Free Isaca CRISC Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 2

Well-developed, data-driven risk measurements should be focused on providing a forward-looking view, as they enable the organization to anticipate and prepare for the potential changes and impacts of the risk level and exposure, and to take proactive and appropriate actions toaddress the risk. The other options are not the characteristics of well-developed, data-driven risk measurements, as they may not reflect the strategic, comprehensive, or timely aspects of the risk measurements, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 110.

Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) are metrics used by organizations to provide early warning signs of potential risks, including unauthorized data disclosure. By monitoring KRIs, organizations can proactively identify vulnerabilities and take corrective actions before a risk materializes. This proactive approach is essential in minimizing the potential impact of data breaches.​

According to ISACA's CRISC Review Manual, KRIs are defined as "metrics capable of showing that the enterprise is, or has a high probability of being, subject to a risk that exceeds the defined risk appetite." They are critical to the measurement and monitoring of risk and performance optimization. ​ISACA

While data backups (Option B) are vital for data recovery post-incident, they do not prevent unauthorized disclosures. An incident response plan (Option C) is reactive, focusing on responding after an incident has occurred. Cyber insurance (Option D) provides financial compensation post-incident but does not prevent the occurrence of data breaches.​

Therefore, implementing and monitoring KRIs is the most proactive approach to minimizing the potential impact of unauthorized data disclosure.

An organization may rely on third-party vendors to provide some of its IT systems, applications, or services, such as cloud computing, software development, or data processing. The organization should evaluate the control environment of the third-party vendors, which is the set of policies, procedures, and practices that establish the tone and culture of the vendor’s risk management and control activities. The best way to evaluate the control environment of severalthird-party vendors is to obtain independent control reports from high-risk vendors. Independent control reports are the documents that attest to the design, implementation, and effectiveness of the vendor’s controls, based on the standards or frameworks that are relevant and applicable for the vendor’s services, such as the ISAE 3402 or the SOC 2. Independentcontrol reports are prepared by independent and qualified auditors, who provide an objective and reliable assessment of the vendor’s controls. High-risk vendors are the vendors that pose the highest level of risk to the organization, such as by having access to sensitive or confidential data, or by providing critical or complex services. By obtaining independent control reports from high-risk vendors, the organization can verify that the vendor’s controls are adequate and appropriate for the organization’s needs, and that the vendor complies with thecontractual and regulatory requirements. The other options are not as good as obtaining independent control reports from high-risk vendors, as they may not provide sufficient or consistent information or evidence on the vendor’s control environment:

Review vendors’ internal risk assessments covering key risk and controls means that the organization examines the vendor’s own evaluation of its risks and controls, such as by reviewing the vendor’s risk register, risk matrix, or risk report. This may provide some information or insight on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as reliable or objective as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s internal risk assessments may have biases, conflicts, or gaps in their methodology, scope, or quality.

Review vendors performance metrics on quality and delivery of processes means that the organization measures and monitors the vendor’s performance and outcomes, such as by using key performance indicators (KPIs), service level agreements (SLAs), or customer satisfaction surveys. This may provide some information or feedback on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as comprehensive or relevant as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s performance metrics may not cover all the aspects or components of the vendor’s controls, or may not reflect the latest or updated status or results of the vendor’s controls.

Obtain vendor references from third parties means that the organization collects and verifies the testimonials or recommendations of the vendor’s services from other customers or stakeholders, such as by contacting them directly or by reading their reviews or ratings. This may provide some information or evidence on the vendor’s control environment, but it may not be as accurate or consistent as obtaining independent control reports, as the vendor’s references from third parties may have biases, conflicts, or variations in their expectations, experiences, or opinions of the vendor’s services. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.2.1, pp. 147-148.

A risk dashboard is a graphical tool that displays the key indicators and metrics of the organization’s IT risk profile, such as the risk level, status, trend, performance, etc., using charts, graphs, tables, etc. A risk dashboard can help the organization to monitor and communicate the IT risk profile, and to support the decision making and planning for the IT risk management.

A risk dashboard is the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it provides a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and highlights the most significant and relevant IT risks that need to be addressed or monitored. A risk dashboard can also help to compare and contrast the IT risk profile with the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite, and to identify the gaps or opportunities for improvement.

