Free Practice Questions for Isaca CRISC Exam

The primary reason to perform ongoing risk assessments is that the risk environment is subject to change. The risk environment is the external and internal factors that influence the level and nature of the risks that the organization faces1. These factors include economic, political, social, technological, legal,and environmental aspects, as well as the organization’s objectives, strategies, culture, and resources2. The risk environment is dynamic and unpredictable, and may change due to various events, trends, ordevelopments that create new or modify existing risks3. Therefore, it is important to perform ongoing risk assessments to identify, analyze, and evaluate the changes in the risk environment, and to adjust the risk response and management accordingly. Ongoing risk assessments help to ensure that the organization’s risk profile is up to date and reflects the current reality, and that the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance are aligned with the changing risk environment4. The other options are not the primary reason to perform ongoing risk assessments, as they are either less comprehensive or less relevant than the changing risk environment. Emerging risk must be continuously reported to management. This option is a consequence or outcome of performing ongoing risk assessments, not a reason for doing so. Emerging risk is a new or evolving risk that has the potential to affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or performance5. Ongoing risk assessments can help to identify and monitor emerging risks, and to report them to management for decision making and action. However, this is not the main reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not cover the existing or modified risks that may also change due to the risk environment. Newsystem vulnerabilities emerge at frequent intervals. This option is a specific or narrow example of a changing risk environment, not a general or broad reason for performing ongoing risk assessments. System vulnerabilities are weaknesses or flaws in the design, implementation, or operation of information systems that can be exploited by threats to cause harm or loss6. Ongoing risk assessments can help to discover and assess new system vulnerabilities that may emerge due to technological changes, cyberattacks, or human errors. However, this is not the primary reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not encompass the other types or sources of risks that may also change due to the risk environment. The information security budget must be justified. This option is a secondary or incidental benefit of performing ongoing risk assessments, not a primary or essential reason for doing so. The information security budget is the amount of money that the organization allocates for implementing and maintaining information security measures and controls7. Ongoing risk assessments can help tojustify the information security budget by demonstrating the value and effectiveness of the security measures and controls in reducing the risks, and by identifying the gaps or needs for additional or improved security measures and controls. However, this is not the main reason for performing ongoing risk assessments, as it does not address the purpose or objective of risk assessment, which is to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks and their impact on the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, Page 47.

Key risk indicator (KRI): A metric that measures the level of risk exposure or the likelihood of a risk event1.

KRI threshold: A predefined value or range that triggers an alert or action when the KRI reaches or exceeds it2.

Loss expectancy: The estimated amount of loss that an organization may incur due to a risk event3.

The most helpful thing in developing KRI thresholds is loss expectancy information. Loss expectancy information provides an estimate of the potential or expected impact of a risk event on the organization’s operations, reputation, or objectives. Loss expectancy information can help an organization to:

Quantify and prioritize the risks that pose the greatest threat to the organization

Determine the acceptable level of risk exposure or tolerance for each risk

Set the appropriate value or range for the KRI threshold that reflects the risk appetite and the risk mitigation strategy

Monitor and measure the performance and effectiveness of the risk management process and controls

Loss expectancy information can be derived from various sources, such as historical data, statistical analysis, expert judgment, or simulation models3.

The other options are not as helpful as loss expectancy information in developing KRI thresholds, because they do not directly address the potential or expected impact of a risk event.Control performance predictions, which are the forecasts or estimates of how well the risk management controls will perform in preventing, detecting, or mitigating risks, may help to evaluate the adequacy and efficiency of the risk management process and controls, but they do not provide a clear and quantifiable measure of the risk impact. IT service level agreements (SLAs), which are the contracts or agreements that define the quality and availability of IT services, may help to establish the standards and expectations for IT service delivery and performance, but they do not provide a comprehensive and current view of the risk exposure or likelihood. Remediation activity progress, which is the status or outcome of the actions taken to address and resolve a risk event, may help to monitor and report the effectiveness and compliance of the risk management process and controls, but it is usually done after the risk event has occurred and resolved, not before.

References = Key Risk Indicators: Definition, Examples, and Best Practices, KRI Framework for Operational Risk Management | Workiva, Loss Expectancy: Definition, Calculation, and Examples

When proposing a risk acceptance framework for an organization, the most important consideration for the risk practitioner is to clearly define the individuals or roles authorized to approve risk acceptance. This ensures that the process is controlled, accountable, and aligned with the organization’s risk management policies.

Risk Acceptance Framework:

Purpose:A risk acceptance framework provides structured criteria and processes for deciding whether to accept a risk. This includes evaluating the risk against the organization's risk appetite and tolerance.

Authorization:Identifying who has the authority to accept risk is critical. This ensures that only those with the appropriate knowledge, experience, and understanding of the organization's risk appetite and strategic objectives can make these decisions.

Importance of Authorized Individuals:

Accountability:Clearly defined roles for risk acceptance ensure accountability. It is essential that those making the decisions are accountable for the outcomes and understand the potential impact of their decisions.

Consistency:By defining specific roles, the organization ensures consistency in risk acceptance decisions, reducing the likelihood of ad-hoc or inconsistent risk management practices.

