Shared Assessments Updated CTPRP Exam Questions and Answers by franco

An emergency response plan (ERP) is a document that outlines the procedures and actions to be taken by an organization in the event of a disruptive incident that threatens its operations, assets, reputation, or stakeholders1. An ERP should be aligned with the organization’s business continuity and disaster recovery plans, and should cover the roles and responsibilities, communication channels, escalation processes, resources, and recovery strategies for different types of emergencies2.

The first step in developing an ERP is to conduct an assessment that includes an inventory of the types of events that have the greatest potential to trigger an ERP3. This assessment should consider the likelihood and impact of various scenarios, such as natural disasters, cyberattacks, pandemics, civil unrest, terrorism, or supply chain disruptions, and identify the critical functions, processes, assets, and dependencies that could be affected by these events4. The assessment should also evaluate the existing capabilities and gaps in the organization’s preparedness and response, and prioritize the areas that need improvement or enhancement5. The assessment should be based on a comprehensive risk analysis and a business impact analysis, and should involve input from relevant stakeholders, such as senior management, business units, IT, security, legal, compliance, human resources, and third parties.

The other options are not the first step in developing an ERP, but rather subsequent or complementary steps that should be performed after the initial assessment. Considering work-from-home parameters, incorporating periodic crisis management team tabletop exercises, and using the results of continuous monitoring tools are all important aspects of an ERP, but they are not the starting point for creating one. These steps should be based on the findings and recommendations of the assessment, and should be updated and tested regularly to ensure the effectiveness and relevance of the ERP. References: 1: What is an Emergency Response Plan? | IBM 2: Emergency Response Plan | Ready.gov 3: 8 Steps to Building a Third-Party Incident Response Plan | Prevalent 4: How to create an effective business continuity plan | CIO 5: Emergency Response Planning: 4 Steps to Creating a Plan : Third-Party Risk Management: Final Interagency Guidance : Improving Third-Party Incident Response | Prevalent

According to the Shared Assessments Certified Third Party Risk Professional (CTPRP) Study Guide, risk based decisioning is the process of applying risk criteria to prioritize and address the gaps identified during a third-party risk assessment1. The assessor should analyze the gaps based on the impact, likelihood, and urgency of the risk, and document the findings and recommendations in a report. The assessor should also review the existing or proposed compensating controls that could mitigate the risk, and submit the report to the business owner for approval of the risk treatment plan. The risk treatment plan could include accepting, transferring, avoiding, or reducing the risk, depending on the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization1.

The other statements do not reflect the best use of risk based decisioning, as they either ignore the risk analysis and documentation process, or apply a uniform or arbitrary approach to prioritizing and addressing the gaps. The assessor should not decide or conclude on the risk treatment plan without consulting the business owner, as the business owner is ultimately responsible for the third-party relationship and the risk management decisions1. The assessor should also not communicate that the gaps would not be included in the report if they were corrected immediately, as this could compromise the integrity and transparency of the assessment process and the report2.

References:

• 1: Shared Assessments Certified Third Party Risk Professional (CTPRP) Study Guide, pages 29-30, 33-34
• 2: Third-Party Risk Management: Final Interagency Guidance, page 10

Vendor classification or risk tiering is a process of categorizing vendors based on the level of security risk they introduce to an organization12. It is a key component of a third-party risk management (TPRM) program, as it helps to prioritize and allocate resources for vendor assessment, monitoring, and remediation12. The statement D is true, as it reflects the first step of vendor classification or risk tiering, which is to determine the inherent risk of each vendor relationship based on the nature, scope, and complexity of the product or service being outsourced3 . Inherent risk is the risk that exists before any controls or mitigating factors are applied3 . By calculating the inherent risk, an organization can assign each vendor to a risk tier that reflects the potential impact and likelihood of a security breach or incident involving the vendor3 .