The other options are not the most effective tools in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because they do not provide the same level of visibility and clarity that a risk dashboard provides, and they may not be updated or aligned with the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite.

A risk self-assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, using the input and feedback from the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the IT activities or functions. A risk self-assessment can help the organization to understand and document the IT risk profile, and to align it with the organization’s IT strategy and culture, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not reflect the current or accurate state and performance of the IT risk profile, and it may not cover all the relevant or emerging IT risks that may exist or arise.

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the information and status of the identified IT risks and their responses. It includes the IT risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, priority, response, owner, action plan, status, etc. A risk register can help the organization to identify, analyze, evaluate, and communicate the IT risks and their responses, and to align them with the organization’s IT strategy and culture, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not provide a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and it may not highlight the most significant and relevant IT risks that need to be addressed or monitored.

A risk map is a graphical tool that displays the results of the IT risk analysis in a matrix format, using colors and symbols to indicate the level and priority of the IT risks. A risk map can show the distribution and comparison of the IT risks based on various criteria, such as likelihood, impact, category, source, etc. A risk map can help the organization to assess and prioritize the IT risks, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the IT risks, but it is not the most effective tool in identifying trends in the IT risk profile, because it may not provide a visual and intuitive representation of the changes and variations in the IT risk profile over time, and it may not reflect the organization’s IT objectives and risk appetite. 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 180

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The best way to ensure adequate resources will be allocated to manage identified risk is to assign risk ownership to appropriate roles. Risk ownership is the process of assigning the authority and responsibility to manage a specific risk or a group of related risks to a person or entity. Risk ownership helps to ensure adequate resources for managing risk, because it helps to define and clarify the roles and responsibilities of the risk owners, and to establish and enforce the expectations and standards for the risk owners. Risk ownership also helps to measure and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk owners, and to identify and address any issues or gaps in the risk management activities. The other options are not as effective as assigning risk ownership to appropriate roles, although they may be related to the risk management process. Prioritizing risk within each business unit, reviewing risk ranking methodology, and promoting an organizational culture of risk awareness are all activities that can help to support or improve the risk management process, but they do not necessarily ensureadequate resources for managing risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 2-11.

When an organization restructures its business processes, the first step in revising the BCP is to identify new potentially disruptive scenarios that may affect the continuity of the critical functions and processes. This can be done by conducting a risk assessment or a business impact analysis (BIA) to determine the likelihood and impact of various threats and vulnerabilities onthe organization’s objectives and operations. By identifying new potentially disruptive scenarios, the organization can then update its recovery strategies, objectives, and plans accordingly.

 The data owner is accountable for the confidentiality of the data that is outsourced to a third party with servers located in a foreign country. The data owner is the person or entity that has the authority and responsibility to classify, label, and protect the data according to the organization’s policies and standards. The data owner is also responsible for defining the data access rights and privileges, and for ensuring that the data is handled in compliance with the applicable laws and regulations. The data owner retains the accountability for the data even when it is outsourced to a third party, and must monitor and evaluate the security performance and compliance of the service provider. The third-party data custodian, the data custodian, and the regional office executive are not accountable for the confidentiality of the data, as they have different roles and responsibilities in the outsourcing process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1.2, page 2461

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 654.

 Risk monitoring is the process of tracking and evaluating the performance and effectiveness of the risk management process and controls, and identifying any changes or emerging risks that may affect theenterprise’s objectives and strategy. The primary benefit of risk monitoring is that it facilitates risk-aware decision making, as it provides timely and relevant information and feedback to the decision-makers and stakeholders, and enables them to adjust the risk strategy and response actions accordingly. Risk monitoring also helps to ensure that the risk management process is aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance, and supports the achievement of the enterprise’s goals and value creation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 239. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 239. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 239.

Regulatory restrictions for cross-border data transfer can significantly impact compliance, making this the most critical consideration. Addressing such restrictions ensures adherence toLegal and Regulatory Requirementsin risk management.

Risk limits, thresholds, and indicators provide the most useful information to determine risk exposure following control implementations, as they help to measure and monitor the current and residual risk levels and compare them with the desired and acceptable risk levels. Risk limits, thresholds, and indicators are defined as follows:

Risk limits are the maximum amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept for a given activity, process, or objective. Risk limits are derived from the organizational risk appetite and tolerance, and they help to guide the risk response and control selection.

