Free Practice Questions for Isaca CRISC Exam

The primary reason to have risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register is to ensure that risk is treated appropriately, as risk owners are responsible for implementing the risk response strategies and monitoring the risk status and outcomes. Risk owners are also accountable for the risk and its impact on the enterprise’s objectives and operations. Having risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register helps to clarify the roles and responsibilities, improve the communication and coordination, and enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management process. Mitigating actions are prioritized, risk entries are regularly updated, and risk exposure is minimized are not the primary reasons to have risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register, but rather the results or benefits of having risk owners assigned to entries in the risk register. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 206; CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, question 206.

The business unit owner is accountable for authorizing application access in a SaaS environment because they are responsible for aligning access controls with business needs. They determine the roles and permissions needed to ensure operational effectiveness while adhering to the principle ofAccess Managementin the CRISC framework.

In addition to the risk register, which is a tool to document and monitor the risks that affect the organization, a risk practitioner should review the business objectives of the organization to develop an understanding of its risk profile. The risk profile is a description of the set of risks that the organization faces in relation to its goals and strategies. By reviewing the business objectives, the risk practitioner can identify the sources, drivers, and consequences of the risks, as well as the alignment, prioritization, and tolerance of the risks. The business objectives also provide the context and criteria for evaluating and managing the risks. The other options are not the best choices to review for developing an understandingof the organization’s risk profile, as they do not capture the full scope and nature of the risks. The control catalog is a list of the existing controls that are implemented to mitigate the risks, but it does not reflect the effectiveness, efficiency, or sufficiency of the controls. The asset profile is a description of the resources and capabilities that the organization possesses or relies on, but it does not indicate the value, vulnerability, or interdependency of the assets. The key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the level and trend of the risks, but they do not explain the causes, impacts, orresponses to the risks. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.2, Page 49.

Implementing internal controls to address inadequate third-party controls is a risk mitigation strategy. It reduces risk by enhancing control effectiveness.

 The primary objective for requiring an independent review of an organization’s IT risk management process should be to assess gaps in IT risk management operations and strategicfocus, as this helps to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current process, and to provide recommendations for improvement and alignment with the enterprise’s objectives and environment. An independent review is an objective and unbiased evaluation of the IT risk management process by a qualified and competent party that is not involved in the process. An independent review can help to ensure the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of the IT risk management process, as well as to enhance the credibility and confidence of the process. Confirming that IT risk assessment results are expressed as business impact, verifying implemented controls to reduce the likelihood of threat materialization, and ensuring IT risk management is focused on mitigating potential risk are not the primary objectives for requiring an independent review of an organization’s IT risk management process, but rather the expected outcomes or benefits of the independent review. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question219; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 219.

The most important factor to identify when developing top-down risk scenarios is B. Business objectives12

Top-down risk scenarios are based on the organization’s strategic goals, objectives, and key performance indicators (KPIs), and they aim to identify the potential events or situations that could prevent or hinder the achievement of those goals and objectives12

By identifying the business objectives, the risk practitioner can align the risk scenarios with the organization’s mission, vision, and values, and ensure that the risk scenarios are relevant, realistic, and meaningful for the senior management and other stakeholders12

The other factors are not as important as the business objectives when developing top-down risk scenarios, because they are either more relevant for bottom-up risk scenarios (A and D), or they are derived from the business objectives and the risk scenarios ©12

The primary risk management responsibility of the first line of defense is to implement risk treatment plans. The first line of defense is the operational management and staff who are directly involved in the execution of the business activities and processes. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, and responding to the risks that affect their objectives and performance. Implementing risk treatment plans means applying the appropriate risk response strategies and actions to address the identified risks, and monitoring and reporting the results and outcomes of the risk treatment. The other options are not as primary as implementing risk treatment plans, as they are related to the validation, establishment, or review of the risk management process, not the execution of the risk management process. References = Risk andInformation Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.1: IT Risk Management Process, page 15.

A key control indicator (KCI) is a metric that provides information on the extent to which a given control is meeting its intended objectives in terms of loss prevention, reduction, etc. A KCI should have an explicit relationship to both the specific control and the specific risk against which the control has been implemented. For risk related to IT infrastructure failure, a possible control is to have a recovery plan that can restore the critical IT services and minimize the impact of the failure. A KCI that can measure the effectiveness of this control is the number of successful recovery plan tests, which indicates how well the recovery plan can be executed in a real scenario. The higher the number of successful tests, the lower the risk of IT infrastructure failure. Therefore, this is the best KCI among the given options. References =

