Isaca CRISC - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

ï‚· Understanding the Question:

The question is about mitigating the impact of social engineering attacks that use AI technology to impersonate senior management personnel.

ï‚· Analyzing the Options:

A. Training and awareness of employees for increased vigilance:This is the most proactive approach. Educating employees about the risks and signs of social engineering attacks enhances their ability to recognize and respond appropriately to such threats.

B. Increased monitoring of executive accounts:Useful but reactive; it doesn't prevent initial attempts.

C. Subscription to data breach monitoring sites:Helps detect breaches but doesn’t directly mitigate impersonation attacks.

D. Suspension and takedown of malicious domains or accounts:Reactive measure and might not be immediate or comprehensive.

ï‚·

Importance of Training:Employees are often the first line of defense against social engineering attacks. Regular training ensures they are aware of the tactics used in such attacks, including those leveraging AI, and how to respond effectively.

Proactive Measure:Training increases vigilance and the likelihood of early detection, reducing the potential impact of the attack.

Ensuring senior management understands the organization’s risk universe in relation to the IT risk management program is primarily to define effective enterprise IT risk appetite andtolerance levels. This understanding is essential for setting the boundaries within which the organization is willing to operate regarding IT risks.

Defining Effective IT Risk Appetite and Tolerance Levels (Answer A):

Purpose: Senior management needs to understand the range and nature of IT risks to set appropriate risk appetite and tolerance levels.

Impact: This enables the organization to make informed decisions about which risks to accept, mitigate, transfer, or avoid.

Alignment: It ensures that the IT risk management strategy is aligned with the overall business objectives and risk posture of the organization.

Comparison with Other Options:

B. To execute the IT risk management strategy in support of business objectives:

Purpose: While important, it follows the definition of risk appetite and tolerance.

Limitation: Without understanding the risk universe, execution may be misaligned.

C. To establish business-aligned IT risk management organizational structures:

Purpose: Structural alignment is crucial but secondary to setting risk appetite and tolerance.

D. To assess the capabilities and maturity of the organization’s IT risk management efforts:

Purpose: This is part of the ongoing process but not the primary purpose of understanding the risk universe.

A service level agreement (SLA) is a contract between a SaaS vendor and a customer that defines the quality and availability of the SaaS service, as well as the responsibilities and obligations of both parties. An SLA is most important to include in a SaaS vendor agreement because it sets the expectations and standards for the SaaS service, provides a mechanism for measuring and monitoring the serviceperformance, and establishes the remedies and penalties for service failures or breaches. An SLA can also help to mitigate the risks and liabilities associated with SaaS delivery, such as data security, privacy, compliance, and disaster recovery. The other options are not the most important to include in a SaaS vendor agreement, although they may be beneficial or desirable depending on the context and nature of the SaaS service. An annual contract review is a process of evaluating and revising the SaaS vendor agreement to reflect the changing needs and circumstances of the customer and the vendor, but it is not a mandatory or essential element of the agreement. A requirement to adopt an established risk managementframework is a way of ensuring that the SaaS vendor follows the best practices and standards for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks related to the SaaS service, but it is not a specific or measurable term of the agreement. A requirement to provide an independent audit report is a way of verifying and validating the SaaS vendor’s compliance with the SLA and other contractual obligations, but it is not a direct or primary component of the agreement. References = SaaS Agreements: Key Contractual Provisions, SaaS Agreement: Everything You Need to Know, Essential checklist for SaaS agreement negotiations, KeyClauses To Understand and Evaluate in SaaS Contracts, SaaS Reseller Agreement: Everything You Need to Know

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.

