Free Isaca CRISC Practice Exam with Questions & Answers

Verifying the deficiency and then notifying the business process owner is the best response when a potential IT control deficiency has been identified. This is because verifying the deficiency can help confirm the existence, nature, and extent of the deficiency, as well as its root causes and impacts. Notifying the business process owner can help ensure that the deficiency is communicated to the person who is responsible for the process and its outcomes, and who has the authority and accountability to take appropriate actions to address the deficiency. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk response techniques is to report the risk to the relevant stakeholders, such as the business process owners1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, verifying the deficiency and then notifying the business process owner is the correct answer to this question2.

Remediating and reporting the deficiency to the enterprise risk committee or senior executive management are not the best responses when a potential IT control deficiency has been identified. These are possible actions that can be taken after the deficiency has been verified and notified to the business process owner, but they are not the first or immediate responses. Remediating the deficiency without verifying it can lead to ineffective or inappropriate solutions, as well as wasted time and resources. Reporting the deficiency to the enterprise risk committee or senior executive management without notifying the business process owner cancreate confusion, conflict, or delay in the risk response process, as well as undermine the ownership and accountability of the business process owner.

IT disaster recovery point objectives (RPOs) should be based on the:

B. maximum tolerable loss of data.

RPOs are determined by how much data loss an organization can withstand in the event of a disaster. It’s a measure of the maximum age of files that an organization must recover from backup storage for normal operations to resume after a disaster. Therefore, RPOs are directly related to the maximum tolerable loss of data.

 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.

The data owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility to classify, label, and protect the information assets of the organization. The data owner is accountable for the risk ofpotential loss of confidential information, as they are the ones who determine the level of protection and access required for the data. The risk manager is responsible for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks that may affect the organization, but they are not accountable for the data itself. The end user is the person who uses the information assets for their operational tasks, but they are not accountable for the data protection or classification. The IT department is responsible for providing the technical support and infrastructure for the information assets, but they are not accountable for the data ownership or risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Data Classification, p. 69-70.

The software version is the component of a software inventory that best enables the identification and mitigation of known vulnerabilities. The software version is the specific release or update of a software product that has a unique identifier, such as a number or a name. The software version indicates the features, functions, and security patches that are included in the software product. By knowing the software version, the organization can compare it with the latest available version and identify any missing or outdated security fixes. The organization can then mitigate the known vulnerabilities by updating or upgrading the software to the latest version. The other components of a software inventory, such as the assigned software manager, the software support contract expiration, and the software licensing information, are not as directly related tothe identification and mitigation of known vulnerabilities, although they may provide some contextual or administrative information. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2, page 2-25.

The greatest benefit to an organization when updates to the risk register are made promptly after the completion of a risk assessment is optimized risk treatment decisions. Risk treatment decisions are the choices made by the organization on how to respond to the identified risks, such as avoiding, transferring,mitigating, or accepting them. Optimized risk treatment decisionsare those that align with the organizational risk appetite and objectives, and provide the best balance between the costs and benefits of the risk response actions.

Updating the risk register promptly after the completion of a risk assessment helps to optimize risk treatment decisions by providing the most current and accurate information on the risk exposure and control environment. By updating the risk register, the organization can ensure that the risk scenarios, risk levels, risk owners, risk responses, and risk indicators are consistent with the risk assessment results and reflect the changes in the internal and external environment. Updating the risk register also helps to prioritize the risks and allocate the resources more effectively and efficiently for risk treatment. Updating the risk register also facilitates the communication, collaboration, and accountability among the stakeholders involved in the risk management and control processes.