Integrating KRIs and KPIs for Effective Technology Risk Management

Key Control Indicator (KCI) - CIO Wiki

Infrastructure Issues: Understanding and Mitigating Risks

The best way to protect company sensitive information from being exposed when an organization allows employee use of social media accounts for work purposes is to require employees to sign nondisclosure agreements. Nondisclosure agreements are legal contracts that prohibit the employees from disclosing or sharing the company sensitive information with unauthorized parties, such as competitors, media, or regulators. Nondisclosure agreements also specify the scope, duration, and conditions of the nondisclosure obligation, and the penalties or remedies for breaching the agreement. Requiring employees to sign nondisclosure agreements is the best way to protect company sensitive information, as it helps to prevent or deter the employees from exposing or leaking the company sensitive information on social media, and to hold the employees accountable and liable for their actions. Requiring employees to signnondisclosure agreements also helps to comply with the legal and regulatory requirements for data protection and privacy. Educating employees on what needs to be kept confidential, implementing a data loss prevention (DLP) solution, and taking punitive action against employees who expose confidential data are also useful ways, but they are not as effective as requiring employees to sign nondisclosure agreements, as they are either dependent on the employees’ awareness or behavior, or reactive or corrective measures, rather than proactive or preventive measures. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

The main reason for documenting the performance of controls is to provide accurate risk reporting. Risk reporting is a process that communicates and discloses the relevant and reliable information about the risks and their management to the stakeholders and decision makers. Risk reporting is an essential component of the risk management process, as it helps to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring activities, as well as to support and inform the risk governance and oversight functions. Documenting the performance of controls is a technique that records and tracks the results and outcomes of the controls that are implemented to address the risks, such as the control objectives,

Unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator is a security risk that involves altering, deleting, or inserting data on a database without proper authorization or approval, by a person who has privileged access to the database, such as a database administrator12.

The best control to detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator is to review database activity logs, which are records that capture and store the details and history ofthe transactions or activities that are performed on the database, such as who, what, when, where, and how34.

Reviewing database activity logs is the best control because it provides evidence and visibility of the database operations, and enables the detection and reporting of any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator34.

Reviewing database activity logs is also the best control because it supports the accountability and auditability of the database operations, and facilitates the investigation and resolution of any unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator34.

The other options are not the best controls, but rather possible measures or techniques that may supplement or enhance the review of database activity logs. For example:

Reviewing database access rights is a measure that involves verifying and validating the permissions and privileges that are granted or revoked to the users or roles who can access or modify the data on the database56. However, this measure is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the database administrator has legitimate access rights to the data56.

Comparing data to input records is a technique that involves matching and reconciling the data on the database with the original or source data that are entered or imported into the database, and identifying and correcting any discrepancies or errors78. However, this technique is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the input records are also modified or compromised78.

Reviewing changes to edit checks is a technique that involves examining and evaluating the modifications or updates to the edit checks, which are rules or validations that are applied to the data on the database to ensure their accuracy, completeness, andconsistency9 . However, this technique is not the best control because it does not directly detect unauthorized modification of data by a database administrator, especially if the edit checks are bypassed or disabled9 . References =

1: Database Security: Attacks and Solutions | SpringerLink2

2: Unauthorised Modification of Data With Intent to Cause Impairment3

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia4

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva5

5: Database Access Control - Wikipedia6

6: Database Access Control: Best Practices for Database Security7

7: Data Reconciliation - Wikipedia8

8: Data Reconciliation and Gross Error Detection9

9: Edit Check - Wikipedia

Edit Checks: A Data Quality Tool

A risk-aware culture is a culture that recognizes, understands, and values the importance of risk management in achieving the organization’s objectives and goals. A risk-aware culture is also a culture that supports and encourages the identification, assessment, response, and monitoring of risks across the organization, as well as the sharing and learning of risk information and best practices. One of the activities that would best contribute to promoting an organization-wide risk-aware culture is communicating components of risk and their acceptable levels. This is a technique to inform and educate the stakeholders and decision makers about the nature and scope of the risks that the organization faces, as well as the criteria and standards that the organization uses to measure and manage the risks. Communicating components of risk and their acceptable levels can help to increase the awareness and understanding of the risks and their impact on the organization’s performance and value, as well as to align the expectations and behaviors of the stakeholders and decision makers with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Communicating components of risk and their acceptable levels can also help to foster a transparent and collaborative environment for risk management, where the stakeholders and decision makers can openly discuss and address the risks and their implications, as well as to provide and receive feedback and support. The other options are not the best activities to promote an organization-wide risk-aware culture, although they may be relevant and useful. Performing a benchmark analysis and evaluating gaps is a technique to compare and improve the organization’s risk management process and performance with the industry standards or best practices, as well as to identify and close the gaps or weaknesses in the organization’s risk management capabilities or maturity. However, this technique does not necessarily promote a risk-aware culture, as it focuses on the process and performance of risk management, not the attitude and behavior of risk management. Conducting risk assessments and implementing controls is a technique to identify and analyze the risks that the organization faces, as well as to select and execute the appropriate actions to address the risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risks. However, this technique does not directly promote a risk-aware culture, as it focuses on the actions and outcomes of risk management, not the values and beliefs of risk management. Participating in peer reviews and implementing best practices is a technique to evaluate and enhance the quality and effectiveness of the organization’s risk management activities anddeliverables, as well as to adopt and apply the proven and successful methods or solutions for risk management. However, this technique does not effectively promote a risk-aware culture, as it focuses on the improvement and optimization of risk management, not the communication and collaboration of risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 982; The 6 keyelements to creating and maintaining a good risk culture3; How to increase risk awareness - Project Management Institute4

