Isaca Updated CRISC Exam Questions and Answers by benji

Developing a risk treatment plan is the best way to facilitate the mitigation of identified gaps between current and desired risk environment states. A risk treatment plan is a document that outlines the actions and resources needed to implement the chosen risk response strategy for each risk scenario. A risk treatment plan should include the following elements:

Risk scenario description and risk ID

Risk owner and other stakeholders

Risk response strategy and objectives

Risk response actions and tasks

Resources, costs, and benefits

Roles and responsibilities

Timeline and milestones

Performance indicators and monitoring mechanisms

Contingency plans and triggers

A risk treatment plan helps to close the gaps between the current and desired risk environment states by providing a clear and comprehensive roadmap for risk mitigation. It also helps to ensure that the risk response actions are aligned with the organizational risk appetite, objectives, and priorities. A risk treatment plan also facilitates the communication, coordination, and collaboration among the risk owners and other stakeholders involved in the risk mitigation process.

The other options are not the best ways to facilitate the mitigation of identified gaps between current and desired risk environment states. Validating organizational risk appetite is an important step in establishing the risk criteria and thresholds for the risk assessment process, but it does not directly address the gaps between the current and desired risk environment states. Reviewing results of prior risk assessments can provide useful insights and lessons learned for the current risk assessment process, but it does not necessarily lead to the development and implementation of effective risk response actions. Including the current and desired states in the risk register can help to document and monitor the risk scenarios and their status, but it does not provide the details and guidance for risk mitigation. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4: Risk Response, Section 4.2: Risk Treatment, p. 189-191.

A denial-of-service (DoS) attack is a type of cyberattack that aims to disrupt or disable the normal functioning of a system or network by overwhelming it with excessive traffic or requests.

The chief technology officer (CTO) has decided to accept the risk associated with the potential loss from a DoS attack. This means that the CTO has determined that the cost or effort of implementing or maintaining controls to prevent or reduce the impact of a DoS attack is not justified by the expected benefits or savings, and that the organization is willing to bear the consequences of a DoS attack if it occurs.

The best course of action for the risk practitioner in this situation is to identify key risk indicators (KRIs) for ongoing monitoring. This means that the risk practitioner should define and measure the metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to the DoS attack risk, such as the frequency, duration, or severity of the attacks, the availability, performance, or security of the systems or networks, the customer satisfaction, reputation, or revenue of the organization, etc.

Identifying KRIs for ongoing monitoring helps to track and evaluate the actual results and outcomes of the risk acceptance decision, compare them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identify any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and report them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.

The references for this answer are:

Risk IT Framework, page 15

Information Technology & Security, page 9

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

The most helpful activity for a risk practitioner when ensuring that mitigated risk remains within acceptable limits is to implement a process for ongoing monitoring of control effectiveness. This would enable the risk practitioner to track the performance of the controls, identify any deviations or gaps, and take corrective actions as needed. Ongoing monitoring of control effectiveness would also provide assurance that the risk responses are working as intended, and that the residual risk is aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the enterprise. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, page 188.

Artificial intelligence (AI) solutions can offer significant benefits to an organization, such as improved efficiency, accuracy, and innovation. However, AI also poses new challenges and risks that need to be considered and addressed by senior management. Some of these risks include:

Ethical and social risks: AI solutions may have unintended or undesirable impacts on human values, rights, and behaviors, such as privacy, fairness, accountability, and transparency. For example, AI systems may exhibit bias, discrimination, or manipulation, or may infringe on personal data or autonomy.

Technical and operational risks: AI solutions may have vulnerabilities, errors, or failures that affect their performance, reliability, or security. For example, AI systems may be subject to hacking, tampering, or misuse, or may malfunction or produce inaccurate or harmful outcomes.

Legal and regulatory risks: AI solutions may have unclear or conflicting legal or regulatory implications or obligations, such as liability, compliance, or governance. For example, AI systems may raise questions about ownership, responsibility, or accountability, or may violate existing laws or regulations, or create new ones.

Therefore, a risk practitioner should communicate to senior management that AI potentially introduces new types of risk that need to be identified, assessed, and managed in alignment with the organization’s objectives, values, and risk appetite. References = ISACA CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.2, page 113.