How to Easily Pass the Isaca CRISC Exam: Expert Advice

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

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 metrics that 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

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the right to audit the provider is the most important factor to help define the IT risk associated with outsourcing activity to a cloud-based service provider, as it enables the organization to verify the compliance and performance of the provider with the contractual obligations and service level agreements. The right to audit the provider helps to:

Assess the security, availability, confidentiality, integrity, and privacy of the data and processes hosted by the provider

Identify and evaluate the risks and controls related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s infrastructure

Monitor and measure the quality and effectiveness of the cloud-based services and the provider’s governance and management practices

Report and resolve any issues or incidents related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s operations

Ensure the alignment of the cloud-based services and the provider’s policies and standards with the organization’s objectives and requirements

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 176-1771

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the primary goal of a risk awareness program is to reduce the risk to an acceptable level by increasing the knowledge and understanding of the risk among the stakeholders. A risk awareness program should:

Educate the stakeholders about the sources, types and impacts of IT-related risks

Explain the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders in the risk management process

Promote a risk-aware culture that supports the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the organization

Provide guidance and tools for identifying, assessing, responding and monitoring IT-related risks

Encourage the reporting and escalation of risk issues and incidents

Reinforce the benefits and value of effective risk management

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: IT Risk Reporting, pp. 224-2251

The primary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation is to ensure that risk is mitigated by the control. A control is a measure or action that is taken to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk, or to increase the likelihood or impact of an opportunity1. Testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation means verifying whether the control can achieve its intended purpose and objective, and whether it can address the risk adequately and appropriately2. Testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation helps to avoid wasting resources, time, and effort on implementing a control that is ineffective, inefficient, or unsuitable for the risk scenario. It also helps to ensure that the control does not introduce new or unintended risks, or adversely affect other controls or processes3. The other options are not the primary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation, as they are either less relevant or less specific than ensuring that risk is mitigated by the control. Measuring efficiency of the control process is a secondary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Efficiency refers to the optimal use of resources to achieve the desired outcome4. Measuring efficiency of the control process means evaluating whether the control can achieve its objective with the least amount of cost, time, and effort. Measuring efficiency of the control process helps to optimize the performance and value of the control, but it is not the main reason for testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Confirming control alignment with business objectives is a tertiary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Alignment refers to the consistency and coherence of the control with the goals and strategies of the organization5. Confirming control alignment with business objectives means ensuring that the control supports and enables the achievement of the organization’s mission, vision, and values. Confirming control alignment with business objectives helps to integrate the control with the organization’s culture and governance, but it is not the primary reason for testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Complying with the organization’s policy is a quaternary objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. Policy refers to the set of principles and rules that guide the organization’s decisions and actions6. Complying with the organization’s policy means adhering to the standards and requirements that the organization has established for implementing and operating controls. Complying with the organization’s policy helps to ensure the quality and consistency of the control, but it is not the main objective of testing the effectiveness of a new control before implementation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.8, Page 61.

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

The main reason for documenting the performance of controls is to provide accurate risk reporting. Risk reporting is a process that communicates and discloses the relevant and reliable information about the risks and their management to the stakeholders and decision makers. Risk reporting is an essential component of the risk management process, as it helps to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring activities, as well as to support and inform the risk governance and oversight functions. Documenting the performance of controls is a technique that records and tracks the results and outcomes of the controls that are implemented to address the risks, such as the control objectives,

End user acceptance testing is a process that verifies that a system or service meets the requirements and expectations of the end users, who are the actual or potential customers or beneficiaries of the system or service. End user acceptance testing is the final stage of testing before the system or service is deployed or released to the production environment. The results of end user acceptance testing are the most important consideration for a risk practitioner when making a system implementation go-live recommendation, as they indicate the quality, functionality, usability, and reliability of the system or service from the end user perspective. The results of end user acceptance testing can help to identify and resolve any defects, errors, or issues that may affect the performance, satisfaction, or acceptance of the system or service by the end users. The results of end user acceptance testing can also help to evaluate the benefits, value, and risks of the system or service for the end users and the organization. The other options are not the most important consideration for a risk practitioner when making a system implementation go-live recommendation, although they may be relevant and useful. The completeness of system documentation is a factor that affects the maintainability, supportability, and auditability of the system or service, but it does not measure the end user experience or satisfaction. The variances between planned and actual cost is a measure of the efficiency and budget management of the system or service development or implementation, but it does not reflect the end user needs or expectations. The availability of in-house resources is a resource that supports the system or service delivery and operation, but it does not ensure the end user acceptance or approval. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 180-1811; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 87

