Free Practice Questions for Isaca CRISC Exam

 Risk appetite is the broad-based amount of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the level of risk that the organization is prepared to take to achieve its strategic goals, and provides guidance and boundaries for the risk management activities and decisions. To define the risk management strategy, which is the plan and approach for managing the risks that may affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives, the factor that must be set by the board of directors is the risk appetite. The board of directors is the highest governing body of the organization, and has the ultimate responsibility and authority for setting the direction and oversight of the organization. By setting the risk appetite, the board of directors can communicate its expectations and preferences for the risk exposure and performance of the organization, and ensure alignment with the business objectives and strategies. References = 3

Senior management involvement is a critical driver for the success of any risk management program. Without their engagement, there is a lack of strategic oversight, resource allocation, and prioritization of risk management initiatives, directly impacting the organization's ability to meet risk objectives. This is emphasized in theGovernance Principlesof CRISC.

The issue of greatest concern when evaluating existing controls during a risk assessment is the presence of successive assessments with the same recurring vulnerabilities. This indicates that the controls are ineffective or inadequate in addressing the identified risks, and that the risk management process is not functioning properly. Recurring vulnerabilities expose the enterprise to potential losses, breaches, or incidents that could harm its objectives, reputation, or compliance. Therefore, it is essential to identify the root causes of the recurring vulnerabilities, implement corrective actions, and monitor the effectiveness ofthe controls on a regular basis. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2, page 183.

A web-based service provider is an organization that offers online services or applications to its customers or users, such as e-commerce, social media, cloud computing, etc. A web-based service provider depends on the availability, reliability, and security of its web servers, networks, and systems to deliver its services or applications.

A low risk appetite for system outages means that the organization is not willing to accept a high level or frequency of system outages, which are interruptions or disruptions in the normal operation or functionality of the web servers, networks, or systems. System outages can cause customer dissatisfaction, revenue loss, reputation damage, or legal liability for the web-based service provider.

A current risk profile for online security is the current state or condition of the online security risks that may affect the web-based service provider’s objectives and operations. It includes the identification, analysis, and evaluation of the online security risks, and the prioritization and response to them based on their significance and urgency.

The most relevant observation to escalate to senior management is an increase in attempted distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, which are malicious attacks that aim to overwhelm or overload the web servers, networks, or systems with a large volume or frequency of requests or traffic, and prevent them from responding to legitimate requests or traffic. An increase in attempted DDoS attacks indicates a high likelihood and impact of system outages, and a high level of threat or vulnerability for the web-based service provider’s online security. Escalating this observation to senior management can help them to understand the severity and urgency of the risk, and to decide on the appropriate risk response and allocation of resources.

The other options are not the most relevant observations to escalate to senior management, because they do not indicate a high likelihood or impact of system outages, and they may not be relevant or actionable for senior management.

An increase in attempted website phishing attacks means an increase in malicious attempts to deceive or trick the web-based service provider’s customers or users into providing their personal or financial information, such as usernames, passwords, credit card numbers, etc., by impersonating the web-based service provider’s website or email. An increase in attemptedwebsite phishing attacks indicates a high level of threat or vulnerability for the web-based service provider’s online security, but it may not directly cause system outages, unless thephishing attacks are used to compromise the web servers, networks, or systems. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval.

A decrease in achievement of service level agreements (SLAs) means a decrease in the extent or degree to which the web-based service provider meets or exceeds the agreed or expected standards or criteria for the quality, performance, or availability of its services or applications, as specified in the contracts or agreements with its customers or users. A decrease in achievement of SLAs indicates a low level of customer satisfaction, retention, or loyalty, and a low level of competitiveness or profitability for the web-based service provider. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval.

