CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

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. A risk assessmentcan help the organization to understand and document the risks that may affect its objectives and operations, and to support the decision making and planning for the risk management.

Performing a risk assessment would be the most helpful to understand the impact of a new technology system on an organization’s current risk profile, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:

What are the potential benefits and challenges of implementing the new technology system, and how do they align with the organization’s objectives and needs?

What are the existing or emerging risks that may affect the new technology system, and how do they relate to the organization’s current risk profile?

How likely and severe are the risks that may affect the new technology system, and what are the possible consequences or impacts for the organization and its stakeholders?

How can the risks that may affect the new technology system be mitigated or prevented, and what are the available or feasible options or solutions?

Performing a risk assessment can help the organization to understand the impact of the new technology system on its current risk profile by providing the following benefits:

It can enable the comparison and evaluation of the current and desired state and performance of the organization’s risk management function, and to identify and quantify the gaps or opportunities for improvement.

It can provide useful references and benchmarks for the alignment and integration of the new technology system with the organization’s risk management function, and for the compliance with the organization’s risk policies and standards.

It can support the implementation and monitoring of the new technology system, and for the allocation and optimization of the resources, time, and budget for the new technology system.

The other options are not the most helpful to understand the impact of a new technology system on an organization’s current risk profile, because they do not provide the same level of detail and insight that performing a risk assessment provides, and they may not be specific or applicable to the organization’s objectives and needs.

Hiring consultants specializing in the new technology means engaging or contracting external experts or professionals that have the skills and knowledge on the new technology system, and that can provide advice or guidance on the implementation and management of the new technology system. Hiring consultants specializing in the new technology can help the organization to enhance its competence and performance on the new technology system, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not measure and compare the likelihood and impact of the risks that may affect the new technology system, and it may not be relevant or appropriate for the organization’s current risk profile.

Reviewing existing risk mitigation controls means examining and evaluating the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls or countermeasures that are intended to reduce or eliminate the risksthat may affect the organization’s objectives and operations. Reviewing existing risk mitigation controls can help the organization to improve and optimize its risk management function, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not identify and prioritize the risks that may affect the newtechnology system, and it may not cover all the relevant or significant risks that may affect the new technology system.

Conducting a gap analysis means comparing and contrasting the current and desired state and performance of the organization’s objectives and operations, and identifying and quantifying the gaps or differences that need to be addressed or corrected. Conducting a gap analysis can help the organization to identify and document its improvement needs and opportunities, but it is not the most helpful, because it does not measure and compare the likelihood and impact of the risks that may affect the new technology system, and it may not be aligned or integrated with the organization’s current risk profile. 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 208

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

The maturity of an IT risk management program is most influenced by the organization’s risk culture, as this reflects the shared values, beliefs, and attitudes that shape how the organization perceives and responds to risk. The risk culture determines the level of awareness, commitment, and involvement of the stakeholders in the IT risk management process, as well as the degree of integration and alignment with the enterprise’s objectives and strategy. A mature IT risk management program requires a strong and positive risk culture that fosters trust, collaboration, and accountability among the stakeholders, and supports continuous improvement and learning. The other options are not the most influential factors for the maturity of an IT risk management program, although they may have some impact or relevance. Benchmarking results against similar organizations can provide useful insights and comparisons, but they do not necessarily reflect the organization’s own risk culture or context. Industry-specific regulatory requirements can impose certain standards and expectations, but they do not guarantee the effectiveness or efficiency of the IT risk management program. Expertise available within the IT department can enhance the technical and operational aspects of the IT risk management program, but it does not ensure the strategic and cultural alignment with the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, page 23.

The best course of action when an organization wants to reduce likelihood in order to reduce a risk level is to implement preventive measures. Likelihood is the probability or chance of a risk occurring, and risk level is the combination of likelihood and impact of a risk. Preventive measures are controls that are designed to prevent or deter the occurrence of a risk, such as policies, standards, procedures, guidelines, etc. Implementing preventive measures is the best course of action, because it helps to reduce the likelihood of a risk, and consequently, the risk level. Implementing preventive measures also helps to protect and enhance the organization’s objectives, performance, and improvement. The other options are not the best course of action, although they may be related to the risk management process. Monitoring risk controls, implementing detective controls, and transferring the risk are all activities that can help to manage or mitigate the risks, but they do not necessarily reduce the likelihood or the risk level. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-21.

