Isaca Updated CRISC Exam Questions and Answers by woody

Conducting phishing exercises would best help minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats, because they can help to raise awareness and educate employees about the common techniques and tactics used by social engineers, such as sending deceptive emails or text messages that ask for sensitive information or direct users to malicious websites. Phishing exercises are simulated attacks that test the employees’ ability to recognize and respond to social engineering attempts, and provide feedback and guidance on how to improve their security behavior. By conducting phishing exercises, the organization can measure and improve the employees’ level of security awareness and resilience, and reduce the likelihood and impact of falling victim to social engineering attacks. The other options are less effective ways to minimize the risk associated with social engineering threats. Enforcing employees’ sanctions can help to deter and punish employees who violate the security policies or procedures, but it may not prevent or reduce the occurrence of social engineering attacks, as they may target employees who are unaware, careless, or coerced by the attackers. Enforcing segregation of duties can help to prevent or limit the damage caused by social engineering attacks, by restricting the access and authority of employees to perform certain tasks or functions, but it may not address the root cause or source of the attacks, which is the human factor. Reviewing the organization’s risk appetite can help to define and communicate the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives, but it may not directly affect or influence the employees’ behavior or attitude toward social engineering threats, which may depend on their individual or situational factors. References = How to Prevent and Mitigate Social Engineering Attacks 1

Prioritizing risk responses helps to balance the costs and benefits of managing IT risk by ensuring that the most significant risks are addressed first and that the resources allocated to risk management are used efficiently and effectively. Evaluating risk based on frequency and probability is a part of risk analysis, not risk response. Considering risk factors that can be quantified is also a part of risk analysis, and it does not necessarily capture all the relevant aspects of risk. Managing the risk by using controls is a possible risk response, but it does not guarantee that the costs and benefits of risk management are balanced, as some controls may be too expensive or ineffective for the level of risk they mitigate. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4: Risk Response, page 145.

A risk profile is a summary of the risks that an organization faces and their likelihood and impact. Consistently recording risk assessment results in the risk register can help improve the accuracy of risk profiles by providing a reliable and up-to-date source of information on the current risk situation, the risk response actions, and the residual risk levels. A risk register is a tool that captures and documents the risk identification, analysis, evaluation, and treatment processes2. A risk register can also facilitate risk communication, monitoring, and reporting2.

Assessment of organizational risk appetite, compliance with best practice, and accountability for loss events are not the primary benefits of consistently recording risk assessment results in the risk register. These are possible outcomes or objectives of risk management, but they do not directly depend on the risk register.

The risk owner is the person who should be accountable for any related losses to the organization, because they are the person who has the authority and responsibility to manage the risk and its associated controls.The risk owner is also the person who accepts the risk and its residual level, and who monitors and reports on the risk status and performance. The IT risk manager, the server administrator, and the risk practitioner are all involved in the riskmanagement process, but they are not the person who should be accountable for the risk and its outcomes, as they do not have the ultimate decision-making power and accountability for therisk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1, page 79