CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

The main goal of the risk analysis process is to determine the frequency and magnitude of loss, because this will help to measure the level of risk exposure and the need for risk mitigation controls. Frequency refers to how often a risk event may occur, while magnitude refers to how much harm or damage a risk event may cause. By determining the frequency and magnitude of loss, the risk analysis process can quantify the impact and likelihood of the risks, and assign a risk rating and priority. The other options are not the main goal of the risk analysis process, because they are either inputs or outputs of the process, as explained below:

A. Potential severity of impact is an output of the risk analysis process, as it is the result of estimating the consequences of a risk event on the organization’s objectives, assets, or processes. The potential severity of impact is influenced by the magnitude of loss, but also by other factors, such as the timing, duration, and scope of the risk event.

C. Control deficiencies are an input of the risk analysis process, as they are the gaps or weaknesses in the existing controls that may increase the risk exposure or reduce the risk mitigation effectiveness. Control deficiencies are identified by comparing the current control environment with the desired control environment, and by evaluating the design and operation of the controls.

D. Threats and vulnerabilities are inputs of the risk analysis process, as they are the sources and causes of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives, assets, or processes. Threats are external or internal factors that have the potential to exploit the vulnerabilities, while vulnerabilitiesare internal or external weaknesses that increase the susceptibility to the threats. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 45. What is Risk Analysis? Process, Types, Examples & Methods, Risk Analysis Tutorial - The Process | solver, What is the goal of a risk assessment? - Creative Safety Supply

 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 …

Using a common risk taxonomy is the most important factor to consider when creating a separate IT risk register for a large organization with regard to the existing corporate risk register, as it ensures consistency, clarity, and alignment of the IT risk identification, classification, and reporting with the corporate risk management framework and strategy. Leveraging business risk professionals, relying on generic IT risk scenarios, and describing IT risk in business terms are not the most important factors, as they are more related to the resources, inputs, or outputs of the IT risk register, respectively, rather than the structure or format of the IT risk register. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 100.

 Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite can be expressed in qualitative or quantitative terms, and can vary depending on the context and the stakeholder. Risk appetite should be defined and communicated by the senior management or the board of directors, and should guide the risk management decisions and actions throughout the organization. When a project team has accepted a risk outside the established risk appetite, the risk practitioner’s best course of action is to escalate the risk decision to the project sponsor for review, meaning that the risk practitioner should report the risk acceptance and its rationale to the project sponsor, who is the person or group that provides the resources and support for the project, and is accountable for its success. The project sponsor should review the risk decision and determine whether it is aligned with the organization’s objectives and strategy, and whether it requires any further approval oraction. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.1, p. 25-26

The effectiveness of risk treatment determines whether the selected response sufficiently mitigates the identified risk. This consideration ensures alignment with risk appetite and reduces residual risk to acceptable levels, reflecting the priorities set out in theRisk Response and Treatmentdomain of CRISC.

When preparing a risk status report for periodic review by senior management, it is most important to ensure the report includes risk exposure in business terms. Risk exposure is the potential loss or harm that may result from a risk event. Expressing risk exposure in business terms can help senior management to understand the impact and significance of the risk on the organization’s objectives, performance, and value. A detailed view of individual risk exposures, a summary of incidents that have impacted the organization, and recommendations by an independent risk assessor are other possible contents of the report, but they are not as important as risk exposure in business terms. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 10; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 140.

The business impact analysis (BIA) identifies critical services, acceptable downtime limits, and the business consequences of disruptions. CRISC emphasizes that the BIA is the foundation for deciding risk treatment strategies because it defines what must be restored first and to what level. Scenario analysis identifies risks but does not determine business priorities. Failover procedures are themselves a treatment, not a method for selecting treatments. A risk treatment plan documents chosen actions but depends entirely on the BIA to inform those decisions. Therefore, the BIA is the key input enabling proper treatment selection during disasters.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the contracts department is responsible for drafting, reviewing, and negotiating contracts with vendors and other third parties. The contracts department should ensure that the contracts include adequate clauses and terms to address the risks and controls related to the vendor services and activities. Therefore, the best course of action for the risk practitioner when finding a missing clause to control privileged access to the organization’s systems by vendor employees is to report this concern to the contracts department for further action. The contracts department can then revise the contract to include the necessary clause, or seek alternative solutions to mitigate the risk of unauthorized or inappropriate access by vendor employees. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 229.