Free Practice Questions for Isaca CISM Exam

Redirecting the attacker’s traffic is a viable containment strategy for a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack because it helps to divert the malicious traffic away from the target server and reduce the impact of the attack. A DDoS attack is an attempt by attackers to overwhelm a server or a network with a large volume of requests or packets, preventing legitimate users from accessing the service or resource. Redirecting the attacker’s traffic is a technique that involves changing the DNS settings or routing tables to send the attacker’s traffic to another destination, such as a sinkhole, a honeypot, or a scrubbing center. A sinkhole is a server that absorbs and discards the malicious traffic. A honeypot is a decoy server that mimics the target server and collects information about the attacker’s behavior and techniques. A scrubbing center is a service that filters out the malicious traffic and forwards only the legitimate traffic to the target server. Redirecting the attacker’s traffic helps to contain the DDoS attack by reducing the load on the target server and preserving its availability and performance. Therefore, redirecting the attacker’s traffic is the correct answer.

The first step to gain approval for outsourcing to address a security gap is to perform a cost-benefit analysis, because it helps to evaluate the feasibility and viability of the outsourcing option and compare it with other alternatives. A cost-benefit analysis is a method of estimating and comparing the costs and benefits of a project or a decision, in terms of financial, operational, and strategic aspects. A cost-benefit analysis can help to:

Identify and quantify the expected costs and benefits of outsourcing, such as the initial and ongoing expenses, the potential savings and revenues, the quality and efficiency of the service, the risks and opportunities, and the alignment with the business objectives and requirements

Assess and prioritize the criticality and urgency of the security gap, and the impact and likelihood of the related threats and vulnerabilities

Determine the optimal level and scope of outsourcing, such as the type, duration, and frequency of the service, the roles and responsibilities of the parties involved, and the performance and security standards and metrics

Justify and communicate the rationale and value proposition of outsourcing, and provide evidence and support for the decision making process

Establish and document the criteria and process for selecting and evaluating the outsourcing provider, and the contractual and legal terms and conditions

A cost-benefit analysis should be performed before submitting a funding request to senior management, because it can help to demonstrate the need and the return on investment of the outsourcing project, and to secure the budget and the resources. A cost-benefit analysis should also be performed before beginning due diligence on the outsourcing company, because it can help to narrow down the list of potential candidates and to focus on the most relevant and suitable ones. Collecting additional metrics may be a part of the cost-benefit analysis, but it is not the first step, because it requires a clear definition and understanding of the objectives and scope of the outsourcing project.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2021, pages 173-174, 177-178.

 A service provider is a third-party supplier that provides IT services or products to an organization. A service provider should comply with the organization’s information security requirements, such as policies, standards, procedures, and controls, to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the organization’s data and systems. The best way to provide an information security manager with sufficient assurance that a service provider complies with the organization’s information security requirements is to have the ability to audit the third-party supplier’s IT systems and processes. An audit is a systematic and independent examination of evidence to determine the degree of conformity to predetermined criteria. An audit can verify the effectiveness and efficiency of the service provider’s security controls, identify any gaps or weaknesses, and provide recommendations for improvement. An audit can also ensure that the service provider adheres to the contractual obligations and service level agreements (SLAs) with the organization. Therefore, option B is the most appropriate answer.

Option A is not the best answer because a live demonstration of the third-party supplier’s security capabilities may not be comprehensive, objective, or reliable. A live demonstration may only show the positive aspects of the service provider’s security, but not reveal any hidden or potential issues. A live demonstration may also be subject to manipulation or deception by the service provider.

Option C is not the best answer because third-party security control self-assessment (CSA) results may not be accurate, complete, or consistent. A self-assessment is a process where the service provider evaluates its own security controls against a set of criteria or standards. A self-assessment may be biased, subjective, or incomplete, as the service provider may not disclose or report all the relevant information or issues. A self-assessment may also vary in quality and scope depending on the service provider’s expertise, resources, and methodology.

