CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

The risk practitioner’s primary focus when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk should be the level of residual risk, because this indicates the amount and type of risk that remains after applying the controls, and whether it is acceptable or not. Residual risk is the risk that is left over after the risk response actions have been taken, such as implementing or improving controls. Controls are the measures or actions that are designed and performed to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of a risk event, or to exploit the opportunities that a risk event may create. The adequacy of controls to mitigate risk depends on how well they address the root causes or sources of the risk, and how effectively and efficiently they reduce the risk exposure and value. The level of residual risk reflects the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it shows the gap between the inherent risk and the actual risk, and whether it is within the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance. The risk practitioner should focus on the level of residual risk when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk, as it helps to evaluate and compare the benefits and costs of the controls, and to decide on the best risk response strategy, such as accepting, avoiding, transferring, or further reducing the risk. The other options are less important or relevant to focus on when determining whether controls are adequate to mitigate risk. Sensitivity analysis is a technique that measures how the risk value changes when one or more input variables are changed, such as the probability, impact, or control effectiveness. Sensitivity analysis can help to identify and prioritize the most influential or critical variables that affect the risk value, and to test the robustness or reliability of the risk assessment. However, sensitivity analysis does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the risk acceptance criteria. Cost-benefit analysis is a technique that compares the expected benefits and costs of a control or a risk response action, and determines whether it is worthwhile or not. Cost-benefit analysis can help to justify and optimize the investment or resource allocation for the control or the risk response action, and to ensure that it is aligned with the organization’s objectives and value. However, cost-benefit analysis does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the risk acceptance criteria. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite can help to define and communicate the organization’s risk preferences and boundaries, and to guide the risk decision-making and behavior. However, risk appetite does not directly indicate the adequacy of controls to mitigate risk, as it does not measure the level of residual risk or the actual risk performance. References = Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2022, p. 131

The primary input when designing IT controls should be internal and external risk reports. IT controls are specific activities performed by persons or systems to ensure that business objectives are met, and that the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of data and the overall management of the IT function are ensured1. Designing IT controls means creating and implementing the appropriate measures or actions to reduce the likelihood or impact of the IT risks that may affect the organization2. Internal and external risk reports are documents that provide information and analysis on the current and potential IT risks that the organization faces, as well as their sources, drivers, consequences, and responses3. Internal risk reports are generated by the organization itself, such as by the IT risk management function, the internal audit function, or the business units. External risk reports are obtained from external sources, such as regulators, industry associations, or third-party service providers. Internal and external risk reports are the primary input when designing IT controls, because they help to:

Identify and prioritize the IT risks that need to be addressed by the IT controls;

Evaluate the likelihood and impact of the IT risks, and compare them against the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance;

Determine the most suitable and effective IT control objectives and activities to mitigate the IT risks;

Align the IT control design and implementation with the organization’s objectives, strategies, and values;

Monitor and measure the performance and effectiveness of the IT controls in reducing the IT risks. The other options are not the primary input when designing IT controls, as they are either less relevant or less specific than internal and external risk reports. Benchmark of industry standards is a comparison of the organization’s IT control practices and performance with those of other organizations in the same industry or sector4. Benchmark of industry standards can help to improve the quality and consistency of the IT control design and implementation, as well as to identify the best practices and gaps. However, benchmark of industry standards is not the primary input when designing IT controls, as it does not address the specific IT risks that the organization faces, or the IT control objectives and activities that are appropriate and effective for the organization. Recommendations from IT risk experts are the suggestions or advice from the professionals or specialists who have the knowledge and experience in IT risk management and IT control design and implementation5. Recommendations from IT risk experts can help to enhance the IT control design and implementation, as well as to provide guidance and support to the organization. However, recommendations from IT risk experts are not the primary input when designing IT controls, as they are based on the opinions and perceptions of the experts, and may not reflect the actual or objective level and nature of the IT risks, or the IT control objectives and activities that are suitable and efficient for the organization. Outcome of control self-assessments is the result or conclusion of the evaluation and testing of the design and operation of the existing IT controls by the organization itself, such as by the IT control owners, the IT risk management function, or the business units6. Outcome of control self-assessments can help to improve the IT control design and implementation, as well as to detect and correct any issues or deficiencies. However, outcome of control self-assessments is not the primary input when designing IT controls, as it does not cover the new or emerging IT risks that the organization may face, or the IT control objectives and activities that are relevant and necessary for the organization. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, Page 189.

ï‚· Whistleblower Program:

A whistleblower program provides a confidential and anonymous channel for employees to report unethical behavior, violations of laws, regulations, or company policies.

It is a proactive approach to uncover ethical violations that might not be detected through regular monitoring and controls.

ï‚· Enabling Detection:

Encourages employees to come forward without fear of retaliation.

Provides management with early warning signs of potential ethical issues, allowing them to address problems before they escalate.

ï‚· Comparing Other Methods:

Transaction Log Monitoring: While useful for detecting anomalies, it may not specifically identify ethical violations.

