CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

The risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access is that the former employees or unauthorized parties may use the accounts to access or manipulate the organization’s information systems or resources, and cause harm or damage to the organization and its stakeholders, such as data loss, data breach, system failure, fraud, etc.

The first step to address the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access is to disable user access, which means to revoke or remove the permissions or privileges that allow the accounts to access or use the organization’s information systems or resources. Disabling user access can help the organization to address the risk by providing the following benefits:

It can prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and reduce or eliminate the potential harm or damage that they may cause for the organization and its stakeholders.

It can ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the organization’s information systems or resources, and protect them from unauthorized access or manipulation.

It can provide useful evidence and records for the verification and validation of the organization’s access control function, and for the compliance with the organization’s access control policies and standards.

The other options are not the first steps to address the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access, because they do not provide the same level of urgency and effectiveness that disabling user access provides, and they may not be sufficient or appropriate to address the risk.

Performing a risk assessment is a process of measuring and comparing the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizing them based on their significance and urgency. Performing a risk assessment can help the organization to understand and document the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access, but it is not the first step to address the risk, because it does not prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and it may not be timely or feasible to perform a risk assessment before disabling user access.

Developing an access control policy is a process of defining and describing the rules or guidelines that specify the expectations and requirements for the organization’s access control function, such as who can access what, when, how, and why. Developing an access control policy can help the organization to establish and communicate the boundaries and objectives for the organization’s access control function, but it is not the first step to address the risk, because it does not prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and it may not be relevant or applicable to the existing or emerging risk scenarios that may affect the organization’s access control function.

Performing a root cause analysis is a process of identifying and understanding the underlying or fundamental causes or factors that contribute to or result in a problem or incident that has occurred or may occur in the organization. Performing a root cause analysis can help the organization to address and correct the risk of terminated employee accounts maintaining access, and prevent or reduce its recurrence or impact, but it is not the first step to address the risk, because it does not prevent or stop the former employees or unauthorized parties from accessing or using the organization’s information systems or resources, and it may not be timely or feasible to perform a root cause analysis before disabling user access. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 207

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The risk owner is the person who has the authority and accountability to manage a specific risk and its associated controls. The risk owner is also responsible for ensuring that the risk is within the acceptable level and that the risk response is effective and efficient. In this case, the risk owner is also the owner of the business service that depends on the managed hosting service. Therefore, the risk owner should be notified of the new information about the flood risk first, as they have the most interest and influence on the risk and its impact on the business objectives. The risk owner can then decide on the appropriate actions to take, such as reviewing the contract terms, requesting additional controls, or changing the service provider. The other options are not the correct answers because they are not the primary stakeholders of the risk and its consequences. The data center manager is an employee of the managed hosting service provider, not the organization that procured the service. The data center manager may not have the authority or the incentive to address the flood risk or inform the organization. The site manager is also an employee of the managed hosting service provider, and their role is to conduct annual risk assessments under the contract. The site manager may not be aware of the new information or have the responsibility to communicate it to the organization. The CIO is the senior executive who oversees the IT strategy and operations of the organization. The CIO may have a general interest in the managed hosting service and its risks, but they are not the direct owner or managerof the specific risk or the business service that relies on the service. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 702

Detailed Explanation:Theimpact to business objectivesis paramount when developing risk scenarios, as the primary purpose of risk management is to protect and support business objectives. Understanding the impact helps tailor scenarios to potential risks that could disrupt key operations or strategic goals.