The other options are not the greatest benefits to an organization when updates to the risk register are made promptly after the completion of a risk assessment. Improved senior management communication is a benefit of updating the risk register, as it helps to inform and involve the senior management in the risk management and control processes, but it is not the greatest benefit. Enhanced awareness of risk management is a benefit of updating the risk register, as it helps to educate and engage the staff and other stakeholders in the risk management and control processes, but it is not the greatest benefit. Improved collaboration among risk professionals is a benefit of updating the risk register, as it helps to coordinate and integrate the efforts andexpertise of the risk professionals, but it is not the greatest benefit. References = Risk Register: Examples, Benefits, and Best Practices, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Discover 10 major benefits for keeping a risk register

The most reliable evidence of a control’s effectiveness is a system-generated testing report. A system-generated testing report is a document that shows the results of automated tests performed by the system to verify that the control is functioning as intended and producing the expected outcomes. A system-generated testing report is reliable, because it is objective, consistent, accurate, and timely, and because it can provide a high level of assurance and confidence in the control’s effectiveness. The other options are not as reliable as a system-generated testing report, although they may provide some evidence of the control’s effectiveness. A risk and control self-assessment, senior management’s attestation, and a detailed process walk-through are all examples of manual or subjective evidence, which may be prone to errors, biases, or inconsistencies, and which may provide a lower level of assurance and confidence in the control’s effectiveness. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 3-32.

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), periodically reviewing controls per the risk treatment plan would best help to ensure that identified risk is efficiently managed, as it involves verifying the effectiveness and efficiency of the implemented risk response actions and identifying any gaps or changes in the risk profile. Periodically reviewing controls per the risk treatment plan helps to:

Confirm that the controls are operating as intended and producing the desired outcomes

Detect any deviations, errors, or weaknesses in the controls and their performance

Evaluate the adequacy and appropriateness of the controls in relation to the current risk environment and the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address any issues or deficiencies in the controls

Update the risk register and the risk treatment plan to reflect the current risk status and the residual risk levels

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.1: IT Risk Monitoring, pp. 215-2161

An intrusion detection system (IDS) is a network security tool that monitors and analyzes network traffic for signs of malicious or suspicious activity, such as unauthorized access, data exfiltration, malware infection, or denial-of-service attack. An IDS can detect and alert the organization to potential threats based on predefined rules or signatures, or based on anomalies or deviations from normal network behavior. An IDS can also generate logs that record the details of the network events and incidents, such as the source, destination, content, and context of the network traffic. By analyzing the IDS logs, the organization can identify and validate the suspicious network activity, and determine its scope, impact, and root cause. The organization can also use the IDS logs to support the incident response and remediation process, and to improve the network security and resilience. The other options are less effective ways to ensure that suspicious network activity is identified. Analyzing server logs can provide some information about the network activity, but it may not be sufficient or timely to detect and validate the suspicious or malicious activity, as server logs only capture the events or activities that occur on the server, and not on the entire network. Using a third-party monitoring provider can help to outsource the network monitoring and analysis function, but it may not be the best option, as it may introduce additional risks, such as data privacy, vendor reliability, or service quality issues. Coordinating events with appropriate agencies can help to share information and resources with other organizations or authorities, such as law enforcement, regulators, or industry peers, but it may not be the best option, as it may depend on the availability andcooperation of theagencies, and it may not be feasible or desirable to disclose the network activity to external parties. References = Monitoring for Suspicious Network Activity: Key Tips to Secure Your Network 1

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

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

In the three lines of defense model, the primary responsibility for ensuring risk mitigation controls are properly configured belongs to line management.

First Line of Defense:

Operational Management:Line management is part of the first line of defense and is responsible for managing risks and implementing controls in their day-to-day operations.

Direct Control:They have the most direct control over processes and are best positioned to ensure that risk mitigation controls are properly configured and functioning as intended.

Responsibilities:

Implementation and Monitoring:Line management is responsible for both implementing the controls and monitoring their effectiveness. They are on the front lines of risk management and are integral to maintaining control effectiveness.

Accountability:They are accountable for ensuring that controls are aligned with the organization's risk management policies and procedures.

The principle of least privilege is a key concept in information security that aims to provide users with the minimum level of access—or permissions—necessary to perform their job functions. Byensuring that users only have the access they need, organizations can significantly reduce the risk associated with excessive access by authorized users.

Understanding Least Privilege

The principle of least privilege restricts access rights for users to the bare minimum permissions they need to perform their work. This minimizes the potential damage from accidents or malicious activities.

