CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

The board of directors’ response to identified risk factors is the best indicator of the risk appetite of an organization. The board of directors is the highest governing body of the organization, and it is responsible for setting the strategic direction, objectives, and risk appetite of the organization. The board of directors should also oversee the risk management process, and ensure that the risks are aligned with the organization’s goals and values. The board of directors’ response to identified risk factors reflects how much and what type of risk the organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take in order to achieve its objectives. The regulatory environment, the risk management capability, and the importance assigned to IT are not direct indicators of the risk appetite, although they may influence or constrain it. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

A risk profile is a summary of the nature and level of risk that an organization faces. It includes information such as the sources, causes, and consequences of the risks, their likelihood and impact, their interrelationships and dependencies, and their alignment with the risk appetite and tolerance. A risk profile is influenced by various factors, such as the organization’s objectives, strategies, activities, processes, resources, capabilities, culture, etc. When an organization configures a new business division, the factor that is most likely to be affected is the risk profile, as the new business division may introduce new or change existing risks, opportunities, and uncertainties that may affect the achievement of the organization’s objectives. Therefore, the organization should update its risk profile to reflect the current and potential risks associated with the new business division, and implement the appropriate risk management actions to optimize the risk exposure and performance. References = 4

 The most important step when developing risk scenarios using a list of generic scenarios based on industry best practices is to validate the generic risk scenarios for relevance. The generic risk scenarios may not be applicable or suitable for the specific context, objectives, and environment of the organization. Therefore, the risk practitioner should validate the relevance of the generic risk scenarios by comparing them with the organization’s risk profile, risk appetite, and risk criteria. Assessing generic risk scenarios with business users, selecting the maximum possible risk scenarios from the list, and identifying common threats causing generic risk scenarios are other steps that may be useful, but they are not as important as validating the relevance of the generic risk scenarios. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

The risk practitioner’s most important action related to the decision to commit to a business activity with the knowledge that the risk exposure is higher than the risk appetite is to document formal acceptance of the risk. Formal acceptance of the risk means that the organization acknowledges and agrees to bear the risk and its potential consequences. Formal acceptance of the risk should be documented and approved by the appropriate authority level, such as senior management or the board of directors. Formal acceptance of the risk should also include the rationale, assumptions, and conditions for accepting the risk, as well as the monitoring and reporting mechanisms for the risk. Formal acceptance of the risk provides evidence and accountability for the risk management decision and helps to avoid disputes or misunderstandings in the future. The other options are not as important as documenting formal acceptance of the risk, as they are related to the alternatives, adjustments, or rejections of the risk, not the actual acceptance of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: IT Risk Response Options, page 133.

 The best evidence of an effective internal control environment is the independent audit results. Independent audit results are the outcomes or findings of an external or independent party that evaluates the design, implementation, and operation of the internal controls. Independent audit results can provide an objective, reliable, and consistent assessment of the internal control environment, and identify the strengths, weaknesses, gaps, or issues of the internal controls. Independent audit results can also provide assurance, recommendations, or improvement opportunities for the internal control environment. The other options are not as good as independent audit results, as they are related to the inputs, processes, or outputs of the internal control environment, not the evaluation or verification of the internal control environment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 69.

Peak bandwidth usage is the most helpful in defining an early-warning threshold associated with insufficient network bandwidth. Peak bandwidth usage is the maximum amount of data that is transferred over a network connection at a given time. It indicates the highest demand and stress on the network resources and capacity. By monitoring the peak bandwidth usage, the organization can identify the potential bottlenecks, slowdowns, and disruptions that may occur due to insufficient network bandwidth. The organization can also plan and allocate the network bandwidth accordingly to meet the peak demand and avoid service degradation. The other options are not as helpful as peak bandwidth usage, as they do not reflect the actual or potential network performance issues that may arise due to insufficient network bandwidth. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk and Control Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.3: Key Risk Indicators, page 197.

 The most likely cause of the situation where the recovery team does not know what steps to take to recover critical data backups following a major flood is the failure to test the disaster recovery plan (DRP). A DRP is a document that describes the procedures and resources needed to restore the normal operations of an organization after a disaster. Testing the DRP is essential to ensure that the plan is feasible, effective, and up-to-date. Testing the DRP also helps to train the recovery team members, identify and resolve any issues or gaps, and improve the confidence and readiness of the organization. The lack of a well-documented business impact analysis (BIA), the lack of annual updates to the DRP, and the significant changes in management personnel are also possible factors that could affect the recovery process, but they are not as likely or as critical as the failure to test the DRP. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.1, page 5-19.

The most relevant source to reference when updating security awareness training materials is the recent security incidents reported by competitors. This can help to illustrate the real-world threats and consequences of poor security practices, and to motivate the employees to follow the security policies and procedures. Risk management framework, risk register, and global security standards are other sources that may be useful, but they are not as relevant as the recent security incidents. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 9; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 214.