CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

Disaster recovery plans are essential for ensuring the continuity and resilience of business operations in the event of a disruption or disaster. However, creating and maintaining separatedisaster recovery plans for each business unit may not be cost-effective or efficient, as it may result in duplication, inconsistency, or gaps in the plans. Therefore, the best course of action would be to evaluate opportunities to combine disaster recovery plans across the business units, where possible and appropriate. This would help to achieve economies of scale, standardization, and alignment of the plans, as well as reduce complexity and costs. However, this does not mean that all disaster recovery plans should be identical or centralized, as different business units may have different risk profiles, recovery objectives, and requirements. Therefore, the combined disaster recovery plans should still be tailored and customized to suit the specific needs and characteristics of each business unit. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2, page 71.

The next thing that the risk practitioner should do from a risk management perspective when the organization is considering the adoption of an aggressive business strategy to achieve desired growth is to identify new threats resulting from the new business strategy. A threat is a potentialcause of an unwanted incident that may affect the achievement of the objectives. An aggressive business strategy is a strategy that involves pursuing high-risk, high-reward opportunities or initiatives to gain a competitive advantage or a significant market share. An aggressive business strategy may introduce new threats or increase thelikelihood or impact of existing threats, such as market volatility, regulatory changes, customer dissatisfaction, or competitor retaliation. Therefore, the risk practitioner should identify the new threats resulting from the new business strategy, and assess their potential consequences and implications for the organization. The other options are not as immediate as identifying new threats resulting from the new business strategy, as they are related to the update, information, or measurement of the risk management process, not the identification or analysis of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.3: IT Risk Scenarios, page 23.

The most effective way to help ensure accountability for managing risk is to assign process owners to key risk areas. Process owners are the persons or entities that have the authority andresponsibility to manage a specific process or a group of related processes. Process owners help to identify, assess, and respond to the risks associated with the process, and to monitor and report on the process performance and improvement. Process owners also help to communicate and coordinate the process management activities with the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Assigning process owners to key risk areas helps to ensure accountability for managing risk, because it helps to define and clarify the roles and responsibilities of the process owners, and to establish and enforce the expectations and standards for the process owners. Assigning process owners to key risk areas also helps to measure and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the process owners, and to identify and address any issues or gaps in the process management activities. The other options are not as effective as assigning process owners to key risk areas, although they may be related to the risk management process. Obtaining independent risk assessments, assigning incident response action plan responsibilities, and creating accurate process narratives are all activities that can help to support or improve the risk management process, but they do not necessarily ensure accountability for managing risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 2-11.

 Implementing controls to bring the risk to a level within appetite and accept the residual risk is the best recommendation to senior management when the results of a risk and control assessment indicate a risk scenario can only be partially mitigated, as it helps to balance the costs and benefits of the risk management and control processes, and to align them with the organizational strategy and objectives. A risk and control assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and controls associated with a specific activity, process, or objective. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could cause harm or loss to the organization or its stakeholders. A risk scenario can only be partially mitigated when the existing or proposed controls are not sufficient or effective to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. A risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. A residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls or risk treatments.

Implementing controls to bring the risk to a level within appetite and accept the residual risk helps to provide the following benefits:

It enables a data-driven and evidence-based approach to risk management and reporting, rather than relying on subjective or qualitative judgments.

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating risk levels and exposure across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the development and implementation of effective and efficient risk response and mitigation strategies and actions that are aligned with the business risk appetite and objectives.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the risk management and control processes, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best recommendations to senior management when the results of a risk and control assessment indicate a risk scenario can only be partially mitigated. Implementing a key performance indicator (KPI) to monitor the existing control performance is a useful method to measure and monitor the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, but it does not address the residual risk or the risk appetite. Accepting the residual risk in its entirety andobtaining executive management approval is a possible option to deal with the risk scenario, but it may expose the organization to excessive or unacceptable risk, and it may not comply with the legal or regulatory obligations or requirements. Separating the risk into multiple components and avoiding the risk components that cannot be mitigated is a possible option to deal with the risk scenario, but it may not be feasible or practical, and it may create new or additional risks or challenges. References = Risk and Control Self-Assessment (RCSA) - Management Study Guide, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Risk Mitigation: What It Is and How to Implement It (Free Templates …

 According to the 6 Best Practices to Ensure Software License Compliance article, the best way to determine software license compliance is to conduct regular internal compliance audits. These self-assessments can be done with the help of software license management companies. The goal is to see where compliance issues lie and to take corrective actions before they become seriousproblems. Periodic compliance reviews can help to avoid fines, penalties, lawsuits, and reputational damage that may result from software license violations. They can also help to optimize software spending and utilization, and to identify any gaps or opportunities for improvement in the software license management process. References = 6 Best Practices to Ensure Software License Compliance

 The risk owner should be assigned accountability for monitoring risk levels, as they have the authority and responsibility to manage the risk and its associated controls, and to report on the risk status and performance. The risk practitioner, the business manager, and the control owner are not the best choices, as they have different roles and responsibilities related to risk identification, assessment, response, and reporting, but they are not accountable for the risk and its monitoring. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

Key Control Indicators (KCIs) measure the performance and effectiveness of controls. When regulatory objectives are tied to technical controls (like firewalls or SIEM), KCIs can detect when those controls are failing or operating outside of thresholds. This allows proactive remediation before compliance violations occur.

Updating a risk register with assessment results for a key project must primarily capture action plans to address risk scenarios requiring treatment.

Risk Register Purpose:

Documentation of Risks:The risk register is a central repository for all identified risks and their respective treatment plans. It ensures that all risks are documented, tracked, and managed throughout the project lifecycle.

Action Plans:It is crucial to document action plans for risks that require treatment. This ensures that there are clear strategies in place to mitigate or manage these risks.

Importance of Action Plans:

Mitigation and Management:Action plans detail the steps necessary to mitigate identified risks, providing a clear path for risk management. This is vital for ensuring that risks do not negatively impact the project.

Accountability and Tracking:Including action plans in the risk register assigns responsibility and timelines for risk treatment, which is essential for accountability and tracking progress.