Isaca CRISC - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

User accounts provisioning is the process of creating, managing, and modifying user accounts within a system or an application, based on the user’s roles, responsibilities, and requirements. User accounts provisioning is an essential part of identity and access management (IAM), which aims to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the system or the application, and the information or resources that it handles or supports1.

The best key performance indicator (KPI) for monitoring adherence to an organization’s user accounts provisioning practices is the percentage of accounts without documented approval, because it can help to measure how well the organization follows the policies, standards, and procedures for user accounts provisioning, and how effectively the organization controls andaudits the user accounts provisioning activities. The percentage of accounts without documented approval can indicate:

The level of compliance and accountability of the user accounts provisioning process, and the extent to which the user accounts provisioning requests and actions are authorized and verified by the appropriate parties, such as managers, IT staff, or security officers

The level of risk and exposure of the user accounts provisioning process, and the likelihood and impact of unauthorized or inappropriate user accounts provisioning, such as granting excessive or unnecessary access privileges, creating duplicate or fraudulent accounts, or violating legal or regulatory requirements

The level of quality and efficiency of the user accounts provisioning process, and the ability and capacity of the organization to manage and maintain the user accounts provisioning records and documents, such as forms, logs, or reports23

The other options are not the best KPIs for monitoring adherence to an organization’s user accounts provisioning practices, but rather some of the factors or outcomes of it. User accountswith default passwords are user accounts that have not changed their passwords from the initial or default values that are assigned by the system or the application. User accounts with default passwords are a factor that can increase the risk of unauthorized or malicious access to the system or the application, as the default passwords may be easily guessed or compromised by attackers. Active accounts belonging to former personnel are user accounts that have not been deactivated or deleted after the users have left the organization. Active accounts belonging to former personnel are an outcome of ineffective or inefficient user accounts deprovisioning, which is the process of revoking or removing the user accounts and access privileges when they are no longer needed or valid. Accounts with dormant activity are user accounts that have not been used or accessed for a long period of time. Accounts with dormant activity are an outcome of poor or inconsistent user accounts management, which is the process of updating or modifying the user accounts and access privileges according to the changes or needs of the users or the organization4. References =

User Provisioning for SaaS Apps: Top 10 Best Practices | Resmo

Top Identity and Access Management Metrics

KPI-driven approach to Identity & Access Management - Elimity

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying controls to mitigate the inherent risk. Inherent risk is the risk that exists before considering the controls. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metricsthat measure the level and impact of risks. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. The failure of the data loss prevention (DLP) system to detect outgoing emails containing credit card data would most impact the residual risk, because it would increase the likelihood and impact of data leakage, data loss, and data exfiltration incidents. These incidents could cause financial, reputational, legal, and regulatory damages to the organization. The failure of the DLP system would also affect the KRIs, as they would show a higher level of risk exposure and a lower level of control effectiveness. However, the KRIs are not the risk itself, but rather the indicators of the risk. The failure of the DLP system would not directly impact the inherent risk or the risk appetite, as they are independent of the controls. The inherent risk would remain the same, as it is based on the nature and value of the data and the threats and vulnerabilities that exist. The risk appetite would also remain the same, as it is based on the organization’s culture, strategy, and stakeholder expectations. Therefore, the most impacted factor would be the residual risk, as it reflects the actual risk level that the organization faces after applying the controls. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

A compensating control addresses risk when the primary control cannot meet the required objectives due to practical constraints.

The operational risk associated with attacks on a web application should be owned by the individual in charge of the business function, because they are the primary stakeholder and beneficiary of the web application, and they are responsible for defining and achieving the business objectives and requirements that the web application supports or enables. Anoperational risk is a risk of loss or damage resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people, or systems, or from external events. An attack on a web application is a type of operational risk that involves a malicious or unauthorized attempt to compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the web application, such as a denial-of-service attack, a SQL injection attack, or a cross-site scripting attack. A web application is an application that runs on a web server and can be accessed or used through a web browser, such as an online shopping site, a social media platform, or a web-based email service. A business function is a set of activities or tasks that support or enable the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, such as marketing, sales, or customer service. A risk owner is a person or role that has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk, and to implement and monitor the risk response and controls. The individual in charge of the business function should be the risk owner, as they have the best understanding and interest of the web application and its business value and impact, and they have the ability and responsibility to manage the operational risk associated with the attacks on the web application. The individual in charge of network operations, the cybersecurity function, or application development are all possible candidates for the risk owner, but they are not the best choice, as they may not have the same level of stake and influence in the web application and its business objectives and requirements, and they may have different orconflicting priorities or perspectives on the operational risk and its management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 101

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 andresponsibility 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.

