CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

Employee activity monitoring is the process of tracking and recording the actions and behaviors of employees on company owned IT systems, such as email, internet, applications, etc. The purpose of employee activity monitoring is to ensure compliance with the company’s policies and regulations, prevent data leakage and misuse, detect and deter inappropriate or malicious activities, and improve productivity and performance. The most likely way to deter an employee from engaging in inappropriate use of company owned IT systems is to communicate the employee activity monitoring policy and practice to the employees, and make them aware of the consequences of violating the policy. By doing so, the company can create a deterrent effect and discourage the employees from misusing the IT systems, as they know that their actions are being monitored and recorded, and that they will be held accountable for any misconduct. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 181.

The best way to enable a risk practitioner to understand management’s approach to organizational risk is to know the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the organization. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take in order to achieve its objectives. Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in relation to specific performance measures, such as availability, reliability, or security. Risk appetite and risk tolerance reflect the management’s attitude, preferences, and expectations towards risk, and guide the risk management process, such as risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring. The other options are not as effective as knowing the risk appetite and risk tolerance, although they may provide some input or context for understanding the management’s approach to organizational risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

 Using anonymized data in a non-production environment is the best approach for an organization in a heavily regulated industry to comprehensively test application functionality. Anonymized data is data that has been stripped of any personally identifiable information (PII) or other sensitive data, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc. Anonymized data protects the privacy and security of the data, while still preserving the structure and format of the original data. Using anonymized data in a non-production environment allows the organization to test the application functionality without risking data breaches or violating regulations. Using production data, masked data, or test data in either production or non-production environments are not as optimal as using anonymized data, because they may introduce errors, inconsistencies, or vulnerabilities in the data or the application. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

 The greatest concern for the risk practitioner when the potential vendor has offered to perform quarterly self-audits of its controls instead of having annual independent audits is that the controls may not be properly tested. Self-audits are audits that are performed by the vendor itself, without the involvement of an external or independent party. Self-audits may not be reliable, objective, or consistent, as the vendor may have biases, conflicts of interest, or lack of expertise in auditing its own controls. Self-audits may also not follow the same standards, criteria, or methodologies as independent audits, and may not provide sufficient assurance or evidence of the effectiveness of the controls. The other options are not as concerning as the possibility of improper testing of the controls, as they are related to the outcomes, expectations, or approaches of the controls, not the quality or validity of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 6

The best course of action for a risk practitioner when senior management is deciding whether to share confidential data with the organization’s business partners is to submit a report to senior management containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans. A risk practitioner is a professional who is responsible for identifying, assessing, and managing the risks that could affect the organization’s objectives or operations. A risk practitioner should provide senior management with the information and guidance they need to make informed and effective decisions regarding the sharing of confidential data. A risk practitioner should submit a report that outlines the possible risk scenarios, such as data loss, theft, or compromise, and their likelihood and impact. A risk practitioner should also suggest mitigation plans, such as encryption, access control, monitoring, or contractual agreements, that could reduce or transfer the risk. The other options are not as effective as submitting a report containing the possible risk and suggested mitigation plans, although they may be part of or derived from the report. Designing controls to encrypt the data to be shared, developing a project plan for classification of the data, and summarizing the data protection and privacy legislation are all activities or outcomes that could be included or referenced in thereport, but they are not the best course of action for a risk practitioner. References = CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, page 2-23

The most important factor for successful incident response is the timeliness of attack recognition. Incident response is the process of detecting, analyzing, containing, eradicating, recovering, and reporting on security incidents that could affect the organization’s IT systems or data. The timeliness of attack recognition is the speed and accuracy with which the organization can identify and confirm that an attack has occurred or is in progress. The timeliness of attack recognition is crucial for successful incident response, as it affects the ability and effectiveness of the organization to respond to and mitigate the attack, and to minimize the damage and impact of the attack. The other options are not as important as the timeliness of attack recognition, although they may also contribute to or influence the incident response. The quantity of data logged by the attack control tools, the ability to trace the source of the attack, and the blocking of the attack route immediately are all factors that could help or hinder the incident response, but they are not the most important factor for successful incident response. References = CISA Review Manual, 27th Edition, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 5-32.

 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, butthey 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.

Risk exposure is the product of risk likelihood and risk impact ratings. It represents the potential loss or damage that may result from a risk event. After implementing countermeasures, the risk likelihood and/or impact ratings may change, depending on the effectiveness of the countermeasures. Therefore, the risk exposure must also change to reflect the updated risk ratings. The other components of the register, such as risk owner, risk impact rating, and risk likelihood rating, may or may not change depending on the nature and scope of the countermeasures. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.4: IT Risk Response, page 87.