After identifying new risk events during a project, the project manager’s next step should be to record the scenarios into the risk register, which is a document that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, owners, and status. Recording the scenarios into the risk registerhelps to document and communicate the risks to the project team and stakeholders, and to facilitate the subsequent risk analysis and response processes. The other options are not the next steps, but rather the subsequent steps after recording the scenarios into the risk register. Determining if the scenarios need to be accepted or responded to is part of the risk evaluation and treatment process, which requires a prior risk analysis. Continuing with a qualitative or quantitative risk analysis is part of the risk assessment process, which requires a prior risk identification and documentation. References = Risk Register: A Project Manager’s Guide with Examples [2023] • Asana; Risk Identification in Project Management; 6.3. The 5 Steps of the Risk Management Process

When establishing leading indicators for the information security incident response process, it is most important to consider the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the service levelagreement (SLA). A leading indicator is a metric that can predict or influence the future performance or outcome of a process or activity. A leading indicator for the information security incident response process should measure how well the process is achieving its objectives, such as minimizing the impact of incidents, restoring normal operations as quickly as possible, and preventing recurrence of incidents. The percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is a leading indicator that reflects the efficiency and effectiveness of the information security incident response process. It shows how well the process is meeting the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders, such as the business units, customers, and regulators. It also shows how well the process is managing the resources, such as time, budget, and personnel, that are allocated for incident response. A high percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA indicates that the information security incident response process is performing well and delivering value to the organization. A low percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA indicates that the information security incident response process is facing challenges and needs improvement. The percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA can also help identify the root causes of incidents, the gaps in the process, and the areas for improvement. For example, if the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is low, it may indicate that the process has issues with the following aspects: - Incident detection and reporting: The process may not have adequate tools, techniques, or procedures to detect and report incidents in a timely and accurate manner. - Incident prioritization and classification: The process may not have clear and consistent criteria to prioritize and classify incidents based on their severity, impact, and urgency. - Incident analysis and investigation: The process may not have sufficient skills, knowledge, or evidence to analyze and investigate the incidents and determine their root causes, scope, and consequences. - Incident containment and eradication: The process may not have effective methods or measures to contain and eradicate the incidents and prevent them from spreading or escalating. - Incidentrecovery and restoration: The process may not have reliable backup and recovery plans or systems to restore the normal operations and functionality of the affected systems or services. - Incident communication and escalation: The process may not have proper communication and escalation channels or protocols to inform and involve the relevant stakeholders, such as the management, the users, the vendors, or the authorities. - Incident documentation and closure:The process may not have adequate documentation and closure procedures to record and report the incidents and their resolution. - Incident review and improvement: The process may not have regular review and improvement activities to evaluate and enhance the process and its performance. Therefore, the percentage of reported incidents that are resolved within the SLA is the most important leading indicator for the information security incident response process, as it can provide valuable insights and feedback for the process and its improvement. References = Information Security Incident Response | Process Street1, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Security Operations and Incident Response2, 7 Incident Response Metrics and How to Use Them3

 Continuity planning is the process of developing strategies and plans to ensure the continuity of critical business functions and processes in the event of a disruption or disaster. Continuity planning involves identifying the risks, impacts, and recovery options for various scenarios, as well as testing and updating the plans regularly. The primary advantage of involving end users in continuity planning is that they have a better understanding of specific business needs, such as the operational requirements, the customer expectations, and the dependencies and interdependencies of the business processes. End users can provide valuable input and feedback on the continuity plans, as well as participate in the testing and validation of the plans. End users can also help to ensure the alignment of the continuity plans with the business objectives and priorities, as well as the compliance with the relevant standards and regulations. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, p. 204-205

 The most important factor to ensure when reviewing an organization’s risk register is that the risk ownership is recorded, as it indicates the authority and responsibility for managing the risk and its associated controls, and facilitates the communication and accountability of the risk management process and activities. The other options are not the most important factors, as they are more related to theidentification, classification, or measurement of the risk, respectively, rather than the management of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

According to the CRISC Review Manual, notifying network administrators before testing is the best mitigating control to reduce the risk introduced when conducting penetration tests, because it helps to avoid any disruption or damage to the network services and systems. Penetration testing is a technique that simulates an attack on the network to identify and exploit the vulnerabilities and weaknesses. Notifying network administrators before testing allows them to prepare for the test, monitor the test activities, and respond to any incidents or issues that may arise during the test. The other options are not the best mitigating controls, because they do not address the risk of network disruption or damage. Requiring the vendor to sign a nondisclosure agreement is a legal measure that protects the confidentiality of the network information, but it does not prevent the vendor from causing any harm to the network. Clearly defining the project scope is a planning activity that sets the boundaries and objectives of the test, but it does not ensure the safety and availability of the network. Performing background checks on the vendor is a due diligence activity that verifies the vendor’s credentials and reputation, but it does not guarantee the vendor’s performance or behavior. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2, page 181.