 The best method to identify unnecessary controls is reviewing system functionalities associated with business processes, because this can help to determine whether the controls are relevant, effective, and efficient for the current business needs and objectives. System functionalities are the capabilities and features of IT systems that support the execution and performance of business processes. Business processes are the set of interrelated activities that transform inputs into outputs to deliver value to customers or stakeholders. By reviewing system functionalities associated with business processes, an organization can assess whether the controls are aligned with the process requirements, expectations, and outcomes, and whether they add value or create waste. The review can also identify any gaps, overlaps, redundancies, or conflicts among the controls, and any changes or improvements that are needed to optimize the controls. The other options are less effective methods to identify unnecessary controls. Evaluating the impact of removing existing controls can help to measure the benefits and costs of the controls, but it does not address the root causes or sources of the unnecessary controls. Evaluating existing controls against audit requirements can help to ensure compliance and assurance, but it does not consider the business context or purpose of the controls. Monitoring existing key risk indicators (KRIs) can help to measure the level and impact of risks, but it does not evaluate the suitability oradequacy of the controls. References = Surveying Staff to Identify Unnecessary Internal Controls - Methodology and Results 

 The most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization is clearly defined roles and responsibilities. The three lines of defense model is a framework that outlinesthe roles and responsibilities of different functions or groups within the organization in relation to risk management and internal control1. The three lines of defense are:

The first line of defense, which consists of the operational management and staff who own and manage the risks associated with their activities and processes. They are responsible for identifying, assessing, and mitigating the risks, as well as designing, implementing, and operating the controls.

The second line of defense, which consists of the specialized functions or units that provide oversight, guidance, and support to the first line of defense in managing the risks and controls. They are responsible for developing and maintaining the risk management framework, policies, and standards, as well as monitoring and reporting on the risk and control performance.

The third line of defense, which consists of the internal audit function that provides independent and objective assurance on the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management and internal control system. They are responsible for evaluating and testing the design and operation of the risks and controls, as well as reporting and recommending improvements to the senior management and the board. Clearly defined roles and responsibilities are essential for ensuring that the three lines of defense model works effectively and efficiently. They help to avoid confusion, duplication, or gaps in the risk management and internal control activities, as well as to ensure accountability, coordination, and communication among the different functions or groups. They also help to establish the appropriate level of independence, authority, and competence for each line of defense, as well as to align the risk management and internal control objectives and strategies with the organization’s goals and values2. The other options are not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as they are either less relevant or less specific than clearly defined roles and responsibilities. A robust risk aggregation tool set is a set of methods or techniques that enable the organization to collect, consolidate, and analyze the risk data and information from different sources, levels, or perspectives. A robust risk aggregation tool set can help to enhance the risk identification, assessment, and reporting processes, as well as to support the risk decision making and prioritization. However, a robust risk aggregationtool set is not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as it does not address the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups in relation to risk management and internal control. A well-established risk management committee is a group of senior executives or managers who are responsible for overseeing and directing the risk management activities and performance of the organization. A well-established risk management committee can help to ensure the alignment and integration of the risk management objectives and strategies with the organization’s goals and values, as well as to provide guidance and support to the different functions or groups involved in risk management and internal control. However, a well-established risk management committee is not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as it does not cover theroles and responsibilities of the operational management and staff, the specialized functions or units, or the internal audit function. Well-documented and communicated escalation procedures are the steps or actions that are taken to report and resolve any issues or incidents that may affect the risk management and internal control activities or performance of the organization. Well-documented and communicated escalation procedures can help to ensure the timely and appropriate response and resolution of the issues or incidents, as well as to inform and involve the relevant stakeholders and authorities. However, well-documented and communicated escalation procedures are not the most important foundational element of an effective three lines of defense model for an organization, as they do not define the roles and responsibilities of the different functions or groups in relation to risk management and internal control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, Page 85.

