New Release CRISC Isaca Certification Questions

The risk practitioner’s first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls should be A. Determine whether the impact is outside the risk appetite1

According to the CRISC Review Manual, risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite reflects the organization’s risk culture, strategy, and values2

When an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, it means that the controls are not providing the expected level of protection or assurance for the information assets or processes. This may result in increased exposure or vulnerability to threats, or reduced ability to achieve objectives. Therefore, the risk practitioner should first determine whether the impact of the ineffective controls is outside the risk appetite, as this would indicate the need for urgent action or escalation3

The other options are not the first course of action when an assessment of information security controls has identified ineffective controls, because:

•B. Requesting a formal acceptance of risk from senior management may be appropriate if the impact of the ineffective controls is within the risk appetite, and the organization decides to accept the risk as it is. However, this should not be the first course of action, as it may not address the root cause of the ineffective controls, or the potential consequences or opportunities for improvement4

•C. Reporting the ineffective control for inclusion in the next audit report may be part of the risk communication and reporting process, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may delay the resolution or mitigation of the issue, or the implementation of corrective actions. Moreover, the next audit report may not be timely or relevant for the decision-makers or stakeholders who need to be informed of the ineffective controls5

•D. Deploying a compensating control to address the identified deficiencies may be a possible risk response option, but it should not be the first course of action, as it may require further analysis, evaluation, and approval. Moreover, deploying a compensating control may not be the most effective or efficient solution, as it may introduce additional complexity, cost, or risk.

1: CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, Question ID: 100003 2: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 28 3: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 223 4: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 224 5: CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 225 : CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 226

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), the primary reason a risk practitioner would be interested in an internal audit report is to evaluate the maturity of the risk management process, as it provides an independent and objective assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk management activities and controls. An internal audit report helps to:

Identify and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the risk management process and its alignment with the organization’s objectives and strategy

Detect and report any gaps, errors, or deficiencies in the risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring processes and controls

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address the issues or findings in the risk management process

Communicate and coordinate the audit results and recommendations with the relevant stakeholders, such as the risk owners, the senior management, and the board

Enhance the accountability and transparency of the risk management process and its outcomes

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 4: IT Risk Monitoring and Reporting, Section 4.2: IT Risk Reporting, pp. 223-2241

According to the CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), assessing changes in residual risk is the best approach for determining whether a risk action plan is effective, as it measures the impact and value of the risk response actions and controls on the risk level. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response actions and controls have been implemented. Assessing changes in residual risk helps to:

Evaluate the extent to which the risk response actions and controls have reduced the likelihood and/or impact of the risk to an acceptable level

Identify and report any deviations, errors, or weaknesses in the risk response actions and controls and their performance

Recommend and implement corrective actions or improvement measures to address any issues or deficiencies in the risk response actions and controls

Monitor and measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk response actions and controls and their alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and risk tolerance

Update the risk register and the risk treatment plan to reflect the current risk status and the residual risk levels

References = CRISC Review Manual (Digital Version), Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: Risk Response Process, pp. 161-1621