Option D is not the best answer because an independent review report indicating compliance with industry standards may not be sufficient or specific for the organization’s information security requirements. An independent review is a process where an external party evaluates the service provider’s security controls against a set of industry standards or best practices, such as ISO/IEC 27001, NIST CSF, PCI DSS, etc. An independent review report may provide a general overview of the service provider’s security posture, but not address the organization’s unique or specific security needs, risks, or expectations. An independent review report may also be outdated, limited, or generic, as the industry standards or best practices may not reflect the current or emerging security threats or trends. References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition1, pages 257-258; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription, QID 301.

An independent review report indicating compliance with industry standards BEST provides an information security manager with sufficient assurance that a service provider complies with the organization’s information security requirements. This is because an independent review report is an objective and reliable source of evidence that the service provider has implemented and maintained effective security controls that meet the industry standards and best practices. An independent review report can also provide assurance that the service provider has addressed any gaps or weaknesses identified in previous audits or assessments.

 Cost-benefit analysis results are the best way to support the business case for an increase in the information security budget because they help to demonstrate the value and return on investment of the proposed security initiatives or projects. A cost-benefit analysis is a method of comparing the costs and benefits of different alternatives or options, taking into account both quantitative and qualitative factors. A cost-benefit analysis helps to justify the need and feasibility of the security budget, as well as to prioritize the security spending based on the expected outcomes and impacts. Therefore, cost-benefit analysis results are the correct answer.

The most important factor to obtain senior leadership support when presenting an information security strategy is that the strategy aligns with management’s acceptable level of risk because it ensures that the strategy is consistent and compatible with the organization’s risk appetite and thresholds, and reflects management’s expectations and priorities for security risk management. The strategy addresses ineffective information security controls is not a very important factor because it does not indicate how the strategy will improve or enhance the security controls or performance. The strategy aligns with industry benchmarks and standards is not a very important factor because it does not indicate how the strategy will differentiate or innovate the organization’s security capabilities or practices. The strategy addresses organizational maturity and the threat environment is not a very important factor because it does not indicate how the strategy will advance or adapt the organization’s security posture or resilience. References: https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2016/volume-4/technical-security-standards-for-information-systems https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2017/volume-2/how-to-align-security-initiatives-with-business-goals-and-objectives

The reduction of organizational risk is the desired outcome that best supports a decision to invest in a new security initiative. The organizational risk is the level of exposure or uncertainty that the organization faces in achieving its objectives. The organizational risk is influenced by various factors, such as the threat landscape, the vulnerability of the assets, the impact of the incidents, and the effectiveness of the controls. The information security manager should evaluate the organizational risk and propose security initiatives that can reduce the risk to an acceptable level. The security initiatives should be aligned with the business goals, the risk appetite, and the available resources of the organization. The security initiatives should also provide a positive return on investment (ROI) or value for money (VFM) for the organization. The reduction of organizational risk is the ultimate goal and benefit of any security initiative, as it enhances the security posture, performance, and resilience of the organization. Enhanced security monitoring and reporting, reduced control complexity, and enhanced threat detection capability are all possible outcomes of security initiatives, but they are not the best ones to support a decision to invest in a new security initiative. These outcomes are more specific and technical, and they may not directly relate to the business objectives or the risk appetite of the organization. These outcomes are also intermediate or enabling, rather than final or ultimate, as they may not necessarily lead to the reduction of organizational risk. For example, enhanced security monitoring and reporting may improve the visibility and awareness of the security status, but it may not prevent or mitigate the incidents. Reduced control complexity may simplify the security management and maintenance, but it may not address the emerging or evolving threats. Enhanced threat detection capability may increase the speed and accuracy of identifying the attacks, but it may not reduce the impact or the likelihood of the attacks. Therefore, the reduction of organizational risk is the best outcome to support a decision to invest in a new security initiative, as it demonstrates the value and effectiveness of the security initiative for the organization. References = CISM Review Manual 2023, page 40 1; CISM Practice Quiz 2