Corporate culture is the set of values, beliefs, and norms that shape the behavior and attitude of an organization and its people. Corporate culture alignment is the degree of consistency and compatibility between the corporate culture and the organization’s vision, mission, strategy, andobjectives. Corporate culture misalignment is the situation where the corporate culture is not aligned with the organization’s goals and expectations, and may hinder or undermine the achievement of those goals. The acceptance of control costs that exceed risk exposure is most likely an example of corporate culture misalignment, as it indicates that the organization is not following a rational and optimal approach to risk management. The organization is spending more resources on controlling risks than the potential benefits or losses that the risks entail, which may result in inefficiency, waste, or opportunity cost. The organization may also be overemphasizing the importance of risk avoidance or mitigation, and neglecting the potential value creation or innovation that may arise from taking or accepting some risks. The other options are not the best answers, as they do not explain the situation of accepting control costs that exceed risk exposure. Low risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is not willing to accept. Low risk tolerance may lead to excessive or unnecessary controls, but it does not necessarily mean that the control costs exceed the riskexposure. High risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is willing to accept. High risk tolerance may lead to insufficient or ineffective controls, but it does not imply that the control costs exceed the risk exposure. Corporate culture alignment is the situation where the corporate culture is aligned with the organization’s goals and expectations, and supports and facilitates the achievement of those goals. Corporate culture alignment would not result inaccepting control costs thatexceed risk exposure, as it would imply a balanced and rational approach to risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 22-231; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 812

The primary reason to implement a formalized risk taxonomy is to reduce subjectivity in risk management, as it provides a common and consistent language and structure for identifying, classifying, and reporting risks, and facilitates the comparison and aggregation of risks across the organization. The other options are not the primary reasons, as they are more related to the outcomes, benefits, or drivers of risk management, respectively, rather than the reason for risk management. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

Risk tolerance defines the boundaries for acceptable risk levels and directly impacts decision-making for mitigation strategies. A well-defined tolerance helps prioritize actions and allocate resources effectively, emphasizing its central role in theRisk Responsedomain.

Formal acceptance of the risk is critical when the risk exposure exceeds the risk appetite, as it ensures accountability and acknowledges the decision at the appropriate level. Documenting acceptance involves communicating the potential impacts and obtaining agreement from senior stakeholders. This process aligns with theRisk Response and Reportingdomain in CRISC, emphasizing clear documentation and communication of risks for decision-making.

The application risk profile should be updated when reviewing functional requirements. This will help to identify and assess the potential risks that may arise from the changes to the application, and to plan and implement appropriate risk responses. Updating the application risk profile at this stage will also help to ensure that the changes are aligned with the organization’s objectives, policies, and standards, and that they meet the stakeholders’ expectations and needs. Updating the application risk profile after user acceptance testing, upon release to production, or during backlog scheduling are not the best points to update the risk profile, as they may be too late or too early to capture the relevant risks and their impacts. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1.1, page 511

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 655.

A risk register is a document that contains information about potential cybersecurity risks that could threaten a project’s success, or even the business itself2. Therefore, it is important to protect the confidentiality and integrity of the risk register from unauthorized or inappropriate access, modification, or disclosure. One way to do this is to implement role-based access, which is a method of restricting access to the risk register based on the roles or responsibilities of the users1. This way, only authorized users who need to view or edit the risk register for legitimate purposes can do so, and the access rights can be revoked or modified as needed. This would most effectively reduce the potential for inappropriate exposure of vulnerabilities documented in the risk register. The other options are not as effective or feasible as option C, as they do not address the need to balance the security and availability of the risk register. Option A, limiting access to senior management only, would compromise the availability and usefulness of the risk register, as other stakeholders such as project managers, risk owners, or auditors may need to access therisk register for risk identification, analysis, response, or monitoring purposes3. Option B, encrypting the risk register, would enhance the security of the risk register, but it would not prevent authorized users from exposing the vulnerabilities to unauthorized parties, either intentionally or unintentionally. Encryption also adds complexity and cost to the risk register management process, and may affect the performance or usability of the risk register4. Option D, requiring users to sign a confidentiality agreement, would rely on the compliance and ethics of the users, but it would not prevent or detect any breaches of the agreement. A confidentiality agreement also does not specify the access rights or roles of the users, and may not be legally enforceable in some cases5.

