Isaca Updated CRISC Exam Questions and Answers by isla-rose

A spear phishing attack is a type of cyberattack that targets a specific individual or organization with a fraudulent email that appears to be from a trusted source, and attempts to trick the recipient into clicking amalicious link, opening a malicious attachment, or providing sensitive information. A spear phishing attack can compromise the security, confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the information systems and data of the individual or organization. The most effective way to mitigate the risk associated with spear phishing attacks is to implement a security awareness program, which is a program that educates and trains the employees and stakeholders of the organization about the security policies, procedures, and best practices, and the potential threats and risks that may affect the organization. A security awareness program can help to prevent or reduce the success of spear phishing attacks, as it can increase the knowledge and skills of the employees and stakeholders to recognize and avoid the fraudulent emails, and to report and respond to any suspicious or malicious activities. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 181.

The best way to justify the risk mitigation actions recommended in a risk assessment would be to focus on the business drivers, which are the factors that influence the organization’s objectives, performance, and value creation12.

Focusing on the business drivers means aligning the risk mitigation actions with the organization’s strategic goals, priorities, and values, and demonstrating how the actions will support or enhance the organization’s capabilities, opportunities, and competitive advantage12.

Focusing on the business drivers also means communicating the benefits, costs, and trade-offs of the risk mitigation actions to the relevant stakeholders, and showing how the actions will address the organization’s risk appetite, tolerance, and exposure12.

The other options are not the best way to justify the risk mitigation actions, but rather possible sources of information or guidance that may support the justification. For example:

Aligning with audit results is a way to validate the effectiveness and efficiency of the risk mitigation actions, and to identify any gaps or weaknesses that need improvement34. However, audit results may not reflect the organization’s current or future business drivers, and may not capture the full scope or impact of the risk mitigation actions34.

Benchmarking with competitor’s actions is a way to compare the organization’s risk mitigation actions with the best practices or standards of the industry or market, and to identify any areas of improvement or differentiation56. However, competitor’s actions may not be suitable or applicable for the organization’s specific context, needs, or challenges, and may not align with the organization’s business drivers56.

Referencing best practice is a way to adopt the proven or accepted methods or techniques for risk mitigation, and to ensure the quality and consistency of the risk mitigation actions78. However, best practice may not be the most optimal or innovative solution for the organization’s unique situation, and may not address the organization’s business drivers78. References =

1: Risk IT Framework, ISACA, 2009

2: IT Risk Management Framework, University of Toronto, 2017

3: IT Audit and Assurance Standards, ISACA, 2014

4: IT Audit and Assurance Guidelines, ISACA, 2014

5: Benchmarking IT Risk Management Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 4, 2017

6: Benchmarking: A Tool for Improving IT Risk Management, ISACA Now Blog, March 27, 2017

7: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Journal, Volume 1, 2018

8: IT Risk Management Best Practices, ISACA Now Blog, January 9, 2018

The best approach to identify relevant risk scenarios is to engage line management in risk assessment workshops. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how a risk event could occur and what the consequences could be1. Identifying risk scenarios can help to understand and communicate the nature and impact of the risks, and to design and evaluate the risk responses2. To identify relevant risk scenarios, it is important to involve the people who are responsible for or affected by the risks, such as the line managers. Line managers are the managers who oversee the operational activities and processes of the organization, and whoreport to the senior or executive management3. By engaging line managers in risk assessment workshops, the organization can:

Leverage the line managers’ knowledge and experience of the operational environment, the business objectives, the stakeholder expectations, and the potential threats and opportunities4.

Encourage the line managers’ participation and collaboration in the risk identification and analysis process, and foster a risk-aware culture and mindset5.

Enhance the line managers’ ownership and accountability of the risks and the risk responses, and ensure their alignment and commitment to the risk management strategy and objectives6.

The other options are not the best approaches to identify relevant risk scenarios, because:

Escalating the situation to risk leadership is not an effective or efficient way to identify risk scenarios, as it may bypass or undermine the line managers’ role and responsibility in the risk management process. Risk leadership is the function or role that provides the vision, direction, andguidance for the risk management activities and initiatives of the organization7. Escalating the situation to risk leadership may imply that the line managers are not capable or willing to identify and manage the risks, or that the risk leadership is not aware or involved in the riskmanagement process. This may create confusion, conflict, or distrust among the risk management stakeholders, and reduce the quality and credibility of the risk scenarios.

Engaging internal audit for risk assessment workshops is not a suitable or appropriate way to identify risk scenarios, as it may violate the independence and objectivity of the internal audit function. Internal audit is an independent and objective assurance and consulting activity that evaluates and improves the effectiveness of the organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes8. Engaging internal audit for risk assessment workshops may compromise the internal audit’s role and mandate, as it may create a conflict of interest or a self-review threat. Internal auditshould not be involved in the risk identification and analysis process, but rather provide assurance or advice on the adequacy and reliability of the process.

Reviewing system and process documentation is not a sufficient or comprehensive way to identify risk scenarios, as it may overlook or miss some important or emerging risks. System and process documentation are the records or artifacts that describe the structure, functions, features, and requirements of the organization’s systems and processes. Reviewing system and process documentation can help to identify some risks that are related to the design, implementation, or operation of the systems and processes, but it cannot capture all the risks that may affect the organization. Some risks may arise from external or internal factors that are not reflected or updated in the system and process documentation, such as changes in the market, technology, regulation, or stakeholder expectations.

References =

Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack - ISACA

Line Manager - CIO Wiki

Engaging Line Managers in Risk Management - IRM

Risk Culture - CIO Wiki

Risk Ownership - CIO Wiki

Risk Leadership - CIO Wiki

Internal Audit - CIO Wiki

[System Documentation - CIO Wiki]

CRISC and business continuity guidance stress that BCP development starts from understanding andprioritizing critical business services and processesderived from the business impact analysis (BIA). Prioritization allows the organization to define recovery time objectives (RTOs), recovery point objectives (RPOs), and sequence of restoration, ensuring limited resources are first focused on the processes that protect life, safety, regulatory obligations, revenue, and reputational value. Identifying alternate locations and DR sites, and designing communication plans, are essential elements of continuity and disaster recovery planning, but they are built around the set of prioritized services. Without a clear hierarchy of what must be restored first and to what level, the BCP will be unfocused and may fail to meet business expectations during a disruption.