CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

The most helpful source in providing an overview of an organization’s risk management program is the risk management framework. The risk management framework is a set of components that provide the foundations and organizational arrangements for designing, implementing, monitoring, reviewing, and continually improving risk management throughout the organization. The framework includes the risk management principles, policies, processes, procedures, roles, responsibilities, and resources that enable the organization to manage risk effectively. Risk management treatment plan, risk assessment results, and risk register are other sources that may provide some information about the risk management program, but they are not as comprehensive as the risk management framework. 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 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

Participation in the risk assessment may constitute a conflict of interest, because it may create a situation where the risk practitioner’s personal or professional interests or relationships interfere with their objectivity, independence, or impartiality in conducting the risk assessment. A conflict of interest is a type of risk that may compromise the integrity, quality, or validity of the risk assessment process and outcomes, and may damage the reputation or trust of the risk practitioner or the organization. A conflict of interest may arise when the risk practitioner has a direct or indirect connection or involvement with the subject or stakeholder of the risk assessment, such as a previous or current role, responsibility, or relationship, that may influence or bias theirjudgment or decision. Participation in the risk assessment may constitute a conflict of interest, as the risk practitioner may have a prior or residual interest or loyalty to the financialprocess team or the new critical application, and may not be able to assess the risk in a fair and unbiased manner.

The risk assessment team being overly confident of its ability to identify issues, the risk practitioner being unfamiliar with recent application and process changes, and the risk practitioner still having access rights to the financial system are all possible concerns with the request, but they are not the greatest concern, as they do not necessarily imply a conflict of interest, and they may be mitigated or resolved by other means, such as training, documentation, or review.

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the information and status of the identified risks and their responses. It includes the risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, priority, response, owner, action plan, status, etc.

A risk scenario is a description or representation of a possible or hypothetical situation or event that may cause or result in a risk for the organization. A risk scenario usually consists of three elements: a threat or source of harm, a vulnerability or weakness, and an impact or consequence.

Multiple risk practitioners are the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the identification, analysis, evaluation, and communication of the risks and their responses. They may include the risk owners, risk managers, risk analysts, risk consultants, risk auditors, etc.

A single risk register is a risk register that is shared or used by multiple risk practitioners across the organization, and that contains the information and status of all the risks and their responses that are relevant or applicable to the organization.

The most important consideration when multiple risk practitioners capture risk scenarios in a single risk register is using a consistent method for risk assessment, which is the process of determining the significance and urgency of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Risk assessment involves measuring and comparing the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their magnitude and importance.

Using a consistent method for risk assessment when multiple risk practitioners capture risk scenarios in a single risk register ensures that the risk scenarios are captured and recorded in a uniform and standardized way, and that they are comparable and compatible with each other. It alsohelps to avoid or reduce the inconsistencies, discrepancies, or conflicts that may arise from the different perspectives, assumptions, or judgments of the multiple risk practitioners, and to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and validity of the risk register.

The other options are not the most important considerations when multiple risk practitioners capture risk scenarios in a single risk register, because they do not address the main challenge or issue that may arise from the multiple risk practitioners capturing risk scenarios in a single risk register, which is the lack of consistency or standardization in the risk assessment method.

Aligning risk ownership and control ownership means ensuring that the individuals or groups that are accountable and responsible for the risks and their responses are clearly defined and assigned, and that they have the authority and resources to perform their roles and duties. Aligning risk ownership and control ownership is important when multiple risk practitioners capture risk scenarios in a single risk register, but it is not the most important consideration, because it does not ensure that the risk scenarios are captured and recorded in a uniform and standardized way, and that they are comparable and compatible with each other.

Developing risk escalation and reporting procedures means establishing and implementing the processes and guidelines for communicating and sharing the information and status of the risks and their responses among the relevant stakeholders, and for escalating or transferring the risks and their responses to the appropriate levels or parties when necessary or required. Developing risk escalation and reporting procedures is important when multiple risk practitioners capture riskscenarios in a single risk register, but it is not the most important consideration, because itdoes not ensure that the risk scenarios are captured and recorded in a uniform and standardized way, and that they are comparable and compatible with each other.

Maintaining up-to-date risk treatment plans means updating and revising the actions or plans that are selected and implemented to address or correct the risks and their responses, based on the changes or developments that may occur in the risk environment or performance. Maintaining up-to-date risk treatment plans is important when multiple risk practitioners capture risk scenarios in a single risk register, but it is not the most important consideration, because it does not ensure that the risk scenarios are captured and recorded in a uniform and standardized way, and that they are comparable and compatible with each other. 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 178

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The observation from a third-party service provider review that would be of greatest concern to a risk practitioner is that the service level agreements (SLAs) have not been met over the last quarter, as it indicates a significant performance issue or breach that may affect the quality, functionality, or security of the outsourced services, and may require a remediation or escalation action. The other options are not the greatest concerns, as they may not indicate a performance issue or breach, but rather a contractual, personnel, or financial issue, respectively, that may not affect the outsourced services directly or significantly. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

A loss event is an occurrence that results in a negative consequence or damage for an organization, such as a data breach, a cyberattack, or a natural disaster. The impact of a loss event is the extent or magnitude of the harm or loss caused by the event, such as financial losses, reputational damage, operational disruptions, or legal liabilities. A newly enacted information privacy law that significantly increases financial penalties for breaches of personally identifiable information (PII) will most likely increase the impact of a loss event for an organization affected by the new law, because it will increase the potential cost and severity of a data breach involving PII. The other options are not as likely as an increase in loss event impact, because they do not directly result from the new law, but rather depend on other factors, such as the organization’s risk management capabilities, as explained below:

A. Increase in compliance breaches is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will not comply with the new law, which would expose it to more risks and penalties. A rational organization would try to comply with the new law by implementing appropriate controls and measures to protect PII and prevent data breaches.

C. Increase in residual risk is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will not adjust its risk response strategies to account for the new law, which would leave it with more risk exposure than desired. A prudent organization would try to reduce its residual risk by enhancing its risk mitigation controls or transferring its risk to a third party, such as an insurance company.

D. Increase in customer complaints is not a likely outcome, because it assumes that the organization will experience more data breaches involving PII, which would affect its customersatisfaction and loyalty. A responsible organization would try to avoid data breaches by improving its security posture and practices, and by communicating transparently and effectively with its customers about the new law and its implications. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, page 32.