A decrease in remediated web security vulnerabilities means a decrease in the number or percentage of web security vulnerabilities that have been identified and resolved or mitigated by the web-based service provider. Web security vulnerabilities are weaknesses or flaws in the web servers, networks, or systems that can be exploited by malicious attackers to compromise or damage the web-based service provider’s online security. A decrease in remediated web security vulnerabilities indicates a low level of effectiveness or efficiency for the web-based service provider’s web security controls or processes. Escalating this observation to senior management may not be the most relevant, because it may not reflect the web-based service provider’s risk appetite for system outages, and it may not require senior management’s involvement or approval. 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 161

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The percentage of unpatched IT assets is a KPI that measures the effectiveness of the IT asset management process in ensuring that the IT assets are updated with the latest security patches and are protected from vulnerabilities. This KPI reflects the compliance of the IT assets with the enterprise’s security policy and standards, and the ability of the IT asset management process to identify and remediate any gaps or risks in the IT asset inventory. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 5. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 4. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 4.

Thebest practiceis torecord the problem immediately as a new issuein the risk management system. ISACA emphasizes maintaining an up-to-date risk register to ensure emerging issues are tracked and addressed in a timely manner.

===========

Personal data is any information that relates to an identified or identifiable individual, such as name, address, email, phone number, etc. Processing personal data involves collecting, storing, using, disclosing, or deleting it. Processing personal data poses various risks to the privacy and security of the data subjects,such as unauthorized access, disclosure, modification, or loss. Therefore, processing personal data requires appropriate technical and organizational measures to safeguard the data and to comply with the relevant laws and regulations. One of the most effective practices to safeguard the processing of personal data is to use tokenization. Tokenization is a technique that replaces sensitive data elements with non-sensitive equivalents, called tokens, that have no meaning or value outside of a specific system or context. Tokenization reduces the risk of exposing personal data to unauthorized parties, as the tokens cannot be reversed or linked back to the original data without the proper key or algorithm. Tokenization also helps to minimize the amount of personal data that is stored or transmitted, and to limit the scope of compliance requirements. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2.2, p. 196-197

 Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe potential events or actions that could affect the achievement of enterprise objectives. The design of relevant risk scenarios should consider the following factors: the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise, the key risk indicators and risk drivers, the potential impact and likelihood of the scenarios, and the alignment with the risk management capabilities of the enterprise. The scenarios should be realistic, plausible, and consistent with the enterprise’s context and objectives. The scenarios should also be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect changes in the internal and external environment. The alignment with the risk management capabilities is the most critical factor, as it ensures that the scenarios are relevant for the decision making and risk response processes of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3.2, pp. 67-69.

The best course of action when a risk practitioner identifies a database application that has been developed and implemented by the business independently of IT is to include the application in IT risk assessments. IT risk assessments are the process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the IT-related risks that could affect the achievement of the enterprise’s objectives. By including the application in IT risk assessments, the risk practitioner can identify the potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts associated with the application, and recommend the appropriatecontrols and mitigation strategies to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Escalating the concern to senior management, documenting the reasons for the exception, and proposing that the application be transferred to IT are not the best courses of action, as they do not address the risk exposure and impact of the application, and may not be feasible or desirable for the business. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 47.

According to the ISACA Risk IT Framework, one of the key principles for effective risk management is to establish tone at the top and accountability. This means that senior management should set an example of ethical behavior and culture, and communicate the importance of ethics and compliance to the entire organization. Senior management should also ensure that the risk management process is aligned with the organization’s mission, vision, values, and code of conduct, and that ethical risks are identified, assessed, and treated appropriately. By demonstrating ethics in their day-to-day decision making, senior management can have the greatest positive impact on ethical compliance within the risk management process, as they can influence the attitudes, behaviors, and actions of all stakeholders.

 The interdependency of information systems means that the failure or disruption of one system can affect the performance or availability of other systems. Therefore, it is important to aggregate the results from multiple risk assessments on interdependent information systems to understand the overall impact to the organization. By aggregating the results, the risk manager can identify the potential cascading effects, the cumulative consequences, and the worst-casescenarios of interdependent risks. This can help theorganization to prioritize the risks, allocate the resources, and implement the risk response strategies accordingly. The other options are not as important as the overall impact to the organization, because they do not capture the full extent of the interdependency of information systems. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.3, page 99.

