CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

The primary purpose of using a framework for risk analysis is to improve consistency. A framework for risk analysis is a set of principles, standards, methods, and tools that guide and govern the risk analysis process. Risk analysis is the process of estimating the impact and likelihood of the risk events, and determining the level and nature of the risk exposure. A framework for risk analysis helps to improve consistency, which is the degree of uniformity and agreement among the risk analysis results and practices. Improving consistency helps to ensure that the risk analysis is performed in a systematic and structured way, and that the risk analysis results are comparable and reliable. Improving consistency also helps to reduce the bias, uncertainty, and variability in the risk analysis process, and to enhance the quality and accuracy of the risk analysis results. Improving accountability, helping define risk tolerance, and helping develop risk scenarios are not the primary purposes of using a framework for risk analysis, asthey are either the benefits or the objectives of the risk analysis process, and they do not addressthe primary need of improving the quality and reliability of the risk analysis results. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk mitigation plans have been implemented. Residual risk reflects the effectiveness of the risk response in reducing the likelihood or impact of the risk. The best evidence that risk mitigation plans have been implemented effectively is the change in the level of residual risk. A change in the level of residual risk can be measured by comparing the risk level before and after the risk mitigation plans have been executed. A change in the level of residual risk can also be evaluated by comparing the actual residual risk with the target or acceptable residual risk. A change in the level of residual risk can demonstrate how well the risk mitigation plans have achieved the risk objectives and met the risk criteria. A change in the level of residual risk can also provide feedback and lessons learned for future risk management activities. References = Residual Risk: Definition, Formula & Management, Residual Risk: What It Is and How to Manage It, Residual Risk: How to Calculate and Manage It.

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the right to audit the provider is the most important factor to help define the IT risk associated with outsourcing activity to a cloud-based service provider, as it enables the organization to verify the compliance and performance of the provider with the contractual obligations and service level agreements. The right to audit the provider helps to:

Assess the security, availability, confidentiality, integrity, and privacy of the data and processes hosted by the provider

Identify and evaluate the risks and controls related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s infrastructure

Monitor and measure the quality and effectiveness of the cloud-based services and the provider’s governance and management practices

Report and resolve any issues or incidents related to the cloud-based services and the provider’s operations

Ensure the alignment of the cloud-based services and the provider’s policies and standards with the organization’s objectives and requirements

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: Risk Response Options, pp. 176-1771

 The control owner should be responsible for evaluating the residual risk after a compensating control has been implemented. 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 residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response or mitigation has beenapplied. The control owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for designing, implementing, and monitoring the controls that enforce the policy. The control owner can assess the impact and effectiveness of the compensating control on the residual risk, and report the results and recommendations to the risk owner or the risk practitioner. The other options are not as responsible as the control owner, as they are related to the compliance, ownership, or management of the risk, not the evaluation of the control. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4: Key Control Indicators, page 211.

Implementing a file corruption detection tool as a risk response strategy will help to reduce the impact of future events, as it will enable the organization to identify and correct the corrupted files before they cause further damage or loss. A file corruption detection tool is a software that scans and verifies the integrity and validity of the files, and alerts the users or administrators of any anomalies or errors. This helps to minimize the disruption and downtime caused by the data corruption incidents, and to preserve the quality and reliability of the data. Implementing a file corruption detection tool will not reduce the likelihood of future events, as it does not prevent or mitigate the causes or sources of the data corruption incidents. It will not restore availability, as it does not recover or restore the corrupted files, but only detects them. It will not address the root cause, as it does not analyze or eliminate the underlying factors that lead to the data corruption incidents. References = CRISC Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control – Question215; ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 215.

The effective implementation of a risk treatment plan is best indicated by managing residual risk within the organization’s appetite and tolerance levels. Residual risk is the remaining risk aftercontrols have been applied, and ensuring it is within acceptable levels demonstrates that the risk treatment plan is effective.

Managing Residual Risk within Appetite and Tolerance (Answer B):

Definition: Residual risk is the risk remaining after risk treatment measures have been implemented.

Significance: Managing residual risk within the set appetite and tolerance levels shows that the implemented controls are effective and aligned with the organization’s risk management objectives.

Outcome: It ensures that the organization's risk exposure is kept within acceptable boundaries, thereby protecting its assets and operations.

Comparison with Other Options:

A. Inherent risk is managed within an acceptable level:

Definition: Inherent risk is the risk before any controls are applied.

Limitation: The focus should be on residual risk post-treatment.

C. Risk treatments are aligned with industry peers:

Purpose: While benchmarking is useful, it does not directly indicate the effectiveness of risk treatment.

D. Key controls are identified and documented:

Purpose: Identifying and documenting controls is necessary, but effectiveness is shown by managing residual risk.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, authorizing user access requests is the process of granting or denying access to IT resources based on the user’s role, responsibilities, and business needs. Authorizing user access requests is a key control accountability that should be retained within the organization, as it helps to ensure that the principle of least privilege is applied, and that the access rights are aligned with the organization’s policies, standards, and risk appetite. Authorizing user access requests also helps to prevent unauthorized access, data leakage, fraud, and other potential risks associated with user access provisioning and termination. Therefore, the best control accountability to retain within the organizationwhen a third-party vendor offers to perform user access provisioning and termination is authorizing user access requests. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 240.

The percentage of servers receiving automatic patches is the best key control indicator (KCI) to monitor the effectiveness of patch management, because it measures how well the patch management process is ensuring that the servers are updated with the latest security patches and fixes. A high percentage of servers receiving automatic patches indicates that the patch management process is effective and efficient, and that the servers are protected from known vulnerabilities and threats. The other options are not the best KCIs, because they do not directly measure the effectiveness of patch management. The percentage of legacy servers out of support, the number of unpatched vulnerabilities, and the number of intrusion attempts are examples of risk indicators or consequence indicators that measure the exposure or impact of the lack of patch management, but not the performance or outcome of the patch management process. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers