or issues are identified and resolved before the project is deployed. The number of projects going live without a security review should be minimized or eliminated, as it indicates a failure or weakness of the security review process. The other options are not the best KCIs, because they do not directly measure the identification and management of security requirements. The number of employees completing project-specific security training, the number of security projects started in core departments, and the number of security-related status reports submitted by project managers are examples of input or output indicators that measure the activities or results of the project, but not the security requirements. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

Controls should be incorporated into system specifications in the design phase of the system development life cycle (SDLC), because this is the phase where the system requirements are translated into detailed specifications and architectures that define how the system will be built and operated. Incorporating controls in the design phase ensures that the system is secure, reliable, and compliant from the start, and reduces the cost and complexity of implementing controls later in the SDLC. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not the phases where controls are incorporated into system specifications. The implementation phase is the phase where the system is installed, configured, and tested. The development phase is the phase where the system is coded, integrated, and tested. The feasibility phase is the phase where the system concept and scope are defined and evaluated. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The issue of greatest concern when evaluating existing controls during a risk assessment is the presence of successive assessments with the same recurring vulnerabilities. This indicates that the controls are ineffective or inadequate in addressing the identified risks, and that the risk management process is not functioning properly. Recurring vulnerabilities expose the enterprise to potential losses, breaches, or incidents that could harm its objectives, reputation, or compliance. Therefore, it is essential to identify the root causes of the recurring vulnerabilities, implement corrective actions, and monitor the effectiveness of the controls on a regular basis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2, page 183.

Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk tolerance is an important component of the corporate risk profile, as it defines the boundaries and limits of the acceptable risk exposure for the organization. Comparing the risk tolerance against the corporate risk profile can help to ensure that the organization’s risk strategy and objectives are aligned with its risk appetite and capacity, and that the organization is not taking on more risk than it can handle or afford. Comparing the risk tolerance against the corporate risk profile can also help to monitor and adjust the risk management process and controls, and to optimize the risk-return trade-off. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 249. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 249. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 249. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

 A risk register is a tool used to identify, assess, and prioritize risks in an organization. It typically includes a detailed description of each identified risk, an assessment of its likelihood and potential impact, and a plan for managing or mitigating the risk1. A risk register is usually created at the beginning of a project or a process, and is updated regularly throughout the risk management life cycle2.

The main reason for creating and maintaining a risk register is to account for identified key risk factors. This means that the risk register helps to:

• Document and track all the relevant risks that may affect the project or the organization, and their sources, causes, and consequences
• Provide a comprehensive and consistent view of the risk profile and exposure of the project or the organization
• Support the decision-making and prioritization of the risk responses and controls, based on the risk appetite and tolerance of the project or the organization
• Communicate and report the risk information and status to the stakeholders and regulators, and ensure transparency and accountability
• Enable the continuous improvement and learning from the risk management process and outcomes3

References = What is a risk register and why is it important?, Purpose of a risk register: Here’s what a risk register is used for, Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2024], Risk Register - Wikipedia

Service level agreements (SLA) are contracts that define the expected level of performance and quality of service that an IT service provider will deliver to its customers. SLA are the best indicators that an organization has implemented IT performance requirements, as they specify the measurable and verifiable criteria that the IT service provider must meet or exceed, such as availability, reliability, security, and responsiveness. SLA also establish the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved, the methods of monitoring and reporting the service performance, and the consequences of non-compliance or breach of the agreement. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 232. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 232. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 232.

The first step to ensure continuity of operations when performing a risk assessment of a new service to support a new business process is to identify the conditions that may cause disruptions to the service or the process. This is because identifying the potential sources, causes, and scenarios of disruptions helps to determine the impact and likelihood of the risks, and to select the appropriate risk responses and recovery strategies. The other options are not the first steps, although they may also be part of the risk assessment process. Reviewing incident response procedures, evaluating the probability of risk events, and defining metrics for restoring availability are examples of subsequent steps that depend on the identification of the conditions that may cause disruptions. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The best approach to ensure the effectiveness of risk awareness training is to create modules for targeted audiences. This means that the risk awareness training should be customized and tailored to the specific needs, roles, and responsibilities of different groups of staff, such as business owners, process owners, IT staff, or external parties. Creating modules for targeted audiences helps to ensure that the risk awareness training is relevant, engaging, and applicable to the participants, and that it covers the appropriate level of detail and complexity. It also helps to enhance the learning outcomes and retention of the risk awareness training, and to foster a culture of risk awareness and responsibility within the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 2491

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls. It is important for a risk practitioner to verify that the residual risk is within the acceptable levels defined by the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. This ensures that the controls are effective in reducing the risk exposure to an acceptable level and align with the enterprise’s objectives and strategy. References = CRISC Review Manual 27th Edition, page 131. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers.

Reviewing historical risk events is most useful for the risk assessment process within the risk management life cycle. Risk assessment is the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that may affect the project or the organization1. Reviewing historical risk events can help to:

• Identify the sources, causes, and consequences of past risks and learn from the successes and failures of previous projects or organizations
• Analyze the likelihood and impact of potential risks based on historical data and trends, and use statistical methods or models to estimate the probability and severity of risk scenarios
• Evaluate the level of risk exposure and compare it with the risk appetite and tolerance of the project or the organization, and prioritize the risks that need further attention or action
• Use historical risk events as inputs or examples for risk identification and analysis techniques, such as brainstorming, checklists, interviews, surveys, SWOT analysis, root cause analysis, or Monte Carlo simulation2

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

KRIs and KCIs are both metrics that measure and monitor the risk and control environment of an enterprise. KRIs are indicators that reflect the level and trend of risk exposure, and help to identify potential risk events or issues. KCIs are indicators that reflect the performance and effectiveness of the risk controls, and help to ensure that the controls are operating as intended and mitigating the risk. Both KRIs and KCIs provide insight to potential changes in the level of risk, as they can signal the need for risk response actions, such as enhancing, modifying, or implementing new controls, or adjusting the risk strategy and objectives. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 240.

Policies and standards are the primary documents that define the organization’s expectations and requirements for information security and risk management. They provide the basis for establishing controls, procedures, roles, and responsibilities. Policies and standards should be updated following a change in legislation requiring notification to individuals impacted by data breaches, to ensure compliance with the new legal obligations and to align with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Updating policies and standards can also help to communicate the changes to the relevant stakeholders and to provide guidance for implementing and monitoring the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, p. 28-29

The greatest concern when assessing the risk profile of an organization is that the risk profile was last reviewed two years ago. A risk profile is a snapshot of the current risk exposure and appetite of the organization, based on the identification, analysis, and evaluation of the risks that could affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives. A risk profile should be reviewed and updated regularly, at least annually, or whenever there are significant changes in the internal or external environment, such as new projects, strategies, regulations, or incidents. A risk profile that was last reviewed two years ago may not reflect the current risk situation and status of the organization, and may lead to inaccurate or incomplete risk assessment and response. The risk profile not being updated after a recent incident, the risk profile being developed without using industry standards, and the risk profile not containing historical loss data are also concerns, but they are not as critical as the risk profile being outdated. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 48.

An external audit is the most reliable input to evaluate residual risk in the vendor’s control environment, as it provides an independent and objective assessment of the vendor’s financial systems and processes. An external audit is conducted by a third party, such as a certified public accountant (CPA) or a professional auditing firm, that follows the generally accepted auditing standards (GAAS) and the generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). An external audit can help to verify the accuracy and completeness of the vendor’s financial statements, identify any material misstatements or errors, and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the vendor’s internal controls. An external audit can also provide assurance and confidence to the organization and other stakeholders that the vendor is complying with the relevant laws, regulations, and contractual obligations.

