CRISC Exam Dumps - Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control

The most important activity when conducting a post-implementation review as part of the system development life cycle (SDLC) is to verify that the project objectives are met. The project objectives are the specific and measurable outcomes that the project aims to achieve. By verifying that the project objectives are met, the post-implementation review can evaluate the success and value of the project, and identify the lessons learned and best practices for future projects. Identifying project cost overruns, leveraging an independent review team, and reviewing the project initiation risk matrix are other possible activities, but they are not as important as verifying that the project objectives are met. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 4; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 153.

 In an environment where reduced time-to-market for new software products is a top business priority, the risk practitioner’s greatest concern should be whether sufficient resources are assigned to IT development projects. Resources include human, financial, technical, and physical assets that are needed to plan, design, develop, test, and deliver high-quality software products in a timely manner. If the IT development projects are under-resourced, they may face challenges such as delays, errors, defects, rework, scope creep, or failure to meet customer expectations or requirements. These challenges can increase the risk of losing competitive advantage, market share, customer satisfaction, or reputation. The other options are less critical, as they are not directly related to the core business priority of reducing time-to-market for new softwareproducts. Customer support help desk staff training, email infrastructure rollback plans, and corporate email system phishing detection are important aspects of information security and customer service, but they are not the primary drivers of software product development anddelivery. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: Risk Response Options, p. 115-116.

When proposing a risk acceptance framework for an organization, the most important consideration for the risk practitioner is to clearly define the individuals or roles authorized to approve risk acceptance. This ensures that the process is controlled, accountable, and aligned with the organization’s risk management policies.

Risk Acceptance Framework:

Purpose:A risk acceptance framework provides structured criteria and processes for deciding whether to accept a risk. This includes evaluating the risk against the organization's risk appetite and tolerance.

Authorization:Identifying who has the authority to accept risk is critical. This ensures that only those with the appropriate knowledge, experience, and understanding of the organization's risk appetite and strategic objectives can make these decisions.

Importance of Authorized Individuals:

Accountability:Clearly defined roles for risk acceptance ensure accountability. It is essential that those making the decisions are accountable for the outcomes and understand the potential impact of their decisions.

Consistency:By defining specific roles, the organization ensures consistency in risk acceptance decisions, reducing the likelihood of ad-hoc or inconsistent risk management practices.

Alignment with Strategy:Authorized individuals are typically those who understand the strategic objectives of the organization, ensuring that risk acceptance aligns with these goals.

 A vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in the IT system or environment that could be exploited by a threat. A threat event is an occurrence or action that exploits a vulnerability and causes harm or damage to the IT system or environment. The lack of data to measure threat events is the most important factor, because it may affect the accuracy and reliability of the risk assessment and evaluation, and consequently, the risk response and strategy. The lack of data to measure threat events 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 important as the lack of data to measure threat events, although they may also influence the risk response and strategy. The likelihood and impact of threat events, the cost to implement the risk response, and the monetary value of the asset are all factors that could affect the feasibility and sustainability of the risk response and strategy, but they do not necessarily affect the validity and quality of the risk assessment and evaluation

According to the CRISC Review Manual, the primary reason to periodically review key performance indicators (KPIs) is to identify trends, because it helps to monitor the changes and patterns in the performance and effectiveness of the risk management processes and controls. KPIs are metrics that measure the achievement of the objectives and targets of the risk management activities. Periodically reviewing KPIs allows the organization to evaluate the progress and results of the risk management strategies and actions, and to identify any gaps, issues, or opportunities for improvement. The other options are not the primary reason to periodically review KPIs, as they are related to other aspects or outcomes of the risk management process. Ensuring compliance is the reason to review key risk indicators (KRIs), which are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the occurrence of risk events.Promoting a risk-aware culture is the reason to review key goal indicators (KGIs), which are metrics that measure the alignment of the risk management with the business goals and values. Optimizing resources needed for controls is the reason to review key control indicators(KCIs), which are metrics that measure the efficiency and adequacy of the risk controls. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2, page 143.

 According to the CRISC Review Manual1, single sign-on (SSO) is a method of authentication that allows a user to access multiple systems or applications with a single set of credentials. SSO can improve user convenience and productivity, but it also introduces some security risks. The greatest concern as a result of a single sign-on implementation is that unauthorized access may be gained to multiple systems, as this can compromise the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the data and resources stored on those systems. If an attacker obtains the SSO credentials of a user, either by phishing, malware, or other means, they can Laccess all the systems or applications that the user is authorized for, without any additional authentication or verification. This can expose the organization to various threats, such as data leakage, theft, loss, corruption, manipulation, or misuse2345. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 240, 253.

 A risk response plan is a document that outlines the actions to be taken to address the identified risk scenarios. A risk response plan should include the objectives, scope, roles and responsibilities, resources, timelines, and metrics for each risk response. Assigning ownership of the risk response plan is the most effective way to mitigate identified risk scenarios, as it ensures accountability, clarity, and communication among the stakeholders involved in the risk management process. Assigning ownership also helps to monitor and evaluate the progress and effectiveness of the risk response plan, and to make adjustments as needed. References =Riskand Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Mitigation, Section 3.3: Risk Response Plan, p. 152-155.