CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

Risk likelihood is most likely to be reassessed as a result of implementing a machine learning-based solution to monitor IT usage and analyze user behavior in an effort to detect internal fraud, as it may change the probability of fraud occurrence or detection, and affect the risk assessment and response. Risk culture, risk appetite, and risk capacity are not the most likely to be reassessed, as they are more stable and strategic aspects of risk management, and are not directly influenced by the implementation of a specific solution. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 108.

Using a VPN ensures the secure transmission of sensitive data over a public network by encrypting the communication channel. This mitigates risks such as interception or unauthorized access, aligning withData Protection and Privacy Standards.

Assessing the threat and associated impact is the next thing that a risk practitioner should do after learning that Internet of Things (IoT) devices installed in the production environment lack appropriate security controls for sensitive data. This is because assessing the threat and associated impact can help determine the level and nature of the risk posed by the IoT devices, as well as the potential consequences and costs of a security breach or incident. Assessing the threat and associated impact can also provide the basis for further risk analysis and response steps, such as evaluating risk appetite and tolerance levels, recommending device management controls, or enabling role-based access control. According to the CRISC Review Manual 2022, assessing the threat and associated impact is one of the key steps in the IT risk assessment process1. According to the web search results, assessing the threat and associated impact is a common and recommended practice for addressing the security risks of IoT devices

ï‚· Developing IT Risk Scenarios:

Risk scenarios are hypothetical events that describe potential threats and their impact on business operations. These scenarios are essential for identifying and assessing risks.

ï‚· Importance of Potential Impact Events:

Events that could potentially impact the business provide the most useful information for developing risk scenarios because they directly relate to the organization’s objectives and operations.

Understanding these events helps in crafting realistic and relevant risk scenarios that can guide risk assessment and mitigation efforts.

ï‚· Components of Risk Scenarios:

Threat Actors:Identify who might exploit vulnerabilities.

Threat Events:Describe the specific events that could impact the business.

Business Impact:Assess how these events would affect business operations, finances, reputation, etc.

ï‚· Using Impact Events for Scenario Development:

Focusing on events that could disrupt critical business functions ensures that the scenarios are relevant and actionable.

It enables the risk practitioner to communicate the potential consequences effectively to stakeholders and prioritize mitigation efforts accordingly.

ï‚· Comparing Other Information Sources:

Published Vulnerabilities:Useful for understanding specific threats but may not directly relate to business impact.

Threat Actors:Important for identifying potential sources of risk but not sufficient alone for scenario development.

IT Assets:Relevant for risk assessment but secondary to understanding potential impact events.

ï‚· References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the importance of considering events that could impact the business when developing risk scenarios (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4 Risk Scenario Development)​​.

The most important factor for management to consider when deciding whether to invest in an IT initiative that exceeds management’s risk appetite is C. Risk tolerance1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation that management is willing to allow for any specific risk as the enterprise pursues its objectives. Risk tolerance reflects the degree of uncertainty that an organization is prepared to accept in relation to achieving its goals2

When an IT initiative exceeds management’s risk appetite, it means that the potential benefits of the initiative are outweighed by the potential negative consequences or losses that could result from the initiative. However, management may still decide to invest in the initiative if the level of uncertainty or variation is within the organization’s risk tolerance. For example, management may accept a higher level of risk for a strategic or innovative initiative that could provide a competitive advantage or a significant return on investment3

Segregation of duties is a key control for preventing and detecting fraudulent transactions, especially in a large organization where there are many employees and transactions involved. Segregation of duties means that no single person has the authority or ability to initiate, approve, execute, and record a transaction without the involvement or oversight of another person. This reduces the opportunity and incentive for fraud, as well as the risk of errors or omissions. Segregation of duties also facilitates the detection of fraud by creating an audit trail and increasing the likelihood of whistleblowing.

The other options are not as effective as segregation of duties for mitigating risk related to fraudulent transactions. Monetary approval limits (B) are useful for controlling the amount and frequency of transactions, but they do not prevent unauthorized or fraudulent transactions from occurring. Clear roles and responsibilities © are important for defining the expectations and accountabilities of employees, but they do not ensure that employees comply with them or that their actions are monitored and verified. Password policies (D) are essential for securing access to systems and data, but they do not prevent fraudsters from exploiting weak or compromised passwords or from using legitimate passwords for fraudulent purposes.

This KPI measures how well the server patch management process meets the agreed-upon standards and expectations for timeliness, quality, and security. It reflects the efficiency and effectiveness of the patch deployment and the compliance with the patch policy. It also helps to identify and address any issues or delays that may affect the patching performance.

References

•Patch Management KPI Metrics - Motadata

•KPI Examples for Patch and Vulnerability Management - Heimdal Security

•Measuring the Effectiveness of Your Patch Management Strategy - Automox

When disposing of storage media, the best way to prevent the loss of highly sensitive data is physical destruction. Here’s why:

Physical Destruction:

Physical destruction involves destroying the storage media so that the data it contains cannot be recovered or reconstructed.

Methods include shredding, crushing, incinerating, or using industrial-grade degaussers that destroy the magnetic fields on the media.

Comparison with Other Methods:

Degaussing:This method erases data by disrupting the magnetic fields of the storage media. While effective for some types of media, it may not work on all (e.g., solid-state drives) and does not provide a visual confirmation that the data is irrecoverable.

Data Anonymization:This process involves altering data to prevent identification of individuals, but it does not destroy the data itself and is not applicable for disposing of storage media.

Data Deletion:Simply deleting data does not remove it permanently. Deleted data can often be recovered using specialized software unless it is overwritten multiple times, which is still less reliable than physical destruction.

Security Best Practices:

Physical destruction is considered the most secure method because it ensures that the media is rendered completely unusable and the data cannot be retrieved by any means.

This method is recommended by various standards and frameworks, including NIST Special Publication 800-88 Guidelines for Media Sanitization.