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 is most useful to an organization when it provides a reference for progress, meaning that it helps the organization to assess its current state, identify its strengths and weaknesses, set its goals and objectives, and measure itsperformance and improvement over time. A maturity model can also help the organization to compare itself with best practices and standards, but benchmarking against other organizations is not its primary purpose. A maturity model can also help the organization to manage its risks, but defining a qualitative measure of risk or providingrisk metrics is not its main function. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2.1, p. 118-119

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics or measures that provide information on the current or potential exposure and performance of an 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, and support and inform the risk decision making and improvement1.

The best way to enable the identification of trends in risk levels is to ensure that the correlation between risk levels and KRIs is positive, because it means that the KRIs are aligned with andreflective of the risk levels, and that they can capture and indicate the variations or movements in the risk levels accurately and reliably. A positive correlation between risk levels and KRIs can be achieved by:

Selecting and defining the KRIs that are relevant and appropriate for the specific risks that the organization faces, and that are consistent and comparable across different domains and contexts

Collecting and analyzing the data and information that are reliable and sufficient for the KRIs, and that are sourced from various methods and sources, such as risk assessments, audits, monitoring, alerts, or incidents

Applying and using the tools and techniques that are suitable and feasible for the KRIs, such as risk matrices, risk registers, risk indicators, or risk models

Reviewing and updating the KRIs periodically or as needed, and ensuring that they reflect the current or accurate risk levels, which may change over time or due to external factors23

The other options are not the best ways to enable the identification of trends in risk levels, but rather some of the factors or aspects of KRIs. Measurements for KRIs are repeatable is a factor that can enhance the reliability and validity of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs can produce the same or similar results under the same or similar conditions. However, repeatability does not necessarily imply accuracy or sensitivity, and it may not capture or reflect the changes or trends in the risk levels. Quantitative measurements are used for KRIs is an aspect that can improve the objectivity and precision of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs are expressed in numerical or measurable values, such as percentages, probabilities, or monetary amounts. However, quantitative measurements may not be suitable or feasible for all types of risks or KRIs, and they may not capture or reflect the complexity or uncertainty of the risk levels. Qualitative definitions for KRIs are used is an aspect that can enhance the understanding and communication of the KRIs, as it means that the KRIs are expressed in descriptive or subjective terms, such as high, medium, or low, based on criteria such as likelihood, impact, or severity. However, qualitative definitions may not be consistent or comparable across different risks or KRIs, and they may not capture or reflect the magnitude or variation of the risk levels. References =

Key Risk Indicators: What They Are and How to Use Them

Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

Key Risk Indicators: Types and Examples

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

ï‚· Digital Signature Software:

Digital signatures are used to verify the authenticity and integrity of a message, document, or software. They provide cryptographic proof that the information has not been altered and that it comes from a verified source.

ï‚· Importance of Nonrepudiation:

Nonrepudiation ensures that the sender of the message cannot deny having sent the message and the recipient cannot deny having received it. This is critical for legal and security purposes, as it provides undeniable proof of the origin and integrity of the information.

ï‚· Selecting Digital Signature Software:

When selecting digital signature software, the most important consideration is that it provides strong nonrepudiation capabilities. This ensures that all parties involved can trust the authenticity and integrity of the signed data.

ï‚· Comparing Other Considerations:

Availability:Ensures the software is accessible when needed but does not directly impact the trustworthiness of the signatures.

Accuracy:Important but generally inherent in properly functioning digital signature software.

Completeness:Ensures all required information is included but nonrepudiation is the critical factor for security and legal purposes.

ï‚· References:

The CISSP Study Guide emphasizes the importance of nonrepudiation in digital signature technology to ensure authenticity and accountability (Sybex CISSP Study Guide, Chapter 7: PKI and Cryptographic Applications)​​.