The asset owner is the best suited to assist a risk practitioner in developing a relevant set of risk scenarios. The asset owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for the IT assets that support the business processes. The asset owner can provide valuable information on the business objectives, requirements, and expectations that the IT assets should meet. The asset owner can also help identify the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts that may affect the IT assets and the business processes. The asset owner can also suggest possible risk responses and mitigation strategies to address the risk scenarios. The other options are not as relevant as the asset owner, as they may not have the same level of knowledge, interest, or involvement in the IT assets and the business processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

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

The policy has not been approved by the organization’s board should be of most concern, as it indicates a lack of governance and oversight for the organization’s cybersecurity posture. The board is ultimately responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization, and for ensuring that the cybersecurity policy aligns with them. Without the board’s approval, the policy may not reflect the organization’s vision, mission, values, and culture, and may not be communicated, implemented, or enforced effectively. The board’s approval also demonstrates the commitment and support of the senior management for the cybersecurity program, and enhances the accountability and responsibility of the stakeholders involved.

The likelihood rating in the risk register is a measure of how probable it is that a risk event will occur, given the current conditions and controls. The risk practitioner should change the likelihood rating if there is a significant change in the effectiveness of the controls that are implemented to prevent or reduce the risk. For example, if a control becomes obsolete, ineffective, or bypassed, the likelihood rating should increase, as the risk event becomes more likely to happen. Conversely, if a control becomes more efficient, reliable, or robust, the likelihood rating should decrease, as the risk event becomes less likely to happen. The other options are not likely to cause a change in the likelihood rating, as they are not directly related to the probability of the risk event. Risk appetite is the amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Control cost is the amount of resources that are required to implement and maintain a control. Risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that an organization is willing to allow for a risk to deviate from its desired level or expected outcome. These factors may influence the risk response or the risk acceptance, but not the likelihood rating. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.4: Risk Register, p. 25-26.

KRI thresholds are the levels or points that trigger an action or a response when a KRI reaches or exceeds them. They reflect the risk appetite of the organization, which is the amount and type of risk that it is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. A new privacy regulation may reduce the risk appetite of the organization, as it may impose stricter requirements and penalties for non-compliance. Therefore, the organization may need to adjust its KRI thresholds to lower levels, to ensure that it can identify and manage privacy risks more effectively and proactively

 The best way to support risk-based decisions by senior management would be to map findings to objectives, because this would help them understand how the identified risks affect theachievement of the organization’s goals and priorities. Mapping findings to objectives would also help senior management evaluate the trade-offs between different risk responses and allocate resources accordingly. By linking risks to objectives, the risk practitioner can communicate the value and impact of risk management in a clear and relevant way. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

The situation that presents the greatest challenge to creating a comprehensive IT risk profile of an organization is having inaccurate documentation of enterprise architecture (EA). EA is the blueprint that describes the structure and operation of an organization, including its business processes, information systems, technology infrastructure, and governance. EA helps to align the IT strategy and objectives with the business strategy and objectives, and to identify and manage the IT risks and opportunities. Having inaccurate documentation of EA could lead to incomplete, inconsistent, or misleading information about the organization’s IT environment, which could affect the quality and reliability of the IT risk profile. The other situations are not as challenging as having inaccurate documentation of EA, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the IT risk profile. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 2-12.

The best course of action to address the risk associated with data transfer if the relationship is terminated with the vendor is to ensure the language in the contract explicitly states who is accountable for each step of the data transfer process. This can help to avoid ambiguity, confusion, or disputes over the ownership, responsibility, and liability of the data and the data transfer process. Meeting with the business leaders, collecting requirements, and working with the information security officer are important activities, but they are not as effective as ensuring the contractual agreement is clear and enforceable. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

Whendata owners inspect and approveincoming data, it provides assurance of its completeness and accuracy, as they are accountable for the integrity of the data under their ownership.

Limited integration with external systems and blockchainsis the greatest concern. Without considering interoperability during the SDLC, the system may not be able to connect seamlessly with partners or external networks, hindering business goals and limiting the blockchain’s benefits.