Least privilege should be applied to all user accounts, including administrative and service accounts.

Implementation

Implementing least privilege involves a detailed analysis of job functions and the necessary access required for each role.

Regularly review and update access permissions to ensure they remain aligned with current job responsibilities and organizational needs.

Mitigating Risk

By limiting access to only what is necessary, organizations can prevent users from having permissions that could be exploited, intentionally or unintentionally, to cause harm.

This also includes revoking unnecessary privileges when users change roles or no longer need access.

Comparison with Other Options

A. Monitoring user activity using security logs: While monitoring can detect inappropriate activity, it does not prevent it.

B. Revoking access for users changing roles: This is a necessary practice but does not address the initial allocation of excessive privileges.

D. Conducting periodic reviews of authorizations granted: Periodic reviews are important but are reactive rather than proactive.

References

Sybex-CISSP-Official-Study-Guide-9-Edition.pdf, p. 641, discussing the principle of least privilege and its implementation​​.

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

IT risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how IT-related risks can affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or assets1. IT risk scenarios help to make IT risk more concrete and tangible, and to enable proper risk analysis and assessment2. IT risk scenarios are developed after IT risks are identified, and are used as inputs for risk analysis, where the frequency and impact of the scenarios are estimated3.

The most important factor to the successful development of IT risk scenarios is threat and vulnerability analysis. Threat and vulnerability analysis is the process of identifying and evaluating the potential sources and causes of IT risks, such as malicious actors, natural disasters, human errors, or technical failures4. Threat and vulnerability analysis can help to:

Define the scope and boundaries of the IT risk scenarios, and ensure that they are relevant and realistic

Identify the critical assets, processes, or functions that are exposed or affected by the IT risks, and assess their value and importance to the organization

Determine the likelihood and methods of the threat events, and the existing or potential weaknesses or gaps in the IT control environment

Estimate the potential consequences and impacts of the IT risks, such as financial losses, operational disruptions, reputational damages, or compliance violations5

References = IT Scenario Analysis in Enterprise Risk Management - ISACA, IT Risk Scenarios - Morland-Austin, Threat and Vulnerability Analysis - Wikipedia, Threat and Vulnerability Analysis - ISACA

Automated asset management software is the best method to track asset inventory because it can provide real-time, accurate, and comprehensive data on the location, condition, value, and usage of assets. It can also help to optimize asset utilization, reduce costs, improve compliance, and enhance security.

References

•Free Asset Tracking Templates | Smartsheet

•5 Best Asset Management Software (2023) – Forbes Advisor

•What Is Asset Tracking? Benefits & How It Works - Forbes

•Inventory and Asset Tracking: Keep it Simple (But Powerful)

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite is the most influential factor when management makes risk response decisions, as it helps to define the boundaries and thresholds for acceptable risk levels, and to align the risk responses with the organization’s strategy, goals, and culture. Risk appetite alsohelps to balance the potential benefits and costs of risk responses, and to communicate the risk expectations and preferences to the stakeholders. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 192.

The primary risk management responsibility of the second line of defense is to monitor the risk responses. The second line of defense is the function that oversees and supports the risk management activities of the first line of defense, which is the function that owns and manages the risks. The second line of defense includes the risk management, compliance, and quality assurance functions, among others. The second line of defense is responsible for monitoring the risk responses, which are the actions taken to address the risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risks. The second line of defense monitors the risk responses to ensure that they are implemented effectively and efficiently, that they achieve the desired outcomes, and that they are aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The second line of defense also provides guidance, advice, and feedback to the first line of defense on the risk responses, and reports the results and issues to the senior management and the board. Applying risk treatments, providing assurance of control effectiveness, and implementing internal controls are not the primary risk management responsibilities of the second line of defense, as they are either the responsibilities of the first line of defense or the third line ofdefense, which is the function that provides independent assurance of the risk management activities, such as the internal audit function. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