The best way to provide assurance of the effectiveness of vendor security controls is to require independent control assessments. Independent control assessments are evaluations of thevendor’s security controls by a third-party auditor or assessor, such as an external auditor, a certification body, or a testing laboratory. Independent control assessments provide an objective and unbiased opinion on the adequacy and performance of the vendor’s security controls, as well as the compliance with relevant standards and regulations. Independent control assessments can also provide evidence and assurance to the customers of the vendor’s security posture and capabilities. Reviewing vendor control self-assessments (CSA), vendor service level agreement(SLA) metrics, or vendor references from existing customers are not as reliable or credible as independent control assessments, because they may be biased, incomplete, or outdated.

The risk associated with an asset after controls are applied can be expressed as a function of the likelihood and impact, as it helps to measure and quantify the residual risk level and exposure. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls or risk treatments. Residual risk can be calculated by multiplying the likelihood and impact of a risk event, where likelihood is the probability or frequency of the risk event occurring, and impact is the consequence or severity of the risk event on the asset or objective. Residual risk can be expressed as:

ResidualRisk=Likelihood×Impact

Expressing the risk associated with an asset after controls are applied as a function of the likelihood and impact helps to provide the following benefits:

It enables a data-driven and evidence-based approach to risk assessment and reporting, rather than relying on subjective or qualitative judgments.

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating risk levels and exposure across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the alignment of risk management and control activities with the organizational strategy and objectives, and helps to evaluate the achievement of the desired outcomes.

It helps to identify and prioritize the areas for improvement and enhancement of the risk management and control processes, and guide the development and implementation of corrective or preventive actions.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the risk management and control processes, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best ways to express the risk associated with an asset after controls are applied. A function of the cost and effectiveness of controls is a measure of the inputs or outputs of therisk management and control processes, but it does not indicate the risk level or exposure. The likelihood of a given threat is a component of the risk calculation, but it does not reflect the impact or consequence of the threat. The magnitude of an impact is a component of the risk calculation, but it does not reflect the likelihood or probability of the risk event.References=Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative,IT Risk Resources | ISACA,Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management - Video & Lesson …

IT assets are the resources that support the organization’s business processes and objectives, such as hardware, software, data, and information. IT assets are the primary targets of IT risk, as they may be exposed to threats, vulnerabilities, and control deficiencies that could compromise their confidentiality, integrity, availability, or value. Therefore, identifying and classifying IT assets is the first step in developing relevant IT risk scenarios, as it helps to determine the scope, boundaries, and dependencies of the IT risk environment.

The other options are not the first things to review for identifying IT risk scenarios. Technology threats (A) are the potential sources of harm or damage to IT assets, such as natural disasters, cyberattacks, human errors, or sabotage. Technology threats are important to consider, but they are not the starting point for IT risk scenarios, as they depend on the context and characteristics of the IT assets. Security vulnerabilities © are the weaknesses or flaws in IT assets or controls that could be exploited by threats, such as outdated software, misconfigured systems, or insufficient encryption. Security vulnerabilities are also important to identify, but they are not the first thing to review, as they are specific to the IT assets and their configurations. IT risk register (D) is a document that records and tracks the identified IT risks, their analysis, evaluation, and response. IT risk register is a result of the IT risk assessment process, not an input to it.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2: 10 security risks of wearables | CSO Online2

3: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

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

5: Continuous Monitoring - ISACA3

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

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

Security Awareness Training - Cybersecurity Education Online | Proofpoint US

Continuously monitoring a critical security transformation program is crucial for a risk practitioner primarily to ensure that any risk events are identified and mitigated promptly. This ensures that the security transformation remains on track and that potential risks do not escalate to a level that could compromise the program’s success.

Identifying and Mitigating Risks:

Risk Identification:Continuously monitoring the program helps in the early identification of risks. This is essential because unidentified risks can lead to unexpected issues that might derail the program.

Timely Mitigation:Once risks are identified, it is crucial to mitigate them as quickly as possible. Delays in mitigation can allow risks to grow in impact, making them harder and more expensive to address.

Ensuring Program Continuity:

Maintaining Momentum:Security transformation programs often involve significant changes and can be disruptive. By ensuring that risks are mitigated in a timely manner, the risk practitioner helps maintain the program’s momentum and keeps it on schedule.

Preventing Escalation:Timely risk mitigation prevents minor issues from escalating into major problems that could halt the program.

Aligning with Strategic Goals:

Strategic Alignment:Ensuring timely mitigation of risks helps in keeping the program aligned with the strategic goals of the organization. It ensures that the security objectives are met without significant delays or cost overruns.