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

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

In a SaaS model, while the provider manages the infrastructure and application,data ownership and ultimate responsibilityfor its confidentiality remains with thecustomer's data owner, including due diligence and contractual safeguards.

Data classification is the process of assigning labels or categories to data based on its sensitivity, value, and criticality to the organization. Data classification is the first consideration when analyzing the risk associated with the web application hosted by a cloud service, as it determines the level of protection and controls required for the data. Data classification can help the organization to comply with legal, regulatory, and contractual obligations, such as GDPR,CCPA, and PCI DSS, and to prevent data breaches, leaks, or losses. Data classification can also help the organization to evaluate the suitability and trustworthiness of the cloud service provider, and to negotiate the terms and conditions of the service level agreement (SLA).

 The number of projects going live without a security review is the best key control indicator (KCI) to indicate whether security requirements are identified and managed throughout a project life cycle, because it measures the compliance and effectiveness of the security review process. A security review is a process that ensures that the security requirements are defined, implemented, tested, and verified for each project, and that any security risks or issues are identified and resolved before the project is deployed. The number of projects going live without a security review should be minimized or eliminated, as it indicates afailure or weakness of the security review process. The other options are not the best KCIs, because they do not directly measure the identification and management of security requirements. The number of employees completing project-specific security training, the number of security projects started in core departments, and the number of security-related status reports submitted by project managers areexamples of input or output indicators that measure the activities or results of the project, but not the security requirements. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions

The primary purpose of creating and documenting control procedures is to help manage risk to acceptable tolerance levels. Control procedures are the specific actions or steps that are performed to achieve the control objectives and mitigate the risks. Control procedures should be documented to provide clear guidance, consistency, and accountability for the control activities. Documenting control procedures also helps to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness andefficiency of the controls, and to identify and address any gaps or weaknesses. The other options are not the primary purpose of creating and documenting control procedures, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, page 1-15.

Upon discovering that an IT control has failed, the risk practitioner's most important action is to review compensating controls. This involves assessing whether other existing controls can mitigate the risk associated with the failed control. Evaluating compensating controls helps determine the immediate impact of the control failure and guides decisions on necessary remediation steps.

The risk owner is the person who should be accountable for any related losses to the organization, because they are the person who has the authority and responsibility to manage the risk and its associated controls.The risk owner is also the person who accepts the risk and its residual level, and who monitors and reports on the risk status and performance. The IT risk manager, the server administrator, and the risk practitioner are all involved in the riskmanagement process, but they are not the person who should be accountable for the risk and its outcomes, as they do not have the ultimate decision-making power and accountability for therisk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, page 79

The primary reason for logging is to provide evidence of activities, ensuring accountability and traceability. This supports investigations, audits, and compliance requirements, aligning withControl Monitoring and Reportingstandards.

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

The standard operating procedure (SOP) statement that best illustrates appropriate risk register maintenance is to remove risk when mitigation results in residual risk within tolerance levels. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response or mitigation has been applied. Tolerance levels are the acceptable or allowable ranges of variation or deviation from the expected or desired outcomes or objectives. When the mitigation results in residual risk within tolerance levels, it means that the risk has been reduced or managed to an acceptable or satisfactory level, and that no further action or monitoring is required. Therefore, the risk can be removed from the risk register, as it is no longer a significant or relevant risk for the organization. The other options are not as appropriate as removing risk when mitigation resultsin residual risk within tolerance levels, as they are related to the transfer, acceptance, or change of the risk, not the removal of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.

