Passed Exam Today CRISC

The best approach to mitigate the risk associated with a control deficiency is to implement compensating controls. A control deficiency is a situation where a control is missing, ineffective, or inefficient, and cannot provide reasonable assurance that the objectives or requirements are met. A compensating control is a control that provides an alternative or additional measure of protection when the primary or preferred control is not feasible or effective. A compensating control can help to reduce the likelihood and/or impact of the risk associated with the control deficiency, and maintain the compliance or performance level. The other options are not as effective as implementing compensating controls, as they are related to the analysis, assessment, or provision of the risk, not the mitigation of the risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

Data anonymization is the most important control to ensure the privacy of customer information when participating in an industry benchmarking study that involves providing customer transaction records for analysis. Data anonymization is the process of removing or modifying personally identifiable information (PII) from data sets, such as names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc., so that the data cannot be traced back to specific individuals. Data anonymization protects the confidentiality and privacy of customers, while still allowing for meaningful analysis and comparison of data. Nondisclosure agreements (NDAs), data cleansing, and data encryption are also useful controls, but they do not eliminate the risk of data breaches or unauthorized access to PII. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.1, page 3-21.

 The best evidence of an effective internal control environment is the independent audit results. Independent audit results are the outcomes or findings of an external or independent party that evaluates the design, implementation, and operation of the internal controls. Independent audit results can provide an objective, reliable, and consistent assessment of the internal control environment, and identify the strengths, weaknesses, gaps, or issues of the internal controls. Independent audit results can also provide assurance, recommendations, or improvement opportunities for the internal control environment. The other options are not as good as independent audit results, as they are related to the inputs, processes, oroutputs of the internal control environment, not the evaluation or verification of the internal controlenvironment. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 69.

 The greatest concern for the risk practitioner when the potential vendor has offered to perform quarterly self-audits of its controls instead of having annual independent audits is that the controls may not be properly tested. Self-audits are audits that are performed by the vendor itself, without the involvement of an external or independent party. Self-audits may not be reliable, objective, or consistent, as the vendor may have biases, conflicts of interest, or lack of expertise in auditing its own controls. Self-audits may also not follow the same standards, criteria, or methodologies as independent audits, and may not provide sufficient assurance or evidence of the effectiveness of the controls. The other options are not as concerning as the possibility of improper testing of the controls, as they are related to the outcomes, expectations, or approaches of the controls, not the quality or validity of the controls. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.3: IT Control Assessment, page 6