Isaca CISM - Certified Information Security Manager

A balanced scorecard most effectively enables information security govern-ance. Information security governance is the process of establishing and maintaining a framework to provide assurance that information security strategies are aligned with and support business objectives, are consistent with applicable laws and regulations, and are managed effectively and efficiently1. A balanced scorecard is a tool for meas-uring and communicating the performance and progress of an organization toward its strategic goals. It typically includes four perspectives: financial, customer, internal pro-cess, and learning and growth2. A balanced scorecard can help information security managers to:

•Align information security objectives with business objectives and communicate them to senior management and other stakeholders

•Monitor and report on the effectiveness and efficiency of information security processes and controls

•Identify and prioritize improvement opportunities and corrective actions

•Demonstrate the value and benefits of information security investments

•Foster a culture of security awareness and continuous learning

Several sources have proposed models or frameworks for applying the balanced scorecard approach to information security governance34 . The other options are not the most effective applications of a balanced scorecard for information security. Pro-ject management is the process of planning, executing, monitoring, and closing pro-jects to achieve specific objectives within constraints such as time, budget, scope, and quality. A balanced scorecard can be used to measure the performance of individual projects or project portfolios, but it is not specific to information security projects. Per-formance is the degree to which an organization or a process achieves its objectives or meets its standards. A balanced scorecard can be used to measure the performance of information security processes or functions, but it is not limited to performance measurement. Risk management is the process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and communicating risks that affect an organization’s objec-tives. A balanced scorecard can be used to measure the risk exposure and risk appetite of an organization, but it is not a tool for risk assessment or treatment. References: 1: Information Security Governance - ISACA 2: Balanced scorecard - Wikipedia 3: Key Per-formance Indicators for Security Governance Part 1 - ISACA 4: A Strategy Map for Se-curity Leaders: Applying the Balanced Scorecard Framework to Information Security - Security Intelligence : How to Measure Security From a Governance Perspective - ISA-CA : Project management - Wikipedia : Performance measurement - Wikipedia : Risk management - Wikipedia

A capability maturity model evaluation is the best way to determine the gap between the present and desired state of an information security program because it provides a systematic and structured approach to assess the current level of maturity of the information security processes and practices, and compare them with the desired or target level of maturity that is aligned with the business objectives and requirements. A capability maturity model evaluation can also help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the information security program, prioritize the improvement areas, and develop a roadmap for achieving the desired state.

References = Information Security Architecture: Gap Assessment and Prioritization, CISM Review Manual 15th Edition

Asset classification is the process of assigning a value to information assets based on their importance to the organization and the potential impact of their compromise, loss or damage1. Asset classification helps to determine the level of protection required for assets, which is proportional to their value and sensitivity2. Asset classification also facilitates risk assessment and management, as well as compliance with legal, regulatory and contractual requirements3. Asset classification does not primarily determine the insurance coverage, priority for replacement, or replacement cost of assets, as these factors depend on other criteria such as risk appetite, business impact, availability and market value4. References = 1: CISM - Information Asset Classification Flashcards | Quizlet 2: CISM Exam Content Outline | CISM Certification | ISACA 3: CIS Control 1: Inventory and Control of Enterprise Assets 4: CISSP versus the CISM Certification | ISC2

= Annual loss expectancy (ALE) is the most important criterion when deciding whether to accept residual risk, because it represents the expected monetary loss for an asset due to a risk over a one-year period. ALE is calculated by multiplying the annual rate of occurrence (ARO) of a risk event by the single loss expectancy (SLE) of the asset. ARO is the estimated frequency of a risk event occurring within a one-year period, and SLE is the estimated cost of a single occurrence of a risk event. ALE helps to compare the cost and benefit of different risk responses, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, or acceptance. Risk acceptance is appropriate when the ALE is lower than the cost of other risk responses, or when the risk is unavoidable or acceptable within the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. ALE also helps to prioritize the risks that need more attention and resources.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 2: Information Risk Management, Section: Risk Assessment, page 831; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, Question 22, page 242

 Performing a risk assessment is the best approach to determine how to protect newly acquired data assets prior to integration, as it will help to identify the threats, vulnerabilities, impacts, and likelihoods of the data assets, and to prioritize the appropriate risk treatment options. Including security requirements in the contract is a good practice, but it may not be sufficient to address the specific risks of the data assets. Assessing security controls and reviewing data architecture are also important steps, but they should be done after performing a risk assessment, as they will depend on the risk level and the risk app

The best approach to determine how to protect newly acquired data assets prior to integration is to perform a risk assessment. A risk assessment will identify the various threats and vulnerabilities associated with the data assets and help the organization develop an appropriate security strategy. This risk assessment should include an assessment of the security controls in place to protect the data, a review of the data architecture, and a review of any contractual requirements related to security.