The control evaluation phase of a risk assessment is the phase where the risk practitioner evaluates the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing or planned controls that mitigate the identified risks. Controls are the actions or measures that reduce the likelihood or impact of the risks to an acceptable level. The control evaluation phase involves testing, reviewing, and auditing the controls, and identifying any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. If the control evaluation phase reveals that multiple controls are ineffective, the risk practitioner’s first course of action should be to determine the root cause of the control failures. The root cause is the underlying or fundamental reason that leads to the problem or issue, such as the controlfailure. By determining the root cause of the control failures, the risk practitioner can understand why the controls are not working as intended, and what factors or variables are influencing the control performance. This will help the risk practitioner to identify and implement the most appropriate and effective risk response strategy and actions, such as recommending risk remediation, comparing the residual risk, or escalating the control failures. The other options are not the first course of action, as they involve different steps or outcomes of the risk management process:

Recommend risk remediation of the ineffective controls means that the risk practitioner suggests the actions or measures that can improve or restore the effectiveness of the controls, such as by modifying, replacing, or adding the controls. This may be a useful step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not address the root cause of the control failures, or may not be feasible or efficient for the enterprise’s needs.

Compare the residual risk to the current risk appetite means that the risk practitioner evaluates the level of risk that remains after considering the existing or planned controls, and compares it with the amount and type of risk that the enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. This may be a helpful step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not reflect the true or current level of risk exposure, or may not account for the uncertainties or complexities of the risks or the controls.

Escalate the control failures to senior management means that the risk practitioner communicates the control failures to the senior leaders of the enterprise, who oversee the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provide guidance and direction to the risk owners and practitioners. This may be a necessary step in the risk management process, but it is not the first course of action, as it may not provide sufficient or timely information or action to address the control failures, or may not reflect the urgency or priority of the control failures. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3.1, pp. 62-63.

Information systems audits are designed to evaluate the effectiveness of controls and identify weaknesses or vulnerabilities within systems. Identifying vulnerabilities allows organizations to address potential security issues proactively.

The risk likelihood is the element of the risk register that should be updated to reflect the change of implementing encryption on all databases that host customer data. The risk likelihood is the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring, and it is one of the factors that determine the risk level and priority. By implementing encryption, the organization reduces the risk likelihood of unauthorized access, disclosure, or breach of the customer data, as encryption protects the data from being read or modified by anyone who does not have the decryption key. Therefore, the risk likelihood should be updated to reflect the lower probability of the risk event after applying the encryption control. The other options are not the elements that should be updated, as they are either not affected by or not related to the change of implementing encryption. The inherent risk is the level of risk before applying any controls or mitigation measures, and it does not change after implementing encryption. The risk appetite is the amount of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, and it is not influenced by the change ofimplementing encryption. The risk tolerance is the acceptable variation between the risk thresholds and thebusiness objectives, and it is not determined by the change of implementing encryption. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Risk Assessment in Project Management | PMI; Risk Assessment Process: Definition, Steps, and Examples; Risk Assessment - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

A legacy system is an old or outdated IT system that is still in use by an organization. A legacy system may pose various risks to the organization, such as security vulnerabilities, compatibility issues, performance degradation, maintenance challenges, etc. When an internal audit report reveals that a legacy system is no longer supported by the vendor or the manufacturer, the risk practitioner’s most important action before recommending a risk response is to assess the potential impact and cost of mitigation, which means to estimate the consequences and expenses of the risk event if the legacy system fails or malfunctions. By assessing the potential impact andcost of mitigation, the risk practitioner can evaluate the risk exposure and determine the appropriate risk response, such as accepting, avoiding, transferring, or reducing the risk. References = 4

 The primary reason for establishing various threshold levels for a set of key risk indicators (KRIs) is to take appropriate actions in a timely manner. KRIs are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given risk or the effectiveness of the controls in place. Threshold levels are predefined values that indicate when the risk level is acceptable, tolerable, or unacceptable. By establishing various threshold levels for a set of KRIs, the enterprise can monitor the risk situation and trigger the necessary responses before the risk becomes too severe or costly to mitigate. The other options are not the primary reasons for establishing various threshold levels, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of doing so. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, page 189.

Validated security requirements and design documents demonstrate that security considerations have been integrated into the SDLC from the outset. This proactive approach ensures that security is embedded into system architecture and design, reducing vulnerabilities and enhancing overall system resilience.