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

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

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

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

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

A risk practitioner should evaluate the relevance of the evolving threats to the organization’s industry, as this is the best course of action to understand the current and future risk landscape, and to align the risk management strategy accordingly. By evaluating the relevance of the evolving threats, the risk practitioner can determine the impact and likelihood of the threats affecting the organization’s objectives, assets, and processes, and prioritize the most critical and urgent risks. The risk practitioner can also identify the gaps and weaknesses in the existing controls, and recommend appropriate risk response measures to mitigate the threats. The other options are not as good as evaluating the relevance of the evolving threats, because they do not address the root cause of the rising security incidents, but rather focus on the symptoms or consequences of the incidents. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 85.

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

Classifying information assets is a process of identifying and categorizing the data and information resources that are owned, controlled, or used by an organization, based on their value, sensitivity, and criticality.

Classifying information assets helps to determine the appropriate level of control that is needed to protect them from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction. Control level refers to the degree of protection or assurance that a control provides against a risk.

Classifying information assets also helps to communicate risk to senior management, assign risk ownership, and facilitate internal audit. These are other benefits of risk management that are not directly related to determining the appropriate level of control.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 11

Information Technology & Security, page 5

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 3

 The first step when developing a business case to drive the adoption of a risk remediation project by senior management is to identify the objectives of the project. The objectives are the specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that the project aims to accomplish. The objectives should be aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy, as well as the identified business problem or opportunity. The objectives should also reflect the expected benefits and outcomes of the project, such as reducing the risk exposure, enhancing the security posture, or improving the business performance. Identifying the objectives is the first step because it provides the direction, scope, and justification for the project, and it serves as the basis for evaluating the alternative solutions, estimating the costs and benefits, and communicating the value proposition to the senior management and other stakeholders. The other options are not the first step, although they may be subsequent or concurrent steps in the business case development process. Calculating the cost is a part of the financial analysis, which estimates the total expenditure and funding sources of the project, but it does not define the purpose or the scope of the project. Analyzing cost-effectiveness is a part of the economic analysis, which compares the costs and benefits of the alternative solutions and recommends the optimal one, but it does not specify the goals or the criteria of the project. Determining the stakeholders is a part of the stakeholder analysis, which identifies and assesses the interests, expectations, and influence of the parties involved in or affected by the project, but it does not establish the objectives or the rationale of the project. References = Business case: 7 key steps to build it and use it - Twproject: project …, Guide to developing the Project Business Case - GOV.UK, How to Write a Business Case: Template & Examples | Adobe Workfront

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, access controls are the policies, procedures, practices, and technologies that are designed and implemented to prevent unauthorized or inappropriate access to IT resources and data. Access controls are essential for ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data, especially personally identifiable information (Pll), which is any information that can be used to identify, locate, or contact an individual. Insufficient access controls are the greatest concern related to data privacy when implementing an Internet of Things (loT) solution that collects Pll, as they can expose the data to various risks and threats, such as data leakage, theft, loss, corruption, manipulation, or misuse. Insufficient access controls can also cause legal, regulatory, ethical, or reputational issues for the organization, if the data privacy rights and expectations of the individuals are violated or compromised. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 240, 253.

 A benchmark analysis is a process of comparing the organization’s performance, practices, and processes with those of other organizations in the same industry or sector. A benchmark analysis can provide the most useful information when determining the frequency of risk assessments, because it can help the organization to identify the best practices, standards, and expectations for security risk management in its industry. A benchmark analysis can also help the organization to assess its current level of maturity, capability, and compliance in relation to security risk management, and to determine the gaps and areas for improvement. By conducting a benchmark analysis, the organization can establish a realistic and appropriate frequency of risk assessments that aligns with its industry norms and its own risk profile. The other options are not as useful as a benchmark analysis, because they do not provide a comprehensive and relevant view of the security risk management landscape, but rather focus on specific or partial aspects of the organization’s situation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 18.