The other options are not the most reliable inputs to evaluate residual risk in the vendor’s control environment. An internal audit is conducted by the vendor itself, which may introduce bias or conflict of interest. An internal audit may also have a different scope, methodology, or quality than an external audit. A vendor performance scorecard is completed by the organization, which may not have the sufficient access, expertise, or authority to assess the vendor’s control environment. A vendor performance scorecard may also focus more on the service level agreement (SLA) compliance, rather than the financial systems and processes. A regulatory examination is conducted by a regulator, such as a government agency or a standard-setting body, which may have a different purpose, criteria, or perspective than the organization. A regulatory examination may also have a limited scope, frequency, or transparency. References = Guide to Vendor Risk Assessment | Smartsheet, Understanding Inherent Vs. Residual Risk Assessments - Resolver, Assessing Internal Controls over Compliance - HCCA Official Site

 Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure how well a specific control is performing in reducing the causes, consequences, or likelihood of a risk1. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure changes in the risk exposure or the potential impact of a risk2. By linking an effective KCI to relevant KRIs, the organization can monitor changes in the risk environment and assess how the control is influencing the risk level3. This can help the organization to:

• Identify emerging or escalating risks and take timely and appropriate actions
• Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the control and make improvements if needed
• Align the control with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization
• Communicate the risk and control status to stakeholders and regulators

References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 6: Risk Response and Mitigation4

The risk practitioner’s best course of action when the residual risk is now within the organization’s defined appetite and tolerance levels is to verify the adequacy of risk monitoring plans. Risk monitoring is the process of tracking and reviewing the risk status and performance, and ensuring that the risk responses are effective and efficient1. Risk monitoring plans are the documents that specify the objectives, scope, methods, roles, and responsibilities for the risk monitoring activities2. By verifying the adequacy of risk monitoring plans, the risk practitioner can:

• Ensure that the risk monitoring plans are aligned with the organization’s risk strategy, objectives, and policies, and that they comply with the relevant standards and regulations3.
• Evaluate whether the risk monitoring plans are comprehensive and consistent, and that they cover all the key aspects and indicators of the risks and the risk responses4.
• Identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may affect the implementation or outcome of the risk monitoring plans, and recommend and implement appropriate improvement actions5.

The other options are not the best course of action, because:

• Identifying new risk entries to include in ERM is not a relevant or necessary course of action, as it is not directly related to the residual risk or the risk responses. ERM is the process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and managing the risks that may affect the organization’s strategic, operational, financial, or reputational objectives6. Identifying new risk entries is a part of the risk identification process, which is the first step in ERM. It should be performed periodically or when there are significant changes in the internal or external environment, not when the residual risk is within the appetite and tolerance levels7.
• Removing the risk entries from the ERM register is not a valid or advisable course of action, as it may create a false sense of security or complacency. The ERM register is a tool that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses. Removing the risk entries from the ERM register may imply that the risks no longer exist or matter, which is not true. The risks may still occur or change, and the risk responses may still fail or become obsolete. Therefore, the risk entries should be kept and updated in the ERM register, unless the risks are completely eliminated or transferred.
• Re-performing the risk assessment to confirm results is not an efficient or effective course of action, as it may be redundant or unnecessary. Risk assessment is the process of estimating the probability and impact of the risks, and prioritizing the risks based on their significance and urgency. Re-performing the risk assessment may not provide any new or useful information or insights, and may waste time and resources. Instead, the risk practitioner should verify and validate the risk assessment results, and ensure that they are accurate and reliable.

References =

• Risk Monitoring - CIO Wiki
• Risk Monitoring Plan - CIO Wiki
• Risk Monitoring and Reporting - ISACA
• Risk Monitoring and Control - Project Management Institute
• Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press
• Enterprise Risk Management - CIO Wiki
• Risk Identification - CIO Wiki
• [Risk Register - CIO Wiki]
• [Risk Register: How to Use It in Project Management - ProjectManager.com]
• [Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]
• [Risk Assessment Process - ISACA]

Data archival processes should be the primary focus of a risk practitioner when ensuring that organization records are being retained for a sufficient period of time to meet legal obligations, because data archival processes ensure that records are stored securely, reliably, and accessibly for as long as they are needed. Data archival processes also help to manage the storage capacity, retention policies, and disposal procedures of records. Data duplication processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for backup and recovery purposes, not for long-term retention. Data anonymization processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for privacy and confidentiality purposes, not for legal compliance. Data protection processes are not the primary focus, because they are mainly used for security and integrity purposes, not for retention requirements. References = Free ISACA CRISC Sample Questions and Study Guide

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the primary reason to periodically review key performance indicators (KPIs) is to identify trends, because it helps to monitor the changes and patterns in the performance and effectiveness of the risk management processes and controls. KPIs are metrics that measure the achievement of the objectives and targets of the risk management activities. Periodically reviewing KPIs allows the organization to evaluate the progress and results of the risk management strategies and actions, and to identify any gaps, issues, or opportunities for improvement. The other options are not the primary reason to periodically review KPIs, as they are related to other aspects or outcomes of the risk management process. Ensuring compliance is the reason to review key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the occurrence of risk events. Promoting a risk-aware culture is the reason to review key goal indicators (KGIs), which are metrics that measure the alignment of the risk management with the business goals and values. Optimizing resources needed for controls is the reason to review key control indicators (KCIs), which are metrics that measure the efficiency and adequacy of the risk controls. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 143.

The primary reason to have risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register is to ensure that risk is treated appropriately, as risk owners are responsible for implementing the risk response strategies and monitoring the risk status and outcomes. Risk owners are also accountable for the risk and its impact on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. Having risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register helps to clarify the roles and responsibilities, improve the communication and coordination, and enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process. Mitigating actions are prioritized, risk entries are regularly updated, and risk exposure is minimized are not the primary reasons to have risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register, but rather the results or benefits of having risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 206; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 206.

The best control to prevent the inappropriate disclosure of confidential information when print jobs containing confidential information are sent to a shared network printer located in a secure room is to require a printer access code for each user. A printer access code is a unique and secret code that the user needs to enter on the printer device to release and retrieve the print job. Requiring a printer access code for each user is the best control, as it helps to prevent or limit the unauthorized access, viewing, or copying of the confidential information on the print job, especially if the print job is left unattended or forgotten on the printer device. Requiring a printer access code for each user also helps to ensure the accountability and traceability of the user who sent the print job, and to support the audit and monitoring of the printer activity. Using physical controls to access the printer room, using video surveillance in the printer room, and ensuring printer parameters are properly configured are also useful controls, but they are not as effective as requiring a printer access code for each user, as they do not directly prevent or limit the inappropriate disclosure of confidential information on the print job, and they may not deter or detect the unauthorized access or misuse of the print job by the authorized users who have access to the printer room or device. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

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

Insecure data transmission protocols should be of greatest concern when an organization is implementing internet of Things (IoT) technology to control temperature and lighting in its headquarters, because they can expose the IoT devices and data to unauthorized access, interception, or manipulation. Insecure data transmission protocols can also compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the IoT system and the information it collects and transmits. The other options are not the greatest concerns, although they may also pose some challenges or risks to the IoT implementation. Insufficient network isolation, impact on network performance, and lack of interoperability between sensors are examples of technical or operational issues that can affect the functionality, efficiency, or compatibility of the IoT system, but they do not have the same severity or impact as insecure data transmission protocols. References = CRISC Sample Questions 2024

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide early warning signals of potential risk events or changes in the risk profile of an organization. They help to monitor the risk exposure and performance of the organization against its risk appetite and tolerance. They also enable timely and proactive risk responses and mitigation actions. Establishing KRIs is the most helpful in preventing risk events from materializing, as they can alert the organization of emerging risks and trigger preventive measures before the risks become significant or materialize. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, p. 114-115

Continuous data backup controls are the best recommendation to further reduce the impact of ransomware attacks, as they enable the organization to restore the data that has been encrypted or deleted by the ransomware without paying the ransom or losing the data. Continuous data backup controls ensure that the data is regularly and automatically backed up to a secure and separate location, and that the backup data is tested and verified for integrity and availability. Two-factor authentication, encryption for data at rest, and encryption for data in motion are not the best recommendations to further reduce the impact of ransomware attacks, as they do not address the recovery of the data that has been compromised by the ransomware. These controls may help to prevent or mitigate ransomware attacks, but not to reduce their impact. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 207; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 207.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics or measures that provide information on the progress and performance of an organization or a team toward an intended result or objective. KPIs can help to monitor and evaluate the achievement of strategic, operational, or tactical goals, and to support the decision making and improvement of the organization or the team1.

Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics or measures that provide information on the status and effectiveness of the controls or safeguards that are implemented to manage the risks or threats that an organization or a team faces. KCIs can help to identify and assess the strengths and weaknesses of the controls or safeguards, and to ensure the compliance and accountability of the organization or the team2.