The best way to ensure the effective decision-making of an IT risk management committee is to enroll key stakeholders as members. Key stakeholders are the individuals or groups who have an interest or influence in the IT risk management process, such as business owners, senior management, IT managers, auditors, regulators, customers, and suppliers. By involving key stakeholders in the IT risk management committee, the committee can benefit from their diverse perspectives, expertise, and experience, and ensure that the IT risk management decisions are aligned with the business objectives, priorities, and expectations. Key stakeholders can also provide valuable input, feedback, and support for the IT risk management activities, and help communicate and implement the IT risk management decisions across the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), a contract associated with a cloud service provider must include ownership of responsibilities, as this defines the roles and obligations of both the cloudprovider and the customer in relation to the cloud services. The contract should specify who is responsible for:

Service delivery and performance

Data security and privacy

Compliance with regulations and standards

Incident management and reporting

Business continuity and disaster recovery

Change management and configuration control

Intellectual property rights and licensing

Termination and data egress

The contract should also include service level agreements (SLAs) that measure and monitor the quality and availability of the cloud services, as well as remedies and penalties for non-compliance. The contract should also address pricing and payment terms, dispute resolution mechanisms, and liability and indemnification clauses.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 173-1741

The most important information to review from the acquired company to facilitate the task of updating the organization’s IT risk profile is the risk assessment and risk register. The risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT risks of the acquiredcompany. The risk register is a document that records the details of the IT risks, such as their sources, causes, consequences, likelihood, impact, and responses. By reviewing the risk assessment and risk register, the risk practitioner can gain a comprehensive and accurate understanding of the IT risk profile of the acquired company, and integrate it with the IT risk profile of the acquiring organization. Internal and external audit reports, risk disclosures in financial statements, and business objectives and strategies are other possible sources of information, but they are not as important as the risk assessment and risk register. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 11; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 144.

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric used to measure and monitor the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system within an organization1. KRIs are typically used in risk management to provide early warning signs of potential risks and to help organizations take proactive steps to mitigate those risks. KRIs are designed to be quantitative and measurable, allowing organizations to track changes in risk levels over time and to identify trends and patterns that may indicate an increased likelihood of risk. A negative security return on investment (ROI) would be most beneficial as a KRI, as it would indicate that the organization is spending more on security than the value it is generating or protecting. A negative security ROI would suggest that the organization is either over-investing in security, under-utilizing its security assets, or facing significant security threats or incidents that erode its security value. A negative security ROI would alert the organization to review its security strategy, budget, and performance, and to adjust them accordingly to optimize its security ROI and reduce its risk exposure2. Current capital allocation reserves are not the most beneficial as a KRI, as they do notdirectly measure the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system. Capital allocation reserves are the amount of capital that an organization sets aside to cover potential losses or liabilities arising from its activities. Capital allocation reserves may reflect the organization’s overall risk appetite and tolerance, but they do not provide specific information on the sources, types, or impacts of risks that the organization faces3. Project cost variances are not the most beneficial as a KRI, as they do not directly measure the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system. Project cost variances are the differences between the actual and planned costs of a project. Project cost variances may indicate the performance or efficiency of a project, but they do not provide specific information on the risks that may affect the project’s objectives, scope, quality, or schedule4. Annualized loss projections are not the most beneficial as a KRI, as they do not directly measure the level of risk associated with a particular process, activity, or system. Annualized loss projections are the estimates of the potential losses that an organization may incur in a year due to various risk events. Annualized loss projections may help the organization to plan and budget for its risk management activities, but they do not provide specific information on the likelihood, frequency, or severity of riskevents that may occur5. References = 1: Key risk indicator - Wikipedia2: What Is A Key Risk Indicator?3: Capital Allocation - Overview, Importance, and Methods4: Project Cost Variance: Definition, Formula, and Examples5: [Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) - Definition, Formula, and Example]

IT governance is the process of ensuring that IT supports the organization’s objectives and strategies, and that IT risks are managed appropriately. IT governance involves defining the roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities of the IT stakeholders, establishing the IT policies, standards, and procedures, and monitoring and evaluating the IT performance and outcomes1.