The risk profile of an organization is a summary of the key risks that affect its objectives, operations, and performance. The risk profile can help senior management understand the current and potential exposure of the organization to various sources of uncertainty, and prioritize the risk response accordingly. An external security audit can reveal multiple findings related to control noncompliance, which indicate that the existing controls are not adequate, effective, or aligned with the organization’s risk appetite. These findings can have a significant impact on the organization’s risk profile, as they can increase the likelihood and/or impact of adverse events, such as data breaches, cyberattacks, regulatory fines, reputational damage, etc. Therefore, the most important information that the risk practitioner should communicate to senior management is the impact to the organization’s risk profile, as it can help them make informed decisions about the risk response and allocation of resources. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: Risk Profile, p. 193-195.

Zero-day malware is malware that exploits unknown and unprotected vulnerabilities. This novel malware is difficult to detect and defend against, making zero-day attacks a significant threat to enterprise cybersecurity1. The best way to detect zero-day malware on an end user’s workstation is to use file integrity monitoring, which is a technique that monitors and alerts on changes to files and directories that may indicate a malware infection or compromise2. By using file integrity monitoring, the end user can detect zero-day malware that may alter or damage the files or directories on their workstation, and take appropriate actions to remove or isolate the malware. File integrity monitoring can also help to prevent the spread of zero-day malware to other systems or networks, and to restore the integrity and availability of the affected files or directories. Antivirus program, database activity monitoring, and firewall log monitoring are not the best ways to detect zero-day malware on an end user’s workstation, as they are not as effective or reliable as file integrity monitoring. Antivirus program is a software that scans and removes known malware from a system or network3. Antivirus program can help to protect the end user’s workstation from common or known malware, but it may not be able to detect zero-day malware that does not have a signature or a pattern that matches the antivirus program’s database. Database activity monitoring is a technique that monitors and audits the activities and transactions on a database, such as queries, updates, or deletions4. Database activity monitoring can help to protect the end user’s database from unauthorized or malicious access or modification, but it may not be able to detect zero-day malware that does not target or affect the database. Firewall log monitoring is a technique that monitors and analyzes the logs generated by a firewall, which is a device or software that filters and controls the incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predefined rules. Firewall log monitoring can help to protect the end user’s workstation from external or internal network attacks, but it may not be able to detect zero-day malware that bypasses or evades the firewall rules or that originates from the workstation itself. References = 1: What is Zero Day Malware? - Check Point Software2: File Integrity Monitoring - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics3: Antivirus Software - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics4: Database Activity Monitoring - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics : [Firewall Log Analysis - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.] : [Zero-day attack detection: a systematic literature review | Artificial Intelligence Review] : [Zero-day Attacks Detection and Prevention Methods | Apriorit] 

A contingency plan is a set of actions and procedures that aim to ensure the continuity of critical business functions in the event of a disruption or disaster. An alternate processing site is a location where the organization can resume its information systems operations in case the primary site is unavailable or damaged. The most important consideration when establishing a contingency plan and an alternate processing site for a company located on a moderate earthquake fault is to ensure that the alternative site does not reside on the same fault, no matter how far apart they are. This is because an earthquake can affect a large area along the fault line, and potentially damage both the primary and the alternative site, rendering them unusable. By choosing an alternative site that is not on the same fault, the company can reduce the risk of losing both sites, and increase the likelihood of restoring its operations quickly and effectively. The other options are not as important as the alternative site location, because they do not address the main threat of an earthquake, but rather focus on specific or partial aspects of the contingency plan, as explained below:

A. The alternative site is a hot site with equipment ready to resume processing immediately is a consideration that relates to the availability and readiness of the alternative site, but it does not ensure that the site is safe and secure from an earthquake. A hot site is a type of alternative site that has the necessary hardware, software, and network components to resume the information systems operations with minimal or no downtime. However, if the hot site is on the same fault as the primary site, it may not be accessible or functional after an earthquake, and the company may lose both sites and the data stored on them.