The best way to support the incident management process for attacks on an organization’s supply chain is to establish communication paths with vendors. This means that the organization and its vendors have clear and agreed-upon channels, methods, and protocols for exchanging information and coordinating actions in the event of an incident that affects the supply chain. Communication paths with vendors can help to identify the source, scope, and impact of the incident, as well as to share best practices, lessons learned, and recovery strategies. Communication paths with vendors can also facilitate the escalation and resolution of the incident, as well as the reporting and documentation of the incident. Communication paths with vendors are part of the incident response plan (IRP), which is a component of the information security program (ISP) 12345.

The other options are not the best ways to support the incident management process for attacks on the organization’s supply chain. Including service level agreements (SLAs) in vendor contracts can help to define the expectations and obligations of the parties involved in the supply chain, as well as the penalties for non-compliance. However, SLAs do not necessarily address the specific procedures and requirements for incident management, nor do they ensure effective communication and collaboration among the parties. Requiring security awareness training for vendor staff can help to reduce the likelihood and severity of incidents by enhancing the knowledge and skills of the vendor personnel who handle the organization’s data and systems. However, security awareness training does not guarantee that the vendor staff will follow the appropriate incident management processes, nor does it address the communication and coordination issues that may arise during an incident. Performing integration testing with vendor systems can help to ensure the compatibility and functionality of the systems that are part of the supply chain, as well as to identify and mitigate any vulnerabilities or errors that could lead to incidents. However, integration testing does not cover all the possible scenarios and risks that could affect the supply chain, nor does it provide the necessary communication and response mechanisms for incident management. References = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

https://niccs.cisa.gov/education-training/catalog/skillsoft/cism-information-security-incident-management-part-1 https://niccs.cisa.gov/education-training/catalog/skillsoft/cism-information-security-incident-management-part-1

The Information Security Manager's primary responsibility is to ensure that the organization's information assets are adequately protected. In this scenario, there is a conflict between the approved mobile access policy and industry best practices. Developing security standards based on a flawed policy could lead to significant security vulnerabilities.

Why the other options are not the best course of action:

A. Align the standards with the organizational policy: This would perpetuate the misalignment with best practices, potentially leaving the organization exposed to risks.

B. Align the standards with industry best practices: While this is ideal from a security perspective, it directly contradicts the approved policy, which could create operational and compliance issues.

D. Perform a cost-benefit analysis of aligning the standards to policy: A cost-benefit analysis might be useful at some point, but it does not address the fundamental issue of a policy that is not in line with best practices.

Key CISM Principles Reflected:

Alignment with Organizational Objectives: Security standards and policies should support and enable the organization's business objectives.

Risk Management: Identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks are essential elements of information security management.

Governance: Effective governance ensures that information security activities are aligned with the organization's strategies and objectives.

In summary: The Information Security Manager should proactively engage senior management to highlight the discrepancy between the approved policy and industry best practices. The goal is to revise the policy to ensure it adequately addresses security risks while supporting the organization's objectives. Once the policy is aligned with best practices, the security standards can be developed accordingly.

 The most important reason to conduct interviews as part of the business impact analysis (BIA) process is to obtain input from as many relevant stakeholders as possible. A BIA is a process of identifying and analyzing the potential effects of disruptive events on the organization’s critical business functions, processes, and resources. A BIA helps to determine the recovery priorities, objectives, and strategies for the organization’s continuity planning. Interviews are one of the methods to collect data and information for the BIA, and they involve direct and interactive communication with the stakeholders who are involved in or affected by the business functions, processes, and resources. By conducting interviews, the information security manager can obtain input from as many relevant stakeholders as possible, such as business owners, managers, users, customers, suppliers, regulators, and partners. This can help to ensure that the BIA covers the full scope and complexity of the organization’s business activities, and that the BIA reflects the accurate, current, and comprehensive views and expectations of the stakeholders. Interviews can also help to validate, clarify, and supplement the data and information obtained from other sources, such as surveys, questionnaires, documents, or systems. Interviews can also help to build rapport, trust, and collaboration among the stakeholders, and to increase their awareness, involvement, and commitment to the information security and continuity planning.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 3: Information Security Program Development and Management, Section: Business Impact Analysis (BIA), pages 178-1801; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, Question 65, page 602.

A post-incident review is a process of analyzing an incident and its impact, identifying the root causes, and recommending corrective actions to prevent recurrence. The first step of a post-incident review is to perform root cause analysis, which is the process of identifying the underlying factors that contributed to the occurrence and severity of the incident. Root cause analysis helps to determine the most effective and efficient solutions to address the problem and avoid future incidents. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.5.2.11

Updating details within the risk register is the next step for the information security manager to do after senior management has accepted the risk of noncompliance with a new regulation because it records and communicates the risk status, impact, and response strategy to the relevant stakeholders. Reporting the decision to the compliance officer is not the next step, but rather a possible subsequent step that involves informing and consulting with the compliance officer about the risk acceptance and its implications. Reassessing the organization’s risk tolerance is not the next step, but rather a possible subsequent step that involves reviewing and adjusting the organization’s risk appetite and thresholds based on the risk acceptance and its implications. Assessing the impact of the regulation is not the next step, but rather a previous step that involves analyzing and evaluating the potential consequences and likelihood of noncompliance with the regulation. References: https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2016/volume-6/how-to-measure-the-effectiveness-of-information-security-using-iso-27004 https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2017/volume-3/how-to-measure-the-effectiveness-of-your-information-security-management-system