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

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

The primary objective of promoting a risk-aware culture within an organization is enabling risk-based decision making, because this helps the organization to achieve its goals and objectives while managing its risks effectively and efficiently. A risk-aware culture is one where everyone understands the organization’s approach to risk, takes personal responsibility to manage risk in everything they do, and encourages others to follow their example. A risk-aware culture also fosters communication, collaboration, and learning about risk across the organization. By promoting a risk-aware culture, the organization can empower its employees to make informed and balanced decisions that consider both the potential benefits and the potential risks of their actions. This can enhance the organization’s performance, resilience, and competitiveness in a dynamic and uncertain environment. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

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

Using the risk management process will best ensure that controls adequately support business goals and objectives, as it involves identifying, assessing, responding, and monitoring the risks that may affect the achievement of the business goals and objectives, and designing and implementing controls to mitigate those risks. Enforcing strict disciplinary procedures in case of noncompliance, reviewing results of the annual company external audit, and adopting internationally accepted controls are also good practices, but they are not the best, as they do not necessarily align the controls with the business goals and objectives. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 146.

The risk practitioner’s first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls should be A. Determine whether the impact is outside the risk appetite1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk culture, strategy, and values2

When an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, it means that the controls are not providing the expected level of protection or assurance for the information assets or processes. This may result in increased exposure or vulnerability to threats, or reduced ability to achieve objectives. Therefore, the risk practitioner should first determine whether the impact of the ineffective controls is outside the risk appetite, as this would indicate the need for urgent action or escalation3

The other options are not the first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, because:

•B. Requesting a formal acceptance of risk from senior management may be appropriate if the impact of the ineffective controls is within the risk appetite, and the organization decides to accept the risk as it is. However, this should not be the first course of action, as it may not address the root cause of the ineffective controls, or the potential consequences or opportunities for improvement4

•C. Reporting the ineffective control for inclusion in the next audit report may be part of the risk communication and reporting process, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may delay the resolution or mitigation of the issue, or the implementation of corrective actions. Moreover, the next audit report may not be timely or relevant for the decision-makers or stakeholders who need to be informed of the ineffective controls5

•D. Deploying a compensating control to address the identified deficiencies may be a possible risk response option, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may require further analysis, evaluation, and approval. Moreover, deploying a compensating control may not be the most effective or efficient solution, as it may introduce additional complexity, cost, or risk.

1: CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 100003 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 28 3: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 223 4: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 224 5: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 225 : CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 226

Reviewing the risk register is the best way to help an organization gain insight into its overall risk profile, because it provides a comprehensive and structured representation of all the key risks that the organization faces, along with their likelihood, impact, and response strategies. A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the current status of risks, their sources, causes, consequences, and controls. A risk register helps to facilitate the communication and reporting of risks, and to support the risk-based decision making and prioritization. A risk profile is a summary of the key risks that an organization faces, and their implications forthe organization’s objectives and strategy. Reviewing the risk register is the best way to understand the risk profile, as it reflects the nature and level of exposure that the organization has from the various risk sources and scenarios. Reviewing the threat landscape, the risk appetite, and the risk metrics are all useful ways to help an organization gain insight into its overall risk profile, but they are not the best way, as they do not provide a comprehensive and structured view of the risks and theirresponses. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 83

 The best way to provide information to management about emergency changes that may not be approved is to use key risk indicators (KRIs). KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. KRIs help to provide information to management about emergency changes, because they help to alert and inform management about the potential risks and consequences of the changes, and to support the risk decision-making and reporting processes. KRIs also help to provide information to management about emergency changes, because they help to track and evaluate the effectiveness and performance of the changes, and to identify and address any issues or gaps that may arise from the changes. The other options are not the best way to provide information to management about emergency changes, although they may be part of or derived from the KRIs. Change logs, change management meeting minutes, and key control indicators (KCIs) are all examples of documentation or communication tools, which may help to record or report the details and status of the changes, but they do not necessarily measure or monitor the risks and outcomes of the changes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.5.1, page 4-38.

 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

The first step in conducting a BIA is to identify critical information assets. This involves determining which assets are essential to the organization's operations and would have the most significant impact if disrupted. Understanding these assets sets the foundation for assessing potential impacts and developing appropriate recovery strategies.

Failure to utilize threat modeling during the design phase results in overlooked vulnerabilities. This highlights the importance ofProactive Threat Identificationin secure software development practices.