B. The contingency plan provides for backup media to be taken to the alternative site is a consideration that relates to the integrity and recoverability of the data, but it does not ensure that the site is safe and secure from an earthquake. Backup media are devices or systems that store copies of the data and information that are essential for the organization’s operations. Taking backup media to the alternative site can help the company to restore its data and resume its operations in case the primary site is damaged or destroyed. However, if the alternative site is on the same fault as the primary site, it may not be accessible or functional after an earthquake, and the company may lose both sites and the backup media.

C. The contingency plan for high priority applications does not involve a shared cold site is a consideration that relates to the performance and reliability of the alternative site, but it does not ensure that the site is safe and secure from an earthquake. A shared cold site is a type of alternative site that has the necessary space and infrastructure to accommodate the information systems operations, but does not have the hardware, software, or network components installed. A shared cold site is shared by multiple organizations, and may not be available or suitable for the company’s high priority applications, which require more resources and customization. However, if the alternative site is on the same fault as the primary site, it may not be accessible or functional after an earthquake, and the company may lose both sites and the ability to resume its high priority applications. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. How to conduct a contingency planning process - IFRC, CP-4(2): Alternate Processing Site - CSF Tools - Identity Digital, Information System Contingency Planning Guidance - ISACA

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

 A vulnerability is a system flaw or weakness that can be exploited by a threat actor, potentially leading to a security breach or incident. A vulnerability that has been exploited means that a threat actor has successfully taken advantage of the vulnerability and compromised the system or network. Implementing controls can help reduce the impact of a vulnerability that has been exploited, by limiting or preventing the damage or loss caused by the security breach or incident. Controls are the mechanisms or procedures that ensure the security, reliability, and quality of an IT system or process. Controls can be classified into different types, depending on their purpose and function. The four types of controls mentioned in the question are:

Detective control: A control that monitors and detects the occurrence or attempt of a security breach or incident, and alerts the appropriate personnel or system. For example, a log analysis tool that identifies and reports any unauthorized access or activity on the system or network.

Deterrent control: A control that discourages or prevents a threat actor from exploiting a vulnerability or performing a malicious action, by increasing the perceived difficulty, risk, or cost of doing so. For example, a warning message that informs the user of the legal consequences of unauthorized access or use of the system or network.

Preventive control: A control that blocks or stops a threat actor from exploiting a vulnerability or performing a malicious action, by eliminating or reducing the vulnerability or the opportunity. For example, a firewall that filters and blocks any unwanted or malicious traffic from entering or leaving the system or network.

Corrective control: A control that restores or repairs the system or network to its normal or desired state, after a security breach or incident has occurred, by fixing or removing the vulnerability or the impact. For example, a backup and recovery tool that restores the data or functionality of the system or network that has been corrupted or lost due to the security breach or incident.

The best type of control for reducing the impact of a vulnerability that has been exploited is the corrective control, because it directly addresses the damage or loss caused by the security breach or incident, and restores the system or network to its normal or desired state. Corrective controls can help minimize the negative consequences of a security breach or incident, such as downtime, data loss, reputational harm, legal liability, or regulatory sanctions. Corrective controls can also help prevent or reduce the recurrence of the security breach or incident, by fixing or removing the vulnerability that has been exploited. References = Types of Security Controls, Security Controls: What They Are and Why You Need Them, Security Controls: Definition, Types & Examples.

The most important factor for sustainable development of secure IT services is security training for systems development staff. Security training helps to ensure that the staff members are aware of the security risks, requirements, and best practices that affect the IT services they develop. Security training also helps to improve the security skills and knowledge of the staff members, and to foster a security culture and behavior within the development team. Security training can also help to prevent or reduce security defects, vulnerabilities, or incidents in the IT services, and to enhance the security performance and quality of the IT services. Well-documented business cases, security architecture principles, and secure coding practices are also important factors for sustainable development of secure IT services, but they are not as important as security training for systems development staff. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.1.1.2, page 2291

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 653.