Alignment with Strategy:Authorized individuals are typically those who understand the strategic objectives of the organization, ensuring that risk acceptance aligns with these goals.

The best course of action for a risk practitioner who finds that the approved risk action plan has not been completed but other risk mitigation actions have been implemented is to verify the sufficiency of mitigating controls with the risk owner. This is because the risk owner is the person who is accountable for the risk and the risk response strategy, and therefore should be consulted to ensure that the alternative actions are adequate and effective in reducing the risk to an acceptable level. The other options are not the best course of action, although they may also be performed after verifying the sufficiency of mitigating controls with the risk owner. Reviewing the cost-benefit of mitigating controls, marking the risk status as unresolved within the risk register, and updating the risk register with implemented mitigating actions are secondary actions that depend on the outcome of the verification process. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, p. 193.

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,

 The chief information officer (CIO) is the most likely person to be responsible for the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, because the CIO is the senior executive who oversees the information technology (IT) function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy, objectives, and operations. The CIO is also responsible for ensuring that the IT function delivers value, supports innovation, and manages IT risks effectively and efficiently. The CIO can coordinate the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy by communicating and collaborating with other business leaders, establishing and implementing IT governance frameworks and policies, and monitoring and reporting on IT performance and risk indicators. The other options are not as likely as the CIO to be responsible for the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, because they have different or limited roles and responsibilities in relation to IT and business risk management, as explained below:

A. Chief financial officer (CFO) is the senior executive who oversees the financial function and manages the financial risks of the organization. The CFO may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to budgeting, funding, or reporting on IT-related projects and initiatives, but the CFO is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives.

B. Information security director is the senior manager who oversees the information security function and manages the information security risks of the organization. The information security director may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to protecting the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information assets and systems, but the information security director is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives.

C. Internal audit director is the senior manager who oversees the internal audit function and provides independent assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes. The internal audit director may be involved in the coordination between the IT risk strategy and the business risk strategy, especially when it comes to auditing, reviewing, or testing the IT-related processes and controls, but the internal audit director is not the primary person who oversees the IT function and aligns it with the organization’s strategy and objectives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.1.1, page 7. The Strategic CIO: Balancing Business and ITPriorities, Technology’s Role in Enterprise Risk Management, Aligning Enterprise Cyber Risk and Business Strategy

 A compensating control is a temporary or alternative control that is implemented when the primary control for mitigating a risk is not feasible or available. A compensating control should provide a similar level of protection and assurance as the primary control, and should be aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The risk practitioner’s best course of action when a compensating control needs to be applied is to obtain the risk owner’s approval. The risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for managing a specific risk, and who is responsible for ensuring that the risk is within the acceptable level. The risk practitioner should consult with the risk owner to explain the situation, proposethe compensating control, and seek their approval before implementing it. This way, the risk practitioner can ensure that the compensating control is appropriate, effective, and acceptable for the risk owner, and that the risk owner is aware of and agrees with the change in the risk treatment. The other options are not the best course of action, as they do not involve the risk owner’s approval or input. Recording the risk as accepted in the risk register implies that the risk is not treated or reduced, which may not be the case with a compensating control. Informing senior management may be a good practice, but it does not ensure that the risk owner is involved or agrees with the compensating control. Updating the risk response plan may be a necessary step after implementing the compensating control, but it does not require the risk owner’s approval or consultation. References = 5 Key Risk Mitigation Strategies (With Examples), Risk Management 101: Process, Examples, Strategies

 Digital Signature Software:

Digital signatures are used to verify the authenticity and integrity of a message, document, or software. They provide cryptographic proof that the information has not been altered and that it comes from a verified source.

 Importance of Nonrepudiation:

Nonrepudiation ensures that the sender of the message cannot deny having sent the message and the recipient cannot deny having received it. This is critical for legal and security purposes, as it provides undeniable proof of the origin and integrity of the information.

 Selecting Digital Signature Software:

When selecting digital signature software, the most important consideration is that it provides strong nonrepudiation capabilities. This ensures that all parties involved can trust the authenticity and integrity of the signed data.

 Comparing Other Considerations:

Availability:Ensures the software is accessible when needed but does not directly impact the trustworthiness of the signatures.

Accuracy:Important but generally inherent in properly functioning digital signature software.

Completeness:Ensures all required information is included but nonrepudiation is the critical factor for security and legal purposes.

 References:

The CISSP Study Guide emphasizes the importance of nonrepudiation in digital signature technology to ensure authenticity and accountability (Sybex CISSP Study Guide, Chapter 7: PKI and Cryptographic Applications)​​.

The project sponsor holds the ultimate accountability for the project's success and is typically responsible for approving significant decisions, including risk mitigation responses. Their role involves ensuring that the project aligns with business objectives and that risks are managed appropriately to achieve desired outcomes.