The statement that best illustrates the relationship between KPIs and KCIs is that KPIs and KCIs both contribute to understanding of control effectiveness, because they can help to:

• Measure and compare the actual and expected outcomes and impacts of the controls or safeguards, and to determine the gaps or deviations
• Analyze and understand the causes and consequences of the gaps or deviations, and to identify the root problems or issues
• Evaluate and report the performance and compliance of the controls or safeguards, and to communicate the results and feedback to the stakeholders
• Improve and optimize the design and implementation of the controls or safeguards, and to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the risk management process34

The other statements do not illustrate the relationship between KPIs and KCIs accurately, but rather some of the differences or misconceptions between them. KPIs measure manual controls, while KCIs measure automated controls is a difference between KPIs and KCIs, but not a general one. KPIs and KCIs can measure both manual and automated controls, depending on the type and nature of the controls or safeguards. A robust KCI program will replace the need to measure KPIs is a misconception about KPIs and KCIs, as they are not mutually exclusive or substitutable. KPIs and KCIs complement and support each other, as they provide different but related information on the performance and risk management of the organization or the team. KCIs are applied at the operational level while KPIs are at the strategic level is a difference between KPIs and KCIs, but not a universal one. KPIs and KCIs can be applied at different levels of the organization or the team, depending on the scope and purpose of the measurement and evaluation. References =

• Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Definition, Types, and Examples
• Key Control Indicators - ISACA
• Key Control Indicators: What They Are and How to Use Them
• Key Performance Indicators vs. Key Control Indicators: What’s the Difference?
• [CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The most important objective of an enterprise risk management (ERM) program is to create a comprehensive view of critical risk to the organization, as it enables the organization to identify, assess, and prioritize the key risks that may affect its objectives and strategy, and to implement appropriate risk responses and controls. A comprehensive view of critical risk also helps the organization to align its risk appetite and tolerance with its business goals and value creation, and to enhance its risk culture and governance. A comprehensive view of critical risk can be achieved by integrating risk management across all levels and functions of the organization, and by using consistent and reliable risk information and reporting. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 242. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 242. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 242.

Validating the risk scenarios is the most important time to involve business stakeholders, as they can provide feedback on the relevance, completeness, and accuracy of the scenarios. They can also help to ensure that the scenarios are aligned with the business objectives, context, and risk appetite. By involving business stakeholders in the validation process, the risk practitioner can increase the credibility and acceptance of the risk scenarios.

Updating the risk register, documenting the risk scenarios, and identifying risk mitigation controls are all important steps in the risk scenario development process, but they are not the most important time to involve business stakeholders. These steps can be performed by the risk practitioner with input from other sources, such as subject matter experts, historical data, industry standards, etc. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, page 47-481

Encryption is a technique that transforms data into an unreadable format using a secret key, so that only authorized parties can access and decrypt the data. Encryption can help to protect sensitive data from unauthorized access or disclosure, especially when the data is stored or transmitted in the cloud1.

Ensuring the vendor does not know the encryption key is a control that will best reduce the risk associated with a data breach, because it can help to:

• Prevent the vendor from accessing or disclosing the sensitive data, intentionally or unintentionally
• Limit the exposure or impact of the data breach, even if the vendor’s systems or networks are compromised by hackers or malicious insiders
• Maintain the confidentiality and integrity of the sensitive data, regardless of the vendor’s liability or responsibility
• Enhance the trust and confidence of the customers and stakeholders, who may be concerned about the vendor’s refusal to accept liability for a data breach23

The other options are not as effective as ensuring the vendor does not know the encryption key for reducing the risk associated with a data breach. Engaging a third party to validate operational controls is a control that can help to verify and improve the vendor’s security practices and processes, but it does not guarantee that the vendor will prevent or respond to a data breach adequately or timely. Using the same cloud vendor as a competitor is not a control, but rather a business decision that may increase the risk associated with a data breach, as the vendor may have access to or disclose the sensitive data of both parties, or may favor one party over the other. Using field-level encryption with a vendor supplied key is a control that can help to encrypt specific fields or columns of data, such as names, addresses, or credit card numbers, but it does not prevent the vendor from accessing or disclosing the data, as the vendor has the encryption key4. References =

• Encryption - ISACA
• Cloud Encryption: Using Data Encryption in The Cloud
• Cloud Encryption: Why You Need It and How to Do It Right
• Field-Level Encryption - ISACA
• [CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

Implementing automated log monitoring is the best control to detect an advanced persistent threat (APT), which is a stealthy and continuous attack on a target network or system. Automated log monitoring can help to identify anomalous or suspicious activities, such as unusual network traffic, unauthorized access attempts, or data exfiltration, that may indicate the presence of an APT. Utilizing antivirus systems and firewalls, conducting regular penetration tests, and monitoring social media activities are controls that help to prevent or mitigate APTs, but not to detect them. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers - The Knowledge Academy, question 200.

The best indicator of the risk appetite and tolerance level for the risk associated with business interruption caused by IT system failures is the recovery time objective (RTO). The RTO is the maximum acceptable time or duration that a business process or an IT system can be disrupted or interrupted before it causes unacceptable impact or harm to the business. The RTO reflects the risk appetite and tolerance level for the business interruption risk, as it indicates how much disruption or interruption the business can tolerate or accept, and how quickly the business needs to resume or recover the business process or the IT system. The RTO also helps to determine the priorities and requirements for the business continuity and recovery planning, and to select and implement the appropriate continuity and recovery strategies and solutions. Mean time to recover (MTTR), IT system criticality classification, and incident management service level agreement (SLA) are not the best indicators of the risk appetite and tolerance level for the business interruption risk, as they are either the measures or the outcomes of the business continuity and recovery performance, and they do not directly indicate how much disruption or interruption the business can tolerate or accept. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. One of the elements of risk appetite is the enterprise’s capacity to absorb loss, which is the maximum amount of loss that an organization can withstand without jeopardizing its existence or strategic objectives. The effectiveness of compensating controls, the residual risk affected by preventive controls, and the amount of inherent risk considered appropriate are not elements of risk appetite, but rather factors that influence the risk assessment and response processes. References = [CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version)], page 41; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, question 196.

Risk limits, thresholds, and indicators provide the most useful information to determine risk exposure following control implementations, as they help to measure and monitor the current and residual risk levels and compare them with the desired and acceptable risk levels. Risk limits, thresholds, and indicators are defined as follows:

• Risk limits are the maximum amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept for a given activity, process, or objective. Risk limits are derived from the organizational risk appetite and tolerance, and they help to guide the risk response and control selection.
• Risk thresholds are the points or levels at which the risk or performance is acceptable or unacceptable. Risk thresholds are used to trigger alerts, actions, or escalation when the risk or performance deviates from the expected or planned range.
• Risk indicators are metrics or measures that provide information on the current or potential risk exposure or performance. Risk indicators can be classified into key risk indicators (KRIs), which measure the likelihood and impact of risk events, and key performance indicators (KPIs), which measure the effectiveness and efficiency of controls and processes.

Risk limits, thresholds, and indicators help to determine risk exposure following control implementations by providing quantitative and qualitative data and feedback on the risk and control environment. They also help to identify and prioritize the areas for improvement and enhancement of the risk and control environment. Risk limits, thresholds, and indicators also facilitate the communication, collaboration, and accountability among the stakeholders involved in the risk management and control processes.

The other options are not the most useful information to determine risk exposure following control implementations. Strategic plan and risk management integration is the process of aligning the organizational strategy and objectives with the risk management framework and activities, but it does not provide specific information on the risk exposure or control effectiveness. Risk escalation and process for communication is the process of reporting and escalating the risk issues and incidents to the appropriate authority and stakeholders, but it does not provide comprehensive information on the risk exposure or control performance. Policies, standards, and procedures are the documents that define the principles, rules, and guidelines for the risk management and control processes, but they do not provide actual information on the risk exposure or control implementation. References = Risk Limits, Thresholds and Indicators - ISACA, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Risk Management: Risk Indicators and Risk Appetite

Identifying potential sources of risk is the first step in the risk identification process, which is essential for developing a thorough understanding of risk scenarios. Sources of risk can be internal or external, and can include factors such as people, processes, technology, environment, regulations, and events. Identifying potential sources of risk can help to generate a comprehensive list of risk scenarios that can affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Identifying potential sources of risk can also help to raise risk awareness among the employees and to foster a risk culture within the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, p. 66-67

A maturity model is a framework that describes the stages or levels of development and improvement of a certain domain, such as a process, a function, or an organization. A maturity model can help to evaluate the current state, identify the strengths and weaknesses, set the goals and objectives, and measure the performance and improvement over time. The primary benefit of using a maturity model is that it helps to evaluate the evolution of process improvements, meaning that it can help to track the progress and changes of the processes, as well as to identify the best practices and standards. A maturity model can also help to compare the processes with the industry benchmarks and competitors, as well as to align the processes with the business strategy and vision. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2.1, p. 118-119