 According to the Key Performance Indicators for Vulnerability Management article, the number of vulnerabilities remediated is a key performance indicator that measures the effectiveness of a vulnerability remediation program. This KPI indicates how many vulnerabilities have been successfully mitigated or fixed within a given time frame. A higher number can imply that the organization is effectively managing its exposures and reducing its risk level. The number of vulnerabilities remediated can also be compared with the number of new vulnerabilities identified to evaluate the progress and performance of the vulnerability remediation program. References = Key Performance Indicators for Vulnerability Management

 The primary reason for establishing various threshold levels for a set of key risk indicators (KRIs) is to take appropriate actions in a timely manner. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk or the effectiveness of the controls in place. Threshold levels are predefined values that indicate when the risk level is acceptable, tolerable, or unacceptable. By establishing various threshold levels for a set of KRIs, the enterprise can monitor the risk situation and trigger the necessary responses before the risk becomes too severe or costly to mitigate. The other options are not the primary reasons for establishing various threshold levels, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of doing so. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 189.

Risk policies provide the best indication of an organization’s risk tolerance, as they define the acceptable level of risk and the risk appetite of the organization. Risk policies also establish the roles and responsibilities, methodologies, and reporting mechanisms for risk management. Risk sharing strategy, risk transfer agreements, and risk assessments are not the best indicators of risk tolerance, as they are more related to risk response, risk mitigation, and risk identification, respectively. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1.2, page 19.

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

B. Lack of governance is a concern when an organization uses an MSSP as a firewall administrator, because it could lead to misalignment or inconsistency between the organization’s and the MSSP’s objectives, policies, and standards for firewall management. However, this concern can be mitigated by establishing a clear and comprehensive service level agreement (SLA) with the MSSP, which defines the roles, responsibilities, expectations, and performance indicators for the firewall management service6.

C. Increased number of firewall rules is a concern when an organization uses an MSSP as a firewall administrator, because it could create complexity, confusion, or duplication in the firewall configuration, which could affect the firewall performance and security. However, this concern can be mitigated by conducting regular firewall audits and reviews with the MSSP, which can help to rationalize, optimize, and update the firewall rules, and to ensure that they are relevant, effective, and efficient for the organization’s network environment.

D. Lack of agreed-upon standards is a concern when an organization uses an MSSP as a firewall administrator, because it could result in gaps or weaknesses in the firewall design and implementation, which could compromise the firewall functionality and security. However, this concern can be mitigated by adopting and following industry best practices, norms, and expectations for firewall management, such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) guidelines, the Center for Internet Security (CIS) benchmarks, or the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) requirements . References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 115. What Is A Managed Security Service Provider (MSSP)? - Fortinet, What is a Firewall? - Definition from Techopedia, Firewall Administrator Job Description - Betterteam, What is a Firewall Log? - Definition from Techopedia, Firewall Log Management: Why It’s Important and How to Do It Right, How to Write a Service Level Agreement (SLA) for an MSSP, [Firewall Auditing: Best Practices for Security and Compliance], [Guidelines on Firewalls and Firewall Policy | CSRC], [CIS Firewall Benchmark - CIS], [PCI DSS and Firewalls - PCI Security Standards Council]

 According to the Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, the main reason for analyzing risk scenarios is to identify additional risk scenarios that may not have been considered in the initial risk identification process. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how, where, and why adverse events can occur. By analyzing risk scenarios, the risk manager can gain a better understanding of the relationships between assets, processes, threats, vulnerabilities, and other factors that may affect the organization’s objectives. Analyzing risk scenarios can also help to evaluate the likelihood and impact of the potential risks, as well as the effectiveness of the existing controls and the need for additional controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, Page 215. How to write good risk scenarios and statements

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk nomenclature and taxonomy is the set of terms and definitions that are used to describe and classify risks and their attributes. Risk nomenclature and taxonomy is the most important consideration when aligning IT risk management with the enterprise risk management (ERM) framework, as it helps to ensure a common and consistent understanding and communication of risks across the organization. Risk nomenclature and taxonomy also helps to integrate and harmonize the IT risk management processes and activities with the ERM framework, and to facilitate the aggregation and reporting of risks at different levels of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 197.