Risk thresholds are the points or levels at which the risk or performance is acceptable or unacceptable. Risk thresholds are used to trigger alerts, actions, or escalation when the risk or performance deviates from the expected or planned range.

Risk indicators are metrics or measures that provide information on the current or potential risk exposure or performance. Risk indicators can be classified into key risk indicators (KRIs), whichmeasure the likelihood and impact of risk events, and key performance indicators (KPIs), which measure the effectiveness and efficiency of controls and processes.

Risk limits, thresholds, and indicators help to determine risk exposure following control implementations by providing quantitative and qualitative data and feedback on the risk and control environment. They also help to identify and prioritize the areas for improvement and enhancement of the risk and control environment. Risk limits, thresholds, and indicators also facilitate the communication, collaboration, and accountability among the stakeholders involved in the risk management and control processes.

The other options are not the most useful information to determine risk exposure following control implementations. Strategic plan and risk management integration is the process of aligning the organizational strategy and objectives with the risk management framework and activities, but it does not provide specific information on the risk exposure or control effectiveness. Risk escalation and process for communication is the process of reporting and escalating the risk issues and incidents to the appropriate authority and stakeholders, but it doesnot provide comprehensive information on the risk exposure or control performance. Policies, standards, and procedures are the documents that define the principles, rules, and guidelines for the risk management and control processes, but they do not provide actual information on the risk exposure or control implementation. References = Risk Limits, Thresholds and Indicators - ISACA, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Risk Management: Risk Indicators and Risk Appetite

Maturity models are tools that help organizations assess and improve their risk management processes and capabilities. They provide a set of criteria or standards that define different levels of maturity, from ad-hoc to innovative. The primary objective of using maturity models in risk management is to enable strategic alignment, which means ensuring that the risk management activities and objectives are consistent with and support the organization’s mission, vision, values, and goals. By using maturity models, organizations can identify their current level of risk management maturity, compare it with their desired level, and plan and implement actions to close the gap. This way, they can align their risk management practices with their strategic direction and priorities, and enhance their performance and value creation. References = How to Use a Maturity Model in Risk Management — RiskOptics - Reciprocity, Using a Maturity Model to Assess Your Risk Management Program, How to Use a Risk Maturity Model to Level Up · Riskonnect

The product owner should own the associated risk when contracting with a cloud service provider to support the deployment of a new product. The product owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for defining the product vision, requirements, and priorities. The product owner also has the accountability for the business value and outcomes of the product. Therefore, the product owner should be the one who identifies, assesses, and manages the risks related to the cloud service provider, such as security, compliance, performance, and quality. The product owner should also collaborate with the other stakeholders, such as the head of EA, the IT risk manager, and the information security manager, to ensure that the cloud service provider meets the organization’s standards and expectations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: IT Risk Mitigation, Section 5.3: IT Risk Mitigation Strategies and Approaches, Page 254; Best Practices to Manage Risks in the Cloud - ISACA.

The risk practitioner should verify the cost-benefit of the new controls being implemented to ensure that they are aligned with the enterprise’s risk appetite and strategy, and that they provide value to the business. The other options are not as important as verifying the cost-benefit of the new controls, because:

Option A: Updating the risk register is a good practice, but it does not provide assurance that the new controls are effective and efficient.

Option B: Ensuring risk monitoring for the project is initiated is also a good practice, but it is not as urgent as verifying the cost-benefit of the new controls, which should be done before the project is closed.

Option C: Conducting and documenting a BIA is not relevant to the scenario, as the project is already completed and the new controls are implemented. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 184.

The second line of defense provides oversight functions, ensuring that risks and controls are effectively managed. This includes policy enforcement, compliance monitoring, and risk program evaluation, aligning with the organizational risk governance structure as described in the CRISC framework.

The organization has adopted the risk treatment of transfer, which means that it has shifted some or all of the potential negative consequences of a risk event to another party, such as a vendor, an insurer, or a partner. By including penalties for loss of availability in the contract, the organization has transferred the financial impact of a service disruption to the vendor, who will be liable for compensating the organization for the loss. Transfer does not eliminate the risk, but it reduces the organization’s exposure to the risk.