 IT risk owners are the most appropriate people to review the completed list of potential key risk indicators (KRIs) and select the ones that should be implemented. IT risk owners are the individuals who have the authority and accountability to manage the IT risks within their scope of responsibility. They are also responsible for defining the risk appetite, tolerance, and thresholds for their IT operations, and for ensuring that the KRIs are aligned with the business objectives and risk management strategy. IT security managers, IT control owners, and IT auditors are also involved in the risk management process, but they do not have the same level of authority and accountability as IT risk owners, and they may have different perspectives and priorities on the selection of KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, page 1-13.

 The best way to support risk-based decisions by senior management would be to map findings to objectives, because this would help them understand how the identified risks affect theachievement of the organization’s goals and priorities. Mapping findings to objectives would also help senior management evaluate the trade-offs between different risk responses and allocate resources accordingly. By linking risks to objectives, the risk practitioner can communicate the value and impact of risk management in a clear and relevant way. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 17

 Process owners are the best suited to help a risk practitioner understand the impact of IT-related events on business objectives, as they have the responsibility and authority over the design, execution, and performance of business processes. Process owners are also accountable for the risks and controls associated with their processes, and they can provide valuable input and feedback on the likelihood and impact of IT-related events on the process outcomes and objectives.

The other options are not the best suited to help a risk practitioner understand the impact of IT-related events on business objectives. IT management is responsible for the delivery and support of IT services and solutions, but they may not have the full visibility or understanding of the business objectives and processes. Internal audit is responsible for providing independent and objective assurance and consulting services on the effectiveness and efficiency of governance, risk management, and control processes, but they may not have the direct involvement or influence on the business objectives and processes. Senior management is responsible for settingthe strategic direction and objectives of the organization, but they maynot have the detailed knowledge or experience of the business processes and their risks and controls. References = IT Risk Manager: Skills and Roles & Responsibilities, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Managing information technology risk | Business Queensland

The risk owner is listed as the department responsible for decision making would pose the greatest concern for a risk practitioner who is reviewing accountability assignments for data risk in the risk register, as it indicates a lack of clarity and specificity on who is accountable for the risk and its response. The risk owner should be an individual, not a department, who has the authority and responsibility to manage the risk and its associated controls. The other options are not the greatest concern, as they do not necessarily imply a lack of accountability, but rather a possible difference in roles and responsibilities between the risk owner and the control owner, the business unit and the IT department, or the staff member and the department manager. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

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

Evaluating risk scenarios and assessing current controls is the most helpful in identifying gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment, because it allows the risk practitioner to compare the actual and expected outcomes of the IT processes and activities under different situations. A risk scenario is a hypothetical situation that describes a possible event or sequence of events that may affect the IT objectives and performance. A risk scenario can be based on various factors, such as the sources of risk, the risk drivers, the risk events, the risk impacts, and the risk responses. A risk scenario can also include the likelihood and severity of the risk, as well as the assumptions and uncertainties involved. Evaluating risk scenarios helps the risk practitioner to understand the nature and extent of the IT risks, as well as the potential consequences and opportunities that may arise from them. Assessing current controls is the process of examining and testing the existing controls that are implemented to manage the IT risks. A control is a measure or action that reduces the likelihood or impact of a risk, or enhances the benefits or opportunities of a risk. Assessing current controls helps the risk practitioner to determine the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, as well as their alignment with the IT objectives and requirements. By evaluating risk scenarios and assessing current controls, the risk practitioner can identify the gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment. The gaps can be related to the following aspects: - The IT objectives and performance: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and expected results of theIT processes and activities, as well as the deviation from the IT goals and targets. - The IT risk exposure and appetite: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actualand acceptable level of risk that the organization faces or is willing to take in pursuit of the IT objectives. - The IT risk management process and practices: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and expected performance of the IT risk management process, as well as the compliance with the IT risk management policies and standards. - The IT risk culture and awareness: The gaps can indicate the difference between the actual and desired level of risk awareness,understanding, and communication among the IT stakeholders, as well as the alignment with the organizational values and culture. Identifying the gaps between the current and desired state of the IT risk environment is important for the risk practitioner, as it can help to prioritize and address the IT risks, as well as to improve and optimize the IT risk management process and practices. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: Risk Scenarios, pp. 63-681

A risk heat map is a kind of risk matrix where risks are ranked based on their potential impact and their likelihood of occurring, which allows you to prioritize the risks that pose the greatest threat. The severity of each risk is indicated by color, usually green for low risk, red for high risk, and yellow for medium risk. Therefore, from a single data point on a risk heat map, one can interpret the risk magnitude, which is the product of impact and likelihood. The other options are not directly related to a single data point on a risk heat map, but rather to the overall risk management strategy and context. References = Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative; What Is a Risk Heat Map, and How Can It Help Your Risk Management Strategy; CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question599

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the information about the identified risks, such as the risk description, category, owner, probability, impact, response strategy, status, and action plan. The most important consideration for effectively maintaining a risk register is to update it frequently, as the risk environment is dynamic and subject to change. By updating the risk register regularly, an organization can ensure that the risk information is current, accurate, and relevant, and that the risk responses are timely, appropriate, and effective. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