 The most important step when developing risk scenarios using a list of generic scenarios based on industry best practices is to validate the generic risk scenarios for relevance. The generic risk scenarios may not be applicable or suitable for the specific context, objectives, and environment of the organization. Therefore, the risk practitioner should validate the relevance of the generic risk scenarios by comparing them with the organization’s risk profile, risk appetite, and risk criteria. Assessing generic risk scenarios with business users, selecting the maximum possible risk scenarios from the list, and identifying common threats causing generic risk scenarios are other steps that may be useful, but they are not as important as validating the relevance of the generic risk scenarios. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The most important factor for an organization to consider when developing its IT strategy is the organizational goals and objectives. The organizational goals and objectives are the statements that define the purpose, direction, and desired outcomes of the organization. The organizational goals and objectives help to align the IT strategy with the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and to ensure that the IT strategy supports and enables the organization’s performance and improvement. The organizational goals and objectives also help to communicate and coordinate the IT strategy with the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions, and to facilitate the IT decision-making and reporting processes. The other options are not as important as the organizational goals and objectives, although they may be related to the IT strategy. IT goals and objectives, the organization’s risk appetite statement, and legal and regulatory requirements are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the IT strategy, but they do not necessarily reflect or influence the organization’s purpose, direction, and desired outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-9.

Policies and standards are the primary documents that define the organization’s expectations and requirements for information security and risk management. They provide the basis for establishing controls, procedures, roles, and responsibilities. Policies and standards should be updated following a change in legislation requiring notification to individuals impacted by data breaches, to ensure compliance with the new legal obligations and to align with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. Updating policies and standards can also help to communicate the changes to the relevant stakeholders and to provide guidance for implementing and monitoring the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, p. 28-29

The impact to affected stakeholdersis the most critical factor when considering risks tied to re-identification. ISACA notes that risk is ultimately measured by how it affects stakeholders—including customers, partners, and regulators—particularly when personal data is involved.

===========

Data classification is the process of organizing data in groups based on their attributes and characteristics, and then assigning class labels that describe a set of attributes that hold true for the corresponding data sets1. Data classification helps an organization understand the value of its data, determine whether the data is at risk, and implement controls to mitigate risks1. Data classification also helps an organization comply with relevant industry-specific regulatory mandates such as SOX, HIPAA, PCI DSS, and GDPR1.

The most important criteria to consider when developing a data classification scheme are the business criticality and sensitivity of the data2. Business criticality refers to the impact of data loss or compromise on the organization’s operations, reputation, and objectives2. Sensitivityrefers to the level of confidentiality, integrity, and availability required for the data2. Data that is highly critical and sensitive should be classified and protected accordingly, as it poses the highest risk to the organization if mishandled or breached2.

Some of the best practices for data classification are3:

Inventory your data: Identify all data assets within your organization.

Define data categories: Create a classification scheme that suits your organization’s needs.

Assign responsibility: Designate individuals or teams responsible for data classification.

Implement classification tools: Invest in tools and technologies that facilitate data classification.

Educate and train: Raise awareness and provide guidance on data classification policies and procedures.

Review and audit: Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and compliance of data classification.

References = What is Data Classification? | Best Practices & Data Types | Imperva, What Is Data Classification? The 5 Step Process & Best Practices for Classifying Data | Splunk, Top 10 Best Practices for Securing Your Database - 2023

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 best course of action for a risk practitioner when a bank recently incorporated Blockchain technology with the potential to impact known risk within the organization is to analyze the risk and update the risk register as needed. Blockchain technology is a new and emerging technologythat may introduce new risks or change the existing risks for the bank. Therefore, the risk practitioner should perform a risk analysis to identify, assess, and evaluate the risks associated with the Blockchain technology, and update the risk register accordingly. Determining whether risk responses are still adequate, analyzing and updating control assessments, and conducting testing of the controls are possible actions that may follow the risk analysis, but they are not the best initial course of action. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

The risk practitioner’s best course of action when the residual risk is now within the organization’s defined appetite and tolerance levels is to verify the adequacy of risk monitoring plans. Risk monitoring is the process of tracking and reviewing the risk status and performance, and ensuring that the risk responses are effective and efficient1. Risk monitoring plans are the documents that specify the objectives, scope, methods, roles, and responsibilities for the riskmonitoring activities2. By verifying the adequacy of risk monitoring plans, the risk practitioner can:

Ensure that the risk monitoring plans are aligned with the organization’s risk strategy, objectives, and policies, and that they comply with the relevant standards and regulations3.

Evaluate whether the risk monitoring plans are comprehensive and consistent, and that they cover all the key aspects and indicators of the risks and the risk responses4.

Identify and address any gaps, issues, or challenges that may affect the implementation or outcome of the risk monitoring plans, and recommend and implement appropriate improvement actions5.

The other options are not the best course of action, because:

Identifying new risk entries to include in ERM is not a relevant or necessary course of action, as it is not directly related to the residual risk or the risk responses. ERM is the process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and managing the risks that may affect the organization’s strategic, operational, financial, or reputational objectives6. Identifying new risk entries is a part of the risk identification process, which is the first step in ERM. It should be performedperiodically or when there are significant changes in the internal or external environment, not when the residual risk is within the appetite and tolerance levels7.

Removing the risk entries from the ERM register is not a valid or advisable course of action, as it may create a false sense of security or complacency. The ERM register is a tool that records and summarizes the key information and data about the identified risks and the risk responses. Removing the risk entries from the ERM register may imply that the risks no longer exist or matter, which is not true. The risks may still occur or change, and the risk responses may still fail or become obsolete. Therefore, the risk entries should be kept and updated in the ERM register, unless the risks are completely eliminated or transferred.