The other statements are false, as they do not accurately describe the vendor classification or risk tiering process. The statement A is false, as vendor classification and risk tiers are not based on residual risk calculations, but on inherent risk calculations. Residual risk is the risk that remains after controls or mitigating factors are applied3 . Residual risk is used to evaluate the effectiveness of the controls and the need for further action, but not to classify or tier vendors3 . The statement B is false, as vendor classification and risk tiering should be used for all third party relationships, not only for critical ones. Vendor classification and risk tiering helps to identify and prioritize the critical vendors, but also to manage the low and medium risk vendors according to their respective risk profiles12. The statement C is false, as vendor classification and corresponding risk tiers do not utilize the same due diligence standards for controls evaluation based upon policy, but different ones. Due diligence standards are the criteria and methods used to assess the security posture and performance of vendors. Due diligence standards should vary according to the risk tier of the vendor, as higher risk vendors require more rigorous and frequent evaluation than lower risk vendors.

References:

• 1: What is Vendor Tiering? Optimize Your Vendor Risk Management | UpGuard Blog
• 2: Vendor Tiering Best Practices: Categorizing Vendor Risks | UpGuard Blog
• 3: Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM): A Complete Guide - BlueVoyant
• [4]: Supplemental Examination Procedures for Risk Management of Third-Party Relationships
• [5]: Third Party Risk Management: Why It’s Important And What Features To Look For - Expert Insights

The frequency of cyclical assessments is one of the key factors that determines the effectiveness and efficiency of a TPRM program. Cyclical assessments are periodic reviews of the vendor’s performance, compliance, and risk posture that are conducted after the initial onboarding assessment. The frequency of cyclical assessments should be aligned with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and should reflect the level of risk and criticality of the vendor to the organization’s operations. A common approach to determine the frequency of cyclical assessments is to use a vendor risk score, which is a numerical value that represents the vendor’s inherent and residual risk based on various criteria, such as the type, scope, and complexity of the services or products provided, the vendor’s security and privacy controls, the vendor’s compliance with relevant regulations and standards, the vendor’s past performance and incident history, and the vendor’s business continuity and disaster recovery capabilities. The vendor risk score can be used to categorize the vendors into different risk tiers, such as high, medium, and low, and assign appropriate frequencies for cyclical assessments, such as annually, biannually, or quarterly. For example, a high-risk vendor may require an annual assessment, while a low-risk vendor may require a biannual or quarterly assessment. The vendor risk score and the frequency of cyclical assessments should be reviewed and updated regularly to account for any changes in the vendor’s risk profile or the organization’s risk appetite.

The other three statements do not best reflect the factors that help you determine the frequency of cyclical assessments, as they are either too rigid, too vague, or too reactive. Statement A implies that vendor assessments are only necessary during onboarding and can be replaced by continuous monitoring afterwards. However, continuous monitoring alone is not sufficient to ensure the vendor’s compliance and risk management, as it may not capture all the aspects of the vendor’s performance and risk posture, such as contractual obligations, service level agreements, audit results, and remediation actions. Therefore, vendor assessments should be conducted during onboarding and at regular intervals thereafter, complemented by continuous monitoring. Statement C suggests that vendor assessments should be scheduled based on the type of services or products provided, without considering the other factors that may affect the vendor’s risk level and criticality, such as the vendor’s security and privacy controls, the vendor’s compliance with relevant regulations and standards, the vendor’s past performance and incident history, and the vendor’s business continuity and disaster recovery capabilities. Therefore, statement C is too vague and does not provide a clear and consistent basis for determining the frequency of cyclical assessments. Statement D indicates that vendor assessment frequency may need to be changed if the vendor has disclosed a data breach, implying that the frequency of cyclical assessments is only adjusted in response to a negative event. However, this approach is too reactive and may not prevent or mitigate the impact of the data breach, as the vendor’s risk level and criticality may have already increased before the data breach occurred. Therefore, statement D does not reflect a proactive and risk-based approach to determining the frequency of cyclical assessments. References:

• Third-Party Risk Management 101: Guiding Principles
• Mastering the TPRM Lifecycle
• Third Party Risk Management Maturity Assessment