The contribution of recovery point objective (RPO) to disaster recovery is to define backup strategy because it determines the maximum amount of data loss that is acceptable to an organization after a disruption, and guides the frequency and type of backups needed to restore the data to a usable format1. Minimize outage periods is not a contribution of RPO, but rather a contribution of recovery time objective (RTO), which defines the maximum amount of time that is acceptable to restore normal operations after a disruption2. Eliminate single points of failure is not a contribution of RPO, but rather a goal of high availability (HA), which ensures that systems or services are continuously operational and resilient3. Reduce mean time between failures (MTBF) is not a contribution of RPO, but rather a measure of reliability, which indicates the average time that a system or component operates without failure4. References: 1 https://www.druva.com/glossary/what-is-a-recovery-point-objective-definition-and-related-faqs 2 https://www.druva.com/glossary/what-is-a-recovery-time-objective-definition-and-related-faqs 3 https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/high-availability 4 https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/mean-time-between-failures

Any weaknesses identified, even after an unsuccessful attack, should be tracked and reported until they are fully resolved. This ensures accountability, remediation, and prevention of future incidents. Ignoring or delaying action increases exposure to future threats.

“All vulnerabilities must be tracked, assigned for remediation, and closed out following proper documentation and validation.”

— CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 4: Incident Management, Section: Remediation and Lessons Learned

ISACA’s guidance in the practice questions clearly recommends formal tracking and resolution of vulnerabilities as the best practice for ongoing security management.

The most important consideration when determining which type of failover site to employ is the recovery time objectives (RTOs). A failover site is a backup site that can be used to restore the functionality and operations of an organization’s primary site in the event of a disaster or disruption. There are different types of failover sites, such as hot sites, warm sites, and cold sites, that vary in terms of availability, cost, and complexity. A recovery time objective (RTO) is a metric that defines the maximum acceptable amount of time that an organization can tolerate to restore a system or an application after a disaster or disruption. By determining the RTOs for each system or application, the organization can choose the most suitable type of failover site that can meet its recovery needs and expectations. For example, if the RTO for a critical system is very low, the organization may opt for a hot site that can provide immediate failover and minimal downtime. However, if the RTO for a non-critical system is high, the organization may choose a cold site that requires manual setup and activation, but has lower cost and maintenance. The other options are not the most important consideration when determining which type of failover site to employ, although they may be some factors or constraints that affect the decision. Reciprocal agreements are arrangements between two or more organizations that agree to provide backup facilities or resources to each other in case of a disaster or disruption. Reciprocal agreements can help reduce the cost and complexity of setting up and maintaining a failover site, but they may not guarantee the availability or compatibility of the backup facilities or resources. Disaster recovery test results are outcomes of testing and validating the functionality and performance of a failover site. Disaster recovery test results can help evaluate and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of a failover site, but they do not determine which type of failover site to employ. Data retention requirements are policies and regulations that define how long and in what format an organization must store its data. Data retention requirements can affect the design and configuration of a failover site, but they do not dictate which type of failover site to employ

The best course of action when the organization receives complaints from users that some of their files have been encrypted and they are receiving demands for money to decrypt the files is to initiate incident response. This is because the organization is facing a ransomware attack, which is a type of malicious software that encrypts the victim’s data and demands a ransom for the decryption key. Ransomware attacks can cause significant disruption, damage, and loss to the organization’s operations, assets, and reputation. Therefore, the organization needs to quickly activate its incident response plan and team, which are designed to handle such security incidents in a coordinated, effective, and efficient manner. The incident response process involves the following steps1:

Preparation: The incident response team prepares the necessary resources, tools, and procedures to respond to the incident. The team also establishes the roles, responsibilities, and communication channels among the team members and other stakeholders.

Identification: The incident response team identifies the scope, source, and severity of the incident. The team also collects and preserves the relevant evidence and logs for further analysis and investigation.

Containment: The incident response team isolates the affected systems and networks to prevent the spread of the ransomware and limit the impact of the incident. The team also implements temporary or alternative solutions to restore the essential functions and services.

Eradication: The incident response team removes the ransomware and any traces of its infection from the affected systems and networks. The team also verifies that the systems and networks are clean and secure before restoring them to normal operations.

Recovery: The incident response team restores the affected systems and networks to normal operations. The team also decrypts or restores the encrypted data from backups or other sources, if possible. The team also monitors the systems and networks for any signs of recurrence or residual issues.