Re-performing the risk assessment to confirm results is not an efficient or effective course of action, as it may be redundant or unnecessary. Risk assessment is the process of estimating the probability and impact of the risks, and prioritizing the risks based on their significance and urgency. Re-performing the risk assessment may not provide any new or useful information or insights, and may waste time and resources. Instead, the risk practitioner should verify and validate the risk assessment results, and ensure that they are accurate and reliable.

References =

Risk Monitoring - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring Plan - CIO Wiki

Risk Monitoring and Reporting - ISACA

Risk Monitoring and Control - Project Management Institute

Risk Monitoring and Review - The National Academies Press

Enterprise Risk Management - CIO Wiki

Risk Identification - CIO Wiki

[Risk Register - CIO Wiki]

[Risk Register: How to Use It in Project Management - ProjectManager.com]

[Risk Assessment - CIO Wiki]

[Risk Assessment Process - ISACA]

The best input for conducting a review of emerging risk is the annual threat reports. Emerging risk is the risk that arises from new or evolving sources, or from existing sources that have not been previously considered or recognized. Emerging risk may have significant impact on the organization’s objectives, strategies, operations, or reputation, and may require new or different risk responses. Annual threat reports are the reports that provide information and analysis on the current and future trends, developments, and challenges in the threat landscape, such as cyberattacks, natural disasters, geopolitical conflicts, or pandemics. Annual threat reports can help to identify and assess the emerging risk, as they can provide insights into the sources, drivers, indicators, and scenarios of the emerging risk, as well as the potential impact and likelihood of the emerging risk. Annual threat reports can also help to benchmark and compare the organization’s risk exposure and preparedness with the industry and the peers, and to prioritize and respond to the emerging risk. Audit reports, industry benchmarks, and financial forecasts are not as useful as annual threat reports, as they do not focus on the emerging risk, and may not capture the latest or future changes in the threat landscape. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 50.

The most effective way to reduce risk associated with an increase of online transactions on a retailer website is to implement website activity monitoring. Website activity monitoring can help to detect and prevent fraudulent transactions, unauthorized access, data breaches, and other cyber threats that may compromise the security and integrity of the website and its data. Scalable infrastructure, a hot backup site, and transaction limits are other possible ways to reduce risk, but they are not as effective as website activity monitoring. 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 risk heat map is a graphical tool that displays the overall risk of the project to senior management by showing the probability and impact of individual risks in a matrix format. A risk heat map can help to prioritize the risks, communicate the risk exposure, and monitor the risk response. A risk heat map can also show the risk appetite and tolerance levels of the organization, as well as the residual risk after the risk response. The other options are not the most effective ways to represent the overall risk of the project to senior management, although they may be useful or complementary to the risk heat map. Aggregated key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics that measure the performance of the project against the objectives, but they do not show the uncertainty or variability of the project outcomes. Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that measure the level of risk or the effectiveness of the risk response, but they do not show the relationship between the probability and impact of the risks. A centralizedrisk register is a document that records the details of the individual risks, such as the description, category, cause, effect, probability, impact, response, and status, but it does not show the overall risk of the project in a visual or concise way. References = Managing overall project risk, Project Risk Management – Quick Reference Guide, 10 Common Project Risks (Plus the Steps To Solve Them), What Is Project Risk Management: Benefits, Challenges, Best Practices

Identifying and assessing the risk scenarios associated with IT strategic initiatives is the best risk management approach for the strategic IT planning process, because it helps to understand and evaluate the potential or actual threats or opportunities that may affect the achievement or implementation of the IT strategic initiatives, and to determine the appropriate risk responses and controls. A risk scenario is a hypothetical situation or event that describes the source, cause, consequence, and impact of a risk. A risk scenario can be positive or negative, depending on whether it represents an opportunity or a threat. An IT strategic initiative is a project or program that supports or enables the IT strategy, which is a plan that defines how IT supports and aligns with the organization’s vision, mission, and strategy. The strategic IT planning process is a process of developing, implementing, and monitoring the IT strategy and its associated IT strategic initiatives. Identifying and assessing the risk scenarios is the best risk management approach, as it helps to anticipate and prepare for the potential or actual outcomes of the IT strategic initiatives, and to optimize the risk-reward balance and the value delivery of IT. Establishing key performance indicators (KPIs) to track IT strategic initiatives, reviewing the IT strategic plan by the chief information security officer (CISO) and enterprise risk management (ERM), and developing the IT strategic plan from the organization-wide risk management plan are all possible risk management approaches for the strategic IT planning process, but they are not the best approach, as they do not directly address the identification and assessment of the risk scenarios associated with IT strategic initiatives. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 37

Key control indicators are designed to measure the operational effectiveness of controls, specifically their contribution to defense-in-depth strategies. This helps assess if controls are functioning as intended to mitigate identified risks, aligning withControl Effectiveness Monitoring.