The type of control that has been applied when an organization provides legal text explaining the rights and expected behavior of users accessing a system from geographic locations that have strong privacy regulations is directive. A directive control is a control that guides or instructs the users or the staff on the policies, procedures, or standards that they need to follow or comply with when performing their tasks or activities. A directive control can help to prevent or reduce the risk of non-compliance, errors, or violations, by ensuring that the users or the staff are aware and informed of the expectations and requirements of the organization or the system. A directive control can also help to enforce the accountability and responsibility of the users or the staff, and to support the audit and monitoring of their actions and behaviors. Providing legal text explaining the rights and expected behavior of users accessing a system from geographic locations that have strong privacy regulations is an example of a directive control, as it informs the users of the legal obligations and consequences of using the system, and instructs them on how to protect their privacy and the privacy of others. Detective, preventive, and compensating are not the correct types of control, as they do not match the definition or the purpose of the control that has been applied. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

 A cost-benefit analysis is a tool that compares the costs and benefits of different alternatives, such as updating software or continuing to use end-of-life software. A cost-benefit analysis can provide the mosthelpful information to justify investing in updated software, as it can show the potential savings, benefits, and risks of each option, and help the decision-makers choose the best course of action. A cost-benefit analysis can also include qualitative factors, such as security, compliance, performance, and customer satisfaction, that may be affected by the software update. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 231. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 8. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 231. CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question231.

The best approach for selecting controls to minimize risk is to perform a risk assessment. A risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the risks that could affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A risk assessment helps to determine the likelihood and impact of the risks, and to prioritize them based on their severity and relevance. A risk assessment also helps to select the most appropriate and effective controls to minimize the risks, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risks. A risk assessment is the best approach for selecting controls, because it helps to align the controls with the organization’s risk profile, risk appetite, and risk objectives, and to ensure that the controls are adequate, suitable, and cost-effective. The other options are not the best approach for selecting controls, although they may be part of or derived from the risk assessment. Industry best practice review, cost-benefit analysis, and control-effectiveness evaluation are all activities that can help to support or improve the control selection, but they are not the best approach for selecting controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are most useful during the monitoring phase of the risk management process, as they provide timely and relevant information on the current and future risk status and performance. KRIs are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the effectiveness of risk response strategies, and they have predefined thresholds that indicate the acceptable or unacceptable risk status. By monitoring the KRIs, the risk practitioner can identify and report any changes or deviations in the risk level, and take appropriate actions to manage the risk. KRIs are not most useful during the analysis, identification, or response selection phases, as they do not help to assess the likelihood or impact of the risk, to find the sources or causes of the risk, or to evaluate or choose the optimal risk response option. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 222.

 A risk register is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and status. A risk register can help manage and communicate risks throughout the risk management process. A risk register should be updated regularly to reflect the current state of risks and their responses. Due to a change in business processes, an identified risk scenario may no longer require mitigation, as the risk level may have decreased or the risk may have been eliminated. However, the risk should remain in the risk register, as the most important reason is to monitor for potential changes to the risk scenario. This means keeping track of the internal and external factors that may affect the risk scenario, such as new threats, vulnerabilities, opportunities, or controls. Monitoring for potential changes to the risk scenario can help identify and respond to any emerging or reoccurring risks, and ensure that therisk register is accurate and complete. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: Risk Register, p. 41-43.

 Zero Trust Architecture:

Zero Trust is a security concept centered on the belief that organizations should not automatically trust anything inside or outside their perimeters and must verify everything attempting to connect to their systems.

 Basic Tenets of Zero Trust:

The primary principle is "never trust, always verify." This means every access request is authenticated, authorized, and encrypted regardless of where it originates.

Zero Trust requires securing all communication, whether it occurs within the internal network or comes from external sources. This approach prevents lateral movement by potential attackers who have breached the network perimeter.

 Key Components:

Authentication and Authorization:Continuous verification of user identities and access privileges.

Microsegmentation:Dividing the network into small, isolated segments to limit the spread of threats.

Encryption:Ensuring that all data, whether at rest or in transit, is encrypted to protect its confidentiality and integrity.

