Isaca CGEIT Based on Real Exam Environment

The best way to ensure that security risk is properly addressed when implementing an information security policy exception process is to confirm process owners’ acceptance of residual risk. Residual risk is the risk that remains after applying controls or mitigating measures to reduce the original risk1. Process owners are the individuals or groups that are responsible for the design, execution, and performance of a business process2. By confirming process owners’ acceptance of residual risk, the enterprise can ensure that the security risk associated with the policy exception is understood, acknowledged, and agreed upon by the relevant stakeholders. This can also help to assign accountability and liability for the potential consequences of the policy exception, as well as to monitor and review the risk level and the effectiveness of the controls or mitigating measures. The other options are not as effective as confirming process owners’ acceptance of residual risk for ensuring that security risk is properly addressed when implementing an information security policy exception process. Performing an internal and external network penetration test is a useful technique for identifying and exploiting vulnerabilities in the network infrastructure, but it does not address the specific security risk related to the policy exception. Obtaining IT security approval on security policy exceptions is a necessary step for validating and authorizing the policy exception, but it does not ensure that the process owners are aware of and accept the residual risk. Benchmarking policy against industry best practice is a good practice for comparing and improving the policy quality and performance, but it does not address the security risk associated with the policy exception.

This is because a business case is a document that provides the justification and rationale for initiating, continuing, or terminating a project or program. It describes the business problem or opportunity, the objectives and benefits, the costs and risks, the alternatives and assumptions, and the expected outcomes and value of the proposed solution. A business case is not a static document, but rather a dynamic one that should be updated throughout the life cycle of the project or program, as new information, changes, and feedback emerge. Updating the business case throughout its life cycle can help to ensure that the project or program remains aligned with the business strategy and goals, as well as to monitor and evaluate its performance and value delivery.

Some of the sources that support this answer are:

1: This source provides a comprehensive guide on how to write a business case, including its purpose, structure, content, and format. It also explains why it is important to update the business case throughout the project or program life cycle, as it can help to track progress, measure benefits, manage risks, and communicate results.

2: This source discusses the benefits and challenges of updating the business case during the project or program execution. It suggests that updating the business case can help to validate assumptions, verify feasibility, adjust scope, and justify changes. It also provides some tips and best practices for updating the business case effectively and efficiently.

3: This source defines what a business case is and how it can be used to support IT governance and decision-making. It states that a business case should be updated regularly throughout the project or program life cycle, as it can help to ensure alignment with the enterprise architecture (EA), assess risks and opportunities, and demonstrate value realization.

The CIO’s first step in deciding the appropriate response to the new regulatory requirement should be to consult with legal and risk experts to understand the requirements. This step is important because the legal and risk experts can provide the CIO with the relevant and accurate information about the new regulation, such as its scope, objectives, implications, and deadlines. The legal and risk experts can also advise the CIO on the potential risks and impacts of non-compliance, as well as the best practices and strategies for compliance .

The other options are not the first step in deciding the appropriate response to the new regulatory requirement, but rather subsequent steps that depend on the outcome of the consultation with the legal and risk experts. Revising initiatives that are active to reflect the new requirements is a step that occurs after the CIO has understood the requirements and assessed their impact on the current IT-enabled business activities. Confirming there are adequate resources to mitigate compliance requirements is a step that occurs after the CIO has identified and prioritized theactions and tasks needed to achieve compliance. Consulting with the board for guidance on the new requirements is a step that occurs after the CIO has developed and proposed a feasible and effective compliance plan.

This is because performance metrics are measurable values that indicate how well the IT assets are performing in terms of functionality, quality, efficiency, and effectiveness1. By implementing performance metrics for key IT assets, the organization can:

Monitor and review the IT assets’ progress, performance, quality, and outcomes

Highlight the IT assets’ achievements, challenges, and opportunities

Demonstrate the alignment of the IT assets with the IT strategy, goals, and priorities

Provide recommendations and feedback for the IT assets’ improvement and adjustment

Implementing performance metrics for key IT assets can help the organization determine the contribution of IT assets in achievement of IT goals, and ensure that they deliver value to the business.

The other options, establishing the span of control during the life cycle of IT assets, determining the average cost of controls for protection of IT assets, and comparing the performance of IT assets against industry best practices are not as beneficial as determining the contribution of IT assets in achievement of IT goals for implementing performance metrics for key IT assets. They are more related to specific aspects or outcomes of IT asset management, rather than a holistic and strategic benefit. They may also not be relevant or applicable to all types or categories of IT assets. They may not address the full scope or potential of IT asset improvement and optimization. References := What Is an IT Asset Management KPI? | Filewave, Performance Measurement Metrics for IT Governance - ISACA