===========

The most important factor to include in the analysis of the policy exception is the risk associated with the inability to implement the multi-factor authentication requirement. A policy exception is a temporary orpermanent deviation from the established policies or standards of the organization, due to various reasons, such as budget constraints, technical limitations, or business needs. A policy exception must be submitted and approved by the appropriate authority, and it must include a clear and comprehensive analysis of the rationale, impact, and mitigation of the exception. The risk associated with the inability to implement the multi-factor authentication requirement is the most important factor to include in the analysis, because it evaluates the probability and severity of potential threats or incidents that could exploit the lack of multi-factor authentication, such as unauthorized access, data breach, or identity theft. The risk analysis also helps to justify the need and urgency of the policy exception, and to propose alternative or compensating controls to reduce or transfer the risk, such as password policies, access restrictions, or encryption. The other options are not the most important factor, although they may be relevant or supportive to the policy exception analysis. Sections of the policy that may justify not implementing the requirement are the clauses or provisions in the policy that allow or enable the policy exception, such as exemptions, waivers, or variances. These sections can help to validate the legitimacy and feasibility of the policy exception, but they do not assess the risk or the impact of the exception. Budget justification to implement the new requirement during the current year is the explanation and evidence of the financial resources and constraints that affect the implementation of the multi-factor authentication requirement. This justification can help to demonstrate the cost-benefit and return on investment of the requirement, but it does not measure the risk or the mitigation of the exception. Industry best practices with respect to implementation of the proposed control are the proven methods and standards that are adopted by the leading organizations in a specific field or sector for implementing the multi-factor authentication requirement. These best practices can help to benchmark and improve the quality and effectiveness of the requirement, but they do not quantify the risk or the impact of the exception. References = Policy Exception Management - ISACA, Multi-Factor Authentication Policy - University of Arkansas, Common Conditional Access policy: Require MFA for all users

The risk practitioner’s next step after learning of an incident that has affected a competitor is to develop risk scenarios, as it involves identifying and describing the potential sources, events, impacts, and responses of the risk that may affect the organization in a similar way as the competitor, and assessing the likelihood and magnitude of the risk. Activating the incident response plan, implementing compensating controls, and updating the risk register are not the next steps, as they are more related to the reaction, mitigation, or reporting of the risk, respectively, rather than the identification and assessment of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

Integrating risk and security requirements in an organization’s enterprise architecture (EA) helps to ensure that information assets are consistently managed throughout their life cycle, and that the risks associated with them are identified and mitigated. (Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 5th Edition, page 112)

The lack of due diligence for the recommended cloud vendor should be of greatest concern to the risk practitioner, because it exposes the organization to potential risks and issues related to the security, reliability, performance, and compliance of the cloud service provider. Due diligence is a process of conducting a thorough investigation and evaluation of a potential vendor or partnerbefore entering into a contractual relationship. Due diligence helps to verify the vendor’s credentials, capabilities, reputation, and track record, and to identify any red flags or gaps that may affect the quality or suitability of the service. Cloud computing is a model of delivering IT services over the internet, where the service provider owns and manages the IT infrastructure, platforms, or applications, and the customer pays only for the resources or functions they use. Cloud computing can offer cost savings, scalability, and flexibility for the business, but it also introduces new risks and challenges, such as data privacy, security breaches, vendor lock-in, service outages, or regulatory compliance. Therefore, performing due diligence for the recommended cloud vendor is essential to ensure that the organization’s expectations and requirements are met, and that the risks and issues are identified and addressed. The business introducing new SaaS solutions without IT approval, the maintenance of IT infrastructure being outsourced to an IaaS provider, and the architecture responsibilities not being clearly defined are all possible concerns for the risk practitioner, but they are not the greatest concern, as they can bemitigated or resolved with appropriate controls, policies, or agreements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, page 183

The risk owner holds ultimate accountability for risk treatment, as they are responsible for decisions regarding the management and mitigation of the risk. This is a fundamental principle ofRisk Ownership and Accountabilitywithin the CRISC framework.

The three lines of defense model is a framework that describes the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders in the risk management and internal control processes of an organization. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense: the operational management and staff who are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks, as well as implementing and maintaining the controls within their areas of activity.

The second line of defense: the risk management, compliance, and security functions who are responsible for establishing the risk policies and standards, providing guidance and support, monitoring and reporting on the risk performance and compliance, and facilitating the risk management and internal control processes across the organization.

