CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. They help to monitor changes in the level of risk and enable timely actions to mitigate the risk. The most useful information for developing KRIs is the possible causes of materialized risk, which are the factors or events that trigger or contribute to the occurrence of a risk. By identifying the possible causes of materialized risk, an organization can design KRIs that measure the likelihood and impact of the risk, and alert the management when the risk exceeds the acceptable level. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

The most concerning factor for a risk practitioner reviewing risk action plans for documented IT risk scenarios is that many action plans were discontinued after senior management accepted the risk. Risk action plans are documents that define the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for implementing the risk responses and strategies for the IT risk scenarios. Risk action plans help to reduce, transfer, avoid, or accept the IT risks, and to monitor and report on the IT risk performance and improvement. Discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk is a major concern, because it may indicate that the risk acceptance decision was not based on a proper risk analysisor evaluation, or that the risk acceptance decision was not communicated or coordinated with the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk may also create challenges or risks for the organization, such as compliance, legal, reputational, or operational risks, or conflicts or inconsistencies with the organization’s risk appetite, risk objectives, or risk policies. The other options are not as concerning as discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the risk management process. Individuals outside IT managing action plans for the risk scenarios, target dates for completion missing from some action plans, and senior management approving multiple changes to several action plans are all factors that could affect the quality and timeliness of the risk management process, but they do not necessarily indicate a lack of risk management accountability or oversight. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-32.

The best way to mitigate the security risk associated with the inappropriate use of enterprise applications on the BYOD devices is to implement BYOD mobile device management (MDM) controls. MDM controls are software tools or services that allow the organization to remotely manage, monitor, and secure the BYOD devices and the enterprise applications and data on them. MDM controls can help to enforce security policies, restrict unauthorized access, encrypt sensitive data, wipe data in case of loss or theft, and update or patch applications. The other options are not as effective as implementing MDM controls, as they are related to the review, awareness, or recovery of the BYOD devices and applications, not the prevention or protection of the security risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

It is most important that security controls for a new system be documented in the system requirements. The system requirements define the functional and non-functional specifications of the system, including the security controls that are needed to protect the system and its data. Documenting the security controls in the system requirements can help ensure that they are designed, developed, tested, and implemented as part of the system development life cycle. Testing requirements, the implementation plan, and the security policy are other documents that may include security controls, but they are not as important as the system requirements. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 5; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 212.

The most likely factor to change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability being discovered in a globally used brand of hardware server that allows hackers to gain access to affected IT systems is the risk likelihood. Risk likelihood is the probability or frequency of a risk event occurring, or the possibility of a risk event occurring within a given time period. Risk likelihood is one of the key dimensions of risk analysis, along with the risk impact. Risk likelihood helps to determine the severity and priority of the risk, and to select the most appropriate and effective risk response. Risk likelihood also helps to evaluate the cost-benefit and trade-off of the risk response, and to measure the residual risk and the risk performance. The risk likelihood is likely to change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability, because a zero-day vulnerability is a security flaw that has been discovered but not yet patched by the vendor, which means that it can be exploited by hackers before the affected systems can be updated or protected. A zero-day vulnerability increases the risk likelihood, because it creates a window of opportunity for hackers to launch attacks that could compromise the affected systems, and because it may not be detected or prevented by the existing security controls or measures. The other options are not as likely to change as the risk likelihood, although they may also be affected or influenced by the zero-day vulnerability. Control effectiveness, risk appetite, and key risk indicator (KRI) are all factors that could change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability, but they are not the most likely factor to change. Control effectiveness is the extent to which the risk controls or responses achieve the intended risk objectives or outcomes. Control effectiveness could change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability, because the existing controls may not be able to detect or prevent the exploitation of the vulnerability, or because new or additional controls may be needed to address the vulnerability. However, control effectiveness is not the most likely factor to change, because it depends on the type and level of the controls that are already in place or that can be implemented, and because it may not change until the vulnerability is actually exploited or the risk response is executed. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives. Risk appetite could change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability, because the vulnerability could affect the organization’s objectives or operations, and because the organization may need to adjust its risk tolerance or threshold to cope with the vulnerability. However, risk appetite is not the most likely factor to change, because it is a strategic and long-term decision that is driven by the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and because it may not change until the vulnerability is resolved or the risk impact is realized. Key risk indicator (KRI) is a metric that measures the likelihood and impact of risks, and helps monitor and prioritize the most critical risks. KRI could change as a result of a zero-day vulnerability, because the vulnerability could increase the likelihood and impact of the risks, and because the organization may need to update or revise its KRI to reflect the current risk situation. However, KRI is not the most likely factor to change, because it is a monitoring and reporting tool that is derived from the risk analysis and response, and because it may not change until the vulnerability is exploited or the risk response is implemented. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 4-25.

The main benefit of using a top-down approach to develop risk scenarios is that it establishes the relationship between risk events and organizational objectives. A top-down approach is a method of risk identification and analysis that starts with the organization’s strategic objectives and then identifies the potential risk events that could affect or prevent the achievement of those objectives. A top-down approach helps to establish the relationship between risk events and organizational objectives, because it links the risk scenarios to the organization’s mission, vision, values, and strategy, and it prioritizes the risk scenarios based on their impact and relevance to the organization’s objectives. A top-down approach also helps to align and communicate the risk scenarios with the organization’s stakeholders, such as the board, management, and business units, and to facilitate the risk response and monitoring activities. The other options are not the main benefit of using a top-down approach, although they may be part of or derived from the top-down approach. Describing risk events specific to technology used by the enterprise, using hypothetical and generic risk events specific to the enterprise, and helping management and the risk practitioner to refine risk scenarios are all activities or outcomes that could be performed or achieved by using a top-down approach, but they are not the primary purpose or result of the top-down approach. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, page 4-13.

The management action that will most likely change the likelihood rating of a risk scenario related to remote network access is implementing multi-factor authentication. Multi-factor authentication is a technique that requires the user to provide two or more pieces of evidence to verify their identity, such as a password, a token, or a biometric factor. Multi-factor authentication can help to reduce the likelihood of unauthorized or malicious access to the remote network, as it adds an extra layer of security and makes it harder for the attackers to compromise the user credentials. The other options are not as likely to change the likelihood rating of the risk scenario, as they are related to the update, creation, or maintenance of the remote network access, not the verification or protection of the remote network access. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

Risk strategies are the plans and actions that an organization adopts to manage its risks and to achieve its objectives. Risk strategies should be aligned with the organization’s vision, mission, values, and culture, as well as its internal and external environment. The most important consideration when developing risk strategies is the long-term organizational goals, meaning that the risk strategies should support and enable the organization to pursue and attain its desired future state and outcomes. The long-term organizational goals should guide the risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring processes, as well as the risk appetite and tolerance levels. The long-term organizational goals should also be communicated and cascaded throughout the organization to ensure the risk awareness and engagement of all stakeholders. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.3.2, p. 27-28