An organization that automatically approves exceptions to security policies on a recurring basis is most likely the result of ineffective IT governance, because it indicates that the organization:

Lacks a clear and consistent IT strategy and direction, and does not align IT with the business goals and needs

Fails to implement and enforce the IT policies, standards, and procedures, and does not ensure the compliance and accountability of the IT users and providers

Neglects to identify and assess the IT risks, and does not implement the appropriate risk responses and controls

Does not monitor and measure the IT performance and outcomes, and does not review and improve the IT processes and practices23

The other options are not the most likely results of ineffective IT governance, but rather some of the possible causes or consequences of it. A lack of mitigating actions for identified risk is a possible consequence of ineffective IT governance, as it implies that the organization does not have a systematic and proactiveapproach to IT risk management, and does not address the IT risks in a timely and effective manner. Decreased threat levels is a possible cause of ineffective IT governance, as it may create a false sense of security and complacency, and reduce the motivation and urgency to implement and follow the IT policies, standards, and procedures. Ineffective service delivery is a possible consequence of ineffective IT governance, as it means that the organization does not deliver the IT services that meet the expectations and requirements of the customers and stakeholders, and does not ensure the quality and reliability of the IT services. References =

IT Governance - ISACA

IT Governance: What It Is and Why You Need It

IT Governance: The Benefits of an Effective Enterprise IT Governance Framework

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

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

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

Prevent the vendor from accessing or disclosing the sensitive data, intentionally or unintentionally

Limit the exposure or impact of the data breach, even if the vendor’s systems or networks are compromised by hackers or malicious insiders

Maintain the confidentiality and integrity of the sensitive data, regardless of the vendor’s liability or responsibility

Enhance the trust and confidence of the customers and stakeholders, who may be concerned about the vendor’s refusal to accept liability for a data breach23

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

Encryption - ISACA

Cloud Encryption: Using Data Encryption in The Cloud

Cloud Encryption: Why You Need It and How to Do It Right

Field-Level Encryption - ISACA

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

The greatest security risk in this scenario is that data may be commingled with other tenants’ data on the public cloud infrastructure. Data commingling occurs when data from different sources or customers are mixed together without proper segregation or encryption. This may result in data leakage, unauthorized access, or loss of confidentiality and integrity. Data commingling is a common challenge in public cloud environments, where multiple customers share the same physical resources and network. System downtime, infrastructure management, and cloud provider certification are also potential risks in this scenario, butthey are not as great as data commingling. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.1, page 2451

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 638.

 Using anonymized data in a non-production environment is the best approach for an organization in a heavily regulated industry to comprehensively test application functionality. Anonymized data is data that has been stripped of any personally identifiable information (PII) or other sensitive data, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc. Anonymized data protects the privacy and security of the data, while still preserving the structure and format of the original data. Using anonymized data in a non-production environment allows the organization to test the application functionality without risking data breaches or violating regulations. Using production data, masked data, or test data in either production or non-production environments are not as optimal as using anonymized data, because they may introduce errors, inconsistencies, or vulnerabilities in the data or the application. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

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

Greatest Privacy Risk:

Jurisdictional Challenges: Processing personal data in an offshore location often involves dealing with different legal and regulatory requirements, which can complicate compliance with data privacy laws such as GDPR or CPRA.

Data Transfer Risks: Even with a data sharing agreement, the protection and enforcement of privacy rights can be less stringent in the offshore location compared to the home jurisdiction. This can lead to increased risks of data breaches and misuse.

Enforcement Difficulties: If privacy violations occur, enforcing legal actions across borders can be challenging, potentially leading to inadequate redress for affected individuals.

Comparison with Other Options:

Privacy Risk Awareness Training Not Conducted: This is a significant risk but can be mitigated relatively quickly with proper training programs.

Privacy Not Incorporated into Risk Management Framework: While critical, the risk can be managed by integrating privacy into the framework without immediate severe consequences.

Remote Work by Staff with Access to Personal Data: This introduces risks related to secure access and data protection but can be managed with proper security controls.

Best Practices:

Data Sovereignty Considerations: Ensure data is processed in jurisdictions with strong privacy laws that align with the organization's regulatory requirements.