The first course of action for the risk practitioner when an organization has decided to expand into new product areas is to identify any new business objectives with stakeholders. Business objectives are the specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals that the organization aims to accomplish through its products and services. Stakeholders are the parties who have an interest or influence in the organization and its products and services, such as customers, employees, shareholders, suppliers, regulators, or competitors. Identifying any new business objectives with stakeholders is the first course of action, because it helps to understand and define the purpose, scope, and criteria of the new product areas, and to align them with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy. Identifying any new business objectives with stakeholders also helps to establish the expectations, needs, and requirements of the stakeholders, and to ensure their engagement and support for the new product areas. Identifying any newbusiness objectives with stakeholders is the basis for the subsequent risk management activities, such as identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and responding to the risks associated with the new product areas. The other options are not the first course of action, although they may be related or subsequent steps in the risk management process. Presenting a business case for new controls to stakeholders is a part of the risk response process, which involves selecting and executing the appropriate actions to reduce, avoid, share, or exploit the risks associated with the new product areas. Presenting a business case for new controls to stakeholders can help to justify and communicate the value and impact of the new controls, and to obtain the approval and resources for implementing them. However, this is not the first course of action, as it depends on the identification and prioritization of the business objectives and the risks. Revising the organization’s risk and control policy is a part of the risk governance process, which involves defining and updating the rules and guidelines for managing the risks and the controls associatedwith the new product areas. Revising the organization’s risk and control policy can help to ensure the consistency and effectiveness of the risk management process, and to comply with the relevant laws and regulations. However, this is not the first course of action, as it follows the identification and assessment of the business objectives and the risks. Reviewing existing risk scenarios with stakeholders is a part of the risk monitoring and review process, which involves evaluating and improving the performance and outcomes of the risk management process for the new product areas. Reviewing existing risk scenarios with stakeholders can help to identify and address any changes or issues in the risk levels or the risk responses, and to provide feedback and learning for the risk management process. However, this is not the first course of action, as it requires the identification and analysis of the business objectives and the risks. References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA, How to Write Strong Risk Scenarios and Statements - ISACA, The Role of Executive Management in ERM - Corporate Compliance Insights

The next thing that the risk practitioner should do from a risk management perspective when the organization is considering the adoption of an aggressive business strategy to achieve desired growth is to identify new threats resulting from the new business strategy. A threat is a potentialcause of an unwanted incident that may affect the achievement of the objectives. An aggressive business strategy is a strategy that involves pursuing high-risk, high-reward opportunities or initiatives to gain a competitive advantage or a significant market share. An aggressive business strategy may introduce new threats or increase thelikelihood or impact of existing threats, such as market volatility, regulatory changes, customer dissatisfaction, or competitor retaliation. Therefore, the risk practitioner should identify the new threats resulting from the new business strategy, and assess their potential consequences and implications for the organization. The other options are not as immediate as identifying new threats resulting from the new business strategy, as they are related to the update, information, or measurement of the risk management process, not the identification or analysis of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

 The areas to address first when classifying and prioritizing risk responses are those with high cost effectiveness ratios and high risk levels, as they represent the most optimal and urgent risk responses that can reduce the risk exposure and impact significantly with a reasonable cost. Theother options are not the areas to address first, as they may indicate suboptimal or less urgent risk responses that may not align with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

The best course of action for a system administrator who suspects a colleague may be intentionally weakening a system’s validation controls in order to pass through fraudulent transactions is B. Share the concern through a whistleblower communication channel1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, a whistleblower communication channel is a mechanism that allows employees to report suspected fraud or unethical behavior without fear of retaliation or reprisal. A whistleblower communication channel is part of an effective fraud detection and prevention framework, and it helps to promote a culture of integrity and accountability within the organization2

The other options are not as effective or appropriate as sharing the concern through a whistleblower communication channel, because:

•A. Implementing compensating controls to deter fraud attempts may not address the root cause of the problem, and it may also create additional complexity and cost for the system. Moreover, it may not prevent the colleague from finding other ways to bypass the controls or collude with external parties.

•C. Monitoring the activity to collect evidence may expose the system administrator to legal or ethical risks, especially if the monitoring is done without proper authorization or due process. Itmay also delay the reporting and resolution of the issue, and potentially allow more fraudulent transactions to occur.