The primary objective of performing a vulnerability assessment following a business system update is to review the effectiveness of controls. A vulnerability assessment is a systematic review of security weaknesses in an information system. It evaluates if the system is susceptible to any known vulnerabilities, assigns severity levels to those vulnerabilities, and recommends remediation or mitigation, if and whenever needed1. A business system update is a process of modifying or enhancing an information system to improve its functionality, performance, security, or compatibility. A business system update may introduce new features, fix bugs, patch vulnerabilities, or comply with new standards or regulations2. Performing a vulnerability assessment following a business system update is important because it helps to:

•Review the effectiveness of controls that are implemented to protect the information sys-tem from threats and risks

•Identify any new or residual vulnerabilities that may have been introduced or exposed by the update

•Evaluate the impact and likelihood of potential incidents that may exploit the vulnerabili-ties

•Prioritize and implement appropriate actions to address the vulnerabilities

•Verify and validate the security posture and compliance of the updated information sys-tem

Therefore, the primary objective of performing a vulnerability assessment following a business system update is to review the effectiveness of controls that are designed to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information system and its data. The other options are not the primary objectives of performing a vulnerability as-sessment following a business system update. Determining operational losses is not an objective, but rather a possible consequence of not performing a vulnerability as-sessment or not addressing the identified vulnerabilities. Improving the change control process is not an objective, but rather a possible outcome of performing a vulnerability assessment and incorporating its results and recommendations into the change man-agement cycle. Updating the threat landscape is not an objective, but rather a prereq-uisite for performing a vulnerability assessment that requires using up-to-date sources of threat intelligence and vulnerability information. References: 1: Vulnerability As-sessment - NIST 2: System Update - Techopedia : Vulnerability Assessment vs Penetra-tion Testing - Imperva : Change Control Process - NIST : Threat Landscape - NIST

The most important information to present to senior management when reporting on the performance of the initiative to mitigate risk associated with ransomware is the cost and associated risk reduction, which means showing the value and effectiveness of the technical and administrative controls in terms of reducing the likelihood and impact of ransomware incidents and data extortion, and comparing them with the investment and resources required to implement and maintain them. The cost and associated risk reduction can help senior management to evaluate the return on investment (ROI) and the alignment with the business objectives and risk appetite of the initiative.

References = Ransomware Risk Management - NIST, #StopRansomware Guide | CISA

To effectively manage an organization’s information security risk, it is most important to establish and communicate risk tolerance, which is the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or bear. By establishing and communicating risk tolerance, the organization can align its risk management strategy and objectives with its business goals and values, and ensure that the risk management activities and decisions are consistent and appropriate across the organization.

 When investigating an information security incident, details of the incident should be shared only as needed, according to the principle of least privilege and the need-to-know basis. This means that only the authorized and relevant parties who have a legitimate purpose and role in the incident response process should have access to the incident information, and only to the extent that is necessary for them to perform their duties. Sharing incident details only as needed helps to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the incident information, as well as the privacy and reputation of the affected individuals and the organization. Sharing incident details only as needed also helps to prevent unauthorized disclosure, modification, deletion, or misuse of the incident information, which could compromise the investigation, evidence, remediation, or legal actions.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 4: Information Security Incident Management, Section: Incident Response Process, page 2311; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, Question 49, page 462.

Security hardening is the process of applying security configuration settings to systems and software to reduce their attack surface and improve their resistance to threats1. Security hardening settings are based on industry standards and best practices, such as the CIS Benchmarks2, which provide recommended security configurations for various software applications, operating systems, and network devices. However, security hardening settings may not always be compatible with the business requirements and objectives of an organization, and may negatively impact the functionality, performance, or usability of the systems and software3. Therefore, before applying any security hardening settings, an information security manager should perform a risk assessment to evaluate the potential benefits and drawbacks of the settings, and to identify and prioritize the risks associated with them. A risk assessment is a systematic process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that an organization faces, and determining the appropriate risk responses. A risk assessment helps the information security manager to balance the security and business needs of the organization, and to communicate the risk level and impact to the relevant stakeholders. A risk assessment should be performed first, before taking any other actions, such as reducing security hardening settings, informing business management of the risk, or documenting a security exception, because it provides the necessary information and justification for making informed and rational decisions. References = 1: Basics of the CIS Hardening Guidelines | RSI Security 2: CIS Baseline Hardening and Security Configuration Guide | CalCom 3: CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 121 : CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 122 : CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 145 : CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 146 : CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 147

Human error remains the leading cause of cybersecurity breaches, including mishandling data, misconfigurations, and falling for phishing attacks.

“Human error continues to be one of the most common causes of data breaches and security incidents.”

— CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 4: Incident Management, Section: Root Cause Analysis*