The most important factor when assessing the risk of allowing users to access company data from their personal devices is the classification of the data, as it indicates the level of sensitivity, confidentiality, and criticality of the data. Data classification helps to determine the appropriate level of protection and controls that are needed to prevent unauthorized access, disclosure, modification, or loss of the data. Data classification also helps to define the roles and responsibilities of the data owners, custodians, and users, and the acceptable use of the data. The other options are not the most important factors, although they may be relevant or influential in the risk assessment. The type of device may affect the security features and vulnerabilities of the device, but it does not determine the value or impact of the data. The remote management capabilities may affect the ability to monitor, control, or wipe the device in case of theft or loss, but they do not reflect the nature or purpose of the data. The volume of data may affect the storage capacity or performance of the device, but it does not indicate the importance or significance of the data. References = What is BYOD (Bring-Your-Own-Device) - CrowdStrike; Understanding BYOD Policy - Get Certified Get Ahead; Addressing cyber security concerns on employees’ personal devices; Personal Devices at Work – Nonprofit Risk Management Center; 10 Keys to an Effective BYOD and Remote Access Policy

The organizational role that should be accountable for ensuring information assets are appropriately classified is the information asset owner, as they have the authority and responsibility to define the classification, retention, and disposal requirements for the information assets they own, and to manage the risk and controls related to the information assets. The other options are not the correct roles, as they have different roles and responsibilities related to the protection, governance, or maintenance of the information assets, respectively, rather than the classification of the information assets. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 154.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the next course of action when there is a gap between the acceptable downtime and the actual recovery time of an application is to prepare a cost-benefit analysis of alternatives available to reduce the gap. The cost-benefit analysis should compare the costs of implementing different risk response options, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer or acceptance, with the benefits of reducing the impact and likelihood of the risk. The cost-benefit analysis should also consider the alignment of the risk response options with the enterprise’s risk appetite, business objectives and strategy. The cost-benefit analysis should help the application owner and the risk owner to select the most appropriate risk response option that optimizes the value of the application and minimizes the residual risk.

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: Risk Response Process, pp. 162-1631

 Risk Appetite:

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to take in order to meet its objectives. It reflects the organization’s risk tolerance and guides decision-making at all levels.

 Impact of Market Changes:

A change in the market situation can alter the risk landscape, potentially affecting the organization’s ability to achieve its objectives. This might necessitate a reassessment of what level of risk is acceptable.

Senior management needs to ensure that the risk appetite remains aligned with the new market conditions and organizational goals.

 Reevaluation Process:

Reevaluating the risk appetite involves assessing the organization's capacity to bear risk and determining if the current acceptable risk levels are still appropriate.

This might involve more conservative or aggressive risk-taking strategies based on the new market dynamics.

 Other Considerations:

Risk Classification:This categorizes risks but does not directly address changes in acceptable risk levels.

Risk Policy:While important, the policy outlines the approach to managing risk and is influenced by the risk appetite.

Risk Strategy:This defines how risks are managed but should be aligned with the risk appetite.

 References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of aligning risk appetite with the organization’s strategic objectives and market conditions (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 1: Governance, Section 1.10 Risk Appetite, Tolerance, and Capacity) .

Ineffective control implementation can result in increased risk exposure, reduced compliance, and diminished performance for the organization. Therefore, the most relevant information for stakeholders is the impact of ineffective control implementation on the business objectives, processes, and outcomes. The impact on business can include financial losses, reputational damage, operational inefficiencies, customer dissatisfaction, and legal liabilities. The other options are not as relevant as the impact on business, because they do not directly link the control effectiveness to the business value. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 128.

A risk register is a document that is used as a risk management tool to identify and track risks that may affect a project or an organization1. A risk register should be updated regularly to reflect the current status and changes of the risks, as well as the actions taken to mitigate or resolve them2. The most comprehensive information for updating a risk register would come from the results of the latest risk assessment, which is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts3. A risk assessment provides a detailed and systematic overview of the risks, theirsources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences, as well as the existing and planned controls andresponses4. A risk assessment also helps to prioritize the risks based on their level of exposure and urgency, and to align them with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance5. Therefore, the results of the latest risk assessment would provide the most relevant and complete information for updating a risk register and ensuring that it reflects the current risk profile and situation of the project or the organization. Results of a risk forecasting analysis are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a complete picture of the risks and their impacts. A risk forecasting analysis is a technique that uses historical data, trends, and scenarios to estimate the potential outcomes and impacts of future events that may affect the organization’s objectives and performance6. A risk forecasting analysis can help to anticipate and prepare for the risks, but it does not provide specific information on the sources, causes, likelihood, severity, and consequences of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. A review ofcompliance regulations is not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as it does not cover all the aspects and dimensions of risk management. A review of compliance regulations is a process that involves checking and verifying that the organization’s activities, processes, and systems are in accordance with the applicable laws, rules, and standards7. A review of compliance regulations can help to identify and mitigate the risks related to legal or regulatory violations, but it does not provide specific information on the other types and sources of risks, such as operational, strategic, financial, or reputational risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. Findings of the most recent audit are not the most comprehensive information for updating a risk register, as they do not provide a current and holistic view of the risks and their impacts. An audit is an independent examination and evaluation of the organization’s activities, processes, and systems, to provide assurance and advice on their adequacy and effectiveness. An audit can help to identify and report the issues or gaps in the organization’s risk management, but it does not provide specific information on the current status and changes of the risks, nor the existing and planned controls and responses. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: Risk Monitoring, pp. 189-191.

Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite provides the most important information to facilitate a risk response decision, because it reflects the organization’s risk tolerance, preferences, and expectations, which guide the selection and implementation of the risk response strategies. Risk appetite helps the organization to balance the potential benefits and costs of taking risks, and to align the risk management process with the organizational strategy and culture. The other options are not as important as risk appetite, because they do not indicate the organization’s desired level of risk exposure, but rather provide supplementary or partial information for the risk response decision, as explained below:

A. Audit findings are the results and recommendations of the internal or external audit activities that evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes. Audit findings provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can identify the gaps or weaknesses in the current risk response strategies, and suggest corrective actions or improvements. However, audit findings do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the optimal risk response strategies.

C. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the impact and likelihood of the risks, and provide early warning signs of changes in the risk exposure. KRIs provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can monitor and report the performance and effectiveness of the current risk response strategies, and trigger corrective actions or adjustments.However, KRIs do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the acceptable level of risk exposure and performance.

D. Industry best practices are the standards, norms, and expectations for risk management that are established and followed by the peers or competitors in the same industry or sector. Industry best practices provide useful information to facilitate a risk response decision, because they can benchmark and compare the organization’s risk response strategies with those of the leading or successful organizations, and identify areas for improvement or innovation. However, industry best practices do not indicate the organization’s risk appetite, which is the basis for determining the unique and customized risk response strategies that suit the organization’s needs and goals. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 40. Risk Appetite: What It Is and How to Use It, Risk Appetite: How Hungry Are You?, Risk Appetite: The Strategic Balancing Act

An increase in the number of security incidents is the most significant indicator of the need to perform a penetration test, because it suggests that the organization’s IT systems or networks are vulnerable to attacks and may not have adequate security controls in place. A penetration test is a simulated attack on an IT system or network to identify and exploit its weaknesses and evaluate its security posture. A penetration test can help to discover and remediate the vulnerabilities that may have caused or contributed to the security incidents, and to prevent or reduce the likelihood and impact of future incidents. An increase in the number of high-risk audit findings, an increase in the percentage of turnover in IT personnel, and an increase in the number of infrastructure changes are all possible indicators of the need to perform a penetration test, but they are not the most significant indicator, as they do not directly reflect the actual or potential occurrence of security incidents. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2, page 200

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the right to audit the provider is the most important factor to help define the IT risk associated with outsourcing activity to a cloud-based service provider, as it enables the organization to verify the compliance and performance of the provider with the contractual obligations and service level agreements. The right to audit the provider helps to:

Assess the security, availability, confidentiality, integrity, and privacy of the data and processes hosted by the provider

Identify and evaluate the risks and controls related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s infrastructure

Monitor and measure the quality and effectiveness of the cloud-based services and the provider’s governance and management practices

Report and resolve any issues or incidents related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s operations

Ensure the alignment of the cloud-based services and the provider’s policies and standards with the organization’s objectives and requirements

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 176-1771

An independent review is typically sought to provide an objective assessment of the IT risk management program, ensuring that it aligns with the organization’s overall strategy andobjectives. The reviewer can identify areas where the program may not be effectively addressing the organization’s strategic goals or where improvements can be made to better manage IT risks.

Reviewing the risk register change log is the best way for management to validate whether risk response activities have been completed, because it helps to track and monitor the changes and updates that have been made to the risk register, and to verify that the risk response activities have been implemented and closed. A risk register is a document that captures, identifies, assesses and tracks risk as part of the risk management process4. A risk register change log is a record that documents the date, description, and reason for each change or update that is made to the risk register. A risk response activity is an action or task that is performed to implement the chosen risk response strategy for a specific risk, such as avoid, transfer, mitigate, or accept. Reviewing the risk register change log is the best way, as it helps to ensure that the risk register is accurate and current, and that the risk response activities have been completed and reported. Reviewing evidence of risk acceptance, control effectiveness test results, and control design documentation are all possible ways to validate whether risk response activities have been completed, but they are not the best way, as they may not cover all the risk response activities, and they may not reflect the changes or updates in the risk register. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 101

Risk scenarios: Narratives that describe potential risk events, their causes, consequences, and likelihood1.