The third line of defense: the internal audit function who is responsible for providing independent and objective assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and internal control processes, as well as recommending improvements and best practices. The stakeholders who are typically included as part of a line of defense within the three lines of defense model are the legal team, who belong to the second line of defense. The legal team is responsible for ensuring that the organization complies with the relevant laws and regulations, aswell as for advising and assisting the organization on the legal aspects and implications of the risk management and internal control processes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.1, p. 32-33

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

An incident is an unplanned event that disrupts or degrades the normal operation or performance of an IT service, system, or network1. An incident can cause various negative impacts, such as service outages, data losses, security breaches, or customer dissatisfaction2. An incident can recur if the underlying cause or problem of the incident is not properly identified and resolved3.

The best course of action to help reduce the probability of an incident recurring is to perform root cause analysis. Root cause analysis is a systematic process of finding and eliminating the fundamental cause or problem that led to the incident4. Root cause analysis can help to:

Prevent or minimize the recurrence of the incident by addressing the source of the problem, not just the symptoms or effects

Identify and implement corrective or preventive actions that can effectively resolve or mitigate the problem

Learn from the incident and improve the IT service, system, or network quality and reliability

Enhance the incident management and problem management processes and capabilities5

References = What is an Incident?, Incident Management - Wikipedia, Problem Management - Wikipedia, Root Cause Analysis - Wikipedia, Root Cause Analysis: A Guide for Business Leaders

When establishing leading indicators for the information security incident response process, it is most important to consider the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the service levelagreement (SLA). A leading indicator is a metric that can predict or influence the future performance or outcome of a process or activity. A leading indicator for the information security incident response process should measure how well the process is achieving its objectives, such as minimizing the impact of incidents, restoring normal operations as quickly as possible, and preventing recurrence of incidents. The percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is a leading indicator that reflects the efficiency and effectiveness of the information security incident response process. It shows how well the process is meeting the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders, such as the business units, customers, and regulators. It also shows how well the process is managing the resources, such as time, budget, and personnel, that are allocated for incident response. A high percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA indicates that the information security incident response process is performing well and delivering value to the organization. A low percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA indicates that the information security incident response process is facing challenges and needs improvement. The percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA can also help identify the root causes of incidents, the gaps in the process, and the areas for improvement. For example, if the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is low, it may indicate that the process has issues with the following aspects: - Incident detection and reporting: The process may not have adequate tools, techniques, or procedures to detect and report incidents in a timely and accurate manner. - Incident prioritization and classification: The process may not have clear and consistent criteria to prioritize and classify incidents based on their severity, impact, and urgency. - Incident analysis and investigation: The process may not have sufficient skills, knowledge, or evidence to analyze and investigate the incidents and determine their root causes, scope, and consequences. - Incident containment and eradication: The process may not have effective methods or measures to contain and eradicate the incidents and prevent them from spreading or escalating. - Incidentrecovery and restoration: The process may not have reliable backup and recovery plans or systems to restore the normal operations and functionality of the affected systems or services. - Incident communication and escalation: The process may not have proper communication and escalation channels or protocols to inform and involve the relevant stakeholders, such as the management, the users, the vendors, or the authorities. - Incident documentation and closure:The process may not have adequate documentation and closure procedures to record and report the incidents and their resolution. - Incident review and improvement: The process may not have regular review and improvement activities to evaluate and enhance the process and its performance. Therefore, the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is the most important leading indicator for the information security incident response process, as it can provide valuable insights and feedback for the process and its improvement. References = Information Security Incident Response | Process Street1, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Security Operations and Incident Response2, 7 Incident Response Metrics and How to Use Them3

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the best way to validate the results of a vulnerability assessment is to perform a penetration test, which is a type of security testing that simulates an attack on the IT assets and processes to exploit the identified vulnerabilities and evaluate the potential impact and severity of the attack. Performing a penetration test helps to:

Confirm the existence and exploitability of the vulnerabilities detected by the vulnerability assessment

Measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing security controls and countermeasures

Identify and prioritize the risks and gaps in the security posture of the IT assets and processes

Recommend and implement appropriate remediation and mitigation actions to address the vulnerabilities and risks

Enhance the security awareness and resilience of the organization

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.5: IT Risk Identification Methods and Techniques, pp. 36-371

 The best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the effectiveness of a disaster recovery test of critical business processes is the percentage of processes recovered within the recovery time and point objectives. Recovery time objective (RTO) is the maximum acceptable time period within which a business process or an IT service must be restored after a disruption. Recovery point objective (RPO) is the maximum acceptable amount of data loss measured in time before the disruption. The percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO indicates how well the disaster recovery test meets the business continuity and recoveryrequirements and expectations, and how effectively the disaster recovery plan and procedures are executed. The percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO canalso help to identify the gaps, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement in the disaster recovery capabilities. Percentage of job failures identified and resolved during the recovery process, number of current test plans and procedures, and number of issues and action items resolved during the recovery test are not as good as the percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO, as they do not directly measure the achievement of the recovery objectives, and may not reflect the actual impact and performance of the disaster recovery test. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 130.

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 oftransforming 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.

•A risk owner is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility to manage a specific risk1. The risk owner is accountable for the implementation and effectiveness of the risk response strategy and the risk treatment plan2.

•Identifying the risk owner is the first step when a new risk scenario has been identified, because the risk owner is the key stakeholder who will be involved in the subsequent steps of the risk management process, such as risk analysis, risk evaluation, risk treatment, and risk monitoring2.

•Identifying the risk owner also helps to clarify the roles and responsibilities of different parties involved in the risk management process, such as the risk manager, the risk analyst, the risk committee, and the risk auditor3. This can improve the communication, coordination, and collaboration among the risk management team and ensure that the risk is managed effectively and efficiently.

•Estimating the residual risk (option A) is not the first step when a new risk scenario has been identified, because the residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk treatment plan has been implemented2. Therefore, estimating the residual risk requires prior steps such as risk analysis, risk evaluation, and risk treatment.

•Establishing key risk indicators (KRIs) (option B) is not the first step when a new risk scenario has been identified, because KRIs are metrics or data points that provide early warning signals or information about the level or trend of a risk4. Therefore, establishing KRIs requires prior steps such as risk identification, risk analysis, and risk evaluation.

•Designing control improvements (option C) is not the first step when a new risk scenario has been identified, because control improvements are part of the risk treatment plan, which is the set of actions and resources needed to implement the chosen risk response strategy2. Therefore,designing control improvements requires prior steps such as risk analysis, risk evaluation, and risk response selection.

References =

•Risk Owner - Institute of Internal Auditors

•Risk Treatment Plan - ISACA

•Risk Management Roles and Responsibilities - 360factors

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

 Continuity planning is the process of developing strategies and plans to ensure the continuity of critical business functions and processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. Continuity planning involves identifying the risks, impacts, and recovery options for various scenarios, as well as testing and updating the plans regularly. The primary advantage of involving end users in continuity planning is that they have a better understanding of specific business needs, such as the operational requirements, the customer expectations, and the dependencies and interdependencies of the business processes. End users can provide valuable input and feedback on the continuity plans, as well as participate in the testing and validation of the plans. End users can also help to ensure the alignment of the continuity plans with the business objectives and priorities, as well as the compliance with the relevant standards and regulations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, p. 204-205

 Configuration updates are changes made to the settings, parameters, or components of an IT system or network. Configuration updates can affect the functionality, performance, security, and reliability of the system or network. Therefore, configuration updates should follow formal change control, which is a process that ensures that changes are authorized, documented, tested, and implemented in a controlled manner. Formal change control can help prevent errors, conflicts, disruptions, and vulnerabilities that may arise from configuration updates. Configuration updates that do not follow formal change control should be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner when determining the effectiveness of IT controls, as they can introduce newrisks or compromise existing controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.5: Control Monitoring and Reporting, p. 161-162.

