CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

The first course of action for an organization that has received notification that it is a potential victim of a cybercrime that may have compromised sensitive customer data is to invoke the incident response plan. An incident response plan is a set of procedures and guidelines that defines the roles and responsibilities of the incident response team, the communication and escalation channels, the incident identification and classification criteria, the incident containment and eradication strategies, the incident recovery and restoration activities, and the incident documentation and reporting requirements. Invoking the incident response plan as soon as possible is crucial to minimize the damage and disruption caused by the cybercrime, to preserve the evidence and facilitate the investigation, and to comply with the legal andregulatory obligations. The other options are not the first course of action, although they may be subsequent or concurrent steps in the incident response process. Determining the business impact is a part of the incident assessment and prioritization phase, which helps to evaluate the severity and scope of the incident and to allocate the appropriate resources and actions. Conducting a forensic investigation is a part of the incident analysis and evidence collection phase, which helps to identify the source and cause of the incident and to support the legal and disciplinary actions. Invoking the business continuity plan (BCP) is a part of the incident recovery and restoration phase, which helps to resume the normal operations and services and to mitigate the adverse effects of the incident. References = The National Cyber Incident Response Plan (NCIRP), Cyber Incident Response Plan | Cyber.gov.au, [Cyber Incident Response: A Framework for Preparation and Success], [Cyber Incident Response Plan: How to Create One for Your Business]

A new risk scenario without controls means that there is a potential threat or event that could adversely affect the organization’s objectives, and there are no existing measures to prevent or reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk. Therefore, the most appropriate action is to include the new risk scenario in the current risk assessment, so that the risk practitioner can analyze therisk, evaluate its severity and priority, and recommend suitable controls to mitigate the risk. By including the new risk scenario in the current riskassessment, the risk practitioner can ensure that the risk register is updated and reflects the current risk profile of the organization. The other options are not appropriate because they either ignore the new risk scenario, delay the risk assessment process, or remove valuable information from the risk register. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, page 95.

The effectiveness of a control action plan’s implementation can be measured by the extent to which it achieves the desired risk reduction. A control action plan is a set of actions that are designed to address the root causes of a risk and mitigate its impact or likelihood. The best indicator of the effectiveness of a control action plan’s implementation is the reduced risk level, which means that the risk is either eliminated or brought within the acceptable range. The otheroptions are not the best indicators, because they do not directly reflect the risk reduction. Increased number of controls may not necessarily reduce the risk level, especially if the controls are not aligned with the risk causes, objectives, and priorities. Increased risk appetite may indicate a higher tolerance for risk, but it does not mean that the risk level has been reduced. Stakeholder commitment may facilitate the implementation of the control action plan, but it does not guarantee the effectiveness of the plan. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3: Risk Response, Section 3.2: Control Action Plan, p. 170-171.

The risk management process is the systematic and continuous process of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, and treating the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, operations, or assets1. The risk management process should be aligned with the organization’s overall risk management framework and strategy, and support the organization’s value creation and protection2.

Having the risk management process reviewed by a third party is a good practice that can provide various benefits for the organization, such as:

Enhancing the credibility and reliability of the risk management process and outcomes

Identifying and addressing any weaknesses, gaps, or errors in the risk management process and controls

Providing independent and objective feedback and recommendations for improving the risk management process and performance

Ensuring compliance with the relevant laws, regulations, and standards for risk management3

Among the four options given, the primary reason to have the risk management process reviewed by a third party is to obtain an objective view of process gaps and systemic errors. This means that the third party can help to:

Assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the risk management process and its alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

Detect and report any inconsistencies, inefficiencies, or inaccuracies in the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, or treatment activities

Identify and prioritize the root causes and consequences of the process gaps and systemic errors, and their impact on the organization’s risk exposure and acceptance

Suggest and implement corrective or preventive actions that can resolve or mitigate the process gaps and systemic errors, and prevent their recurrence

References = Risk Management Process - ISO 31000, Enterprise Risk Management - Wikipedia, How to Select a Third-Party Risk Management Framework

Centralizing IT systems is a process of consolidating and integrating the IT systems or resources in the organization into a single or unified platform or location. Centralizing IT systems helps to improve risk reporting, because it helps to simplify and standardize the risk management process and activities, and to enhance the visibility and transparency of the IT risks and controls. Centralizing IT systems also helps to improve risk reporting, because it helps to facilitate and automate the risk data collection, analysis, and evaluation, and to provide consistent and comprehensive risk information and insights to the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. The other options are not the greatest benefit of centralizing IT systems, although they may be related to the risk management process. Risk classification, risk monitoring, and risk identification are all activities that can help to support or improve the risk management process, but they do not necessarily benefit from centralizing IT systems

The most comprehensive information for developing a risk profile for a system is the risk assessment results. A risk assessment is a process that identifies, analyzes, and evaluates the risks that could affect the system’s objectives or operations. A risk assessment provides comprehensive information for developing a risk profile, because it helps to determine the likelihood and impact of the risks, and to prioritize them based on their severity and relevance. Arisk assessment also helps to select the most appropriate and effective controls to minimize the risks, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risks. A risk profile is a document that summarizes the key risks that the system faces or accepts, and their likelihood, impact, and priority. A risk profile helps to identify and prioritize the most critical or relevant risks, and to align them with the system’s objectives, strategy, and risk appetite. The other options are not as comprehensive as the risk assessment results, although they may be part of or derived from the risk profile. Results of a business impact analysis (BIA), a mapping of resources to business processes, and key performance indicators (KPIs) are all factors that could affect the system’s performance and improvement, but they do not necessarily identify, analyze, or evaluate the risks that could affect the system. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

The best approach to mitigate the risk associated with a control deficiency is to implement compensating controls. A control deficiency is a situation where a control is missing, ineffective, or inefficient, and cannot provide reasonable assurance that the objectives or requirements are met. A compensating control is a control that provides an alternative or additional measure of protection when the primary or preferred control is not feasible or effective. A compensating control can help to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk associated with the control deficiency, and maintain the compliance or performance level. The other options are not as effective as implementing compensating controls, as they are related to the analysis, assessment, or provision of the risk, not the mitigation of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

Business Impact Analysis (BIA):

Objective: The primary objective of a BIA is to identify and evaluate the effects of disruptions on business operations. This includes determining the criticality of IT assets that support key business processes.

Risk Mitigation: By identifying critical IT assets, organizations can prioritize risk mitigation efforts to ensure that key business processes remain operational during and after disruptions.

Appropriate IT Risk Mitigation:

Critical Asset Identification: Knowing which IT assets are essential allows for targeted risk mitigation strategies. This ensures resources are allocated efficiently to protect the most important systems.

Impact Assessment: Understanding the impact of potential disruptions on critical IT assets helps in developing effective disaster recovery and continuity plans.

Comparison with Other Options:

Validating Critical IT Risk: While important, this is typically part of a broader BIA process rather than its primary objective.

Assigning Accountability for IT Risk: This is crucial for governance but does not directly enable risk mitigation actions.

Defining IT Risk-aware Culture: Important for overall risk management but does not directly influence specific mitigation actions.

Best Practices:

Detailed Asset Inventory: Maintain an up-to-date inventory of IT assets and their dependencies on business processes.

Regular Updates and Reviews: Continuously update the BIA to reflect changes in the IT environment and business processes.