 An exception to the information security policy is a permission to continue operating a system, service, or product that cannot comply with the established information security standards and requirements1. A risk owner is a person or entity that has the authority and accountability for a risk and its management2. A risk practitioner is a person or entity that has the knowledge and skills to perform risk management activities3. A high number of exceptions to the information security policy indicates that there are many systems, services, or products that do not meet the expected level of security and pose potential risks to the organization. The risk practitioner’s greatest concern should be that the aggregate risk, which is the total amount of risk that the organization faces from all sources, is approaching the tolerance threshold, which is the limit beyond which the organization does not want to tolerate the risk4. If the aggregate risk is approaching the tolerance threshold, it means that the organization is exposed to a high level of risk that may exceed its risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept to achieve its objectives5. This may result in negative consequences for the organization, such as breaches, losses, damages, or reputational harm. Therefore, the risk practitioner should monitor and report the aggregate risk level and the tolerance threshold, and advise the risk owners and the management on the appropriate risk responses and actions to reduce the aggregate risk to an acceptable level. Security policies are being reviewed infrequently, controls are not operating efficiently, and vulnerabilities are not being mitigated are not the risk practitioner’s greatest concern, as they are not directly related to the aggregate risk level and the tolerance threshold. Security policies are being reviewed infrequently is a condition that indicates that the organization’s security policies are not updated or revised regularly to reflect the changes and updates in the security environment and the security requirements6. This may affect the relevance and effectiveness of the security policies, but it does not necessarily increase the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. Controls are not operating efficiently is a condition that indicates that the organization’s controls, which are the measures or actions taken to manage or mitigate the risks, are not performing well or optimally7. This may affect the quality and performance of the controls, but it does not necessarily increase the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. Vulnerabilities are not being mitigated is a condition that indicates that the organization’s vulnerabilities, which are the weaknesses or gaps that may be exploited by the threats, are not being addressed or reduced8. This may increase the likelihood or impact of the risks, but it does not necessarily increase the aggregate risk level or the tolerance threshold. References = 1: IT/Information Security Exception Request Process2: [Risk Ownership - Risk Management] 3: [Risk Practitioner - ISACA] 4: Risk Threshold: Definition, Meaning & Example - PM Study Circle5: Risk Appetite vs Risk Tolerance vs Risk Threshold - projectcubicle6: [Security Policy Review and Update - SANS Institute] 7: [Control Effectiveness and Efficiency - ISACA] 8: [Vulnerability Management - ISACA] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Concepts, pp. 17-19.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.1: Control Design, pp. 233-235.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.2: Control Implementation, pp. 243-245.] : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Information Systems Control Design and Implementation, Section 5.3: Control Monitoring and Maintenance, pp. 251-253.]

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

 The average time to identify critical information security incidents is the best indicator of effective information security incident management, as it measures how quickly the organization can detect and respond to the most severe threats to its information assets. The faster the organization can identify critical incidents, the lower the potential impact and damage they can cause. The average time to identify critical incidents also reflects the efficiency and accuracy of the monitoring and reporting mechanisms, as well as the awareness and training of the staff and stakeholders. The other options are not the best indicators of effective information security incident management, as they do not directly measure the performance or quality of the incident response process. The monthly trend of information security-related incidents may show the frequency or severity of the incidents, but not how well they are managed. The frequency of information security incident response plan testing may show the preparedness or maturity of the organization, but not the actual effectiveness of the plan. The percentage of high-risk security incidents may show the risk exposure or appetite of the organization, but not the risk mitigation or treatment. References = 7 Types of Information Security Incidents and How to Respond; Annex A.16: Information Security Incident Management - ISMS.online; CISM Isaca Exam Questions and Answers - CertLibrary.com

 A detective control is a type of internal control that seeks to uncover problems in a company’s processes once they have occurred. Examples of detective controls include physical inventory checks, reviews of account reports and reconciliations, as well as assessments of current controls1. A periodic access review is a detective control that involves verifying the access rights and privileges of users to ensure that they are appropriate and authorized. A periodic access review can help to detect any unauthorized or inappropriate access, such as excessive or redundant permissions, segregation of duties violations, or dormant or orphaned accounts23. The other options are not detective controls, but rather preventive controls, which are designed to prevent errors or fraud from occurring in the first place. A limit check is a preventive control that validates the input data against a predefined range or limit, and rejects any data that falls outside the acceptable range4. Access control software is a preventive control that restricts the access to information systems or resources based on the identity, role, or credentials of the user5. Rerun procedures are preventive controls that ensure the accuracy and completeness of data processing by repeating the same process and comparing the results6. References = Detective Control: Definition, Examples, Vs. Preventive Control; Detective Control - What Is It, Examples, Vs Preventive Control; Limit Check - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics; Access Control Software - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics; Rerun Procedures - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

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

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

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

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

 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 the highest-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.