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 BEST way to enable mitigation of newly identified risk factors related to internet of Things (loT) is to introduce control procedures early in the life cycle, because it can help to prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk factors, and to ensure that the loT devices and systems are designed and developed with security and quality in mind. The control procedures should include requirements analysis, design review, testing, validation, and verification of the loT devices and systems. The other options are not as effective as introducing control procedures early in the life cycle, because:

Option B: Implementing loT device software monitoring is a good way to detect and respond to the risk factors related to loT, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors, which is the proactive and preventive approach. Software monitoring is a reactive and corrective measure that may not be able to prevent or reduce the occurrence or impact of the risk factors, especially if they are embedded in the hardware or firmware of the loT devices.

Option C: Performing periodic risk assessments of loT is a necessary way to identify and evaluate the risk factors related to loT, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors, which is the action-oriented and solution-focused approach. Risk assessment is an analytical and descriptive process that may not provide the specific and effective measures to address or mitigate the risk factors, especially if they are complex or dynamic.

Option D: Performing secure code reviews is a useful way to verify and improve the security and quality of the software of the loT devices and systems, but it does not enable mitigation of the risk factors related to loT, which may involve more than just the software aspect. The risk factors related to loT may also include the hardware, firmware, network, communication, data, andintegration aspects, which may not be covered or resolved by the code reviews. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 214.

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

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

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

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

The best indicator of executive management’s support for IT risk mitigation efforts is the number of executives attending IT security awareness training. This shows that the executives are committed to enhancing their knowledge and skills on IT security issues, and that they are setting a positive example for the rest of the organization. The number of stakeholders involved in IT risk identification workshops, the percentage of corporate budget allocated to IT risk activities, and the percentage of incidents presented to the board are other possible indicators, but they are not as strong as the number of executives attending IT security awareness training. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 7; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 202.

 The best method to identify unnecessary controls is reviewing system functionalities associated with business processes, because this can help to determine whether the controls are relevant, effective, and efficient for the current business needs and objectives. System functionalities are the capabilities and features of IT systems that support the execution and performance of business processes. Business processes are the set of interrelated activities that transform inputs into outputs to deliver value to customers or stakeholders. By reviewing system functionalities associated with business processes, an organization can assess whether the controls are aligned with the process requirements, expectations, and outcomes, and whether they add value or create waste. The review can also identify any gaps, overlaps, redundancies, or conflicts among the controls, and any changes or improvements that are needed to optimize the controls. The other options are less effective methods to identify unnecessary controls. Evaluating the impact of removing existing controls can help to measure the benefits and costs of the controls, but it does not address the root causes or sources of the unnecessary controls. Evaluating existing controls against audit requirements can help to ensure compliance and assurance, but it does not considerthe business context or purpose of the controls. Monitoring existing key risk indicators (KRIs) can help to measure the level and impact of risks, but it does not evaluate the suitability oradequacy of the controls. References = Surveying Staff to Identify Unnecessary Internal Controls - Methodology and Results 

Greatest Privacy Risk:

Jurisdictional Challenges: Processing personal data in an offshore location often involves dealing with different legal and regulatory requirements, which can complicate compliance with data privacy laws such as GDPR or CPRA.

Data Transfer Risks: Even with a data sharing agreement, the protection and enforcement of privacy rights can be less stringent in the offshore location compared to the home jurisdiction. This can lead to increased risks of data breaches and misuse.

Enforcement Difficulties: If privacy violations occur, enforcing legal actions across borders can be challenging, potentially leading to inadequate redress for affected individuals.

Comparison with Other Options:

Privacy Risk Awareness Training Not Conducted: This is a significant risk but can be mitigated relatively quickly with proper training programs.

Privacy Not Incorporated into Risk Management Framework: While critical, the risk can be managed by integrating privacy into the framework without immediate severe consequences.

Remote Work by Staff with Access to Personal Data: This introduces risks related to secure access and data protection but can be managed with proper security controls.

Best Practices:

Data Sovereignty Considerations: Ensure data is processed in jurisdictions with strong privacy laws that align with the organization's regulatory requirements.

Regular Audits and Assessments: Conduct regular audits of data processing practices in offshore locations to ensure compliance with data privacy agreements.

Legal Safeguards: Establish robust legal safeguards and contracts to enforce data protection standards across jurisdictions.

 Residual risk is the risk that remains after security controls have been implemented on a system. Residual risk can be accepted, transferred, avoided, or further mitigated. The most important consideration when deciding whether to accept residual risk is the cost versus benefit of additional mitigating controls. This means comparing the potential impact of the residual risk with the cost and effectiveness of implementing more controls to reduce it. If the cost of additional controls outweighs the benefit of reducing the residual risk, then it may be acceptableto accept the residual risk. However, if the benefit of additional controls exceeds the cost, then it may be advisable to implement more controls to lower the residual risk to an acceptable level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.4: Risk Response Selection, p. 156-157.

The greatest concern when establishing key risk indicators (KRIs) is using ineffective methods to assess risk. KRIs are metrics that measure the likelihood and impact of risks, and help monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. To establish effective KRIs, the risk assessment methods should be reliable, valid, consistent, and timely. Ineffective methods to assess risk could lead to inaccurate or misleading KRIs, which could result in poor risk management decisions and outcomes. The other options are not as significant as using ineffective methods to assess risk, although they may also affect the quality and usefulness of KRIs. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-36.