•D. Determining whether the system environment has flaws that may motivate fraud attempts may be useful for understanding the context and the factors that contribute to the fraud risk, but it does not address the immediate concern of reporting the suspected fraud. It may also imply that the system administrator is trying to justify or rationalize the colleague’s behavior, rather than holding them accountable.

1: CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 100002 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 224

Preventive controls are the best types of controls to minimize the risk associated with a vulnerability, because they aim to avoid or reduce the occurrence of a threat or an exploit. Preventive controls can include physical, technical, or administrative measures, such as locks, firewalls, encryption, policies, training, or backup. Preventive controls can also involve eliminating or substituting the source of the vulnerability, such as outdated software or hardware.

References

•ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Domain 3: Risk Response, Section 3.2.1: Control Types

•Hazard Controls - Princeton University

•Risk Control | Techniques and Importance of Risk Control - EDUCBA

Relationship between Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance:

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

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

Contextual Understanding:

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

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

Comparison with Other Options:

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

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

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

Best Practices:

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

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

The risk owner is primarily accountable for risk treatment decisions, as they are the person or entity with the authority and responsibility to manage a particular risk. The risk owner shouldevaluate the available risk response options, select the most appropriate one, implement the chosen response, and monitor its effectiveness. The risk owner should also communicate and report on the risk status and any issues or changes. The business manager, data owner, and risk manager are not primarily accountable for risk treatment decisions, although they may be involved in the risk management process. The business manager is responsible for the overall performance and objectives of a business unit or function. The data owner is responsible for the security and quality of a specific data asset. The risk manager is responsible for facilitating and coordinating the risk management activities across the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Identification, page 47.

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 organizationuses 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: BestPractices for Security and Compliance], [Guidelines on Firewalls and Firewall Policy | CSRC], [CIS Firewall Benchmark - CIS], [PCI DSS and Firewalls - PCI Security Standards Council]

The MOST important stakeholders to include during the initial risk identification process for a business application are the business process owners, because they are the ones who have the authority and responsibility for the business processes that are supported or enabled by the business application. The business process owners can provide valuable input and feedback on the business objectives, requirements, and expectations of the business application, as well as thepotential risks, impacts, and opportunities that may affect the business processes and outcomes. The other options are not as important as the business process owners, because:

Option B: Business process consumers are the ones who use or benefit from the business processes that are supported or enabled by the business application, such as customers, employees, or partners. They can provide useful information and perspectives on the user needs, preferences, and satisfaction of the business application, but they are not as important as the business process owners, who have the ultimate accountability and authority for the business processes and outcomes.

Option C: Application architecture team is the one who designs and develops the technical architecture and components of the business application, such as the hardware, software, network, and data. They can provide technical expertise and guidance on the feasibility, functionality, and security of the business application, but they are not as important as the business process owners, who have the primary stake and interest in the business application and its alignment with the business processes and objectives.

Option D: Internal audit is the one who provides independent assurance and consulting services on the governance, risk management, and control processes of the organization, including the business application. They can provide objective and impartial evaluation and recommendation on the effectiveness and efficiency of the business application and its compliance with the internal and external standards and regulations, but they are not as important as the businessprocess owners, who have the direct involvement and influence on the business application and its performance and value. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 103.

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.

The best way to ensure key risk indicators (KRIs) provide value to risk owners is to provide timely notification of the changes in the risk exposure. KRIs are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. By providing timely notification of the KRI values, the risk owners can be alerted of the risk situation and take appropriate actions to manage the risk. Ongoing training, return on investment (ROI), and cost minimization are other possible ways to ensure KRIs provide value, but they are not as effective as timely notification. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 10; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 140.

A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses or gaps in an application that may expose it to potential threats or attacks.

When vulnerability assessment results identify a weakness in an application, the first thing that a risk practitioner should do is to assess the risk to determine mitigation needed. This means that the risk practitioner should analyze the likelihood and impact of the weakness being exploited, the existing controls that are in place to prevent or reduce the exploitation, and the residual risk that remains after applying the controls.

Assessing the risk to determine mitigation needed helps to prioritize the actions that are required to address the weakness, such as implementing new or additional controls, accepting the risk, transferring the risk, or avoiding the risk.

