CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

The best way to ensure ongoing control effectiveness is to measure trends in control performance. This will help to monitor and evaluate how well the controls are achieving their objectives, and to identify any deviations or anomalies that may indicate control failures or weaknesses. Measuring trends in control performance also helps to provide feedback and assurance to the stakeholders and decision makers, and to support continuous improvement and optimization of the control environment. Establishing policies and procedures, periodically reviewing control design, and obtaining management control attestations are good practices, but they are not the best way to ensure control effectiveness. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.2, page 1071

1: ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC®) Exam Guide, Answer to Question 650.

The primary reason to update a risk register with risk assessment results is to communicate the level and priority of assessed risk to management, as this enables them to make informed decisions about risk response and allocation of resources. The risk register is a tool for documenting and reporting the current status of risks, their causes, impacts, likelihood, and responses. Updating the risk register with risk assessment results ensures that the information is accurate, relevant, and timely. The risk register also helps to monitor and track the progress and effectiveness of risk management activities. The other options are not the primary reasons to update the risk register, although they may be secondary benefits or outcomes of doing so. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Assessment, page 109.

The MOST effective way to help ensure an organization’s current risk scenarios are relevant is to involve the stakeholders in the risk assessment process, because they are the ones who have the knowledge, experience, and interest in the risk scenarios that affect their domains and objectives. The involvement of stakeholders can help to identify and validate the risk scenarios, to provide input and feedback on the risk analysis and evaluation, and to ensure the alignment and integration of the risk scenarios with the business processes and goals. The other options are not as effective as the involvement of stakeholders, because:

Option A: Adoption of industry best practices is a good way to improve the quality and consistency of the risk scenarios, but it does not ensure their relevance to the organization’s specific context and environment. Industry best practices are general and standardized guidelines that may not reflect the organization’s unique risks and needs.

Option C: Review of risk scenarios by independent parties is a useful way to verify and enhance the accuracy and reliability of the risk scenarios, but it does not ensure their relevance to the organization’s internal and external stakeholders. Independent parties are objective and impartial reviewers who may not have the same knowledge, experience, and interest as the stakeholders.

Option D: Documentation of potential risk in business cases is a helpful way to communicate and justify the importance and value of the risk scenarios, but it does not ensure their relevance to the organization’s current and future state. Business cases are concise and persuasive documents that may not capture all the aspects and dimensions of the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, ISACA, 2020, p. 104.

A risk register is a document that records and tracks the information and status of the identified risks and their responses. It includes the risk description, category, source, cause, impact, probability, priority, response, owner, action plan, status, etc.

Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors primarily helps to provide a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions, which are the decisions that are made based on the consideration and evaluation of the risks and their responses. Providing a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions helps to ensure that the decisions are consistent, appropriate, and proportional to the level and nature of the risks, and that they support the organization’s objectives and values. It also helps to optimize the balance between risk and return, and to create and protect value for the organization and its stakeholders.

The other options are not the primary benefits of periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of a risk register, which is to provide a current reference to stakeholders for risk-based decisions.

Minimizing the number of risk scenarios for risk assessment means reducing the scope and depth of risk analysis and reporting, and impairing the organization’s ability to identify and respond to emerging or changing risks. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors does not necessarily minimize the number of risk scenarios for risk assessment, and it may not be a desirable or beneficial outcome for the organization.

Aggregating risk scenarios identified across different business units means combining or consolidating the risks that are identified by different parts or functions of the organization, and creating a holistic or integrated view of the organization’s risk profile. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors does not necessarily aggregate risk scenarios identified across different business units, and it may not be a sufficient or effective way to achieve a holistic or integrated view of the organization’s risk profile.

Building a threat profile of the organization for management review means creating or developing a summary or representation of the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives and operations, and presenting or reporting it to the senior management for their awareness and approval. Periodically reviewing and updating a risk register with details on identified risk factors does not necessarily build a threat profile of the organization for management review, and it may not be a comprehensive or reliable way to create or develop a summary or representation of the potential threats or sources of harm that may affect 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 172

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

 The primary purpose of vulnerability assessments is to detect weaknesses that could lead to system compromise. A vulnerability assessment is a systematic review of security weaknesses in an information system. It evaluates if the system is susceptible to any known vulnerabilities, assigns severity levels to those vulnerabilities, and recommends remediation or mitigation, if and whenever needed1. By identifying and prioritizing the vulnerabilities, a vulnerability assessment helps to prevent or reduce the risk of cyberattacks that could exploit the vulnerabilities and compromise the system. The other options are not the primary purpose, but they may be secondary or tertiary outcomes or benefits of a vulnerability assessment. Providing clear evidence that the system is sufficiently secure is a result of a successful vulnerability assessment and remediation process, but it is not the main objective. Determining the impact of potential threats is a part of the risk assessment process, which complements the vulnerability assessment process, but it is not the same as detecting the vulnerabilities. Testing intrusion detection systems (IDS) and response procedures is a part of the penetration testing process, which simulates a real-world attack on the system to evaluate its security posture, but it is not the same as scanning the system for vulnerabilities. References = What is Vulnerability Assessment | VA Tools and Best Practices - Imperva

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

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, senior management support is the commitment and involvement of the top-level executives and leaders in the risk management process. Senior management support is the most important enabler of effective risk management, as it helps to establish and communicate the risk vision, strategy, and culture of the organization. Senior management support also helps to allocate the necessary resources, authority, and accountability for risk management, and to ensure the alignment of the risk management objectives and activities with the organization’s strategy, goals, and values. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 198.

 A common risk taxonomy is a framework that defines and categorizes the sources, types, and impacts of risks within an organization1. It helps to establish a consistent and shared understanding of risk across the organization, and to facilitate effective risk identification, assessment, reporting, and communication2. A common risk taxonomy also enables comparison and aggregation of risks at different levels and domains, and supports alignment of risk management with business objectives and strategies3. Using key performance indicators (KPIs) and key risk indicators (KRIs) are important for measuring and monitoring risk and performance, but they are not the most important factor when discussing risk within an organization. KPIs and KRIs should be derived from the common risk taxonomy and aligned with theorganization’s risk appetite and tolerance4. Creating a risk communication policy is also important for ensuring that risk information is communicated to the right stakeholders at the right time and in the right format, but it is not the most important factor either. A risk communication policy should be based on the common risk taxonomy and the risk roles and responsibilities within the organization5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: Risk Taxonomy, pp. 25-29.