The best way to ensure the effective decision-making of an IT risk management committee is to enroll key stakeholders as members. Key stakeholders are the individuals or groups who have an interest or influence in the IT risk management process, such as business owners, senior management, IT managers, auditors, regulators, customers, and suppliers. By involving key stakeholders in the IT risk management committee, the committee can benefit from their diverse perspectives, expertise, and experience, and ensure that the IT risk management decisions are aligned with the business objectives, priorities, and expectations. Key stakeholders can also provide valuable input, feedback, and support for the IT risk management activities, and help communicate and implement the IT risk management decisions across the organization. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

The best way to increase the chances of a successful delivery of a new application and to assure the business management that IT has a plan in place for early identification of potential issues is to include business management on a weekly risk and issues report. A risk and issues report is a document that summarizes the current status, progress, and challenges of the IT project, as well as the actions and resources needed to address them. A risk and issues report helps to communicate and align the expectations and objectives of the IT and business stakeholders, and to facilitate timely and effective decision-making and problem-solving. A risk and issues report also helps to monitor and control the project scope, schedule, budget, and quality, and to ensure that the project delivers the desired value and benefits to the organization. The other options are not as effective as including business management on a weekly risk and issues report, althoughthey may be part of the IT project management process or outcomes. Implementing a release and deployment plan, conducting comprehensive regression testing, and developing enterprise-wide key risk indicators (KRIs) are all activities that can help to ensure the quality and reliability of the new application, but they do not necessarily involve the business management or provide assurance for the early identification of potential issues. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 5-32.

A threat risk assessment will best quantify the risk associated with malicious users in an organization, because it focuses on identifying and evaluating the potential sources of harm or damage to the organization’s assets, such as data, systems, or networks. A malicious user is a person who intentionally and unauthorizedly accesses, modifies, destroys, or steals the organization’s information or resources, for personal gain, revenge, espionage, or sabotage. A threat risk assessment can help the organization to estimate the likelihood and impact of malicious user attacks, based on factors such as the user’s motivation, capability, opportunity, and access level. A threat risk assessment can also help the organization to determine the appropriate risk response strategies, such as prevention, detection, mitigation, or transfer, to reduce the risk exposure and impact of malicious user attacks. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 141

Automated asset management software is the best method to track asset inventory, as it can provide accurate, timely, and comprehensive information about the organization’s IT assets, such as their location, status, configuration, ownership, and value. Automated asset management software can also help to optimize the utilization, performance, and lifecycle of the IT assets, and to reduce the risks of loss, theft, damage, or obsolescence. Automated asset management software can integrate with other systems, such as configuration management database (CMDB), service desk, and security tools, to enable better visibility, control, and governance of the IT assets.

 IT risk management is the process of identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks related to the use of information technology (IT) in the organization. IT risk management aims to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of IT resources and information, and to support the IT governance and strategy of the organization1.

The best indicator of the effectiveness of IT risk management processes is the time between when IT risk scenarios are identified and the enterprise’s response. This indicator can help to measure how quickly and efficiently the organization can detect and respond to the IT risks, and how well the organization can prevent or minimize the negative impacts of the IT risks. The time between when IT risk scenarios are identified and the enterprise’s response can include:

The time taken to identify and report the IT risk scenarios, using various methods and sources, such as risk assessments, audits, monitoring, alerts, or incidents

The time taken to analyze and evaluate the IT risk scenarios, using various tools and techniques, such as risk matrices, risk registers, risk indicators, or risk models

The time taken to select and implement the IT risk responses, using various strategies and controls, such as avoidance, mitigation, transfer, or acceptance

The time taken to review and improve the IT risk management processes, using various feedback and learning mechanisms, such as lessons learned, best practices, or benchmarks23

The other options are not the best indicators of the effectiveness of IT risk management processes, but rather some of the inputs or outputs of IT risk management processes. Percentage of business users completing risk training is an indicator of the awareness and competence of the IT users and providers, which can affect the IT risk management performance, but it does not measure the IT risk management processes directly. Percentage of high-risk scenarios for which risk action plans have been developed is an indicator of the completeness and coverage of the IT risk management activities, which can affect the IT risk management outcomes, but it does not measure the IT risk management processes directly. Number of key risk indicators (KRIs) defined is an indicator of the scope and complexity of the IT risk management objectives, whichcan affect the IT risk management resources and capabilities, but it does not measure the IT risk management processes directly. References =

IT Risk Management - ISACA

Risk Management Process - ISACA

Risk Response - ISACA

[CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition]

Local laws and regulations should be the primary consideration when assessing the risk of using Internet of Things (IoT) devices to collect and process personally identifiable information (PII), because they define the legal and ethical obligations and boundaries for the protection and privacy of PII, and the potential consequences of non-compliance or violation. IoT devices are devices that are connected to the internet and can collect, transmit, or process data, such as smart watches, cameras, sensors, or appliances. PII is information that can be used to identify, locate, or contact an individual, such as name, address, phone number, or email address. PII is considered sensitive and confidential, and may be subject to various laws and regulations that govern how it should be collected, processed, stored, shared, or disposed, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the United States. Therefore, local laws and regulations should be the primary consideration, as they provide the legal and ethical framework and guidance for the use of IoT devices to collect and process PII, and the potential risks and impacts of non-compliance or violation. Costs and benefits, security features and support, and business strategies and needs are all possible considerations when assessing the risk of using IoT devices to collect and process PII, but they are not the primary consideration, as they may vary or conflict depending on the situation or context, and may not override the local laws and regulations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2, page 158