The other options are not the first things that a risk practitioner should do when vulnerability assessment results identify a weakness in an application. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 18

Information Technology & Security, page 12

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 10

Introducing recovery control procedures is the best way to address the risk of an outage of the fraud detection system for an online payment processor, because it helps to restore the functionality and availability of the system as quickly and effectively as possible, and to minimize the impact and disruption to the business operations and customers. A fraud detection system is a system that monitors and analyzes the transactions and activities of an online payment processor, and detects and prevents any fraudulent or suspicious behavior, such as identity theft, money laundering, or chargebacks. An outage is a situation where the system is unavailable or inaccessible, due to factors such as technical failure, human error, or malicious attack. An outage of the fraud detection system may have severe consequences for the online payment processor, such as financial losses, reputational damage, customer dissatisfaction, or regulatory penalties. A recovery control procedure is a procedure that defines the steps and actions to be taken to recover the system from an outage, such as identifying the root cause, isolating the affected components, restoring the data and functionality, testing the system, and reporting the incident. Introducing recovery control procedures is the best way to address the risk, as it helps to ensure that the system is back online and operational as soon as possible, and that the risk exposure and impact are reduced and contained. Implementing continuous control monitoring, communicating the risk to management, and documenting a risk response plan are all possible ways to address the risk, but they are not the best way, as they do not directly address the recovery of the system from an outage, and they may not be sufficient or effective to mitigate the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 208

The number of IT policy exceptions granted serves as a direct measure of how well IT policies align with organizational needs and practices. A high number of exceptions may indicate that policies are too restrictive or not practical, suggesting a need for review or modification.

 The risk of users circumventing application controls is the most significant exposure when an application uses individual user accounts to access the underlying database. This is because users may have direct access to the data and bypass the validation, authorization, and logging mechanisms that are implemented at the application level. Users may also be able to modify or delete data without proper authorization or audit trail. The other options are less significant exposures, as they do not directly affect the integrity or confidentiality of the data. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009, page 35; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 214.

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; RiskAppetite vs. Risk Tolerance: What is the Difference?; IT Risk Management - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics; IT Risk Management Framework - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

The best way to mitigate the risk of customer identity theft is to implement layered security. Layered security is a defense-in-depth approach that applies multiple and diverse security controls at different levels and stages of the information system and the data lifecycle. Layered security can include physical, technical, and administrative controls, such as locks, firewalls, encryption, authentication, authorization, backup, audit, and policy. Layered security can help to protect the customer data and identity from unauthorized access, use, modification, disclosure, or destruction, by creating multiple barriers and deterrents for potential attackers, and by reducing the impact and likelihood of a successful breach. Layered security can also help to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements and standards for data privacy and protection, such as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), and the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS)123.The other options are not the best way to mitigate the risk of customer identity theft, although they may be useful or complementary to layered security. Implementing monitoring techniques is a part of the layered security approach, but it is not sufficient, as it mainly focuses on detecting and responding to the incidents, rather than preventing or deterring them. Outsourcing to a local processor is a business decision that may or may not improve the security of the customer data and identity, depending on the quality and reliability of the service provider, and the terms and conditions of the outsourcing contract. Conducting an awareness campaign is a good practice that can help to educate and inform the customers and the employees about the common types, methods, and indicators of identity theft, and the best practices and precautions to prevent or report it, but it does not directly apply or enforce any security controls to the information system or the data.

The data privacy officer is the best person to notify in case of a new malware that has severely impacted industry peers with data loss. The data privacy officer is responsible for ensuring that the enterprise complies with the applicable privacy laws and regulations, and that the personal data of the customers, employees, and other stakeholders are protected from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, or destruction. The data privacy officer can assess the potential impact of the malware on the enterprise’s data privacy obligations and risks, and coordinate the appropriate response and remediation actions. The customer database manager, the customer data custodian, and the audit committee are not the best persons to notify, as they do not have the same level of authority, responsibility, and expertise as the data privacy officer in dealing with data privacy issues. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 191.

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

===========

The best tool for communicating strategic risk priorities is a heat map. A heat map is a graphical representation of the risk profile of an enterprise, showing the likelihood and impact of various risks on a matrix. A heat map can help to highlight the most significant risks that require attention, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance levels of the enterprise. A heat map can also facilitate the comparison of risks across different business units, processes, or objectives, and enable the communication of risk information to stakeholders in a clear and concise manner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, page 240.