 Other Options:

Incoming Traffic Inspection:While important, this is just one aspect of Zero Trust.

Security Frameworks and Libraries:These are tools and guidelines to implement security but do not define the core tenets of Zero Trust.

Digital Identities:Implementing digital identities is part of the broader Zero Trust strategy but not a standalone tenet.

 References:

The CISSP Study Guide explains the Zero Trust architecture and its emphasis on securing all communications regardless of network location (Sybex CISSP Study Guide, Chapter 8: Principles of Security Models, Design, and Capabilities)​​.

A control deficiency is a weakness or flaw in the design or implementation of a control that reduces its effectiveness or efficiency in achieving its intended objective or mitigating the risk that it is designed to address. A control deficiency may be caused by various factors, such as human error, system failure, process inefficiency, resource limitation, etc.

When determining which control deficiencies are most significant, the most useful information would be the risk analysis results, which are the outcomes or outputs of the risk analysis process that measures and compares the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizes them based on their significance and urgency. The risk analysis results can help to determine which control deficiencies are most significant by providing the following information:

The level and priority of the risks that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization if they materialize.

The gap or difference between the current and desired level of risk, and the extent or degree to which the control deficiencies contribute to or affect the gap or difference.

The cost-benefit or feasibility analysis of the possible actions or plans to address or correct the control deficiencies, and the expected or desired outcomes or benefits that they may provide for the organization.

The other options are not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that the risk analysis results provide, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the organization.

An exception handling policy is a policy that defines and describes the procedures and guidelines for dealing with the situations or circumstances that deviate from the normal or expected operation or functionality of a control, and that may require special or alternative actions or measures to address or resolve them. An exception handling policy can provide useful information on how to handle or manage the control deficiencies, but it is not the most usefulinformation when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the level and priority of the risks that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization.

A vulnerability assessment is an assessment that identifies and evaluates the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A vulnerability assessment can provide useful information on the existence and severity of the control deficiencies, but it is not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the likelihood and impact of the risk scenarios that are associated with the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization.

A benchmarking assessment is an assessment that compares and contrasts the organization’s performance, practices, or processes with those of other organizations or industry standards, and identifies the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or threats that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A benchmarking assessment can provide useful information on the best practices or improvement areas for the organization, but it is not the most useful information when determining which control deficiencies are most significant, because it does not indicate the level and priority of the risks that are associatedwith the control deficiencies, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization. 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 176

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The effectiveness of risk treatment determines whether the selected response sufficiently mitigates the identified risk. This consideration ensures alignment with risk appetite and reduces residual risk to acceptable levels, reflecting the priorities set out in theRisk Response and Treatmentdomain of CRISC.

Data flow documentation provides insight into how and where data moves, stored, or processed. It helps identify vulnerable points in the data lifecycle where data loss can occur.

Mitigating technology risk to acceptable levels means that the organization implements and maintains appropriate controls to reduce the likelihood and impact of potential threats or losses that may arise from the use of technology, such as IT systems, applications, networks, devices, etc.

The primary factor that should guide the mitigation of technology risk is the organizational risk appetite. This means that the organization defines and communicates the amount and type of risk that it is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives and strategy.

The organizational risk appetite helps to determine the risk tolerance and thresholds for different risk categories and scenarios, prioritize the risks, select the most suitable risk responses, allocate the resources and budget for risk management, and monitor and report the risk performance and outcomes.