Regular Audits and Assessments: Conduct regular audits of data processing practices in offshore locations to ensure compliance with data privacy agreements.

Legal Safeguards: Establish robust legal safeguards and contracts to enforce data protection standards across jurisdictions.

A vulnerability management process is a process that identifies, analyzes, prioritizes, and remediates the vulnerabilities in the IT systems and applications. The effectiveness of a vulnerability management process can be measured by the key performance indicators (KPIs) that reflect the achievement of the process objectives and the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. The best KPI to measure the effectiveness of a vulnerability management process is the percentage of vulnerabilities remediated within the agreed service level. This KPI indicates how well the process is able to address the vulnerabilities in a timely and efficientmanner, and reduce the exposure and impact of the risks associated with the vulnerabilities. The other options are not as good as the percentage of vulnerabilities remediated within the agreed service level, as they may not reflect the quality or timeliness of the remediation actions, or the alignment with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2.1, pp. 171-172.

IT risk scenarios are the descriptions or representations of the possible or hypothetical situations or events that may cause or result in an IT risk for the organization. IT risk scenarios usually consist of three elements: a threat or source of harm, a vulnerability or weakness, and an impact or consequence.

The best approach to use when creating a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios is to map scenarios to a recognized risk management framework, which is an established or recognized model or standard that provides the principles, guidelines, and best practices for the organization’s IT risk management function. Mapping scenarios to a recognized risk management framework can help the organization to create a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios by providing the following benefits:

It can ensure that the IT risk scenarios are relevant, appropriate, and proportional to the organization’s IT objectives and needs, and that they support the organization’s IT strategy and culture.

It can ensure that the IT risk scenarios are consistent and compatible with the organization’s IT governance, risk management, and control functions, and that they reflect the organization’s IT risk appetite and tolerance.

It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the identification, analysis, evaluation, and communication of the IT risk scenarios, and for the alignment and integration of the IT risk scenarios with the organization’s IT risk policies and standards.

The other options are not the best approaches to use when creating a comprehensive set of IT risk scenarios, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that mapping scenarios to a recognized risk management framework provides, and they may not be specific or applicable to the organization’s IT objectives and needs.

Deriving scenarios from IT risk policies and standards means creating or generating the IT risk scenarios based on the rules or guidelines that define and describe the organization’s IT risk management function, and that specify the expectations and requirements for the organization’s IT risk management function. Deriving scenarios from IT risk policies and standards can help the organization to create a consistent and compliant set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not cover all the relevant or significant IT risks that may affect the organization, and it may not support the organization’s IT strategy and culture.

Gathering scenarios from senior management means collecting or obtaining the IT risk scenarios from the senior management or executives that oversee or direct the organization’s IT activities or functions. Gathering scenarios from senior management can help the organization to create a high-level and strategic set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not reflect the operational or technical aspects of the IT risks, and it may not involve the input or feedback from the other stakeholders or parties that are involved or responsible for the IT activities or functions.

Benchmarking scenarios against industry peers means comparing and contrasting the IT risk scenarios with those of other organizations or industry standards, and identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats that may affect the organization’s IT objectives oroperations. Benchmarking scenarios against industry peers can help the organization to create a competitive and innovative set of IT risk scenarios, but it is not the best approach, because it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization’s IT objectives and needs, and it may not comply with the organization’s IT policies and standards. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 199

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The criticality of the asset is the most important factor to consider when determining the value of an asset during the risk identification process, because it reflects the importance or significance of the asset to the organization’s objectives or functions, and the potential impact or consequence of losing or compromising the asset. An asset is a resource or capability that has value to the organization, such as data, systems, applications, infrastructure, or people. The value of an asset is a measure of the worth or benefit of the asset to the organization, and the cost or loss of the asset to the organization. The risk identification process is a process of systematically identifying the sources and types of risk that an organization faces, and estimating their likelihood and impact. The criticality of the asset is the most important factor, as it helps to prioritize and focus on the assets that have the highest value and impact, and to determine the appropriate level of protection and investment for the assets. The monetary value of the asset, the vulnerability profile of the asset, and the size of the asset’s user base are all possible factors to consider when determining the value of an asset, but they are not the most important factor, as they do not directly reflect the criticality of the asset to the organization’s objectives or functions. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 83