The management’s primary consideration when approving risk response action plans should be the changes in residual risk after implementing the plans. Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses1. It indicates the degree of exposure or uncertainty that the organization still faces, and the potential impact or consequences of the risk events. The management should evaluate the effectiveness and adequacy of the risk responses, and decide whether the residual risk is acceptable or not2. The management should also compare the residual risk with the risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives3. The management should ensure that the residual risk is aligned with the risk appetite, and that the risk responses are consistent and proportional to the risk level4.

The other options are not the primary consideration when approving risk response action plans, because:

Ability of the action plans to address multiple risk scenarios is a desirable but not essential criterion for approving risk response action plans. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how a risk event could occur and what the consequences could be5. They can help to understand and communicate the nature and impact of the risks, and to design and evaluate the risk responses6. However, not all risk scenarios are equally likely or relevant, and some risk scenarios may be too complex or improbable to address. Therefore, the ability of the action plansto address multiple risk scenarios is not the primary consideration, but rather a secondary or supplementary one.

Ease of implementing the risk treatment solution is a practical but not critical criterion for approving risk response action plans. Risk treatment is the process of selecting and applying appropriate measures to modify the risk7. It can involve different strategies, such as avoid, reduce, transfer, or accept the risk8. The ease of implementing the risk treatment solution depends on various factors, such as the availability of resources, the feasibility of the solution, or the cooperation of the stakeholders. However, the ease of implementation is not the primary consideration, but rather a supporting or facilitating one.

Prioritization for implementing the action plans is a useful but not vital criterion for approving risk response action plans. Prioritization is the process of ranking the action plans according to their importance, urgency, or impact. It can help to allocate the resources, schedule the activities, and monitor the progress of the action plans. However, prioritization is not the primary consideration, but rather a subsequent or follow-up one.

References =

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite: What It Is and Why It Matters - Gartner

Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack - ISACA

Risk Treatment - CIO Wiki

Risk Treatment Plan - CIO Wiki

[Prioritization - CIO Wiki]

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 risk profile is the most important thing to reassess when an organization implements new technologies that enable the use of robotic process automation (RPA). The risk profile is a comprehensive and dynamic view of the organization’s risks, their ratings, responses, and status. RPA can introduce new risks or change the existing risks related to the organization’s objectives, operations, and performance. For example, RPA can create risks such as system failures, databreaches, compliance violations, human errors, or ethical dilemmas. Therefore, the organization should reassess its risk profile to identify, assess, treat, monitor, and review the risks associated with RPA, and to ensure that the risk management strategy is aligned with the business needs and expectations.

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

ï‚· Understanding Reputational Risk:

Reputational risk arises from negative public perception, which can be fueled by disinformation campaigns. These campaigns spread false or misleading information about an organization, potentially damaging its reputation.

ï‚· Mitigating Reputational Risk:

The best way to mitigate this risk is to actively counteract false information and restore public trust. This involves debunking false stories and correcting misinformation promptly and effectively.

ï‚· Role of Public Relations:

Engaging public relations (PR) personnel is crucial in managing the organization's reputation. PR professionals are skilled in crafting messages, dealing with media, and using communication strategies to address and correct false narratives.

PR personnel can issue press releases, organize press conferences, and leverage social media to reach a wide audience, ensuring the correct information is disseminated.

ï‚· Monitoring and Awareness Training:

While monitoring digital platforms and providing awareness training are important, they are more preventive measures. Monitoring helps in early detection, and training aids in internalmanagement of such risks. However, they do not actively counteract the false information once it is in the public domain.

ï‚· Restricting Social Media:

Restricting social media usage on corporate networks does not address the core issue of disinformation campaigns. It may reduce internal risks but does not mitigate external reputational damage.

ï‚· References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses strategies for managing reputational risk and highlights the importance of proactive communication and public relations efforts (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.3.4 The Value of Risk Communication)​​.

The best course of action when a recent regulatory requirement has the potential to affect an organization’s use of a third party to supply outsourced business services is to conduct a gap analysis, as it involves comparing the current and desired states of compliance, and identifying any gaps or discrepancies that need to be addressed. Terminating the outsourcing agreement, identifying compensating controls, and transferring risk to the third party are not the best courses of action, as they may not be feasible, effective, or appropriate, respectively, and may require the prior knowledge of the compliance gaps and risks. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a control owner is the person who is accountable for ensuring that specific control activities are performed. The control owner is responsible for defining, implementing, monitoring, and improving the control. Therefore, the control ownershould authorize changing the control threshold value, as it is part of their role to ensure that the control is effective and efficient. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not directly involved in the control activities. The risk owner is the person who is accountable for the risk and its associated mitigation actions. The IT security manager is the person who is responsible for overseeing the IT security function and ensuring that the IT security policy is enforced. The IT system owner is the person who is responsible for the operation andmaintenance of the IT system and its associated data. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.2, page 108.