The risk practitioner’s most important responsibility in managing risk acceptance that exceeds risk tolerance is to verify authorization by senior management. Risk acceptance is a risk response strategy that involves acknowledging and agreeing to bear the risk and its potential consequences. Risk tolerance is the acceptable or allowable level of variation or deviation from the expected or desired outcomes or objectives. When the risk acceptance exceeds the risk tolerance, it means that the organization is taking on more risk than it can handle or afford. Therefore, the risk practitioner should verify that the risk acceptance is authorized by senior management, who have the authority and accountability for making risk management decisions and ensuring that they are aligned with the organizational strategy and objectives. The other options are not as important as verifying authorization by senior management, as they are related to the adjustments, conditions, or documentation of the risk acceptance, not the approval or validation of the risk acceptance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

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

Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure the performance and effectiveness of the controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks. KCIs can help to monitor the status and health of the controls, as well as to identify any issues or gaps that need to be addressed. The primary reason to adopt KCIs in the risk monitoring and reporting process is to provideassessments of mitigation effectiveness, meaning that they can help to evaluate how well the controls are reducing the risk exposure and achieving the desired outcomes. KCIs can also help to support the risk management decision making and improvement actions, as well as to demonstrate the value and benefits of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1.2, p. 115-116

 The most important factor when deciding on a control to mitigate risk exposure is the cost-benefit analysis. This is a process that compares the costs and benefits of implementing a control, and determines whether the control is worth the investment. A cost-benefit analysis helps to ensure that the control is efficient and effective in reducing the risk to an acceptable level, and that it does not introduce new risks or adversely affect other objectives. A cost-benefit analysis also helps to prioritize the controls based on their value and feasibility, and to allocate the resources accordingly. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.5, page 1861

Reporting the activity to the supervisor is the first thing that the risk practitioner should do when learning that a risk owner has been accepting gifts from a supplier of IT products. This is because accepting gifts from a supplier of IT products can create a conflict of interest, compromise the integrity and objectivity of the risk owner, and violate the organizational ethics policies. Reporting the activity to the supervisor can help ensure that the issue is escalated to the appropriate authority, investigated, and resolved in a timely and transparent manner. 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 supervisor1. According to the web search results, reporting the activity to the supervisor is a common and recommended action when encountering a potential ethical violation in the workplace

 The PRIMARY objective of the board of directors periodically reviewing the risk profile is to help ensure that the risk strategy is appropriate, because the risk strategy defines the enterprise’s risk appetite, tolerance, and objectives, and guides the risk management process and activities. The board of directors should review the risk profile to ensure that it reflects the current internal and external environment, and that it aligns with the enterprise’s strategy and goals. The other options are not the primary objective, because:

Option B: KRIs and KPIs are aligned is a desirable outcome of the risk strategy, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. KRIs and KPIs are indicators that measure and monitor the risk exposure and performance of the enterprise, respectively, and they should be consistent with the risk strategy and objectives.

Option C: Performance of controls is adequate is a result of the risk response, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. Performance of controls is the degree to which the controls are effective and efficient in mitigating the risks, and it should be evaluated and reported by the risk management function and the internal audit function.

Option D: The risk monitoring process has been established is a prerequisite for the risk profile, but not the primary objective of the board of directors reviewing the risk profile. The risk monitoring process is the process of tracking and reporting the risk status and performance, and it should be implemented and executed by the risk management function and the business process owners. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 119.

A critical threshold value for a key control indicator (KCI) is the value that indicates that the control is no longer performing its intended function of mitigating a risk. If the KCI reaches or exceeds this value, it means that the control effectiveness has failed and corrective actions are needed. The other options are not the best representations of a critical threshold value for a KCI, because they do not reflect the actual performance or outcome of the control. Thresholds benchmarked to peer organizations, a typical operational value, and a value that represents the intended control state are examples of target or acceptable values for a KCI, not critical or unacceptable values. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner when reviewing the findings of a security awareness program assessment is that the program uses non-customized training modules. Non-customizedtraining modules are generic and may not address the specific security needs, issues, and challenges of the organization. They may also fail to engage and motivate the employees to follow the security policies and procedures, and to enhance their security knowledge and skills. The program not decreasing threat counts, not considering business impact, or being significantly revised are other possible findings, but they are not as concerning as the program using non-customized training modules. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