Implementing a file corruption detection tool as a risk response strategy will help to reduce the impact of future events, as it will enable the organization to identify and correct the corrupted files before they cause further damage or loss. A file corruption detection tool is a software that scans and verifies the integrity and validity of the files, and alerts the users or administrators of any anomalies or errors. This helps to minimize the disruption and downtime caused by the data corruption incidents, and to preserve the quality and reliability of the data. Implementing a file corruption detection tool will not reduce the likelihood of future events, as it does not prevent or mitigate the causes or sources of the data corruption incidents. It will not restore availability, as it does not recover or restore the corrupted files, but only detects them. It will not address the root cause, as it does not analyze or eliminate the underlying factors that lead to the data corruption incidents. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question215; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 215.

Changes deployed to production are those that affect the functionality, performance, or security of the system in a way that is visible or accessible to the end users1. These changes can introduce new risks or vulnerabilities, such as errors, bugs, compatibility issues, or unauthorized access2. Therefore, it is important to monitor the risk associated with these changes and measure how often they cause incidents in production.

One metric that can be used to monitor this risk is the percentage of changes that cause incidents in production. This metric indicates how effective the change management process is and how well the organization can prevent or mitigate potential problems caused by changes3. A high percentage of incidents indicates a high level of risk and a need for improvement in the change management process.

References = IT Change Management for SOC: Process and Best Practices, Determining and Managing Risk when Deploying Code, 6 Deployment Risks and How To Mitigate Them

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

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

The primary goal of risk mitigation is to reduce residual risk to an acceptable level. This aligns with the principles ofRisk Treatment, ensuring that the implemented strategies effectively address identified risks without exceeding the organization's risk appetite.

Reevaluating the design of the key risk indicators (KRIs) is the best recommendation when a KRI is generating an excessive volume of events, because it helps to determine whether the KRI is relevant, reliable, and valid, and whether it needs to be modified or replaced. A KRI is a metric or indicator that helps to monitor and evaluate the likelihood or impact of a risk, or the effectiveness or efficiency of a control. A KRI can be quantitative or qualitative, and can be derived from internal or external sources. An event is an occurrence or incident that may indicate a change or trend in the risk level or performance. A KRI that generates an excessivevolume of events may indicate that the KRI is not well-designed or well-aligned with the risk objectives or criteria, and that it may produce false positives or negatives, or irrelevant or misleading information. Therefore, reevaluating the design of the KRIs is the best recommendation, as it helps to improve the quality and usefulness of the KRIs, and to avoid unnecessary or inappropriate actions or responses. Developing a corresponding key performance indicator (KPI), monitoring KRIs within a specific timeframe, and activating the incident response plan are all possible actions to perform after reevaluating the design of the KRIs, but they are not the best recommendation, as they do not address the root cause of the excessive volume of events. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 97

The most relevant source to reference when updating security awareness training materials is the recent security incidents reported by competitors. This can help to illustrate the real-world threats and consequences of poor security practices, and to motivate the employees to follow the security policies and procedures. Risk management framework, risk register, and global security standards are other sources that may be useful, but they are not as relevant as the recent security incidents. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 9; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 214.

Brainstorming sessions with key stakeholders are the best way to facilitate the development of relevant risk scenarios, as they can generate diverse and creative ideas, perspectives, and insights about the potential risks and their impact on the organization’s objectives and operations. Brainstorming sessions can also foster collaboration, communication, and engagement among the stakeholders, and help to identify and prioritize the most significant and realistic risk scenarios. Brainstorming sessions can be guided by an industry-recognized risk framework, such as ISACA’s Risk IT, and supported by qualitative or quantitative risk assessment methodologies, but they are not sufficient by themselves to develop relevant risk scenarios.