The other options are not the primary factors that should guide the mitigation of technology risk. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 25

Information Technology & Security, page 19

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 17

IT capacity is the ability of an IT system or network to handle the current and future workload and performance demands. IT capacity can be affected by various factors, such as the numberand type of users, applications, devices, data, transactions, etc. IT capacity management is the process of planning, monitoring, and optimizing the IT resources to ensure that they meet the business needs and objectives. IT capacity management can help prevent issues such as system slowdowns, outages, errors, or failures, and improve the efficiency, reliability, and security of the IT system or network. One of the IT key risk indicators (KRIs) that provides managementwith the best feedback on IT capacity is the trends in IT resource usage. IT resource usage is the measure of how much of the IT resources, such as CPU, memory, disk, bandwidth, etc., are being consumed by the IT system or network. Trends in IT resource usage can help monitor and analyze the changes in the IT capacity over time, and identify the patterns, peaks, and bottlenecks in the IT resource consumption. Trends in IT resource usage can also help forecast the future IT capacity requirements, and plan for the appropriate IT resource allocation, optimization, or expansion. Trends in IT resource usage can provide management with valuable information on the current and potential IT capacity risks, and support the decision making and risk response for IT capacity management. References = Integrating KRIs and KPIs for Effective Technology Risk Management, p. 3-4.

A noncompliant control is a control that does not meet the requirements or standards of an audit, regulation, or policy. A noncompliant control can expose the organization to risks such as errors, fraud, or breaches. When a noncompliant control is identified, the service provider and the client should work together to resolve the issue as soon as possible. However, sometimes the resolution may not be feasible or cost-effective, and the client may decide to accept the risk associated with the noncompliant control.

In this case, the service provider’s most appropriate action would be to ask the client to document the formal risk acceptance for the provider. This means that the client should acknowledge the existence and consequences of the noncompliant control, and provide a written justification for accepting the risk. The risk acceptance document should also specify the roles and responsibilities of the service provider and the client, and the duration and conditions of the risk acceptance. The risk acceptance document should be signed by the client’s senior management and the service provider’s management, and kept as part of the audit evidence.

The other options are not appropriate actions for the service provider. Developing a risk remediation plan overriding the client’s decision would be disrespectful and unprofessional, as it would ignore the client’s authority and preference. Making a note for this item in the next audit explaining the situation would be insufficient and misleading, as it would imply that the issue is still unresolved and that the service provider is responsible for it. Insisting that the remediation occur for the benefit of other customers would be unreasonable and impractical, as it woulddisregard the client’s business needs and constraints, and potentially harm the relationship between the service provider and the client. References =

Risk Acceptance - Institute of Internal Auditors

New Guidance on the Evaluation of Non-compliance with the Risk Assessment Standard and its Peer Review Impact - REVISED

The Impact of Non-compliance: Understanding The Risks And Consequences

 Understanding the Question:

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

 Analyzing the Options:

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

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

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

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



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

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

 The percentage of relevant threats mitigated is the best key control indicator (KCI) to determine the effectiveness of an intrusion prevention system (IPS), because it measures how well the IPS is performing its intended function of preventing unauthorized access or attacks. The percentageof system uptime is not a good KCI, because it does not reflect the quality or accuracy of the IPS. The total number of threats identified is not a good KCI, because it does not indicate how many of those threats were actually prevented by the IPS. The reaction time of the system to threats is not a good KCI, because it does not measure the impact or severity of the threats that were prevented or not prevented by the IPS. References = CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions2

A post-implementation review (PIR) is a process to evaluate whether the objectives of the project were met and whether the project delivered the expected benefits and outcomes1. The primary objective of a risk practitioner performing a PIR of an IT risk mitigation project is to verify that the risk level has been lowered as a result of the project implementation2. This can be done by comparing the actual risk level with theexpected risk level, assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk mitigation controls, and identifying any residual or emergingrisks3. Documenting project lessons learned, validating the project completion, and confirming the project budget are important aspects of a PIR, but they are not the primary objective for a risk practitioner, as they do not directly measure the impact of the project on the risk level4. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 5.4: Post-Implementation Review, pp. 239-241.

Integrating risk and security requirements in an organization’s enterprise architecture (EA) helps to ensure that information assets are consistently managed throughout their life cycle, and that the risks associated with them are identified and mitigated. (Risk and Information Systems Control Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, 5th Edition, page 112)

Assigning ownership to each risk scenario is fundamental in risk management. Without designated owners, there is a lack of accountability, which can lead to risks not being adequately managed or mitigated. The absence of assigned owners means that no one is responsible for monitoring, reporting, or addressing the risk, increasing the likelihood of adverse outcomes.