The best way to prevent future occurrences of active network accounts belonging to former employees is to conduct a comprehensive review of access management processes. This review should include verifying that the access rights of all employees are updated regularly, especially when they change roles or leave the organization. The review should also ensure that there are clear policies and procedures for granting, modifying, and revoking access rights, and that these are followed consistently and documented properly. The review should also identify and address any gaps or weaknesses in the access management processes that could lead to unauthorized or inappropriate access. By conducting a comprehensive review of access management processes, the organization can improve its security posture and reduce the risk of data breaches or misuse of resources. References = IT audit: The ultimate guide [with checklist] | Zapier, IT auditing and controls – planning the IT audit [updated 2021]

 The best course of action for a newly hired risk practitioner who finds that the risk register has not been updated in the past year is to identify changes in risk factors and initiate risk reviews. This would help the risk practitioner to update the risk register with the current and relevant information on the risks facing the enterprise, such as their sources, drivers, indicators, likelihood, impact, and responses. It would also help the risk practitioner to evaluate the effectiveness of the existing controls, and to identify any new or emerging risks that need to be addressed. Identifying changes in risk factors and initiating risk reviews would enable the risk practitioner to maintain the accuracy and completeness of the risk register, and to provide valuable input for the risk management process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.1.1, page 2271

Measurability and consistency are the most essential attributes of an effective key control indicator (KCI), because they ensure that the KCI can be quantified, compared, and reported over time. A KCI should be able to measure the performance or effectiveness of a control in mitigating a risk and provide consistent results across different periods, sources, and methods. The other options are not the most essential attributes, although they may also be desirable for a KCI. Flexibility and adaptability are not the most essential attributes, because they may compromise the reliability and comparability of the KCI. Robustness and resilience are not the most essential attributes, because they are more relevant for the control itself, not the KCI. Optimal cost and benefit are not the most essential attributes, because they are more related to the value and feasibility of the KCI, not the quality and accuracy of the KCI. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers

According to the CRISC Review Manual, conducting a business impact analysis (BIA) is the task that should be completed prior to creating a disaster recovery plan (DRP), because it helps to identify the critical business processes and resources, and their dependencies, that need to be recovered in the event of a disaster. The BIA also helps to determine the recovery time objectives (RTOs) and recovery point objectives (RPOs) for each business process and resource, which are the key inputs for the DRP. The other options are not the tasks that should be completed prior to creating a DRP, as they are part of the DRP itself. Identifying the recovery response team is the task of defining the roles and responsibilities of the personnel involved in the recovery process. Procuring a recovery site is the task of selecting and acquiring an alternative location where the business operations can be resumed. Assigning sensitivity levels to data is the task of classifying the data based on its importance and protection requirements. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 237.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that help organizations monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their operations, financial health, or overall performance1. KRIs should have certain characteristics that make them effective for risk monitoring, such as:

• Ability to measure the right thing (e.g., supports the decisions that need to be made)
• Quantifiable (e.g., damages in dollars of profit loss)
• Capability to be measured precisely and accurately
• Relevant (measuring the right thing associated with decisions)2

Among the four options given, only option C (sensitivity to changes in risk levels) best enables effective risk monitoring. This is because KRIs should be able to capture the changes in risk levels over time and alert organizations to emerging or escalating risks3. A high sensitivity to changes in risk levels indicates that the KRI is responsive and timely, and can help organizations take preventive or corrective actions before the risks become too severe.

References = Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide, Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions, Key Risk Indicators - Wikipedia

Qualitative measures are methods of expressing risk levels using descriptive terms, such as high, medium, or low, based on subjective criteria, such as likelihood, impact, or severity. Qualitative measures are often used to identify and prioritize risks, and to communicate risk information to stakeholders1.

Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the risk response has been implemented. Residual risk reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response, and the need for further action or monitoring2.

Emerging threats are new or evolving sources or causes of risk that have the potential to adversely affect the organization’s objectives, assets, or operations. Emerging threats are often characterized by uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity, and may require innovative or adaptive risk responses3.

The best reason to use qualitative measures to express residual risk levels related to emerging threats is that qualitative measures are better able to incorporate expert judgment. Expert judgment is the opinion or advice of a person or a group of people who have specialized knowledge, skills, or experience in a particular domain or field. Expert judgment can help to:

• Provide insights and perspectives on the nature and characteristics of the emerging threats, and their possible causes and consequences
• Assess the likelihood and impact of the emerging threats, and their interactions and dependencies with other risks
• Evaluate the suitability and effectiveness of the risk responses, and their alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance
• Identify and recommend the best practices and lessons learned for managing the emerging threats, and for improving the risk management process45

Qualitative measures are better able to incorporate expert judgment than quantitative measures, which are methods of expressing risk levels using numerical or measurable values, such as percentages, probabilities, or monetary amounts. Quantitative measures are often used to estimate and analyze risks, and to support risk decision making1. However, quantitative measures may not be suitable or feasible for expressing residual risk levels related to emerging threats, because:

• Quantitative measures require reliable and sufficient data and information, which may not be available or accessible for the emerging threats
• Quantitative measures rely on mathematical models and techniques, which may not be able to capture or reflect the complexity and uncertainty of the emerging threats
• Quantitative measures may create a false sense of precision or accuracy, which may not be justified or warranted for the emerging threats
• Quantitative measures may be influenced or manipulated by biases or assumptions, which may not be valid or appropriate for the emerging threats67

Therefore, qualitative measures are better able to incorporate expert judgment, which can enhance the understanding and management of the residual risk levels related to emerging threats.

The other options are not the best reasons to use qualitative measures to express residual risk levels related to emerging threats, but rather some of the advantages or disadvantages of qualitative measures. Qualitative measures require less ongoing monitoring than quantitative measures, because they are simpler and easier to apply and update. However, this does not mean that qualitative measures can eliminate or reduce the need for monitoring, which is an essential part of the risk management process. Qualitative measures are better aligned to regulatory requirements than quantitative measures, because they are more consistent and comparable across different domains and contexts. However, this does not mean that qualitative measures can satisfy or comply with all the regulatory requirements, which may vary depending on the industry or sector. Qualitative measures are easier to update than quantitative measures, because they do not depend on complex calculations or formulas. However, this does not mean that qualitative measures can always reflect the current or accurate risk levels, which may change over time or due to external factors. References =

• Qualitative Risk Analysis vs. Quantitative Risk Analysis - ISACA
• Residual Risk - ISACA
• Emerging Threats - ISACA
• Expert Judgment - ISACA
• Expert Judgment in Project Management: Narrowing the Theory-Practice Gap
• Quantitative Risk Analysis - ISACA
• Quantitative Risk Analysis: A Critical Review
• [CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

 IT risk management is the process of identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks related to the use of information technology (IT) in the organization. IT risk management aims to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of IT resources and information, and to support the IT governance and strategy of the organization1.

The best indicator of the effectiveness of IT risk management processes is the time between when IT risk scenarios are identified and the enterprise’s response. This indicator can help to measure how quickly and efficiently the organization can detect and respond to the IT risks, and how well the organization can prevent or minimize the negative impacts of the IT risks. The time between when IT risk scenarios are identified and the enterprise’s response can include:

• The time taken to identify and report the IT risk scenarios, using various methods and sources, such as risk assessments, audits, monitoring, alerts, or incidents
• The time taken to analyze and evaluate the IT risk scenarios, using various tools and techniques, such as risk matrices, risk registers, risk indicators, or risk models
• The time taken to select and implement the IT risk responses, using various strategies and controls, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, or acceptance
• The time taken to review and improve the IT risk management processes, using various feedback and learning mechanisms, such as lessons learned, best practices, or benchmarks23

The other options are not the best indicators of the effectiveness of IT risk management processes, but rather some of the inputs or outputs of IT risk management processes. Percentage of business users completing risk training is an indicator of the awareness and competence of the IT users and providers, which can affect the IT risk management performance, but it does not measure the IT risk management processes directly. Percentage of high-risk scenarios for which risk action plans have been developed is an indicator of the completeness and coverage of the IT risk management activities, which can affect the IT risk management outcomes, but it does not measure the IT risk management processes directly. Number of key risk indicators (KRIs) defined is an indicator of the scope and complexity of the IT risk management objectives, which can affect the IT risk management resources and capabilities, but it does not measure the IT risk management processes directly. References =

• IT Risk Management - ISACA
• Risk Management Process - ISACA
• Risk Response - ISACA
• [CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

According to the CRISC Review Manual, notifying network administrators before testing is the best mitigating control to reduce the risk introduced when conducting penetration tests, because it helps to avoid any disruption or damage to the network services and systems. Penetration testing is a technique that simulates an attack on the network to identify and exploit the vulnerabilities and weaknesses. Notifying network administrators before testing allows them to prepare for the test, monitor the test activities, and respond to any incidents or issues that may arise during the test. The other options are not the best mitigating controls, because they do not address the risk of network disruption or damage. Requiring the vendor to sign a nondisclosure agreement is a legal measure that protects the confidentiality of the network information, but it does not prevent the vendor from causing any harm to the network. Clearly defining the project scope is a planning activity that sets the boundaries and objectives of the test, but it does not ensure the safety and availability of the network. Performing background checks on the vendor is a due diligence activity that verifies the vendor’s credentials and reputation, but it does not guarantee the vendor’s performance or behavior. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2, page 181.

