CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

A cost-benefit analysis is a tool that compares the costs and benefits of different alternatives, such as implementing or not implementing a specific control. A cost-benefit analysis provides the most useful information when determining if a specific control should be implemented, as it can show the potential savings, benefits, and risks of each option, and help the decision-makers choose the best course of action. A cost-benefit analysis can also include qualitative factors, such as security, compliance, performance, and customer satisfaction, that may be affected by the control implementation. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, Question 256. CRISC: Certified in Risk & Information Systems Control Sample Questions, Question 256. Most Asked CRISC Exam Questions and Answers, Question 10. CRISC by Isaca Actual Free Exam Q&As, Question 9.

 A risk practitioner is preparing a report to communicate changes in the risk and control environment, such as new or emerging risks, changes in risk levels, risk responses, or control effectiveness. The best way to engage stakeholder attention is to include a summary linking information to stakeholder needs, meaning that the report should highlight the key points and findings that are relevant and important for the stakeholder’s role, responsibility, and interest. The summary should also explain how the information affects the stakeholder’s objectives, expectations, and decisions. The summary should be concise, clear, and compelling, and should capture the stakeholder’s attention and interest. The report can also include detailed deviations from industry benchmarks, a roadmap to achieve operational excellence, or an option to publish the report on-demand for stakeholders, but these are not the best ways to engage stakeholder attention, as they may not be directly related to the stakeholder’s needs or may overwhelm the stakeholder with too much information. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.1, p. 124-125

 The best key performance indicator (KPI) to measure the effectiveness of a disaster recovery test of critical business processes is the percentage of processes recovered within the recovery time and point objectives. Recovery time objective (RTO) is the maximum acceptable time period within which a business process or an IT service must be restored after a disruption. Recovery point objective (RPO) is the maximum acceptable amount of data loss measured in time before the disruption. The percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO indicates how well the disaster recovery test meets the business continuity and recovery requirements and expectations, and how effectively the disaster recovery plan and procedures are executed. The percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO canalso help to identify the gaps, weaknesses, and opportunities for improvement in the disaster recovery capabilities. Percentage of job failures identified and resolved during the recovery process, number of current test plans and procedures, and number of issues and action items resolved during the recovery test are not as good as the percentage of processes recovered within the RTO and RPO, as they do not directly measure the achievement of the recovery objectives, and may not reflect the actual impact and performance of the disaster recovery test. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 130.

 Implementing controls to bring the risk to a level within appetite and accept the residual risk is the best recommendation to senior management when the results of a risk and control assessment indicate a risk scenario can only be partially mitigated, as it helps to balance the costs and benefits of the risk management and control processes, and to align them with the organizational strategy and objectives. A risk and control assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and controls associated with a specific activity, process, or objective. A risk scenario is a description of a possible event or situation that could cause harm or loss to the organization or its stakeholders. A risk scenario can only be partially mitigated when the existing or proposed controls are not sufficient or effective to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. A risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. A residual risk is the risk that remains after the implementation of controls or risk treatments.

Implementing controls to bring the risk to a level within appetite and accept the residual risk helps to provide the following benefits:

It enables a data-driven and evidence-based approach to risk management and reporting, rather than relying on subjective or qualitative judgments.

It facilitates a consistent and standardized way of measuring and communicating risk levels and exposure across the organization and to the external stakeholders.

It supports the development and implementation of effective and efficient risk response and mitigation strategies and actions that are aligned with the business risk appetite and objectives.

It provides feedback and learning opportunities for the risk management and control processes, and helps to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

The other options are not the best recommendations to senior management when the results of a risk and control assessment indicate a risk scenario can only be partially mitigated. Implementing a key performance indicator (KPI) to monitor the existing control performance is a useful method to measure and monitor the effectiveness and efficiency of the controls, but it does not address the residual risk or the risk appetite. Accepting the residual risk in its entirety and obtaining executive management approval is a possible option to deal with the risk scenario, but it may expose the organization to excessive or unacceptable risk, and it may not comply with the legal or regulatory obligations or requirements. Separating the risk into multiple components and avoiding the risk components that cannot be mitigated is a possible option to deal with the risk scenario, but it may not be feasible or practical, and it may create new or additional risks or challenges. References = Risk and Control Self-Assessment (RCSA) - Management Study Guide, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Risk Mitigation: What It Is and How to Implement It (Free Templates …

According to the CRISC Review Manual, performing the assessment as it would normally be done is the best approach when a risk practitioner has been asked by a business unit manager for special consideration during a risk assessment of a system, because it ensures that the risk practitioner maintains their objectivity, integrity, and professionalism. The risk practitioner should not compromise the quality or accuracy of the risk assessment, regardless of any external pressure or influence. The risk practitioner should follow the established risk assessment methodology and standards, and report the risk results and recommendations based on the facts and evidence. The other options are not the best approaches, because they may affect the credibility or reliability of the risk assessment. Conducting an abbreviated version of the assessment may result in incomplete or insufficient risk information, which may lead to poor risk decisions or actions. Reporting the business unit manager for a possible ethics violation may escalate the situation or create a conflict of interest, which may hinder the risk assessment process or outcome. Recommending an internal auditor perform the review may transfer the responsibility or accountability of the risk practitioner, which may undermine their role or authority. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.1, page 74.