Lessons learned: The incident response team conducts a post-incident review to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the incident response process and team. The team also identifies the root causes, lessons learned, and best practices from the incident. The team also recommends and implements the necessary improvements and corrective actions to prevent or mitigate similar incidents in the future.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 4: Information Security Incident Management, Section: Incident Response Process, pages 229-2331; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 10th Edition, Question 45, page 432.

 The information security manager’s best course of action is to present the risk to senior management, because this is a case of conflicting objectives and priorities between the information security team and the business management. The information security manager should explain the potential impact and likelihood of a security breach due to the violation of the access policy, as well as the possible legal, regulatory, and reputational consequences. The information security manager should also provide alternative solutions that can achieve both operational efficiency and security compliance, such as implementing single sign-on, role-based access control, or multi-factor authentication. The information security manager should not enforce the policy without senior management’s approval, because this could cause operational disruption and business dissatisfaction. The information security manager should not modify the policy without a proper risk assessment and approval process, because this could weaken the security posture and expose the organization to more threats. The information security manager should not create an exception for the deviation without a formal risk acceptance and documentation process, because this could create inconsistency and ambiguity in the policy enforcement and accountability. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2021, pages 127-128, 138-139, 143-144.

Performing a vulnerability analysis is the best option to ensure that a new application complies with information security policy because it helps to identify and evaluate any security flaws or weaknesses in the application that may expose it to potential threats or attacks, and provide recommendations or solutions to mitigate them. Reviewing the security of the application before implementation is not a good option because it may not detect or prevent all security issues that may arise after implementation or deployment. Integrating security functionality at the development stage is not a good option because it may not account for all security requirements or challenges of the application or its environment. Periodically auditing the security of the application is not a good option because it may not address any security issues that may occur between audits or after deployment. References: https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2017/volume-2/secure-software-development-lifecycle https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2016/volume-4/integrating-assurance-functions

The most important information to communicate with regard to the open items from the risk register to senior management is the potential business impact of these risks. The potential business impact is the estimated consequence or loss that the organization may suffer if the risk materializes or occurs. The potential business impact can be expressed in quantitative or qualitative terms, such as financial, operational, reputational, legal, or strategic impact. Communicating the potential business impact of the open items from the risk register helps senior management to understand the severity and urgency of these risks, and to prioritize the risk response actions and resources accordingly. Communicating the potential business impact also helps senior management to align the risk management objectives and activities with the business objectives and strategies, and to ensure that the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization are respected and maintained.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 2: Information Risk Management, Section: Risk Assessment, page 831; CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 2: Information Risk Management, Section: Risk Reporting, page 1012.

The best way to integrate information security governance with corporate governance is for management teams to embed information security into business processes. The CISM Review Manual explains that aligning security objectives and activities with organizational goals and business processes ensures that security is a core part of business operations and strategy, not an isolated activity.

 The organizational risk appetite is the best indicator of the comprehensiveness of an information security strategy. The risk appetite defines the level of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. The information security strategy should align with the risk appetite and provide a framework for managing the risks that the organization faces. An internal or external security audit can assess the effectiveness of the information security strategy, but not its comprehensiveness. A business impact analysis (BIA) can identify the critical business processes and assets that need to be protected, but not the overall scope and direction of the information security strategy. References = CISM Review Manual 2023, page 36 1; CISM Practice Quiz 2

Network segmentation is the most effective control to prevent lateral movement. In ransomware attacks, attackers often breach one endpoint and move laterally across the network to reach critical assets.

Segmentation limits this movement by isolating systems into different zones or subnets, thereby reducing the attack surface and preventing unauthorized internal traversal.

DLP and encryption are primarily focused on data protection, not internal network movement.

IDS can detect intrusions but does not prevent movement like segmentation does.

“Network segmentation limits the scope of access for compromised systems and is a key strategy in preventing lateral movement in an attack.”

— CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 3: Information Security Architecture, Section: Network Security*

Real-world example: “In the NotPetya and WannaCry incidents, poor internal segmentation allowed malware to propagate rapidly.”

The first step when a potential breach is discovered is to validate the breach. According to the CISM Review Manual, Domain 4, the information security manager must confirm the event to avoid unnecessary escalation or resource allocation. This validation ensures that the incident is real and justifies further response actions. Invoking the incident response plan or informing management comes after the breach is validated.