Free Practice Questions for Isaca CISM Exam

 Network isolation techniques are immediately implemented after a security breach to reduce the extent of further damage by limiting the access and communication of the compromised systems or networks with the rest of the environment. This can help prevent the spread of malware, the exfiltration of data, or the escalation of privileges by the attackers. Network isolation techniques can include disconnecting the affected systems or networks from the internet, blocking or filtering certain ports or protocols, or creating separate VLANs or subnets for the isolated systems or networks. Network isolation techniques are part of the incident response process and should be performed as soon as possible after detecting a security breach. References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 308-3091; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription, Question ID: 1162

The most important consideration when establishing metrics for reporting to the information security strategy committee is D. Aligning the metrics with the organizational culture. This is because the metrics should reflect the values, beliefs, and behaviors of the organization and its stakeholders, and support the achievement of the strategic objectives and goals. The metrics should also be relevant, meaningful, and understandable for the intended audience, and provide clear and actionable information for decision making. The metrics should not be too technical, complex, or ambiguous, but rather focus on the key aspects of information security performance, such as risk, compliance, maturity, value, and effectiveness.

References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 281; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 9th Edition, Question 5, page 3

 According to the CISM Review Manual, one of the best ways to contain an SQL injection attack that has been detected by a web application firewall is to reconfigure the web application firewall to block the attack. This means that the web application firewall should be updated with the latest detection patterns and rules that can identify and prevent SQL injection attacks. By doing so, the web application firewall can reduce the impact and damage of the attack, and prevent further exploitation of the vulnerable database1

The other options are not as effective as reconfiguring the web application firewall to block the attack. Force password changes on the SQL database is a reactive measure that does not address the root cause of the problem, and may cause data loss or corruption if not done properly. Updating the detection patterns on the web application firewall is a preventive measure that can help to detect SQL injection attacks, but it does not stop them from happening in the first place. Blocking IPs from where the attack originates is a defensive measure that can limit or stop some SQL injection attacks, but it does not protect all possible sources of malicious traffic, and may also affect legitimate users or applications1

References = 1: CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2020, pp. 32-33…

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are measurable values that demonstrate how effectively an organization is achieving its key objectives and goals. KPIs can help senior management understand the status of information security compliance by providing quantifiable and relevant data on the performance and progress of the information security program and processes. KPIs can also help senior management to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the information security controls and activities, identify strengths and weaknesses, and make informed decisions and adjustments. KPIs should be aligned with the organization’s strategy, vision, and mission, and should be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound). Some examples of information security KPIs are: percentage of compliance with policies and standards, number of security incidents and breaches, mean time to detect and respond to incidents, percentage of systems and applications patched, number of security awareness trainings completed, etc.

Industry benchmarks, business impact analysis (BIA) results, and risk assessment results are not the most useful to help senior management understand the status of information security compliance, although they may provide some useful information or insights. Industry benchmarks are comparative measures of the performance or practices of other organizations in the same industry or sector. Industry benchmarks can help senior management to compare and contrast their own information security performance or practices with those of their peers or competitors, and identify gaps or opportunities for improvement. However, industry benchmarks may not reflect the specific goals, needs, or context of the organization, and may not be readily available or reliable. Business impact analysis (BIA) results are the outcomes of the process of analyzing the potential impacts of disruptive events on the organization’s critical business functions and processes. BIA results can help senior management to understand the dependencies, priorities, and recovery objectives of the organization’s business functions and processes, and to plan for business continuity and disaster recovery. However, BIA results do not directly measure or indicate the status of information security compliance, and may not be updated or accurate. Risk assessment results are the outcomes of the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the information security risks that the organization faces. Risk assessment results can help senior management to understand the sources, causes, and consequences of information security risks, and to determine the appropriate risk responses and controls. However, risk assessment results do not directly measure or indicate the status of information security compliance, and may vary depending on the risk assessment methodology, criteria, and frequency. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, pages 47-481, 54-551, 69-701, 72-731; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, page 832

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics that measure the effectiveness and ef-ficiency of information security processes and activities. They help senior manage-ment understand the status of information security compliance by providing relevant, timely and accurate information on the performance of security controls, the level of risk exposure, the return on security investment and the progress toward security ob-jectives. KPIs can also be used to benchmark the organization’s security performance against industry standards or best practices. KPIs should be aligned with the organiza-tion’s strategic goals and risk appetite, and should be reported regularly to senior man-agement and other stakeholders.

Level of residual risk is the amount of risk that remains after applying risk treatment options, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, or acceptance. The information security manager should compare the level of residual risk with the organization’s risk appetite, which is the amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. The comparison will help to determine whether the risk treatment options are sufficient, excessive, or inadequate, and whether further actions are needed to align the risk level with the risk appetite.

References =

CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 49: “Residual risk is the risk that remains after risk treatment.”

CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 43: “Risk appetite is the amount of risk, on a broad level, that an entity is willing to accept in pursuit of value.”

CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 50: “The information security manager should compare the residual risk with the risk appetite and determine whether the risk treatment options are sufficient, excessive, or inadequate.”

A disaster recovery plan (DRP) test is a simulation of a disaster scenario to evaluate the effectiveness and readiness of the DRP. The greatest inherent risk when performing a DRP test is the disruption to the production environment, which could cause operational issues, data loss, or system damage. Therefore, it is essential to plan and execute the DRP test carefully, with proper backup, isolation, and rollback procedures. Poor documentation, lack of communication, and lack of coordination are also potential risks, but they are not as severe as disrupting the production environment. References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 253; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription, QID 224.

The greatest inherent risk when performing a disaster recovery plan (DRP) test is disruption to the production environment. A DRP test involves simulating a disaster scenario to ensure that the organization's plans are effective and that it is able to recover from an incident. However, this involves running tests on the production environment, which has the potential to disrupt the normal operations of the organization. This inherent risk can be mitigated by running tests on a non-production environment or by running tests at times when disruption will be minimized.

The best strategy for risk treatment is to prioritize controls that directly mitigate the organization’s most critical risks. This aligns with a risk-based approach, where limited resources are directed toward areas with the highest business impact.

“Effective risk treatment involves prioritizing actions that address the most critical risks to the organization, considering impact and likelihood.”

— CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 2: Risk Response and Mitigation*

Advancing maturity or applying quick wins may help, but they are not as strategic or impactful as targeting top-priority risks.