 Establishing clear accountability for risk is the best way for an organization to enable risk treatment decisions, as it ensures that the risk owners and stakeholders have the authority and responsibility to manage and mitigate the risks that they are assigned to. Establishing clear accountability for risk also facilitates communication and collaboration among the risk owners and stakeholders, and enables them to monitor and report the risk status and performance. Establishing clear accountability for risk also supports the risk governance and culture of the organization, and aligns the risk management process with the organization’s strategy and objectives. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 250. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 250. CRISC Sample Questions 2024, Question 250. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

Data Privacy Principles:

Consent and Purpose Limitation: According to data privacy regulations like GDPR, data subjects must provide explicit consent for specific purposes. Using data for purposes beyond what was consented to violates these principles, posing significant compliance risks.

Transparency and Accountability: Organizations must be transparent about how they use personal data and ensure accountability in data processing. Using data without consent undermines this transparency and accountability.

Greatest Risk of Noncompliance:

Legal and Regulatory Risks: Using personal data without consent can lead to severe penalties under laws like GDPR and CPRA. These laws impose heavy fines for noncompliance, making this scenario the highest risk.

Reputational Damage: Unauthorized use of personal data can severely damage an organization’s reputation, leading to loss of customer trust and potential financial losses.

Operational Impact: Ensuring compliance with consent requirements is fundamental to an organization's data processing activities. Failure to do so can disrupt business operations and necessitate significant remediation efforts.

Comparison with Other Options:

Making Data Available to a Larger Audience of Customers: While potentially risky, this does not inherently violate data privacy principles if done within consented uses.

Data Not Being Disposed According to the Retention Policy: This poses risks related to data minimization and retention principles but is less severe than unauthorized data use.

Personal Data Not Being De-identified Properly: This is a significant risk but typically involves fewer direct legal and regulatory implications compared to using data without consent.

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 characteristic of an effective risk management program is that risk ownership is assigned. Risk ownership is the accountability and authority to manage a risk1. Assigning risk ownership means identifying and assigning the person or entity who is responsible for evaluating, treating, monitoring, and reporting on a specific risk2. Assigning risk ownership is essential for ensuring that the risk management program works effectively and efficiently, as it helps to:

Clarify the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups involved in risk management and internal control;

Ensure that the risks are managed in accordance with the organization’s objectives, strategies, and risk appetite;

Provide guidance and support to the risk owners in identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks;

Monitor and evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the risk owners and the risk response actions;

Communicate and report on the risk status and issues to the relevant stakeholders and authorities. The other options are not the most important characteristic of an effective risk managementprogram, as they are either less relevant or less specific than assigning risk ownership. Risk response plans are documented. This option is a consequence or outcome of an effective risk management program, not a characteristic of it. Risk response plans are the actions or measures that are taken to modify the risk, such as reducing, avoiding, transferring, or accepting the risk3. Documenting risk response plans means recording and maintaining the details and outcomes of the risk responseactions, such as the objectives, scope, resources, timelines, performance indicators, and results4. Documenting risk response plans can help to improve the consistency and transparency of the risk management process, as well as to support the monitoring and evaluation of the risk response actions. However, documenting risk response plans is not the most important characteristic of an effective risk management program, as it does not address the accountability and authority for managing the risk. Controls are mapped to key risk scenarios. This option is a specific or narrow example of an effective risk managementprogram, not a general or broad characteristic of it. Controls are the measures or actions that are taken to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk, or to increase the likelihood or impact of an opportunity5. Mapping controls to key risk scenarios means linking the controls to the specific situations or events that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance6. Mapping controls to key risk scenarios can help to enhance the design and implementation of the controls, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls in mitigating the risk. However, mapping controls to key risk scenarios is not the most important characteristic of an effective risk management program, as it does not cover the other aspects of risk management, such as risk identification, assessment, treatment, and monitoring. Key risk indicators are defined. This option is a component or element of an effective risk management program, not a characteristic of it. Key risk indicators are the metrics that measure thelevel and trend of a risk that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance7. Defining key risk indicators means establishing and maintaining the criteria and methods for measuring and reporting on the risk8. Defining key risk indicators can help to enhance the risk identification, assessment, and reporting processes, as well as to support the risk decision making and prioritization. However, defining key risk indicators is not the most important characteristic of an effective risk management program, as it does not indicate the accountability and authority for managing the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 85.