The first factor that should be considered when assessing risk associated with the adoption of emerging technologies is the organizational strategy. The organizational strategy defines the vision, mission, goals, and objectives of the enterprise, and provides the direction and guidance for its activities and decisions. The adoption of emerging technologies should be aligned with the organizational strategy, and support its achievement and performance. The organizational strategy also helps to determine the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise, and the criteria for evaluating the risks and benefits of the emerging technologies. Cost-benefit analysis, control self-assessment, and business requirements are also important factors to consider when assessing risk associated with the adoption of emerging technologies, but they are not the first factor to consider. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1.1, page 181

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 656.

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks for the best guidance for developing relevant risk scenarios.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Based on industry trends:Important but may not always be directly relevant to the specific organization.

B. Mapped to incident response plans:Useful but secondary to ensuring the scenarios are probable.

C. Related to probable events:Ensures the scenarios are realistic and likely, making them more relevant and actionable.

D. Aligned with risk management capabilities:Important for managing risks but not as critical as ensuring scenarios are probable.



Probable Events:Developing risk scenarios that are based on probable events ensures that the organization is prepared for the most likely risks. This makes risk management efforts more practical and focused on real threats.

Relevance:By focusing on probable events, the scenarios will be more relevant to the organization's actual risk environment, making it easier to allocate resources and plan responses effectively.

The risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk and its associated controls. The risk owner is also responsible for ensuring that the risk is within the acceptable level and that the risk response is effective and efficient. In this case, the risk owner is also the owner of the business service that depends on the managed hosting service. Therefore, the risk owner should be notified of the new information about the flood risk first, as they have the most interest and influence on the risk and its impact on the business objectives. The risk owner can then decide on the appropriate actions to take, such as reviewing the contract terms, requesting additional controls, or changing the service provider. The other options are not the correct answers because they are not the primary stakeholders of the risk and its consequences. The data center manager is an employee of the managed hosting service provider, not the organization that procured the service. The data center manager may not have the authority or the incentive to address the flood risk or inform the organization. The site manager is also an employee of the managed hosting service provider, and their role is to conduct annual risk assessments under the contract. The site manager may not be aware of the new information or have the responsibility to communicate it to the organization. The CIO is the senior executive who oversees the IT strategy and operations of the organization. The CIO may have a general interest in the managed hosting service and its risks, but they are not the direct owner or managerof the specific risk or the business service that relies on the service. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 702

The best way to test the operational effectiveness of a data backup procedure is to perform a complete restoration of every file to a clean system and verify that there has not been any data corruption or loss. This will ensure that the backup procedure can successfully recover the data in the event of a disaster or incident. The other options are not sufficient to test the operational effectiveness of a data backup procedure, as they do not involve actually restoring the data and verifying its integrity and usability. References = How to review and test backup procedures to ensure data restoration; HOW TO TEST DATA BACKUPS: A BRIEF GUIDE; How to Test a Database Backup

According to the CRISC EXAM TOPIC 2 LONG Flashcards, the first thing that a risk practitioner should do when an organization decides to use a cloud service is to review the vendor selection process and vetting criteria. This is because the vendor selection process and vetting criteria are essential steps to ensure that the cloud service provider meets the organization’s requirements and expectations, and that the risks associated with the cloud service are identified and managed. By reviewing the vendor selection process and vetting criteria, the risk practitioner can evaluate the quality, reliability, security, and compliance of the cloud service provider, and determine if the cloud service is suitable and beneficial for the organization. The risk practitioner can also identify any gaps or weaknesses in the vendor selection process and vetting criteria, and recommend improvements or alternatives accordingly. References = CRISC EXAM TOPIC 2 LONG Flashcards

 Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. They help to monitor changes in the level of risk and enable timely actions to mitigate the risk. The major advantage of using KRIs is that they identify when risk exceeds defined thresholds, which are the acceptable or tolerable levels of risk that the organization has established. By identifying when risk exceeds defined thresholds, the KRIs can alert the management and stakeholders of the need to take corrective or preventive measures, and avoid or reduce the potential losses or damages. References = 3

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