Internet of Things (IoT): A network of interconnected devices, software, sensors, and other things that communicate and exchange data without human intervention2.

IoT threat landscape: The range and types of threats and attacks that target IoT devices, systems, and networks3.

The most helpful thing to review when identifying risk scenarios associated with the adoption of IoT technology in an organization is the IoT threat landscape. The IoT threat landscape provides a comprehensive and current overview of the potential sources, methods, and impacts of cyberattacks on IoT devices, systems, and networks. Reviewing the IoT threat landscape can help an organization to:

Identify the most relevant and prevalent threats and vulnerabilities that affect IoT technology, such as weak passwords, insecure interfaces, insufficient data protection, poor device management, or lack of encryption4.

Assess the likelihood and impact of different types of attacks, such as malware infections, denial-of-service attacks, data breaches, unauthorized access, or sabotage4.

Prioritize the most critical and urgent risks that need to be addressed and mitigated.

Develop realistic and plausible risk scenarios that reflect the actual IoT threat environment and the organization’s specific context and objectives.

The other options are not as helpful as the IoT threat landscape when identifying risk scenarios associated with the adoption of IoT technology in an organization, because they do not provide a comprehensive and current view of the potential threats and attacks that target IoT technology. The business case for the use of IoT, which is the justification and rationale for adopting IoT technology based on the expected benefits, costs, and risks, may help to understand the value and purpose of IoT technology for the organization, but it does not provide detailed information on the specific threats and vulnerabilities that affect IoT technology. Policy development for IoT, which is the process of creating and implementing rules and guidelines for the governance, management, and security of IoT technology, may help to establish the standards and expectations for IoT technology within the organization, but it does not provide an overview of the external threats and attacks that target IoT technology. The network that IoT devices can access, which is the infrastructure and system that enables the connectivity and communicationof IoT devices, may help to identify the potential entry points and attack vectors for IoT threats, but it does not provide a complete picture of the types and impacts of IoT threats.

References = Risk Scenarios Toolkit, What is the Internet of Things (IoT)? With Examples | Coursera, Top IoT security issues and challenges (2022) – Thales, 8 Internet of Things Threats and Security Risks - SecurityScorecard

The relationship owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for managing the relationship with the service provider. The relationship owner should be accountable for ensuring that risk responses are implemented, as they are the primary point of contact and communication with the service provider. The relationship owner can also monitor and evaluate the performance and compliance of the service provider, and enforce the contractual obligations and service level agreements. The other options are not as accountable as the relationship owner, as they are related to the assessment, security, or legal aspects of the service provider, not the management or oversight of the service provider. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The risk associated with malicious functionality in outsourced application development is that the vendor may introduce unauthorized or harmful code into the enterprise’s system, which could compromise its security, integrity, or performance.

To mitigate this risk, the enterprise should perform an in-depth code review with an expert who can verify that the code meets the specifications, standards, and quality requirements, and that it does not contain any malicious or unwanted functionality.

A code review is a systematic examination of the source code of a software program, which can identify errors, vulnerabilities, inefficiencies, or deviations from best practices. A code review can also ensure that the code is consistent, readable, maintainable, and well-documented.

An expert is someone who has the knowledge, skills, and experience to perform the code review effectively and efficiently. An expert may be an internal or external resource, depending on the availability, cost, and independence of the reviewer.

A code review should be performed before the code is deployed to the production environment, and preferably at multiple stages of the development life cycle, such as design, testing, and integration.

A code review can also be complemented by other techniques, such as automated code analysis, testing, and scanning tools, which can detect common or known issues in the code. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, p. 143

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 143

The drawback in the use of quantitative risk analysis is that it requires more resources than other methods. Quantitative risk analysis is a method of risk analysis that assigns numeric values to the exposures of assets, the impact and likelihood of risk events, and the cost and benefit of risk responses. Quantitative risk analysis can provide more precise and objective results, and support the risk-based decision making process. However, quantitative risk analysis also requires more resources than other methods, such as data, time, expertise, and tools, to collect, validate, and analyze the quantitative information, and to perform the complex calculations and simulations. Quantitative risk analysis may also be limited by the availability, reliability, and accuracy of thedata, and the assumptions and models used. Assigning numeric values to exposures of assets, producing the results in numeric form, and being based on impact analysis of information assets are not drawbacks, but characteristics of quantitative risk analysis. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

A consistent approach to reporting risk impact and likelihood is crucial for integrating IT risk scenarios into the broader enterprise risk management framework. Standardizing these metrics ensures that risks are assessed and compared uniformly across the organization, facilitating informed decision-making and prioritization of risk responses.