Implementing multi-factor authentication (MFA) directly reduces the likelihood of unauthorized access by adding an extra layer of verification to remote network access. ISACA and CRISC materials emphasize that technical controls (e.g., MFA) meaningfully reduce the probability of threat scenarios involving remote access

ï‚· Purpose of a Risk Register:

A risk register consolidates all identified risks, their status, and mitigation actions in one place. It serves as a tool for tracking and managing risks systematically.

ï‚· Facilitating Risk Management Functions:

By documenting risk scenarios, a risk register provides a comprehensive view of potential threats and their impact on the organization.

It enables effective communication and review of these scenarios with stakeholders, ensuring that all relevant parties are aware of and understand the risks.

ï‚· Engaging Stakeholders:

Reviewing the risk register with stakeholders helps in validating the risks, assessing their impact, and determining appropriate responses.

It fosters collaboration and ensures that risk management activities are aligned with the stakeholders' expectations and the organization's objectives.

ï‚· Comparing Other Functions:

Analyzing Risk Appetite:While important, this is not the primary function of a risk register.

Influencing Risk Culture:The risk register contributes to risk culture but is primarily a tracking and communication tool.

Articulating Senior Management's Intent:This is more related to policy and strategy documents, whereas the risk register is a practical tool for managing specific risks.

ï‚· References:

The CRISC Review Manual highlights the role of the risk register in consolidating risk information and facilitating stakeholder engagement (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.6 Risk Register)​​ .

In a SaaS environment, the provider manages infrastructure and platforms. The primary asset that remains under the organization’s control is its hosted data. Hence, data is the key business asset.

A penetration test is a simulated cyberattack on a web infrastructure to evaluate its security posture and identify any vulnerabilities or weaknesses that could be exploited by an attacker. A penetration test is the best indicator of how well a web infrastructure protects critical information from an attacker, as it mimics the real-world scenarios and techniques that an attacker would use, and measures the effectiveness of the existing security controls and countermeasures. A penetration test can also provide recommendations for improving the security of the web infrastructure and reducing the risk exposure. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 236. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 236. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10.

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 asprecise 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.

The project sponsor holds the ultimate accountability for the project's success and is typically responsible for approving significant decisions, including risk mitigation responses. Their role involves ensuring that the project aligns with business objectives and that risks are managed appropriately to achieve desired outcomes.

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

 According to the CRISC Review Manual, the average time to grant access privileges is the best indicator of the efficiency of a process for granting access privileges, because it measures how quickly and effectively the process can respond to the access requests and meet the business needs. The average time to grant access privileges can be calculated by dividing the total time spent on granting access privileges by the number of access requests processed. The other options are not the best indicators of the efficiency of the process, because they measure other aspects of the process, such as the quality, the security, or the maintenance. The number of changes in access granted to users measures the quality of the process, as it indicates how wellthe process can align the access rights with the user roles and functions. The average number of access privilege exceptions measures the security of the process, as it indicates how often theprocess deviates from the established policies and standards. The number and type of locked obsolete accounts measures the maintenance of the process, as it indicates how well the process can remove the unnecessary or outdated accounts. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.2, page 163

The most important factor to have in place to ensure the effectiveness of risk and security metrics reporting is an organizational reporting process. An organizational reporting process is a set of procedures that defines the roles, responsibilities, frequency, format, and distribution of the risk and security metrics reports. An organizational reporting process helps to ensure that the risk and security metrics are relevant, accurate, consistent, and timely, and that they provide useful information for decision making and performance improvement. An organizational reporting process also helps to align the risk and security metrics reporting with the enterprise’s objectives, strategies, and policies, and to communicate the risk and security status and issues to the appropriate stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 2421

The most important activity when conducting a post-implementation review as part of the system development life cycle (SDLC) is to verify that the project objectives are met. The project objectives are the specific and measurable outcomes that the project aims to achieve. By verifying that the project objectives are met, the post-implementation review can evaluate the success and value of the project, and identify the lessons learned and best practices for future projects. Identifying project cost overruns, leveraging an independent review team, and reviewing the project initiation risk matrix are other possible activities, but they are not as important as verifying that the project objectives are met. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