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

The effectiveness of risk response options is the best criteria when selecting a risk response, because it reflects the degree to which the response can reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk, or enhance the benefit or opportunity of the risk. The effectiveness of risk response options can be evaluated by considering factors such as cost, feasibility, timeliness, and alignment with the organization’s objectives and risk appetite. The other options are not as good as the effectiveness of risk response options, because they do not measure the outcome or value of the response, but rather focus on the input or process of the response, as explained below:

A. Capability to implement the response is a criteria that considers the availability and adequacy of the resources, skills, and knowledge required to execute the response. While this is an important factor to consider, it does not indicate how well the response can address the risk or achieve the desired result.

B. Importance of IT risk within the enterprise is a criteria that considers the significance and priority of the risk in relation to the organization’s strategy, objectives, and operations. While this is an important factor to consider, it does not indicate how well the response can address the risk or achieve the desired result.

D. Alignment of response to industry standards is a criteria that considers the compliance and conformity of the response with the best practices, norms, and expectations of the industry or sector. While this is an important factor to consider, it does not indicate how well the response can address the risk or achieve the desired result. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 40. How to Select Your Risk Responses - Rebel’s Guide to Project Management, Risk Response Plan in Project Management: Key Strategies & Tips, Risk Responses - options for managing risk - Stakeholdermap.com

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

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

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

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

The risk associated with the loss of company data stored on personal devices is that the data may be accessed, disclosed, or modified by unauthorized parties, resulting in confidentiality, integrity, or availability breaches1. The most effective way to mitigate this risk is to enforce authentication and data encryption on the personal devices that store company data. Authentication is a process that verifies the identity of the user or device that is accessing the data, and prevents unauthorized access by requiring a password, a code, a biometric factor, or a combination of these2. Data encryption is a technique that transforms the data into an unreadable format, and requires a key to decrypt and restore the data to its original format3. By enforcing authentication and data encryption on the personal devices, the organization can ensure that only authorized users or devices can access the company data, and that the data is protected from unauthorized disclosure or modification even if the device is lost or stolen4. An acceptable use policy for personal devices, required user log-on before synchronizing data, and security awareness training and testing are not the most effective ways to mitigate the risk associated with the loss of company data stored on personal devices, as they do not provide the same level of protection as authentication and data encryption. An acceptable use policy for personal devices is a document that defines the rules and guidelines for using personal devices for work purposes, such as the types of devices, data, and applications that are allowed, the security measures that are required, and the responsibilities and liabilities of the users and the organization5. An acceptable use policy for personal devices can help to establish a common understanding and expectation for the use of personal devices, but it does not enforce or guarantee the compliance or effectiveness of the security measures. Required user log-on before synchronizing data is a technique that requires the user to enter their credentials before they can transfer or update the data between their personal device and the company network or system6. Required user log-on before synchronizing data can help to prevent unauthorized synchronization of data, but it does not protect the data that is already stored on the personal device. Security awareness training and testing is a process that educates and evaluates the users on the security risks and best practices for using personal devices for work purposes, such as the importance of using strong passwords, updating software, avoiding phishing emails, and reporting incidents7. Security awareness training and testing can help to increase the knowledge and behavior of the users, but it does not ensure or monitor the implementation or performance of the security measures. References = 1: BYOD security: What are the risks and how can they be mitigated?2: What is Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA)? | Duo Security3: [What is Data Encryption? | Definition and FAQs] 4: How to mitigate the risks of using personal devices in the workplace5: BYOD Policy Template - Get Free Sample6: How to Sync Your Phone With Windows 10 | PCMag7: Security Awareness Training: What Is It and Why Is It Important?

