Isaca Updated CRISC Exam Questions and Answers by diana

The primary risk management responsibility of the second line of defense is to monitor the risk responses. The second line of defense is the function that oversees and supports the risk management activities of the first line of defense, which is the function that owns and manages the risks. The second line of defense includes the risk management, compliance, and quality assurance functions, among others. The second line of defense is responsible for monitoring the risk responses, which are the actions taken to address the risks, such as avoiding, transferring, mitigating, or accepting the risks. The second line of defense monitors the risk responses to ensure that they are implemented effectively and efficiently, that they achieve the desired outcomes, and that they are aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization. The second line of defense also provides guidance, advice, and feedback to the first line of defense on the risk responses, and reports the results and issues to the senior management and the board. Applying risk treatments, providing assurance of control effectiveness, and implementing internal controls are not the primary risk management responsibilities of the second line of defense, as they are either the responsibilities of the first line of defense or the third line of defense, which is the function that provides independent assurance of the risk management activities, such as the internal audit function. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 36.

A threat and vulnerability assessment is a process that identifies and evaluates the potential sources and impacts of risk events on an organization’s assets, processes, and objectives. It also estimates the probability of occurrence and the severity of consequences for each risk event. A threat and vulnerability assessment is the best way to quantify the likelihood of risk materialization, as it provides a numerical or qualitative measure of the risk exposure and the level of uncertainty associated with the risk scenarios. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2, p. 68-69

An independent security audit report is a document that provides an objective and comprehensive assessment of the security posture and practices of a cloud service provider (CSP), based on a set of standards, criteria, or frameworks1. An independent security audit report can help an organization to evaluate the risks and benefits of using a CSP, and to ensure that the CSP meets the organization’s security and compliance requirements2.

If an organization receives an independent security audit report of its CSP that indicates significant control weaknesses, the next step that should be done in response to this report is to analyze the impact of the provider’s control weaknesses to the business. This means that the organization should:

Identify and prioritize the business processes, functions, or objectives that depend on or are affected by the CSP’s services

Assess the potential consequences and likelihood of the control weaknesses leading to security incidents, breaches, or losses

Estimate the financial, operational, reputational, or legal impacts of the security incidents, breaches, or losses

Compare the impacts with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance, and determine the level of risk exposure and acceptance

Communicate the results of the analysis to the relevant stakeholders and decision-makers3

References = What is a Security Audit?, Cloud Security Audit: A 10-Step Checklist, Independent security audits are essential for cloud service providers. Here’s why

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 who report 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, and guidance 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 risk management 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 audit should 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]