According to the ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control study guide and handbook, the most comprehensive approach to capture the risk scenario of collecting and storing credit card information is event tree analysis (ETA). ETA is a forward, top-down, logical modeling technique that explores the responses and outcomes of a single initiating event, such as a data breach or a cyberattack. ETA can help to identify all possible consequences of the scenario, such as financial losses, reputational damages, legal liabilities, regulatory penalties, and customer dissatisfaction. ETA can also help to assess the probabilities of the outcomes and the effectiveness of the controls and mitigation strategies12

1: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Study Guide, 4th Edition, page 33 2: ISACA Risk and Information Systems Control Handbook, 1st Edition, page 25

The best way to ensure that information system controls are effective is to test them periodically. Testing controls periodically helps to verify that the controls are operating as intended, and that they are aligned with the enterprise’s objectives, policies, and standards. Testing controls periodically also helps to identify any gaps, weaknesses, or deficiencies in the controls, and to implement corrective actions or improvements. Responding promptly to control exceptions, implementing compensating controls, and automating manual controls are good practices, but they are not the best way to ensure control effectiveness. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.2, page 1071

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 641.

The best indicator of the condition of a risk management program is the amount of residual risk. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses. Residual risk reflects the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management program in reducing the risk exposure to an acceptable level, and in aligning the risk profile with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. A low amount of residual risk indicates that the risk managementprogram is performing well, and that the controls are adequate and appropriate. A high amount of residual risk indicates that the risk management program is not functioning properly, and that the controls are insufficient or ineffective. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2, page 191

Review Assignments of Data Ownership for Key Assets:

Data Ownership: Ensuring that data ownership is clearly assigned helps establish accountability for data protection. Data owners are responsible for the classification, management, and protection of data.

Baseline Understanding: Reviewing data ownership assignments provides a baseline understanding of who is responsible for sensitive data and ensures that the responsibilities are clearly defined and understood.

Compliance and Control: Proper data ownership ensures that controls are in place and that there is compliance with data protection policies and regulations.

Comparison with Other Options:

Identify Staff Who Have Access to Sensitive Data: This is important but should follow the establishment of clear data ownership to ensure that access controls are appropriately applied.

Identify Recent and Historical Incidents Involving Data Loss: Reviewing incidents helps understand past issues but does not address current data ownership and accountability.

Review the Organization's Data Inventory: While important, a data inventory review is part of understanding data ownership and control but should not be the first step.

Best Practices:

Clear Documentation: Ensure that data ownership is clearly documented and communicated across the organization.

Regular Reviews: Conduct regular reviews of data ownership assignments to ensure they remain accurate and up-to-date.

Training and Awareness: Provide training to data owners on their roles and responsibilities regarding data protection and risk management.

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures the level and trend of a risk that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance1. A KRI threshold is a predefined value or range that indicates the acceptable or tolerable level of risk for the organization2. Theorganization’s risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that it is willing to take in order to meet its strategic goals3. Therefore, the most likely reason for senior management’s response is that the KRI threshold needs to be revised to better align with the organization’s risk appetite. This means that the current threshold is either too low or too high, resulting in false alarms or missed signals. By adjusting the threshold to reflect the organization’s risk appetite, senior management can ensure that the KRI provides relevant and actionable information for risk management and decision making. The other options are not the most likely reasons for senior management’s response, as they imply that the KRI is faulty, irrelevant, or misunderstood. The underlying data source for the KRI is using inaccurate data and needs to be corrected. This option assumes that the KRI is based on erroneous or unreliable data, which would affect its validity and reliability. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to verify the data quality and accuracy before using the KRI for risk monitoring and reporting. The KRI is not providing useful information and shouldbe removed from the KRI inventory. This option assumes that the KRI is not aligned with the organization’s objectives, strategies, or risk profile, which would affect its usefulness and value. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to review and update the KRI inventory periodically to ensure that the KRIs are relevant and meaningful for risk management. Senior management does not understand the KRI and should undergo risk training. This option assumes that senior management lacks the knowledge or skills to interpret and use the KRI for risk management, which would affect their competence and confidence. However, this is not the most likely reason, as senior management would be expected to have sufficient risk awareness and education to understand and apply the KRI for risk management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.4, Page 53.