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are measurable values that demonstrate how effectively an organization is achieving its key objectives. KPIs can be used to evaluate the progress and performance of a risk management program, as well as to identify the areas for improvement and alignment with the organization’s strategy. KPIs can provide the most useful information when determining a risk management program’s maturity level, because they can reflect the extent to which the program is integrated, consistent, proactive, and value-adding. KPIs can also be compared with industry benchmarks or best practices to assess the program’s maturity level relative to other organizations. The other options are not as useful as KPIs, because they do not provide a clear and comprehensive picture of the risk management program’s maturity level, but rather focus on specific aspects or outputs of the program. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 18.

After migrating a key financial system to a new provider, it was discovered that a developer could gain access to the production environment. This indicates that there is a risk of unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction of sensitive data, such as financial records, transactions, reports, etc.

A control that could mitigate this risk is to remove the developer’s access to the production environment. This means that the developer would not be able to alter the source code or configuration of the financial system without proper authorization or approval.

The other options are not the best ways to mitigate the risk in this situation. They are either irrelevant or less effective than removing the developer’s access.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 14

Information Technology & Security, page 8

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 6

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

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

 According to the How Important Is Source Code Escrow - ISACA article, the purpose of requiring source code escrow in a contractual agreement is to ensure that the source code is available if the vendor ceases to exist. Source code escrow is the deposit of the source code of software with a third-party escrow agent, who releases it to the licensee only if certain conditions are met, such as the bankruptcy, merger, or acquisition of the licensor. This arrangement protects the licensee from losing access to the software support and maintenance, and allows them to continue using and modifying the software as needed. Therefore, the answer is B. ensure that the source code is available if the vendor ceases to exist. References = How Important Is Source Code Escrow - ISACA

 The most important thing for an organization to have in place when developing a risk management framework is a strategic approach to risk including an established risk appetite, as this provides the direction, scope, and objectives of the risk management process, and defines the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or avoid in pursuit of its goals. A strategic approach to risk aligns the risk management framework with the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, and ensures that the risk management activities support the achievement of the desired outcomes. An established risk appetite sets the boundaries and criteria for risk decision making, and guides the selection and implementation of risk responses. The other options are not the most important things for an organization to have in place when developing a risk management framework, although they may be useful or necessary components of it. A risk-based internal audit plan is a tool that helps to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of the risk management framework, but it does not define or drive the risk management process. A control function within the risk management team is a role that helps to implement and monitor the risk controls, but it does not determine or influence the risk strategy or appetite. An organization-wide risk awareness training program is a method that helps to enhance the risk culture and competence of the organization, but it does not establish or communicate the risk approach or appetite. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, page 23.

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

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

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

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

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks.

Reviewing KRIs is the most helpful way to determine the effectiveness of an organization’s IT risk mitigation efforts. This means that the organization monitors and evaluates the actual results and outcomes of the risk responses, compares them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identifies any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and reports them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.

The other options are not the most helpful ways to determine the effectiveness of an organization’s IT risk mitigation efforts. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

The most important input when developing risk scenarios is the business objectives, as they provide the context and scope for the risk identification and analysis process. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe the possible causes, events, and consequences of a risk. Risk scenarios help to understand and communicate the nature and impact of the risk, and to support the risk assessment and response planning. The business objectives are the goals and targets that the organization wants to achieve through its processes, functions, and projects. The business objectives define the expected outcomes and performance of the organization, and the criteria for measuring and evaluating the success or failure of the organization. The business objectives also reflect the organization’s vision, mission, values, and strategy, and the needs and expectations of the stakeholders. The other options are not the most important inputs when developing risk scenarios, although they may be useful or relevant information. Key performance indicators are metrics that measure and monitor the progress and achievement of the business objectives, but they do not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. The organization’s risk framework is the set of principles, policies, and processes that guide and support the risk management activities across the organization, but it does not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. Risk appetite is the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept or avoid in pursuit of its business objectives, but it does not provide the context or scope for the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 58.

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

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

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

Verify the roles and responsibilities of the incident response team and other stakeholders

Confirm the communication and escalation channels and protocols

Identify the tools and resources available for incident detection, containment, analysis, eradication, recovery, and reporting

Evaluate the readiness and preparedness of the organization to respond to a data leakage incident

Update or revise the procedures as needed to reflect the current situation and risk level

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

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

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