The control environment is the set of internal and external factors and conditions that influence and shape the organization’s governance, risk management, and control functions. It includes the organization’s culture, values, ethics, structure, roles, responsibilities, policies, standards, etc.

Uncontrolled changes are changes or modifications to the control environment that are not planned, authorized, documented, or monitored, and that may have unintended or adverse consequences for the organization. Uncontrolled changes may be caused by various drivers or events, such as technological innovations, market trends, regulatory changes, customer preferences, competitor actions, environmental issues, etc.

The greatest concern when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment is an increase in the level of residual risk, which is the amount and type of risk that remains after the implementation and execution of the risk responses or controls. An increase in the level of residual risk means that the risk responses or controls are not effective or sufficient to mitigate or prevent the risks, and that the organization may face unacceptable or intolerable consequences if the risks materialize.

An increase in the level of residual risk is the greatest concern when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment, because it indicates that the organization’s risk profile and performance have deteriorated, and that the organization may not be able to achieve its objectives or protect its value. It also indicates that the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance have been violated, and that the organization may need to take corrective or compensating actions to restore the balance between risk and return.

The other options are not the greatest concerns when uncontrolled changes are made to the control environment, because they do not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and they may not be relevant or actionable for the organization.

A decrease in control layering effectiveness means a decrease in the extent or degree to which the organization uses multiple or overlapping controls to address the same or related risks, and to provide redundancy or backup in case of failure or compromise of one or more controls. A decrease in control layering effectiveness may indicate a weakness or gap in the organization’s control design or implementation, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the control layering is required or recommended by the organization’s policies or standards.

An increase in inherent risk means an increase in the amount and type of risk that exists in the absence of any risk responses or controls, and that is inherent to the nature or characteristics of the risk source, event, cause, or impact. An increase in inherent risk may indicate a change or variation in the organization’s risk exposure or level, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the inherent risk exceeds the organization’s risk appetite or tolerance.

An increase in control vulnerabilities means an increase in the number or severity of the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s risk responses or controls that can be exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm that may affect the organization’s objectives or operations. An increase in control vulnerabilities may indicate a weakness or gap in the organization’s control design or implementation, but it does not indicate the actual or potential impact or outcome of the risks, and it may not be relevant or actionable for the organization, unless the control vulnerabilities are exploited or compromised by the threats or sources of harm. 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 174

CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep

A key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that helps organizations monitor and assess potential risks that may impact their operations, objectives, or performance. A good KRI should have certain characteristics that make it effective for risk management. One of these characteristics is repeatability, which means that the KRI can be measured consistently over time and across different situations. A repeatable KRI ensures that the risk data is reliable, comparable, and meaningful, and that the risk trends and patterns can be identified and analyzed. A repeatable KRI also supports the decision-making process by providing timely and accurate information on the risk level and status. Therefore, repeatability is the most important attribute of a KRI. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 441

An IT risk management framework is a set of principles, processes, and practices that guide and support the identification, analysis, evaluation, treatment, monitoring, and communication of IT-related risks within an organization12.

The primary advantage of implementing an IT risk management framework is the establishment of a reliable basis for risk-aware decision making, which enables the organization to balance the potential benefits and adverse effects of using IT, and to allocate resources and prioritize actions accordingly12.

A reliable basis for risk-aware decision making consists of the following elements12:

A common language and understanding of IT risk, its sources, impacts, and responses

A consistent and structured approach to IT risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment

A clear and transparent governance structure and accountability for IT risk management

A comprehensive and up-to-date IT risk register and profile that reflects the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance

A regular and effective IT risk monitoring and reporting process that provides relevant and timely information to stakeholders

A continuous and proactive IT risk improvement process that incorporates feedback and lessons learned

The other options are not the primary advantage, but rather possible outcomes or benefits of implementing an IT risk management framework. For example:

Compliance with relevant legal and regulatory requirements is an outcome of implementing an IT risk management framework that ensures the organization meets its obligations and avoids penalties or sanctions12.

Improvement of controls within the organization and minimized losses is a benefit of implementing an IT risk management framework that reduces the likelihood and impact of IT-related incidents and events12.

Alignment of business goals with IT objectives is a benefit of implementing an IT risk management framework that ensures the IT strategy and activities support the organization’s mission and vision12. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

2: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017