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

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

The organization’s risk appetite and tolerance are the most important topics to cover in a risk awareness training for senior management. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk tolerance is the level of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is prepared to accept. Senior management plays a key role in defining and communicating the risk appetite and tolerance, as well asensuring that they are aligned with the organization’s strategy, culture, and values. By covering these topics in the training session, the risk practitioner can help senior management understand and articulate the risk preferences and boundaries of the organization, as well as monitor andadjust them as needed. The other options are not the most important topics to cover in a risk awareness training for senior management, although they may be relevant and useful. The organization’s strategic risk management projects are specific initiatives or activities that aim to identify, assess, and treat risks that may affect the organization’s objectives. Senior management roles and responsibilities are the duties and expectations that senior management has in relation to risk management, such as providing leadership, oversight, and support. Senior management allocation of risk management resources is the process of assigning and prioritizing the human, financial, and technical resources that are needed to implement and maintain risk management activities. These topics are more operational and tactical than strategic and may vary depending on the context and scope of the risk management function. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 40-411; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 732

The greatest concern for a risk practitioner when an organization is adopting blockchain for a new financial system is the limited organizational knowledge of the underlying technology. Blockchain is a distributed ledger technology that enables secure and transparent transactions among multiple parties without the need for intermediaries or central authorities. Blockchain technology has many potential benefits for the financial sector, such as reducing costs, increasing efficiency, enhancing security, and improving trust. However, blockchain technology also poses many challenges and risks for the organization, such as technical complexity, interoperability issues, regulatory uncertainty, and cultural resistance. The limited organizational knowledge of the underlying technology is the greatest concern, because it affects the ability and readiness of the organization to adopt, implement, use, and maintain the blockchain system effectively and securely. The limited organizational knowledge could also result in poor decision-making, inadequate governance, insufficient training, and increased vulnerability to errors, fraud, or attacks. The other options are not as concerning as the limited organizational knowledge, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the blockchain adoption. Lack of commercial software support, varying costs related to implementation and maintenance, and slow adoption of the technology across the financial industry are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the blockchain system, but they do not directly affect the capability and maturity of the organization. References = 5

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 ratio of emergency fixes to total changes is the best metric to determine if the change management program is performing as expected, because it reflects the quality and stability of the changes that are implemented in the production environment. A high ratio of emergency fixes to total changes indicates that the change management program is not effective, as it means that many changes are causing problems or failures that require urgent correction. A low ratio of emergency fixes to total changes indicates that the change management program is effective, as it means that most changes are well-planned, tested, and approved, and do not cause significant disruptions or defects. The ratio of emergency fixes to total changes can also help identify the root causes of the problems, the gaps in the change management process, and the areas for improvement. For example, if the ratio of emergency fixes to total changes is high, it may indicate that the change management program has issues with the following aspects: - Change request and approval: The change management program may not have a clear and consistent process for requesting, reviewing, and approving changes, or the process may not be followed by all stakeholders. - Change impact analysis: The change management program may not have acomprehensive and systematic method for assessing the potential impact of the changes on thebusiness processes, the IT systems, the users, and the customers. - Change testing and validation: The change management program may not have adequate testing and validation procedures to ensure that the changes meet the requirements and specifications, and do not introduce errors or vulnerabilities. - Change communication and training: The change management program may not have effective communication and training strategies to inform and educate the affected parties about the changes and their implications. - Change implementation and monitoring: The change management program may not have proper implementation and monitoring plans or tools to ensure that the changes are executed smoothly and successfully, and that any issues or incidents are detected and resolved promptly. Therefore, the ratio of emergency fixes to total changes is the best metric to determine if the change management program is performing as expected, as it can provide valuable feedback and insights for the change management program and its improvement. References = How to Measure Change Management Effectiveness: Metrics, Tools & Processes1, Metrics for Measuring Change Management2, Driving Value with Change Management Metrics3, Must-Know Organizational Change Management Metrics

The acquisition phase of the system development life cycle (SDLC) is the phase where the organization decides to purchase a new IT system from an external vendor or develop it internally. During this phase, the identified risks will most likely lead to architecture and design trade-offs, as the organization will have to balance the cost, quality, functionality, security, and performance of the new IT system. The organization will have to evaluate the different options and alternatives available, and select the one that best meets the business needs and the risk appetite. The other phases of the SDLC are not as likely to involve architecture and design trade-offs, as they are more focused on implementing, testing, deploying, and maintaining the new ITsystem. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

The best measure of the impact of business interruptions caused by an IT service outage is the sustained financial loss. This is the amount of money that the enterprise loses due to the disruption of its normal operations, such as lost revenue, increased expenses, or reduced profits. Sustained financial loss reflects the extent and severity of the business interruption, and theeffect on the enterprise’s objectives and performance. Sustained financial loss also helps to determine the recovery objectives and priorities, and to justify the investment in risk mitigation and business continuity strategies. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, page 691

 Understanding the Question:

The question asks what the most important update for keeping the risk register current is.