Centralizing IT systems is a process of consolidating and integrating the IT systems or resources in the organization into a single or unified platform or location. Centralizing IT systems helps to improve risk reporting, because it helps to simplify and standardize the risk management process and activities, and to enhance the visibility and transparency of the IT risks and controls. Centralizing IT systems also helps to improve risk reporting, because it helps to facilitate and automate the risk data collection, analysis, and evaluation, and to provide consistent and comprehensive risk information and insights to the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. The other options are not the greatest benefit of centralizing IT systems, although they may be related to the risk management process. Risk classification, risk monitoring, and risk identification are all activities that can help to support or improve the risk management process, but they do not necessarily benefit from centralizing IT systems

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

Legal and regulatory requirements are paramount when determining data retention periods. Compliance with laws such as GDPR, HIPAA, or industry-specific regulations ensures that data is retained appropriately and disposed of when no longer necessary, thereby mitigating legal risks.

 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 data privacy manager is the best person to an application system used to process employee personal data, because they are responsible for ensuring that the organization complies with the applicable data protection laws and regulations, and that the personal data of employees are collected, stored, processed, and disposed of in a secure and ethical manner. The data privacy manager is also responsible for establishing and maintaining the data privacy policies, procedures, and controls, and for conducting data privacy impact assessments and audits. The compliance manager, the system administrator, and the human resources (HR) manager are all involved in the of the application system, but they are not the best person to it, as they do not have the primary accountability and expertise for data privacy. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

 A control is an action or measure that reduces the likelihood or impact of a risk to an acceptable level. Controls can be classified into different types based on their purpose or function, such asdetective, compensating, corrective, or preventive. Performing a background check on a new employee candidate before hiring is an example of a preventive control. A preventive control is a control that aims to prevent the occurrence or manifestation of a risk, such as by avoiding, removing, or reducing the risk sources, causes, or drivers. A background check is a process that verifies the identity, qualifications, and history of a potential employee, and helps to ensure that the employee is suitable and trustworthy for the job. A background check can prevent the risk of hiring an unqualified, fraudulent, or malicious employee, who could compromise the performance, security, or compliance of the enterprise. The other options are not examples of preventive controls, as they involve different types of controls:

A detective control is a control that aims to detect the occurrence or manifestation of a risk, such as by monitoring, measuring, or reporting the risk events, indicators, or outcomes. An example of a detective control is a log review, which is a process that analyzes the records of the activities or transactions on the IT systems or applications, and helps to identify any anomalies, errors, or violations that could indicate a risk.

A compensating control is a control that aims to compensate for the weakness or deficiency of another control, such as by providing an alternative or additional level of protection or assurance. An example of a compensating control is a firewall, which is a device or software that filters the network traffic and blocks the unauthorized or malicious access to the IT systems or applications, and helps to compensate for the lack or failure of other security controls, such as encryption, authentication, or authorization.

A corrective control is a control that aims to correct the occurrence or manifestation of a risk, such as by restoring, repairing, or improving the affected assets, processes, or functions. An example of a corrective control is a backup, which is a copy or replica of the data or informationon the IT systems or applications, and helps to correct the loss or damage of the data or information due to a risk, such as a hardware failure, a software error, or a cyberattack. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3.1, pp. 62-63.

ï‚· Understanding the Question:

The question asks which tool is best for aggregating data from multiple systems to identify abnormal behavior.

ï‚· Analyzing the Options:

A. Cyber threat intelligence:Provides information on potential threats but does not aggregate data from multiple systems for behavior analysis.

B. Anti-malware software:Focuses on detecting and removing malware, not aggregating data from multiple sources.

C. Endpoint detection and response (EDR):Monitors endpoints for suspicious activity but is more limited in scope compared to SIEM systems.

D. SIEM systems:Security Information and Event Management systems collect, aggregate, and analyze data from various sources to identify and respond to abnormal behavior.

