Download Latest CISM Questions

 Before relying on a vendor’s certification for international security standards, such as ISO/IEC 27001, it is most important that the information security manager confirms that the certification scope is relevant to the service being offered. The certification scope defines the boundaries and applicability of the information security management system (ISMS) that the vendor has implemented and audited. The scope should cover the processes, activities, assets, and locations that are involved in delivering the service to the client. If the scope is too narrow, too broad, or not aligned with the service, the certification may not provide sufficient assurance of the vendor’s security capability and performance.

The current international standard was used to assess security processes (A) is an important factor, but not the most important one. The information security manager should verify that the vendor’s certification is based on the latest version of the standard, which reflects the current best practices and requirements for information security. However, the standard itself is generic and adaptable, and does not prescribe specific security controls or solutions. Therefore, the certification does not guarantee that the vendor has implemented the most appropriate or effective security processes for the service being offered.

The certification will remain current through the life of the contract (B) is also an important factor, but not the most important one. The information security manager should ensure that the vendor’s certification is valid and up to date, and that the vendor maintains its compliance with the standard throughout the contract period. However, the certification is not a one-time event, but a continuous process that requires periodic surveillance audits and recertification every three years. Therefore, the certification does not ensure that the vendor’s security capability and performance will remain consistent or satisfactory for the duration of the contract.

The certification can be extended to cover the client’s business (D) is not a relevant factor, as the certification is specific to the vendor’s ISMS and does not apply to the client’s business. The information security manager should not rely on the vendor’s certification to substitute or supplement the client’s own security policies, standards, or controls. The information security manager should conduct a due diligence and risk assessment of the vendor, and establish a clear and comprehensive service level agreement (SLA) that defines the security roles, responsibilities, expectations, and metrics for both parties.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 3: Information Security Program Development and Management, Section: Information Security Program Management, Subsection: Procurement and Vendor Management, page 142-1431

A reduction in annualized loss expectancy (ALE) demonstrates that implemented controls have effectively reduced the organization’s exposure to risk.

“ALE reduction is a key indicator of the cost-effectiveness of security investments and the improvement of the risk posture.”

— CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 2: Risk Management, Section: Cost-Benefit Analysis*

The technical capabilities of the provider are the MOST important thing for an information security manager to verify when selecting a third-party forensics provider because they determine the quality, reliability, and validity of the forensic services and results that the provider can deliver. The technical capabilities of the provider include the skills, experience, and qualifications of the forensic staff, the methods, tools, and standards that the forensic staff use, and the facilities, equipment, and resources that the forensic staff have. The information security manager should verify that the technical capabilities of the provider match the forensic needs and expectations of the organization, such as the type, scope, and complexity of the forensic investigation, the legal and regulatory requirements, and the time and cost constraints12. The existence of a right-to-audit clause (A) is an important thing for an information security manager to verify when selecting a third-party forensics provider, but it is not the MOST important thing. A right-to-audit clause is a contractual provision that grants the organization the right to audit or review the performance, compliance, and security of the provider. A right-to-audit clause can help to ensure the accountability, transparency, and quality of the provider, as well as to identify and resolve any issues or disputes that may arise during or after the forensic service. However, a right-to-audit clause does not guarantee that the provider has the technical capabilities to conduct the forensic service effectively and efficiently12. The results of the provider’s business continuity tests (B) are an important thing for an information security manager to verify when selecting a third-party forensics provider, but they are not the MOST important thing. The results of the provider’s business continuity tests can indicate the ability and readiness of the provider to continue or resume the forensic service in the event of a disruption, disaster, or emergency. The results of the provider’s business continuity tests can help to assess the availability, resilience, and recovery of the provider, as well as to mitigate the risks of losing or compromising the forensic evidence or data. However, the results of the provider’s business continuity tests do not ensure that the provider has the technical capabilities to perform the forensic service accurately and professionally12. The existence of the provider’s incident response plan (D) is an important thing for an information security manager to verify when selecting a third-party forensics provider, but it is not the MOST important thing. The existence of the provider’s incident response plan can demonstrate the preparedness and capability of the provider to detect, report, and respond to any security incidents that may affect the forensic service or the organization. The existence of the provider’s incident response plan can help to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the forensic evidence or data, as well as to comply with the legal and contractual obligations. However, the existence of the provider’s incident response plan does not confirm that the provider has the technical capabilities to execute the forensic service competently and ethically12. References = 1: CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 310-3111; 2: A Risk-Based Management Approach to Third-Party Data Security, Risk and Compliance - ISACA2