 The MOST important consideration when performing a risk assessment of a fire suppression system within a data center is the maintenance procedures, because they ensure that the fire suppression system is functioning properly and reliably, and that it can prevent or minimize the damage caused by fire incidents. The maintenance procedures should include regular testing, inspection, and servicing of the fire suppression system components, such as sprinklers, detectors, alarms, and extinguishers. The other options are not as important as the maintenance procedures, because:

Option A: Insurance coverage is a financial measure that can compensate for the loss or damage caused by fire incidents, but it does not prevent or reduce the likelihood or impact of the fire incidents. Insurance coverage is also dependent on the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, which may not cover all the scenarios or costs of the fire incidents.

Option B: Onsite replacement availability is a contingency measure that can facilitate the recovery or restoration of the fire suppression system after a fire incident, but it does not prevent or reduce the likelihood or impact of the fire incidents. Onsite replacement availability is alsodependent on the availability and compatibility of the replacement parts, which may not match the original fire suppression system specifications or requirements.

Option D: Installation manuals are a reference source that can provide guidance on how to install or configure the fire suppression system, but they do not ensure that the fire suppression system is functioning properly and reliably. Installation manuals are also static documents that may not reflect the current or updated fire suppression system standards or practices. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 211.

Facilitating the exception process ensures that any deviations from the standard risk assessment procedures are formally documented, reviewed, and approved by appropriate governance bodies. This approach maintains the integrity of the risk management process while addressing the business unit manager's concerns.

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

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that provides information on the level of exposure to a given risk. Changes in risk trend data indicate that the likelihood or probability of a risk occurring has changed. Therefore, the frequency of risk occurrence should be updated in the risk register to reflect the current risk profile. The impact, cost, and legal aspects of risk realization are not directly affected by the changes in risk trend data, unless the nature or severity of the risk has also changed. (Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 5th Edition, page 972

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. For measuring the effectiveness of an antivirus program, a possible goal is to ensure that all IT assets are protected from malware infections. A KPI that can measure this goal is the percentage of IT assets with current malware definitions, which indicates how well the antivirus program can detect and prevent the latest malware threats. The higher the percentage, the more effective the antivirus program is. Therefore, this is the best KPI among the given options. References =

Cybersecurity KPIs to Track + Examples — RiskOptics - Reciprocity

Which of the following is the BEST key performance indicator (KPI) to …

Indicators - Program Evaluation - CDC

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.

Relationship between Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance:

Risk Appetite: Defined as the amount of risk an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. It is a broad measure that reflects the organization's strategy and goals.

Risk Tolerance: Refers to the acceptable level of variation in performance relative to achieving objectives. It is narrower and can sometimes exceed the risk appetite in specific situations where deviations are permissible.

Contextual Understanding:

Controlled Exceedance: Risk tolerance allows for occasional and controlled exceedance of the risk appetite, typically under specific conditions and for compelling business reasons.

Management Decisions: Decisions to exceed risk appetite should be carefully considered and documented, ensuring they do not threaten the overall risk capacity of the organization.

Comparison with Other Options:

Independent of Each Other: Incorrect, as risk tolerance is related to risk appetite.

Risk Tolerance Determines Risk Appetite: Incorrect, risk appetite is generally broader and set before determining risk tolerance.

Synonymous: Incorrect, they are distinct concepts with risk tolerance providing operational flexibility within the boundaries set by risk appetite.

Best Practices:

Clear Definitions: Clearly define and communicate the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance.

Regular Reviews: Regularly review and adjust risk appetite and tolerance to align with changes in business strategy and external environment.

A risk awareness program is a set of activities and communication methods that aim to increase the understanding and knowledge of risk among the stakeholders of an organization. The primary objective of a risk awareness program is to enhance the organizational risk culture, which is the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes that influence how risk is perceived and managed in the organization. A risk awareness program can help to promote a risk-aware culture by:

•Educating stakeholders on the concepts and benefits of risk management

•Aligning risk management with the organization’s vision, mission, and objectives

•Encouraging stakeholder participation and collaboration in risk management processes

•Fostering a positive attitude towards risk taking and learning from failures

•Reinforcing risk management roles and responsibilities

•Recognizing and rewarding good risk management practices