The first step to reduce the likelihood of infection from the attack is to identify systems that are vulnerable to being exploited by the attack. This would help the organization to assess the scope and severity of the risk, and to prioritize the systems that need immediate protection. Identifying systems that are vulnerable to being exploited by the attack would also help the organization to apply the appropriate patches, updates, or configurations to prevent or mitigate the attack, and to isolate or disconnect the systems that are already infected or compromised. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, page 60123

 Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that provide information on the extent to which a given control is meeting its intended objectives in terms of loss prevention, reduction, etc. In order to provide such information, the control effectiveness indicator has to have an explicit relationship to both the specific control and to the specific risk against which the control has been implemented1. Therefore, the best source for identifying KCIs is to use controls mapped to organizational risk scenarios, which can help define the control objectives, the expected outcomes, and the relevant indicators for each risk scenario. This approach can also help align the KCIs with the organizational goals and strategy, and enable the monitoring and reporting of the control effectiveness23.

The other options are not the best sources for identifying KCIs, because:

• Privileged user activity monitoring controls are specific types of controls that aim to prevent unauthorized access or misuse of sensitive data or systems by privileged users. They are not a source for identifying KCIs, but rather a possible subject of KCIs. For example, a KCI for this type of control could be the number of privileged user accounts that have not been reviewed or revoked within a specified period4.
• Recent audit findings of control weaknesses are useful for identifying the gaps or deficiencies in the existing control environment, and for recommending corrective actions or improvements. However, they are not a source for identifying KCIs, but rather an input for evaluating or revising the existing KCIs. For example, if an audit finding reveals that a control is not operating as intended, or that a KCI is not providing reliable or timely information, then the control or the KCI may need to be modified or replaced5.
• A list of critical security processes is a high-level overview of the key activities or functions that are essential for maintaining the security of the organization’s assets and information. It is not a source for identifying KCIs, but rather a starting point for defining the control objectives and requirements. For example, a critical security process could be incident response, which requires a set of controls to ensure the timely and effective detection, containment, analysis, and recovery of security incidents. The KCIs for this process could be the number of incidents detected, the average time to resolve incidents, or the percentage of incidents that resulted in data breaches6.

References =

• Key Control Indicator (KCI) - CIO Wiki
• How to Develop Key Control Indicators to Improve Security Risk Monitoring - Gartner
• Indicators - Program Evaluation - CDC
• Privileged User Monitoring: What Is It and Why Is It Important? - LogRhythm
• Internal Audit Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) - AuditBoard
• Hierarchy of Controls - NIOSH - CDC

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk attitude and its willingness to take on risk in specific scenarios. Risk appetite is usually expressed in a qualitative statement approved by the board of directors1.

Risk capacity is the maximum amount of risk that an organization can responsibly take on without jeopardizing its financial stability or other key objectives. Risk capacity is determined by objective factors like income, assets, liabilities, debts, insurance coverage, dependents, and time horizon. Risk capacity is usually expressed in a quantitative measure that sets the limit of how much risk the organization can handle2.

Prudent business practice requires that risk appetite not exceed risk capacity, because this would mean that the organization is taking on more risk than it can afford or sustain. If the risk appetite is higher than the risk capacity, the organization may face serious consequences such as insolvency, bankruptcy, reputational damage, legal liability, or regulatory sanctions. Therefore, the organization should align its risk appetite with its risk capacity, and ensure that its risk exposure is within its risk tolerance3.

The other options are not correct. Inherent risk is the level of risk that exists in the absence of controls or mitigations. It is the natural level of risk inherent in a process or activity. Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the controls or mitigations have been applied. It is the remaining risk after the risk response has been implemented. Risk tolerance is the acceptable variation in the outcomes related to specific objectives or risks. It is the range of risk exposure that the organization is prepared to accept4. None of these concepts are directly comparable to risk appetite, and none of them represent the limit of how much risk the organization can take on. References =

• Risk Appetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference? - ISACA
• What Is the Difference Between Risk Tolerance and Risk Capacity? - Investopedia
• Risk Management: Understanding Risk Capacity, Appetite, and Tolerance - Consulting Edge
• [CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

Ensuring that database changes are correctly applied is the primary reason for monitoring activities performed in a production database environment, as it helps to maintain the integrity, availability, and performance of the database and the applications that depend on it. Database changes are any modifications made to the database structure, configuration, data, or code, such as adding or deleting tables, columns, indexes, or triggers, updating or inserting data, or altering stored procedures or functions. Database changes can have significant impacts on the database functionality and behavior, and may introduce errors, inconsistencies, or vulnerabilities if not applied correctly. Therefore, monitoring database changes is essential to verify that the changes are implemented as intended, comply with the design specifications and standards, and do not cause any adverse effects or conflicts with the existing database or application components.

The other options are not the primary reasons for monitoring activities performed in a production database environment. Enforcing that changes are authorized is an important aspect of database change management, but it is not the main purpose of database monitoring. Database change management is the process of planning, reviewing, approving, and implementing database changes in a controlled and consistent manner. Database change management helps to ensure that the changes are authorized by the appropriate stakeholders, aligned with the business requirements and objectives, and documented and communicated to the relevant parties. Database monitoring can support database change management by providing information and feedback on the change implementation and performance, but it does not enforce the change authorization. Deterring illicit actions of database administrators is a possible benefit of database monitoring, but it is not the primary reason for it. Database administrators are the users who have the highest level of access and privilege to the database, and they are responsible for managing and maintaining the database operations and security. Database monitoring can help to deter illicit actions of database administrators by tracking and auditing their activities and actions on the database, and alerting or escalating any suspicious or malicious behavior. However, database monitoring is not the only or the most effective way to prevent or detect illicit actions of database administrators. Other measures, such as implementing the principle of least privilege, segregating duties, enforcing password policies, and encrypting data, are also necessary to protect the database from unauthorized or improper access or manipulation by database administrators or other users. Preventing system developers from accessing production data is a possible benefit of database monitoring, but it is not the primary reason for it. System developers are the users who design, develop, and test the applications that interact with the database. System developers should not have access to the production data, as it may contain sensitive or confidential information that could be compromised or misused by the developers. System developers should only use test or dummy data for their development and testing purposes. Database monitoring can help to prevent system developers from accessing production data by controlling and restricting their access and privilege to the database, and logging and reporting any unauthorized or inappropriate access attempts. However, database monitoring is not the only or the most effective way to prevent system developers from accessing production data. Other measures, such as implementing access control policies, masking or anonymizing data, and isolating development and production environments, are also necessary to safeguard the production data from system developers or other users. References = Database Monitoring: Basics & Introduction | Splunk, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Best Practices for Database Performance Monitoring

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a metric that reflects how well an organization is achieving its goals and objectives. A KPI should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. For an IT department that has organized training sessions to improve user awareness of organizational information security policies, the best KPI to reflect the effectiveness of the training is the percentage of staff members who complete the training with a passing score. This KPI measures the level of knowledge and understanding of the security policies among the staff members, as well as the quality and impact of the training sessions. It also indicates whether the training sessions have met the predefined criteria and standards for success. A high percentage of staff members who complete the training with a passing score implies that the training sessions have been effective in improving user awareness of organizational information security policies. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, p. 117-118

The best recommendation for a risk practitioner when an employee lost a personal mobile device that may contain sensitive corporate information is to initiate a remote data wipe. A remote data wipe is a process of erasing the data stored on a device remotely, using a command sent over a network or a wireless connection. A remote data wipe can help to prevent the unauthorized access, use, disclosure, or theft of the sensitive corporate information, and to minimize the potential impact of the loss on the enterprise’s reputation, operations, and compliance. A remote data wipe can also help to comply with the data breach notification laws and regulations, and to reduce the legal liability and penalties. Conducting a risk analysis, invoking the incident response plan, and disabling the user account are not as immediate and effective as initiating a remote data wipe, as they do not address the primary risk of data exposure and loss. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a root cause analysis is a technique that identifies the underlying causes of an event or a problem. It helps to determine the most effective actions to prevent or mitigate the recurrence of the event or problem. A root cause analysis is the best approach for the risk practitioner to take in this scenario, because it will help to understand why the number of emergency changes has increased substantially and what can be done to address the issue. The other options are not the best approaches, because they do not address the underlying causes of the problem. Temporarily suspending emergency changes may disrupt the business operations and create more risks. Documenting the control deficiency in the risk register is a passive action that does not resolve the problem. Continuing monitoring change management metrics is an ongoing activity that does not provide any insight into the problem. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.4, page 130.