 A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the risks that may affect a project, as well as the actions that are taken or planned to manage them1. A risk register should include information such as the risk description, category, source, impact, likelihood, severity, owner, status, and response2. Among these, the most important information to capture in the risk register is the action plans to address risk scenarios requiring treatment. This is because the action plans are the specific steps that are taken to reduce, avoid, transfer, or accept the risks, depending on thechosen risk treatment option3. The action plans should beclear, realistic, measurable, and aligned with the project objectives and constraints4. The action plans should also be monitored and updated regularly to ensure that they are effective and appropriate for the changing risk environment5. The action plans are essential for managing the risks and ensuring the successful delivery of the project. The other options are not the most important information to capture in the risk register, as they are either less relevant or less actionable than the action plans. The team that performed the risk assessment is the group of people who identified, analyzed, and evaluated the risks, using various tools and techniques6. While this information may be useful for accountability and communication purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not indicate how the risks are treated or resolved. The assigned risk manager to provide oversight is the person who has the responsibility and authority to oversee the risk management process and ensure that the risks are properly identified, assessed, treated, and reported. While this information may be useful for governance and coordination purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not specify what actions are taken or planned to manage the risks. The methodology used to perform the risk assessment is the approach or framework that is used to identify, analyze, and evaluate the risks, based on the project context, scope, and objectives. While this information may be useful for consistency and transparency purposes, it is not as important as the action plans, as it does not describe how the risks are addressed or mitigated. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.5, Page 55.

The audit planning process is the process of defining and describing the scope, objectives, and approach of the internal audit that is performed to assess and evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. The audit planning process involves identifying and prioritizing the audit areas, topics, or issues, and allocating the audit resources, time, and budget.

The most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process is the annual risk assessment results, which are the outcomes or outputs of the risk assessment process that measures and compares the likelihood and impact of various risk scenarios, and prioritizes them based on their significance and urgency. The annual risk assessment results can help the internal audit department to plan the audit by providing the following information:

The level and priority of the risks that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization if they materialize.

The gap or difference between the current and desired level of risk, and the extent or degree to which the risk responses or controls contribute to or affect the gap or difference.

The cost-benefit or feasibility analysis of the possible actions or plans to address or correct the risks and their responses, and the expected or desired outcomes or benefits that they may provide for the organization.

The other options are not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that the annual risk assessment results provide, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the internal audit department.

Closed management action plans from the previous audit are the actions or plans that have been implemented or completed by the management to address or correct the findings or recommendations from the previous internal audit that was performed. Closed management action plans from the previous audit can provide useful information on the progress and performance of the management in improving and optimizing the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions, but they are not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because they do not indicate the current or accurate state and performance of the organization’s risk profile, and they may not cover all the relevant or emerging risks that may exist or arise.

An updated vulnerability management report is a report that provides the information and status of the vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the organization’s assets, processes, or systems that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. An updated vulnerability management report can provide useful information on the existence and severity of the vulnerabilities, and the actions or plans to mitigate or prevent them, but it is not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because it does not indicate the likelihood and impact of the risk scenarios that are associated with the vulnerabilities, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization.

A list of identified generic risk scenarios is a list that contains the descriptions or representations of the possible or hypothetical situations or events that may cause or result in a risk for the organization, without specifying the details or characteristics of the risk source, event, cause, or impact. A list of identified generic risk scenarios can provide useful information on the types or categories of the risks that may affect the organization, but it is not the most important information for a risk practitioner to provide to the internal audit department during the audit planning process, because it does not indicate the level and priority of the risks, and the potential consequences or impacts that they may cause for the organization. References =

ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63

ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 188

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A risk heat map is a tool that shows the likelihood and impact of different risks on a matrix, using colors to indicate the level of risk. A risk heat map is most commonly used as part of an IT risk analysis to facilitate risk assessment, which is the process of estimating the probability and consequences of the risks, and comparing them against the risk criteria1. A risk heat map can help to visualize, communicate, and prioritize the risks, as well as to evaluate the effectiveness of the risk response actions2. The other options are not the best choices for describing the purpose of a risk heat map, as they are either less specific or less relevant than risk assessment. Risk communication is the process of sharing and exchanging information about the risks among the stakeholders3. A risk heat map can support risk communication by providing a clear and concise representation of the risks, but it is not the main objective of the tool. Riskidentification is the process of finding, recognizing, and describing the risks that may affect the organization4. A risk heat map can help to identify the risks by categorizing them into different domains or sources, but it is not the primary function of the tool. Risk treatment is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate measures to modify the risk5. A risk heat map can help to guide the risk treatment by showing the risk ratings and thresholds, but it is not the core purpose of the tool. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.1.1, Page 47.