ï‚·

SIEM Systems:SIEM systems are designed to aggregate and analyze security data from multiple sources such as network devices, servers, and applications. They provide real-time analysis of security alerts generated by hardware and software.

Functionality:SIEM systems use advanced analytics to correlate data from different sources and detect patterns that indicate abnormal behavior. This makes them highly effective in identifying and responding to security incidents.

Anonymous reporting mechanisms (e.g., hotlines, web portals) encourage employees to report unethical behavior without fear of retaliation. This increases visibility into otherwise hidden risks and supports early intervention.

To reduce risk impact, the best course of action is to implement corrective measures, which are actions taken to eliminate or minimize the negative effects of a risk event after it has occurred12.

Corrective measures can include restoring normal operations, repairing or replacing damaged assets, recovering lost data, compensating affected stakeholders, and implementing lessons learned12.

Corrective measures can reduce risk impact by minimizing the duration, severity, and scope of the consequences of a risk event, as well as preventing recurrence or escalation of similar risks in the future12.

The other options are not the best course of action to reduce risk impact, but rather different types of risk responses that may have different objectives and effects. For example:

Creating an IT security policy is an example of a preventive measure, which is an action taken to avoid or reduce the likelihood of a risk event before it occurs12. A preventive measure can reduce risk exposure, but not risk impact.

Implementing detective controls is an example of a monitoring measure, which is an action taken to identify and measure the occurrence or status of a risk event during or after it occurs12. A monitoring measure can provide timely information and feedback, but not reduce risk impact.

Leveraging existing technology is an example of a mitigation measure, which is an action taken to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk event before it occurs12. A mitigation measure can reduce risk exposure, but not necessarily risk impact. References =

1: Risk Management Guide for Information Technology Systems, NIST Special Publication 800-30, July 2002

2: Project Risk Management Handbook, California Department of Transportation, June 2011

The best information to present to business control owners when justifying costs related to controls is the return on IT security-related investments, because this shows the value and benefits of the controls in relation to their costs. Return on IT security-related investments is a metric that measures the effectiveness and efficiency of IT security controls by comparing the amount of money saved or gained from preventing or mitigating IT-related risks with the amount of money spent on implementing and maintaining the controls. By presenting this information, business control owners can see how the controls contribute to the achievement of the business objectives, such as reducing losses, increasing revenues, enhancing customer satisfaction, or improving compliance. This information can also help business control owners to prioritize and allocate resources for the most critical and beneficial controls, and to optimize the balance between risk and return. References = Cost Control: How Businesses Use It to Increase Profits

 The greatest benefit of identifying appropriate risk owners is that accountability is established for risk treatment decisions. Risk owners are the individuals or groups who are responsible and accountable formanaging a specific risk and its associated actions and outcomes. By identifying appropriate risk owners, the organization can ensure that the risk treatment decisions are made by the people who have the authority, knowledge, and interest in the risk. Stakeholders beingconsulted, risk owners being informed, and responsibility being established are other possible benefits, but they are not as great as accountability being established. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 97.

•A risk treatment plan is a document that describes the actions and resources needed to implement the chosen risk response strategy for each identified risk1. A risk response strategy is the way an organization decides to address a risk, such as avoiding, accepting, mitigating, or transferring it2.

•Sometimes, a risk treatment plan may not be completed on time due to various reasons, such as delays, resource constraints, technical issues, or changes in the risk environment. In such cases, the best approach is to implement compensating controls until the preferred action can be completed3.

•Compensating controls are alternative or additional controls that provide a similar level of assurance or protection as the original controls, when the latter are not feasible or sufficient3. Compensating controls can help to reduce the residual risk or maintain the risk within the acceptable level until the risk treatment plan is fully executed3.

•For example, if the risk treatment plan involves installing a firewall to protect the network from external threats, but the firewall is not available or compatible with the current system, a compensating control could be to use encryption, authentication, or monitoring tools to secure the network traffic until the firewall is installed3.

