CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

 The control owner is the person who has the authority to approve an exception to a control. A control is a policy, procedure, or technical measure that is implemented to prevent or mitigate a risk. A control owner is responsible for the design, implementation, operation, and maintenance of the control, as well as for monitoring and reporting its performance and effectiveness. A control owner is also accountable for the approval of any changes or exceptions to the control, based on the risk assessment and business justification. An information security manager, a risk owner, and a risk manager are not the best choices, as they do not have the same level of authority, responsibility, and knowledge as the control owner in relation to the control. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 35.

 According to the CRISC Review Manual, the average time to grant access privileges is the best indicator of the efficiency of a process for granting access privileges, because it measures how quickly and effectively the process can respond to the access requests and meet the business needs. The average time to grant access privileges can be calculated by dividing the total time spent on granting access privileges by the number of access requests processed. The other options are not the best indicators of the efficiency of the process, because they measure other aspects of the process, such as the quality, the security, or the maintenance. The number of changes in access granted to users measures the quality of the process, as it indicates how wellthe process can align the access rights with the user roles and functions. The average number of access privilege exceptions measures the security of the process, as it indicates how often theprocess deviates from the established policies and standards. The number and type of locked obsolete accounts measures the maintenance of the process, as it indicates how well the process can remove the unnecessary or outdated accounts. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.1.2, page 163

An IT risk register is a document that records the identified IT risks, their analysis, and their responses. It is a useful tool for managing and communicating the IT risks throughout the project or the organization. The most important factor for maintaining the effectiveness of an IT risk register is to perform regular reviews and updates to the register, meaning that the riskpractitioner should periodically check and revise the riskregister to reflect the changes in the IT risk environment, the project status, or the organization’s objectives. Performing regular reviews and updates to the register can help to ensure that the risk register is accurate, complete, and current, and that it provides relevant and reliable information for the risk management decision making and actions. Performing regular reviews and updates to the register can also help to identify any new or emerging IT risks, as well as to monitor and report on the IT risk performance and improvement. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, p. 106-107

Alignment to business objectives is the most important factor when developing a business case for a proposed security investment, because it demonstrates how the investment will support the enterprise’s mission, vision, and goals. A business case should show how the security investment will contribute to the value creation, risk reduction, and performance improvement of the enterprise. The other options are not the most important factors, although they may also be included in the business case. The identification of control requirements, the consideration of new business strategies, and the inclusion of strategy for regulatory compliance are secondary factors that depend on the alignment to business objectives. References = Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers

Reevaluating the design of the key risk indicators (KRIs) is the best recommendation when a KRI is generating an excessive volume of events, because it helps to determine whether the KRI is relevant, reliable, and valid, and whether it needs to be modified or replaced. A KRI is a metric or indicator that helps to monitor and evaluate the likelihood or impact of a risk, or the effectiveness or efficiency of a control. A KRI can be quantitative or qualitative, and can be derived from internal or external sources. An event is an occurrence or incident that may indicate a change or trend in the risk level or performance. A KRI that generates an excessivevolume of events may indicate that the KRI is not well-designed or well-aligned with the risk objectives or criteria, and that it may produce false positives or negatives, or irrelevant or misleading information. Therefore, reevaluating the design of the KRIs is the best recommendation, as it helps to improve the quality and usefulness of the KRIs, and to avoid unnecessary or inappropriate actions or responses. Developing a corresponding key performance indicator (KPI), monitoring KRIs within a specific timeframe, and activating the incident response plan are all possible actions to perform after reevaluating the design of the KRIs, but they are not the best recommendation, as they do not address the root cause of the excessive volume of events. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 97

 The best way to address the request for IT risk profile reports associated with specific departments would be to use key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics that provide information on the level of exposure to a given operational risk1. KRIs can help to monitor the changes in risk levels over time, identify emerging risks, and trigger risk response actions when the risk exceeds the acceptable thresholds2. KRIs can also help to allocate resources for risk mitigation by prioritizing the risks that pose the greatest threat to the business objectives and performance of each department. The other options are not the best ways to address the request, as they do not provide the same level of insight and guidance as KRIs. The cost associated with each control may indicate the efficiency of the risk mitigation, but not the effectiveness or the necessity. Historical risk assessments may provide some baseline data, but not the current or future risk trends. Information from the risk register may include too much detail or irrelevant information, and not the key risk factors that need to be monitored and reported. References = Key Risk Indicators; Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide

Involve the development team in planning is the best recommendation to help reduce IT risk associated with scheduling overruns when starting a new application development project. This is because involving the development team in planning can help ensure that the project scope, requirements, resources, and timeline are realistic, feasible, and agreed upon by all stakeholders. It can also help improve the communication, collaboration, and commitment of the development team, as well as identify and mitigate potential risks and issues early in the project life cycle. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, one of the key risk identification techniques for IT projects is to involve the project team and other relevant parties in the risk assessment process1. According to the CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2022, involving the development team in planning is the correct answer to this question2.

Implementing a tool to track the development team’s deliverables, reviewing the software development life cycle, and assigning more developers to the project team are not the best recommendations to help reduce IT risk associated with scheduling overruns. These are possible actions that can be taken during or after the planning phase, but they do not address the root cause of the risk, which is the lack of involvement of the development team in planning. Implementing a tool to track the development team’s deliverables can help monitor the project progress and performance, but it does not guarantee that the deliverables are aligned with the project objectives and expectations. Reviewing the software development life cycle can help ensure that the project follows a structured and standardized process, but it does not account for the specific needs and challenges of the project. Assigning more developers to the project team can help increase the project capacity and productivity, but it can also introduce new risks such as coordination, communication, and quality issues.

Local laws and regulations should be the primary consideration when assessing the risk of using IoT devices to collect and process PII, because they define the legal obligations and liabilities of the organization and the individuals involved. Non-compliance with local laws and regulations can result in fines, lawsuits, reputational damage, and loss of trust. Therefore, it is essential to understand and adhere to the applicable laws and regulations in the jurisdictions where the IoT devices operate and where the PII is stored, processed, and transferred.

References

•Considerations for Managing Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity and Privacy Risks

•The Internet of Things (IoT) and Digitally Stored PII: Avoidable or Inevitable?

•Security Issues in IoT: Challenges and Countermeasures