Role-based access controls (RBAC) are a type of preventive control that limit the access and actions of users based on their roles and responsibilities within the organization. RBAC can help to address the risk of malicious outsiders modifying application data by restricting their access to the data and the functions they can perform on it. RBAC can also enforce the principle of least privilege, which means that users only have the minimum level of access required to perform their tasks. RBAC can be implemented through policies, procedures, and technical mechanisms such as access control lists, encryption, and authentication. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.1, p. 178-179

A standardized risk taxonomy is a common language and structure for identifying, analyzing, and reporting risks across the enterprise. It enables consistent and comparable risk assessment and aggregation, as well as clear communication and coordination among different divisions. A list of control deficiencies, an enterprise risk ownership policy, and an updated risk tolerance metric are not sufficient to enable management of risk at the enterprise level, as they do not address the issue of risk alignment and integration among divisions. References = [CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version)], page 42; CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 197.

A business system is a set of interconnected processes, functions, or activities that support the operations and objectives of a business1. A security gap is a weakness or flaw in a business system that can be exploited by a threat to cause harm or gain unauthorized access2. A control is a measure or mechanism that reduces the likelihood or impact of a security gap or threat3.

The best way to determine whether new controls mitigate security gaps in a business system is to perform a vulnerability assessment. A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the security gaps and threats in a business system, and testing the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls that are implemented to address them. A vulnerability assessment can help to:

• Measure and compare the current and desired state of the security posture and performance of the business system
• Detect and prioritize the most critical and urgent security gaps and threats that may compromise the business system or its objectives
• Validate and validate the adequacy and reliability of the new controls and their ability to prevent, detect, or respond to security incidents or breaches
• Provide feedback and recommendations for improving the security of the business system and enhancing the security awareness and culture of the organization

References = What is a Business System?, What is a Security Gap?, What is a Control?, [What is a Vulnerability Assessment?], [Vulnerability Assessment: A Guide for Business Leaders]

Risk management maturity level is the degree to which an organization has developed and implemented a systematic and proactive approach to managing the risks that it faces across its various functions, processes, and activities. Risk management maturity level reflects the organization’s risk culture and capability, and its alignment with its objectives and strategies1.

The best measurement of an organization’s risk management maturity level is the key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics or measures that provide information on the current or potential exposure and performance of the organization in relation to specific risks. KRIs can help to:

• Monitor and track the changes or trends in the risk level and the risk response over time
• Identify and alert the risk issues or events that require attention or action
• Evaluate and report the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management processes and practices
• Support and inform the risk decision making and improvement23

KRIs can be classified into different types, such as:

• Leading KRIs, which are forward-looking and predictive, and indicate the likelihood or probability of a risk event occurring in the future
• Lagging KRIs, which are backward-looking and descriptive, and indicate the impact or consequence of a risk event that has already occurred
• Quantitative KRIs, which are numerical or measurable, and indicate the magnitude or severity of a risk event or outcome
• Qualitative KRIs, which are descriptive or subjective, and indicate the nature or characteristics of a risk event or outcome4

The other options are not the best measurements of an organization’s risk management maturity level, but rather some of the factors or outcomes of it. Level of residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the risk response has been implemented. Level of residual risk reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response, and the need for further action or monitoring. The results of a gap analysis are the differences between the current and the desired state of the risk management processes and practices. The results of a gap analysis reflect the completeness and coverage of the risk management activities, and the areas for improvement or enhancement. IT alignment to business objectives is the extent to which IT supports and enables the achievement of the organization’s goals and strategies. IT alignment to business objectives reflects the integration and coordination of the IT and business functions, and the optimization of the IT value and performance. References =

• Risk Maturity Assessment Explained | Risk Maturity Model
• Key Risk Indicators - ISACA
• Key Risk Indicators: What They Are and How to Use Them
• Key Risk Indicators: Types and Examples
• [CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the primary objective of providing an aggregated view of IT risk to business management is to enable consistent data on risk to be obtained, because it helps to ensure that the risk information is comparable, reliable, and accurate across the organization. An aggregated view of IT risk is a consolidated and comprehensive representation of the IT risk exposure and impact at the enterprise level, based on the risk identification, analysis, and evaluation processes. Providing an aggregated view of IT risk to business management allows them to understand the overall IT risk profile and performance, and to make informed decisions about the risk management strategies and priorities. The other options are not the primary objective of providing an aggregated view of IT risk, as they are related to other benefits or outcomes of the risk aggregation process. Allowing for proper review of risk tolerance is the objective of establishing the risk context, which defines the scope and boundaries of the risk management activities. Identifying dependencies for reporting risk is the outcome of the risk aggregation process, as it provides a clear and consistent structure and format for the risk communication and reporting. Providing consistent and clear terminology is the objective of developing the risk taxonomy, which is the system of classification and categorization of risks based on common characteristics and attributes. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, page 69.

A risk practitioner is a person who is responsible for performing risk management activities, such as identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and communicating risks. When an organization is implementing a project to automate the purchasing process, including the modification of approval controls, the task that is the responsibility of the risk practitioner is to verify that the existing controls continue to properly mitigate the defined risk. This means that the risk practitioner should ensure that the automation and modification of the approval controls do not introduce new risks or change the existing risk profile, and that the controls are still effective and adequate for the purchasing process. The risk practitioner should also monitor the performance and compliance of the controls, and recommend any improvements or adjustments as needed. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 177.

 Asset management is the process of identifying, tracking, and maintaining the physical and information assets of an organization. Asset management helps to optimize the value, performance, and security of the assets, and support the business objectives and strategies. The factor that would be of greatest concern regarding an organization’s asset management is an incomplete asset inventory, which is a list of all the assets that the organization owns or uses. An incomplete asset inventory may indicate that the organization does not have a clear and accurate understanding of its assets, their location, ownership, value, dependencies, etc. This may lead to various risks, such as asset loss, theft, misuse, damage, underutilization, overutilization, etc. An incomplete asset inventory may also affect the asset classification, protection, recovery, and disposal processes. References = 6

The primary reason for sharing risk assessment reports with senior stakeholders is to support decision-making for risk response. Risk assessment reports are documents that summarize the results of the risk assessment process, such as the risk sources, causes, impacts, likelihood, and levels. Risk assessment reports also provide recommendations for risk response options, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Sharing risk assessment reports with senior stakeholders helps to inform them of the current risk situation, and to solicit their input, feedback, or approval for the risk response actions. The other options are not the primary reason for sharing risk assessment reports, although they may be secondary reasons or outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

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

The best course of action for a risk practitioner when senior management is deciding whether to share confidential data with the organization’s business partners is to submit a report to senior management containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans. A risk practitioner is a professional who is responsible for identifying, assessing, and managing the risks that could affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A risk practitioner should provide senior management with the information and guidance they need to make informed and effective decisions regarding the sharing of confidential data. A risk practitioner should submit a report that outlines the possible risk scenarios, such as data loss, theft, or compromise, and their likelihood and impact. A risk practitioner should also suggest mitigation plans, such as encryption, access control, monitoring, or contractual agreements, that could reduce or transfer the risk. The other options are not as effective as submitting a report containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans, although they may be part of or derived from the report. Designing controls to encrypt the data to be shared, developing a project plan for classification of the data, and summarizing the data protection and privacy legislation are all activities or outcomes that could be included or referenced in the report, but they are not the best course of action for a risk practitioner. References = CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 2-23

The best metric to demonstrate that servers are configured securely is the total number of servers meeting the baseline for hardening. Hardening is the process of applying security configurations and settings to servers to reduce their attack surface and vulnerability. A baseline is a standard or benchmark that defines the minimum level of security required for servers. By measuring the number of servers that meet the baseline, the organization can assess the effectiveness of its hardening efforts and identify any gaps or deviations. The other metrics, such as exceeding availability thresholds, experiencing hardware failures, or exceeding current patching standards, are not directly related to the security configuration of servers, but rather to their performance, reliability, or maintenance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2, page 2-25.