•Implementing compensating controls is better than the other options because it allows the organization to continue with the risk treatment plan while maintaining an adequate level of security and compliance. The other options are not advisable for the following reasons:

oReplacing the action owner with a more experienced individual (option A) may not solve the problem if the issue is not related to the action owner’s competence or performance. Moreover, replacing the action owner may cause disruption, confusion, or conflict in the risk management process.

oChanging the risk response strategy of the relevant risk to risk avoidance (option C) may not be possible or desirable if the risk is associated with a critical or beneficial activity or process. Risk avoidance means eliminating the source of the risk or discontinuing the activity that causes the risk2. This may result in losing opportunities, benefits, or value for the organization.

oDeveloping additional key risk indicators (KRIs) until the preferred action can be completed (option D) may not be effective or efficient if the existing KRIs are already sufficient to monitor and measure the risk. KRIs are metrics or data points that provide early warning signals or information about the level or trend of a risk456. Developing additional KRIs may not reduce therisk or improve the risk treatment plan, but may increase the complexity and cost of the risk management process.

References =

•Key Risk Indicators: Examples & Definitions - SolveXia

•Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture

•Complete Guide to Key Risk Indicators — RiskOptics

•Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips

•Risk response strategies: mitigation, transfer, avoidance, acceptance - Twproject: project management software,resource management, time tracking, planning, Gantt, kanban

•Risk Response Strategies: A Guide to Navigating Uncertainty - Teamly

•Compensating Controls | Audit and Compliance | Pathlock

The application owner must formally approve changes after reviewing impact—per ISACA's change management and governance frameworks that assign control over operational fallouts to functional owners .

 Utilizing secure encryption protocols is the most important factor to mitigate risk associated with data privacy when implementing a new Software as a Service (SaaS) speech-to-text solution, as it ensures that the data is protected from unauthorized access, interception, or modification during the transmission and storage in the cloud. Setting up multi-factor authentication for users, approving the solution architecture by IT, and including a risk transfer clause in the contract are not the most important factors, as they may not address the data privacy issue, but rather the data access, quality, or liability issue, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 153.

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 otherpossible 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.

Scenario analysis and stress testing are the best methods to enable an organization to determine whether external emerging risk factors will impact the organization’s risk profile, as they help to simulate and evaluate the potential outcomes and effects of various risk events and scenarios on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. Scenario analysis and stress testing can help to identify and assess the impact of external emerging risk factors, such as changes in the market, technology, regulation, or environment, and to measure the resilience and preparedness oftheenterprise to cope with these factors. Control identification and mitigation, adoption of a compliance-based approach, and prevention and detection techniques are not the best methods to enable an organization to determine whether external emerging risk factors will impact the organization’s risk profile, as they do not help to simulate and evaluate the potential outcomes and effects of various risk events and scenarios, but rather to manage and monitor the existing or known risks. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 223.

Reporting to the Risk Committee:

Role of Risk Committee: The risk committee is responsible for overseeing the organization’s risk management practices, including identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks.

Emerging IT Risks: Reporting emerging IT risk scenarios to the committee ensures that new and evolving threats are identified and addressed proactively.

Importance of Emerging IT Risk Scenarios:

Proactive Risk Management: By staying informed about emerging risks, the committee can implement preventive measures and avoid potential impacts.

Strategic Planning: Understanding emerging risks allows for better strategic planning and resource allocation to address these risks.

Comparison with Other Options:

System Risk and Control Matrix: Useful for ongoing monitoring but may not capture new and emerging risks.

Changes to Risk Assessment Methodology: Important for refining risk management processes but not as critical as identifying new risks.

Audit Committee Charter: Relevant for governance but not directly related to proactive risk management.

Best Practices:

Regular Updates: Provide the risk committee with regular updates on emerging IT risk scenarios.

Collaborative Approach: Engage various stakeholders in identifying and reporting emerging risks.

Communicating risk assessments to senior management is crucial for ensuring that key decision-makers are aware of the organization's risk landscape. This awareness enables informed decision-making regarding risk responses, resource allocation, and strategic planning. It also fosters a risk-aware culture throughout the organization.

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 reportingthe 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.