Access Control Attestation: Ensures that users have appropriate access but does not directly address ethical behavior.

Periodic Job Rotation: Helps prevent fraud by reducing opportunities for unethical behavior but may not actively detect violations.

ï‚· References:

The CRISC Review Manual discusses the role of whistleblower programs in managing ethical risks and detecting violations (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.4.4 Reporting Mechanisms) .

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that help organizations monitor and evaluate the level of risk they are exposed to. They provide early warning signals of potential issues that could affect the achievement of organizational goals12.

The most important data source for monitoring KRIs is automated logs collected from different systems, which are records that capture and store the details and history of the transactions or activities that are performed by the organization’s processes, systems, or controls34.

Automated logs collected from different systems are the most important data source because they provide timely and accurate data and information on the performance and status of the organization’s operations, and enable the detection and reporting of any deviations, anomalies, or issues that may indicate a risk event34.

Automated logs collected from different systems are also the most important data source because they support the accountability and auditability of the organization’s operations, and facilitate the investigation and resolution of any risk event34.

The other options are not the most important data sources, but rather possible inputs or factors that may influence or affect the KRIs. For example:

Directives from legal and regulatory authorities are documents that provide the expectations and obligations of the external authorities or bodies that govern or oversee the organization’s activities and operations, such as laws, regulations, standards, or contracts5 . However, these documents are not the most important data source because they do not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the criteria or framework for risk compliance5 .

Audit reports from internal information systems audits are documents that provide the findings and recommendations of the independent and objective assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s information systems, processes, and controls . However, these documents are not the most important data source because they do not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the assurance or improvement for risk management .

Trend analysis of external risk factors is a technique that involves analyzing and forecasting the changes and impacts of the external factors that influence the organization’s operations, such as technology, competition, regulation, or customer behavior . However, this technique is not the most important data source because it does not directly measure or monitor the level of risk exposure, but rather provide the insight or prediction for risk identification . References =

1: Key Risk Indicators: A Practical Guide | SafetyCulture1

2: Key risk indicator - Wikipedia2

3: Database Activity Monitoring - Wikipedia3

4: Database Activity Monitoring (DAM) | Imperva4

5: Regulatory Compliance - Wikipedia5

: Regulatory Compliance Management Software | MetricStream

: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

: Trend Analysis - Investopedia

: Trend Analysis: A Definition and Examples

When determining an appropriate risk assessment approach, the most important factor to understand is the value of information assets. This is because the value of information assets determines the potential impact of risks and the level of protection required. The value of information assets can be assessed based on their confidentiality, integrity, availability, and relevance to the business objectives and processes. A risk assessment approach should be aligned with the value of information assets and the risk appetite of the organization. The other options are not the most important factors to understand when determining a risk assessment approach, although they may influence the choice of methods and tools. The complexity of the IT infrastructure may affect the scope and depth of the risk assessment, but it does not indicate the level of risk or the priority of risk management. The management culture may affect the risk tolerance and the risk communication, but it does not reflect the value of information assets or the risk exposure. The threats and vulnerabilities may affect the likelihood and severity of risks, but they do not measure the value of information assets or the risk acceptance. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 582

The main reason for documenting the performance of controls is to provide accurate risk reporting. Risk reporting is a process that communicates and discloses the relevant and reliable information about the risks and their management to the stakeholders and decision makers. Risk reporting is an essential component of the risk management process, as it helps to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring activities, as well as to support and inform the risk governance and oversight functions. Documenting the performance of controls is a technique that records and tracks the results and outcomes of the controls that are implemented to address the risks, such as the control objectives,

A key performance indicator (KPI) is a measurable value that demonstrates how effectively an organization is achieving its objectives. In the context of disaster recovery planning (DRP), a KPI should reflect the ability of the organization to recover its critical business processes and applications within the predefined time frames and service levels. One of the most important KPIs for DRP is the percentage of applications that met the recovery time objective (RTO) during DRP testing. The RTO is the maximum acceptable length of time that a business process or application can be down after a disaster. By measuring the percentage of applications that met the RTO during DRP testing, the organization can evaluate the performance and reliability of its DRP, identify any gaps or weaknesses, and implement corrective actions to improve its readiness and resilience. The other options are not the best KPIs for DRP, as they do not directly measure the effectiveness of the recovery process. The number of users that participated in the DRP testing is a measure of the involvement and awareness of the staff, but not of the outcome of the testing. The number of issues identified during DRP testing is a measure of the quality and completeness of the DRP, but not of the actual recovery time. The percentage of issues resolved as a result of DRP testing is a measure of the improvement and maturity of the DRP, but not of the current recovery capability. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3.3, Page 138.

Detailed Explanation:When likelihood is unknown, range-based estimates from subject-matter experts provide informed and realistic insights into potential risk exposure. This approach helps approximate the inherent risk based on experience and expertise, supporting effective decision-making.