CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

Conducting User Acceptance Testing (UAT) is the best way for an organization to avoid situations where users voice concerns about missing functionality after a system implementation.

User Acceptance Testing (UAT):

Definition: UAT involves testing the system with actual users to ensure it meets their needs and requirements. It verifies that the system performs in real-world scenarios as expected by the users.

Involvement of Users: UAT includes the end-users in the testing process, ensuring that their feedback is incorporated and that the system functionalities align with their expectations.

Benefits:

Identifying Gaps: UAT helps in identifying gaps between the delivered system and user expectations. This early detection allows for adjustments before the system goes live.

Improved Satisfaction: By involving users in the testing process, the likelihood of the system meeting their needs increases, leading to higher user satisfaction and reduced post-implementation issues.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual and best practices in project management emphasize the importance of UAT in ensuring that the system meets user requirements and avoids post-implementation functionality concerns .

ï‚· Understanding the Question:

The question is about mitigating the impact of social engineering attacks that use AI technology to impersonate senior management personnel.

ï‚· Analyzing the Options:

A. Training and awareness of employees for increased vigilance: This is the most proactive approach. Educating employees about the risks and signs of social engineering attacks enhances their ability to recognize and respond appropriately to such threats.

B. Increased monitoring of executive accounts: Useful but reactive; it doesn't prevent initial attempts.

C. Subscription to data breach monitoring sites: Helps detect breaches but doesn’t directly mitigate impersonation attacks.

D. Suspension and takedown of malicious domains or accounts: Reactive measure and might not be immediate or comprehensive.

ï‚· Detailed Explanation:

Importance of Training: Employees are often the first line of defense against social engineering attacks. Regular training ensures they are aware of the tactics used in such attacks, including those leveraging AI, and how to respond effectively.

Proactive Measure: Training increases vigilance and the likelihood of early detection, reducing the potential impact of the attack.

References:

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, discusses the importance of training and awareness programs in mitigating social engineering risks​​.

The second line of defense is responsible for challenging the risk decision making of the first line of defense, which is the business process owners and managers. The second line of defense also provides oversight, guidance, and support to the first line of defense in implementing and maintaining effective risk management practices. The second line of defense includes functions such as risk management, compliance, quality assurance, and internal audit. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: IT Risk Management Roles and Responsibilities, Page 14.

KRIs provide predictive metrics to monitor changes in risk levels, enabling timely interventions to maintain risks within the organization's appetite. This aligns with the Risk Monitoring and Reporting framework, which emphasizes proactive identification of risk thresholds.

The risk practitioner’s best recommendation when one of an organization’s key IT systems cannot be patched because the patches interfere with critical business application functionalities is to identify additional mitigating controls, as they may reduce the likelihood or impact of the vulnerabilities being exploited, and align the residual risk with the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. The other options are not the best recommendations, as they may not address the risk adequately, or may introduce unacceptable consequences, such as disrupting the business operations, changing the risk strategy, or accepting excessive risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 111.

According to the CRISC exam content outline2, one of the tasks of a risk practitioner is to “report on risk, in line with organizational reporting requirements, to enable decision making and escalation”. Therefore, the first thing that the risk practitioner should do after discovering a policy violation is to report the incident to the appropriate authority, such as the IT security manager or the risk management committee. This will ensure that the incident is properly documented, investigated, and resolved, and that any potential impact or consequences are minimized.

The other options are not the first actions that the risk practitioner should take. Planning a security awareness session (B) may be a preventive measure to avoid future incidents, but it does not address the current one. Assessing the new risk © may be part of the risk response process, but it should be done after reporting the incident and gathering more information. Updating the risk register (D) may be a result of the risk assessment and response, but it should not be done before reporting the incident and following the organizational procedures.

Assigning accountability to risk owners is the best way to ensure implementation of corrective action plans, because it clarifies the roles and responsibilities of those who are in charge of managing and mitigating the risks. Contracting to third parties, establishing employee awareness training, and setting target dates to complete actions are all helpful measures, but they do not guarantee the implementation of corrective action plans without accountability. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.4.3, page 105

When a risk practitioner identifies an increasing trend of employees copying company information unrelated to their job functions to USB drives, the element of the risk register that should be updated is the risk likelihood. Here’s why:

Risk Likelihood:

Risk likelihood refers to the probability that a risk event will occur.

Observing an increasing trend of inappropriate behavior (such as copying sensitive information) indicates a higher probability of occurrence, thus increasing the risk likelihood.

Risk Impact:

While the impact of such actions could be significant, the increasing trend specifically affects the likelihood rather than the immediate impact.

The risk impact remains constant unless there is a change in the potential damage caused by the action.

Key Risk Indicator (KRI):

This observation might serve as a KRI, but the immediate action is to update the likelihood in the risk register, reflecting the increased probability.

Risk Appetite:

Risk appetite defines the level of risk an organization is willing to accept. This observation suggests a deviation but does not directly affect the risk appetite itself.

References:

The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of regularly updating the risk likelihood based on new observations and trends (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.9.1 Inherent Risk).