 Analyzing the Options:

A. Modifying organizational structures when lines of business merge:Reflects significant changes in the organization that impact risk profiles.

B. Adding new risk assessment results annually:Important but periodic.

C. Retiring risk scenarios that have been avoided:Necessary but not as impactful as major organizational changes.

D. Changing risk owners due to employee turnover:Important but secondary to major structural changes.



Organizational Changes:When lines of business merge, it can significantly alter the risk landscape, introducing new risks and changing the impact and likelihood of existing ones. Updating the risk register to reflect these changes is crucial for accurate risk management.

Impact on Risk Profiles:Mergers and acquisitions can affect every aspect of an organization, from operational processes to regulatory compliance, making it essential to update the risk register accordingly.

Reviewing the methodology used to conduct the business impact analysis (BIA) is the first thing that a risk practitioner should do when wanting to identify potential risk events that affect the continuity of a critical business process, because it helps to ensure that the BIA is conducted in a consistent, comprehensive, and reliable manner, and that it covers all the relevant aspects and scenarios of the business process and its continuity. A BIA is a process of analyzing the potential impact of disruption to the critical business functions or processes, and identifying the recovery priorities and requirements. A BIA methodology is a set of principles, standards, and techniques that guide and support the BIA process, such as the scope, objectives, data sources, data collection methods, data analysis methods, and reporting methods. Reviewing the BIA methodology is the first thing to do, as it helps to establish the foundation and framework for the BIA process, and to ensure that the BIA results are valid and useful for identifying the potential risk events and their consequences. Evaluating current risk management alignment with relevant regulations, determining if business continuity proceduresare reviewed and updated on a regular basis, and conducting a benchmarking exercise against industry peers are all possible things to do after reviewing the BIA methodology, but they are not the first thing to do, as they depend on the quality and accuracy of the BIA process and outcomes. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 143

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), establishing an organizational code of conduct is an example of a directive control, which is a type of control that guides or steers the behavior of individuals or processes to achieve desired outcomes. A directive control aims toinfluence or encourage compliance with the organization’s policies, standards, procedures, and guidelines. A directive control can also communicate the organization’s values, ethics, and expectations to its stakeholders. A directive control can take various forms, such as:

Codes of conduct or ethics

Policies or manuals

Training or awareness programs

Job descriptions or roles and responsibilities

Performance appraisals or incentives

Supervision or oversight

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Scenarios, pp. 105-1061

Assigning ownership ensures accountability, as data owners are responsible for ensuring appropriate protections are in place and enforced.

The primary focus of an independent review of a risk management process is to evaluate the maturity of the process, which means the extent to which the process is aligned with the organization’s objectives, culture, and governance, and how well it is integrated, implemented, and monitored across the organization. A mature risk management process is one that is consistent, effective, efficient, and adaptable to changing circumstances and environments. A maturity assessment can help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the risk management process, as well as the opportunities and challenges for improvement. The other options are not the primary focus, but they may be secondary or tertiary aspects of the review. Accuracy of risk tolerance levels is a measure of how well the organization defines and communicates its risk appetite and risk limits, which are important inputs for the risk management process, but not the main outcome. Consistency of risk process results is a measure of how reliable and repeatable the risk management process is, which reflects the quality and validity of the data, assumptions, methods, and tools used in the process, but not the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the process. Participation of stakeholders is a measure of how well the organization engages and involves its internal and external stakeholders in the risk management process, which enhancesthe awareness, ownership, andaccountability of the process, but not the alignment and integration of the process. References = Assessing the Risk Management Process, p. 9-10.

During an initial risk assessment, it is crucial to consider existing controls primarily to determine the current risk level. Here's a

Understanding Existing Controls:

Existing controls are measures already in place to mitigate risks. These controls can include technical, administrative, and physical safeguards designed to protect organizational assets.

Knowing what controls are currently in place helps to understand the organization’s current defense mechanisms against potential threats.

Assessing the Current Risk Level:

The current risk level is the risk that remains after considering the effectiveness of existing controls, often referred to as residual risk.

By evaluating these controls, one can determine how much risk is actually mitigated and what level of risk remains.

For instance, if an organization has implemented firewalls and intrusion detection systems, these controls would reduce the risk of cyber attacks. The effectiveness of these controls will determine the residual risk level.

Differentiating Between Risk Types:

Inherent Risk:This is the level of risk that exists before any controls are applied. It’s the raw risk associated with a particular asset or process.

Residual Risk:This is the risk that remains after existing controls have been applied. It's the actual risk that an organization faces after mitigation efforts.

Current Risk:This term is often used interchangeably with residual risk but focuses on the risk level at the present moment, considering the existing controls.

Primary Objective in Initial Risk Assessment:

The primary objective of considering existing controls during the initial risk assessment is to gain an accurate picture of the current risk landscape. This allows risk practitioners to understandwhat additional controls or modifications might be needed to further reduce risk to acceptable levels.

Without considering existing controls, the assessment would only reflect the inherent risk, which doesn’t provide a realistic view of the organization's risk exposure.