Which of the following would BEST help an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios?
Industry best practices
Placement on the risk map
Degree of variances in the risk
Cost of risk mitigation
A risk map, also known as a risk heat map, is a visual tool that helps an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios by plotting them on a matrix based on their likelihood and impact. A risk map can help to compare and contrast different risk scenarios, as well as to identify the most critical and urgent risks that require attention. A risk map can also help to communicate and report the risk profile and status to the stakeholders and decision makers. Therefore, the placement on the risk map would best help an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios. The other options are not the best ways to help an enterprise prioritize risk scenarios, although they may be relevant and useful. Industry best practices are the standards or guidelines that are widely accepted and followed by the organizations in a specific industry or domain. Industry best practices can help to benchmark and improve the risk management process and performance, but they may not reflect the specific risk context and needs of the enterprise. Degree of variances in the risk is the measure of the variability or uncertainty of the risk, which may affect the accuracy or reliability of the risk assessment and response. Degree of variances in the risk can help to adjust and refine the risk analysis and treatment, but it may not indicate the priority or importance of the risk. Cost of risk mitigation is the amount of resources or expenses that are required or allocated to implement the risk response actions, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risk. Cost of risk mitigation can help to evaluate and optimize therisk response options, but it may not determine the priority or urgency of the risk. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 38-391; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 892
Which of the following provides the BEST evidence of the effectiveness of an organization's account provisioning process?
User provisioning
Role-based access controls
Security log monitoring
Entitlement reviews
An organization’s account provisioning process is the process of creating, modifying, or deleting user accounts and access rights for the organization’s information systems and resources. It involves defining the access requirements, policies, and standards, and implementing and enforcing them across the organization.
The best evidence of the effectiveness of an organization’s account provisioning process is entitlement reviews, which are the periodic or regular reviews and validations of the user accounts and access rights that are granted or assigned to the users or entities that interact with the organization’s information systems and resources. Entitlement reviews can provide assurance and verification that the account provisioning process is accurate, consistent, and compliant, and that it meets the organization’s security and business objectives and requirements.
Entitlement reviews can be performed using various techniques, such as automated tools, reports, audits, surveys, etc. Entitlement reviews can also be integrated with the organization’s governance, risk management, and compliance functions, and aligned with the organization’s policies and standards.
The other options are not the best evidence of the effectiveness of an organization’s account provisioning process, because they do not provide the same level of assurance and verification that the account provisioning process is accurate, consistent, and compliant, and that it meets the organization’s security and business objectives and requirements.
User provisioning is the process of creating, modifying, or deleting user accounts and access rights for a specific user or entity, based on their identity, role, or function in the organization. User provisioning is an important part of the account provisioning process, but it is not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because it does not indicate whether the user accounts and access rights are appropriate and authorized, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards.
Role-based access controls are the controls that grant or restrict user accounts and access rights based on the predefined roles or functions that the users or entities perform or assume in the organization. Role-based access controls are an important part of the account provisioningprocess, but they are not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because they do not indicate whether the roles or functions are defined and assigned correctly and consistently, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards.
Security log monitoring is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting on the security events or activities that are recorded or logged by the organization’s information systems and resources. Security log monitoring is an important part of the account provisioning process, but it is not the best evidence of the effectiveness of the account provisioning process, because it does not indicate whether the security events or activities are legitimate or authorized, and whether they comply with the organization’s policies and standards. References =
ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63
ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 173
CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep
Which of the following will BEST help mitigate the risk associated with malicious functionality in outsourced application development?
Perform an m-depth code review with an expert
Validate functionality by running in a test environment
Implement a service level agreement.
Utilize the change management process.
The risk associated with malicious functionality in outsourced application development is that the vendor may introduce unauthorized or harmful code into the enterprise’s system, which could compromise its security, integrity, or performance.
To mitigate this risk, the enterprise should perform an in-depth code review with an expert who can verify that the code meets the specifications, standards, and quality requirements, and that it does not contain any malicious or unwanted functionality.
A code review is a systematic examination of the source code of a software program, which can identify errors, vulnerabilities, inefficiencies, or deviations from best practices. A code review can also ensure that the code is consistent, readable, maintainable, and well-documented.
An expert is someone who has the knowledge, skills, and experience to perform the code review effectively and efficiently. An expert may be an internal or external resource, depending on the availability, cost, and independence of the reviewer.
A code review should be performed before the code is deployed to the production environment, and preferably at multiple stages of the development life cycle, such as design, testing, and integration.
A code review can also be complemented by other techniques, such as automated code analysis, testing, and scanning tools, which can detect common or known issues in the code. References =
ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, p. 143
ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 143
The PRIMARY reason a risk practitioner would be interested in an internal audit report is to:
plan awareness programs for business managers.
evaluate maturity of the risk management process.
assist in the development of a risk profile.
maintain a risk register based on noncompliance.
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
Copyright © 2021-2025 CertsTopics. All Rights Reserved