CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

Pseudonymization replaces identifying fields in a data record with artificial identifiers or pseudonyms. However, unlike full anonymization, re-identification remains possible if the pseudonym can be matched with external or hidden reference data.

CRISC and privacy-risk guidance (aligned with GDPR principles) emphasize that:

“The primary concern when using pseudonymization as a privacy safeguard is the potential for re-identification of individual data subjects.”

Pseudonymized data can still be linked back to individuals if the mapping key or auxiliary datasets are compromised.

True anonymization eliminates any reasonable means of re-identification, but pseudonymization does not.

Therefore, while pseudonymization reduces exposure, it does not fully eliminate privacy risk.

Options A, B, and D are not inherent to pseudonymization:

Authorized access and update restrictions are policy issues, not intrinsic to pseudonymization.

Other information disclosure (D) could occur through inference but is secondary to direct re-identification.

Hence, C. Individual data subjects can be re-identified is the correct and verified answer as per CRISC and GDPR-aligned data protection practices.

 Providing acknowledgments from receiver to sender is a control that helps to ensure that transaction data reaches its destination, as it confirms the successful delivery of the data and allows the sender to resend the data in case of failure. Securing the network from attacks, digitally signing individual messages, and encrypting data-in-transit are controls that help toensure the integrity and confidentiality of the data, but not the availability or delivery of the data. References = CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, question 199.

A comprehensive and documented IT risk management plan provides a structured approach to identifying, assessing, and mitigating IT risks. Integrating this plan into the organization's strategic planning ensures that IT risk considerations are aligned with business objectives and are factored into decision-making processes at the strategic level.

A risk register is a tool that records and tracks the identified risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, responses, and owners. A decentralized risk register is maintained by each business unit or function, while a consolidated risk register is maintained at the enterprise level. The greatest concern with maintainingdecentralized risk registers instead of a consolidated risk register is that the aggregated risk may exceed the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an enterprise is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, while risk tolerance is the acceptable level of variation around the objectives. If the risk registers are not consolidated, the enterprise may not have a holistic view of its risk profile and may not be able to prioritize and allocate resources effectively. The other options are also concerns, but they are not as significant as the potential misalignment between the aggregated risk and the enterprise’s risk appetite and tolerance. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.2.2, pp. 21-22.

An intrusion detection system (IDS) is a network security tool that monitors and analyzes network traffic for signs of malicious or suspicious activity, such as unauthorized access, data exfiltration, malware infection, or denial-of-service attack. An IDS can detect and alert the organization to potential threats based on predefined rules or signatures, or based on anomalies or deviations from normal network behavior. An IDS can also generate logs that record the details of the network events and incidents, such as the source, destination, content, and context of the network traffic. By analyzing the IDS logs, the organization can identify and validate the suspicious network activity, and determine its scope, impact, and root cause. The organization can also use the IDS logs to support the incident response and remediation process, and to improve the network security and resilience. The other options are less effective ways to ensure that suspicious network activity is identified. Analyzing server logs can provide some information about the network activity, but it may not be sufficient or timely to detect and validate the suspicious or malicious activity, as server logs only capture the events or activities that occur on the server, and not on the entire network. Using a third-party monitoring provider can help to outsource the network monitoring and analysis function, but it may not be the best option, as it may introduce additional risks, such as data privacy, vendor reliability, or service quality issues. Coordinating events with appropriate agencies can help to share information and resources with other organizations or authorities, such as law enforcement, regulators, or industry peers, but it may not be the best option, as it may depend on the availability andcooperation of theagencies, and it may not be feasible or desirable to disclose the network activity to external parties. References = Monitoring for Suspicious Network Activity: Key Tips to Secure Your Network 1

Documenting user IDs and passwords in procedure manuals is a vulnerability that exposes the organization to unauthorized access, data breaches, and other security risks. A vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in a system, process, or control that can be exploited by a threat. A threat is a potential cause of an unwanted incident that may harm the system or organization. A risk is the combination of the likelihood and impact of a threat exploiting a vulnerability. A policy violation is an act of non-compliance with a rule or standard that is established by the organization. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 8; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 67.

 The next step after determining that a key control does not meet design expectations is to document the finding in the risk register, because this helps to record and track the information about the identified risk, such as its description, likelihood, impact, response, and status. A key control is a control that addresses a significant risk or supports a critical business process or objective. A control design expectation is a criterion or requirement that defines how the control should operate or perform to achieve its objective. If a key control does not meet its design expectation, it means that there is a gap, weakness, or deficiency in the control that may compromise its effectiveness or efficiency, and increase the risk exposure or impact. By documenting the finding in the risk register, the risk practitioner can communicate and report the risk issue to the relevant stakeholders, such as the risk owner, the management, or the auditor, and initiate the appropriate risk response actions, such as modifying the design of the control, implementing a compensating control, or accepting the risk. The other options are not the best next steps after determining that a key control does not meet design expectations. Invoking the incident response plan is a reactive measure that is triggered when a risk event occurs or is imminent, and requires immediate action to contain, mitigate, or recover from the incident. However, in this case, the risk event has not occurred yet, and there may be time to prevent or reduce it by improving the control design. Re-evaluating key risk indicators is a monitoring activity that measures and evaluates the level and impact of risks, and provides timely signals that something may be going wrong or needs urgent attention. However, in this case, the risk practitioner has already identified the risk issue, and needs to document and address it, rather than re-evaluate it. Modifying the design of the control is a possible risk response action that may be taken to improve the control and reduce the risk, but it is not the next step after determining that the key control does not meet design expectations. The next step is to document the finding in the risk register, and then decide on the best risk response action, which may or may not be modifying the design of the control, depending on the cost-benefit analysis, the risk assessment, and the risk response strategy. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 13