 Risk appetite is the broad-based amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the level of risk that the organization is prepared to take to achieve its strategic goals, and provides guidance and boundaries for the risk management activities and decisions. To define the risk management strategy, which is the plan and approach for managing the risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives, the factor that must be set by the board of directors is the risk appetite. The board of directors is the highest governing body of the organization, and has the ultimate responsibility and authority for setting the direction and oversight of the organization. By setting the risk appetite, the board of directors can communicate its expectations and preferences for the risk exposure and performance of the organization, and ensure alignment with the business objectives and strategies. References = 3

The most effective way to help ensure accountability for managing risk is to assign process owners to key risk areas. Process owners are the persons or entities that have the authority and responsibility to manage a specific process or a group of related processes. Process owners help to identify, assess, and respond to the risks associated with the process, and to monitor and report on the process performance and improvement. Process owners also help to communicate and coordinate the process management activities with the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Assigning process owners to key risk areas helps to ensure accountability for managing risk, because it helps to define and clarify the roles and responsibilities of the process owners, and to establish and enforce the expectations and standards for the process owners. Assigning process owners to key risk areas also helps to measure and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the process owners, and to identify and address any issues or gaps in the process management activities. The other options are not as effective as assigning process owners to key risk areas, although they may be related to the risk management process. Obtaining independent risk assessments, assigning incident response action plan responsibilities, and creating accurate process narratives are all activities that can help to support or improve the risk management process, but they do not necessarily ensure accountability for managing risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 2-11.

 The greatest concern for the risk practitioner when an organization wants to launch a campaign to advertise a new product using data analytics is the purpose limitation. Purpose limitation is a principle that states that personal data should be collected for specified, explicit, and legitimate purposes, and not further processed in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes. By using data analytics to target potential customers, the organization may violate the purpose limitation principle if the data was collected for a different purpose and the customers did not consent to the new use of their data. Data minimization, accountability, and accuracy are other principles that should be followed, but they are not as concerning as the purpose limitation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

Data anonymization is the most important control to ensure the privacy of customer information when participating in an industry benchmarking study that involves providing customer transaction records for analysis. Data anonymization is the process of removing or modifying personally identifiable information (PII) from data sets, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc., so that the data cannot be traced back to specific individuals. Data anonymization protects the confidentiality and privacy of customers, while still allowing for meaningful analysis and comparison of data. Nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), data cleansing, and data encryption are also useful controls, but they do not eliminate the risk of data breaches or unauthorized access to PII. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

The most comprehensive resource for prioritizing the implementation of information systems controls is the risk register. The risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their analysis, and their responses. The risk register provides a holistic and systematic view of the risk profile and the risk treatment of the organization. The risk register can help to prioritize the implementation of information systems controls by providing the information on the likelihood, impact, and exposure of the risks, the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, and the gaps or issues of the control environment. The other options are not as comprehensive as the risk register, as they are related to the specific aspects or components of the information systems controls, not the overall assessment and evaluation of the information systems controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

A dashboard summarizing key risk indicators (KRIs) is the best way for a risk practitioner to present an annual risk management update to the board because it provides a concise and visual overview of the current risk status, trends, and performance of the organization. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help the board monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. A summary of risk response plans, a report with control environment assessment results, and a summary of IT risk scenarios are all useful information, but they are too detailed and technical for the board, who needs a high-level and strategic view of the risk management program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

The best way to mitigate the high cost of retrieving electronic evidence associated with potential litigation is to implement policies and procedures for data retention and destruction. Data retention and destruction policies and procedures define the criteria, methods, and schedules for retaining and disposing of electronic data. They help to ensure that the electronic data is stored, managed, and deleted in a consistent, secure, and compliant manner. They also help to reduce the volume, complexity, and cost of retrieving electronic evidence, as they limit the scope, duration, and frequency of the data preservation and discovery process. The other options are not as effective as data retention and destruction policies and procedures, as they are related to the collection, analysis, or classification of electronic data, not the retention or destruction of electronic data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The primary reason an organization should include background checks on roles with elevated access to production as part of its hiring process is to reduce internal threats. Internal threats are the risks that originate from within the organization, such as employees, contractors, or partners. Roles with elevated access to production have the privilege and ability to access, modify, or delete sensitive or critical data and systems. If these roles are assigned to individuals who have malicious intent, criminal records, or conflicts of interest, they may pose a significant threat to the organization’s security, integrity, and availability. By conducting background checks, the organization can verify the identity, credentials, and history of the candidates, and prevent or minimize the possibility of hiring untrustworthy or unsuitable individuals. The other options are not as important as reducing internal threats, as they are related to the outcomes, impacts, or requirements of the roles with elevated access to production, not the reasons for conducting background checks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

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 input or 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 organization control environment is most effective when the controls perform as intended. The controls are the mechanisms or measures that are designed and implemented to prevent, detect, or correct the risks that may affect the achievement of the objectives. The controls perform as intended when they provide reasonable assurance that the risks are mitigated or managed to an acceptable level, and that the objectives are met or exceeded. The performance of the controls can be measured and evaluated by using key performance indicators (KPIs) and key risk indicators (KRIs). The other options are not as indicative of the effectiveness of the control environment, as they are related to the review, implementation, or efficiency of the controls, not the performance or assurance of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 69.

The first thing that should be done when addressing security concerns associated with a new Internet of Things (IoT) solution is to develop new IoT risk scenarios. IoT is a network of physical devices, such as sensors, cameras, appliances, etc., that are connected to the internet and can collect, process, and exchange data. IoT introduces new security concerns, such as privacy, confidentiality, integrity, availability, and accountability of the data and devices, as well as new threats and vulnerabilities, such as unauthorized access, manipulation, or disruption of the data and devices. Developing new IoT risk scenarios is the first thing that should be done, because it helps to identify, analyze, and evaluate the potential risks that could affect the IoT solution’s objectives or operations. Developing new IoT risk scenarios also helps to select the most appropriate and effective controls to minimize the risks, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risks. The other options are not the first thing that should be done, although they may be part of or derived from the IoT risk scenarios. Implementing IoT device monitoring software, introducing controls to the new threat environment, and engaging external security reviews are all activities that can help to support or improve the security of the IoT solution, but they do not necessarily identify, analyze, or evaluate the risks that could affect the IoT solution. References = 1

The primary reason to perform periodic vendor risk assessments is to monitor the vendor’s control effectiveness. A vendor risk assessment is a process of evaluating the risks associated with outsourcing a service or function to a third-party vendor. The assessment should be performed periodically to ensure that the vendor is complying with the contractual obligations, service level agreements, and security standards, and that the vendor’s controls are operating effectively to mitigate the risks. Providing input to the organization’s risk appetite, verifying the vendor’s ongoing financial viability, and assessing the vendor’s risk mitigation plans are other possible reasons, but they are not as important as monitoring the vendor’s control effectiveness. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite is influenced by various factors, such as the organization’s mission, vision, values, culture, stakeholders, resources, capabilities, etc. However, the factor that has the greatest influence on the organization’s risk appetite is the business objectives and strategies, which are the desired outcomes and the plans to achieve them. The business objectives and strategies define the direction and scope of the organization, and the risk appetite reflects the level of risk that the organization is prepared to take to accomplish them. The risk appetite should be aligned with the business objectives and strategies, and should provide guidance for the risk management activities and decisions. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 61.

The most effective practice in protecting personally identifiable information (PII) from unauthorized access in a cloud environment is to utilize encryption with logical access controls. Encryption is a technique that transforms the data into an unreadable or unintelligible form, making it inaccessible or unusable by unauthorized parties. Logical access controls are the mechanisms or rules that regulate who can access, view, modify, or delete the data, based on their identity, role, or privilege. By utilizing encryption with logical access controls, the PII can be protected from unauthorized access, disclosure, or theft, both in transit and at rest, in a cloud environment. The other options are not as effective as utilizing encryption with logical access controls, as they are related to the classification, separation, or audit of the data, not the protection or security of the data. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

Cloud computing is a model for enabling ubiquitous, convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction. The cloud computing architecture is the structure and design of the cloud environment, which includes the components, services, interfaces, standards, and configurations. The cloud computing architecture should be used as the primary basis for evaluating the state of an organization’s cloud computing environment against leading practices, as it determines the performance, security, reliability, scalability, and interoperability of the cloud services. By comparing the cloud computing architecture with the best practices and benchmarks in the industry, an organization can identify the gaps and weaknesses in the cloud environment and implement the necessary improvements and controls. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 156.

 The most concerning issue for a risk practitioner reviewing an organization risk register is that several risk action plans have missed target completion dates. This indicates that the risk responses are not being implemented effectively or timely, and that the risk exposure may not be reduced as expected. Senior management accepting more risk than usual, risk associated with many assets being expressed in qualitative terms, and many risk scenarios being owned by the same senior manager are not as concerning as the missed deadlines, as they may reflect the risk appetite, tolerance, and culture of the organization. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 10; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 140.

The most effective way to reduce risk associated with an increase of online transactions on a retailer website is to implement website activity monitoring. Website activity monitoring can help to detect and prevent fraudulent transactions, unauthorized access, data breaches, and other cyber threats that may compromise the security and integrity of the website and its data. Scalable infrastructure, a hot backup site, and transaction limits are other possible ways to reduce risk, but they are not as effective as website activity monitoring. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

The best course of action for the risk practitioner who has identified that the agreed RTO with a SaaS provider is longer than the business expectation is to collaborate with the risk owner to determine the risk response plan. The risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage the risk within their scope of responsibility. The risk response plan is the document that describes the actions and resources needed to address the risk. By collaborating with the risk owner, the risk practitioner can help to analyze the gap between the agreed RTO and the business expectation, evaluate the potential impact and consequences, and select the most appropriate risk response option, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Documenting the gap in the risk register, including a right to audit clause in the service provider contract, or advising the risk owner to accept the risk are not the best courses of action, because they do not address the root cause of the problem, or provide a solution to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-23.

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. The other 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 activities that 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 next step for the risk practitioner after identifying risk owners and responses for newly identified risk scenarios is to update the risk register with the results. The risk register is a document that records the details of the risks, such as their sources, causes, consequences, likelihood, impact, and responses. By updating the risk register with the results of the risk workshop, the risk practitioner can ensure that the risk information is current, accurate, and complete, and that the risk owners and responses are clearly defined and communicated. Developing a mechanism for monitoring residual risk, preparing a business case for the response options, and identifying resources for implementing responses are possible steps that may follow the updating of the risk register, but they are not the next step. 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 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 heat map is a graphical tool that displays the level of risk severity for various risk scenarios or categories using different colors, shapes, or sizes. A heat map is most helpful in providing a high-level overview of current IT risk severity, as it can show the relative importance and urgency of the risks, and highlight the areas that require attention or action. A heat map can also help to communicate the risk information to the stakeholders, and facilitate the risk prioritization and decision making. References = 5

 The most important thing to do when establishing an enterprise IT risk management program is to review the alignment with the organization’s strategy. The organization’s strategy is the plan or direction that the organization follows to achieve its vision, mission, and goals. The IT risk management program should be aligned with the organization’s strategy, so that it supports and enables the organization’s strategic objectives, and addresses the IT risks that could affect the organization’s performance and value. Reviewing the alignment with the organization’s strategy helps to ensure that the IT risk management program is relevant, effective, and consistent with the organization’s expectations and needs. The other options are not as important as reviewing the alignment with the organization’s strategy, although they may be useful or necessary steps or components of the IT risk management program. Understanding the organization’s information security policy, validating the organization’s data classification scheme, and reporting identified IT risk scenarios to senior management are all activities that can help to implement and improve the IT risk management program, but they are not the initial or primary thing to do. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 2-12.

 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.

 Understanding vulnerabilities associated with the use of the assets is the primary reason for a risk practitioner to review an organization’s IT asset inventory, as it helps to identify and assess the potential threats and risks to the assets. The other options are not the primary reasons for a risk practitioner to review an organization’s IT asset inventory, although they may be related to the process.

A multinational organization that operates in different countries should be aware of the legal and regulatory requirements of each jurisdiction. Some countries may have strict privacy laws that prohibit or limit the collection and use of personal information of employees, such as their criminal records, credit history, or medical conditions. Therefore, implementing standard background checks for all new employees may violate the laws in some countries and expose the organization to legal risks and reputational damage. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: IT Risk Factors, page 31.

The best control criteria to evaluate the outsourced service provider would be based on a recognized industry control framework. A control framework is a set of best practices, guidelines, and methodologies that provide a comprehensive and consistent approach to designing, implementing, and assessing controls. A recognized industry control framework is a control framework that is widely accepted and adopted by the industry and the regulators, and that reflects the current and emerging standards and expectations for the control environment. A recognized industry control framework can help to ensure that the outsourced service provider meets the minimum and acceptable level of control quality and effectiveness, and that the control evaluation is objective, reliable, and comparable. The other options are not as good as a recognized industry control framework, as they are related to the specific sources, aspects, or requirements of the control criteria, not the overall structure and quality of the control criteria. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 69.

The relationship owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for managing the relationship with the service provider. The relationship owner should be accountable for ensuring that risk responses are implemented, as they are the primary point of contact and communication with the service provider. The relationship owner can also monitor and evaluate the performance and compliance of the service provider, and enforce the contractual obligations and service level agreements. The other options are not as accountable as the relationship owner, as they are related to the assessment, security, or legal aspects of the service provider, not the management or oversight of the service provider. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The best indication that key risk indicators (KRIs) should be revised is a decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk. Risk thresholds are the predefined values or ranges that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable level of risk exposure. Critical assets are the assets that are essential or vital for the achievement of the objectives or the continuity of the operations. A decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds means that the KRIs are not capturing or reflecting the current and relevant risk exposure of the organization, and that they may not provide sufficient or accurate information for risk management decisions. Therefore, the KRIs should be revised to ensure that they cover all the critical assets and their risk thresholds. The other options are not as indicative as a decrease in the number of critical assets covered by risk thresholds, as they are related to the outcomes, impacts, or activities of the KRIs, not the scope or quality of the KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

The control owner is the person who is responsible for ensuring that the control is designed to effectively address risk. The control owner is also responsible for implementing, operating, monitoring, and maintaining the control. The control owner should ensure that the control is aligned with the risk owner’s risk appetite and tolerance, and that the control is periodically reviewed and updated to reflect changes in the risk environment. The risk manager, the control tester, and the risk owner are not directly responsible for the design of the control, although they may provide input, feedback, or approval. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 1-15.

When assessing the potential risk exposure of a loss event involving personal data, the most important factor to determine is the composition and number of records in the information asset. The composition refers to the type and sensitivity of the personal data, such as name, address, phone number, email, social security number, health information, financial information, etc. The number of records refers to the quantity and scope of the personal data that is affected by the loss event. The composition and number of records in the information asset determine the severity and impact of the loss event, as they indicate the extent of the harm and damage that can be caused to the data subjects, the organization, and other stakeholders. The composition and number of records in the information asset also influence the cost of the incident response activities, the level of the regulatory fines, and the duration of the incident containment and recovery. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 159.

The most important factor to the effectiveness of key performance indicators (KPIs) is relevance. KPIs are metrics that measure the achievement of the objectives or the performance of the processes. Relevance means that the KPIs are aligned with and support the strategic goals and priorities of the organization, and that they reflect the current and desired state of the outcomes or outputs. Relevance also means that the KPIs are meaningful and useful for the decision makers and stakeholders, and that they provide clear and actionable information for improvement or optimization. The other options are not as important as relevance, as they are related to the approval, review, or automation of the KPIs, not the quality or value of the KPIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Key Performance Indicators, page 183.

 The most important consideration when communicating the risk associated with technology end-of-life to business owners is the cost and benefit of the risk response options. Technology end-of-life is the situation when a technology product or service is no longer supported by the vendor or manufacturer, and may pose security, compatibility, or performance issues. The risk practitioner should communicate the cost and benefit of the possible risk responses, such as replacing, upgrading, or maintaining the technology, to the business owners, and help them to make informed and rational decisions. Security and availability, maintainability and reliability, and performance and productivity are other possible considerations, but they are not as important as the cost and benefit. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

The best way to increase the chances of a successful delivery of a new application and to assure the business management that IT has a plan in place for early identification of potential issues is to include business management on a weekly risk and issues report. A risk and issues report is a document that summarizes the current status, progress, and challenges of the IT project, as well as the actions and resources needed to address them. A risk and issues report helps to communicate and align the expectations and objectives of the IT and business stakeholders, and to facilitate timely and effective decision-making and problem-solving. A risk and issues report also helps to monitor and control the project scope, schedule, budget, and quality, and to ensure that the project delivers the desired value and benefits to the organization. The other options are not as effective as including business management on a weekly risk and issues report, although they may be part of the IT project management process or outcomes. Implementing a release and deployment plan, conducting comprehensive regression testing, and developing enterprise-wide key risk indicators (KRIs) are all activities that can help to ensure the quality and reliability of the new application, but they do not necessarily involve the business management or provide assurance for the early identification of potential issues. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 5-32.