The next step to determine the risk exposure after a vulnerability assessment of a web-facing application is to perform a penetration test. A penetration test is a simulated attack on the application to exploit the identified vulnerabilities and measure the potential impact and likelihood of a successful breach. A penetration test can help to quantify and prioritize the risks associated with the web-facing application. Code review, gap assessment, and business impact analysis (BIA) are other possible steps, but they are not as effective as a penetration test. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

A strong risk-aware culture is reflected by transparent communication about risks. Open discussions signify employee engagement and ownership of risk-related issues.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite is a key factor in communicating the risk associated with IT in business terms, because it helps to align the IT risk management with the business strategy and goals. Risk appetite also helps to define the risk tolerance and thresholds, which are the acceptable levels of variation around the objectives. The other options are not the correct answers, because they are not essential for communicating the risk associated with IT in business terms. Compliance objectives are the objectives that an organization must achieve to comply with the applicable laws, regulations, standards, andcontracts. Organizational objectives are the objectives that an organization sets to achieve its mission, vision, and values. Inherent and residual risk are the risk levels before and after applying the risk responses, respectively. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 66.

Aggregating risk assessment results helps evaluate the total exposure and provides a consolidated view of risk, supporting enterprise-wide decision-making.

Using cloud-based backup tominimize the impactof a potential data loss event is a classic example ofrisk mitigation, which involves reducing risk to an acceptable level through proactive controls.

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.

Outsourcing IT security operations is a common practice that can provide benefits such as cost savings, access to specialized skills, and improved service quality12. However, outsourcing also introduces risks such as loss of control, dependency, contractual issues, and service failures12.

When an organization outsources its IT security operations to a third party, it does not transfer the accountability for the risk associated with the outsourced operations. Accountability is the obligation to answer for the execution of one’s assigned responsibilities34.

The organization’s management is ultimately accountable for the risk associated with the outsourced operations, as they are responsible for defining the organization’s risk appetite, strategy, and objectives, and for ensuring that the organization’s IT security operations are aligned with them34.

The organization’s management is also accountable for selecting, contracting, and overseeing the third party, and for ensuring that the third party meets the agreed service levels, standards, and compliance requirements34.

The organization’s management is also accountable for monitoring and reporting the risk associated with the outsourced operations, and for taking corrective actions when necessary34.

The other options are not ultimately accountable, but rather have different roles and responsibilities in relation to the outsourced operations. For example:

The third party’s management is responsible for delivering the IT security services according to the contract, and for managing the risk within their own organization34. They are accountable to the organization’s management, but not to the organization’s stakeholders.

The control operators at the third party are responsible for implementing and operating the IT security controls according to the service specifications, and for reporting any issues orincidents to the organization’s management34. They are accountable to the third party’s management, but not to the organization’s management or stakeholders.

The organization’s vendor management office is responsible for facilitating the relationship between the organization and the third party, and for supporting the organization’s management in the outsourcing process34. They are accountable to the organization’s management, but not for the risk associated with the outsourced operations. References =

1: Outsourcing IT Security: A Risk Management Perspective, ISACA Journal, Volume 2, 2019

2: The Cyber Security Risks Of Outsourcing, Cybersecurity Intelligence, January 4, 2022

3: Accountability for Information Security Roles and Responsibilities, Part 1, ISACA Journal, Volume 5, 2019

4: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009