Isaca Updated CRISC Exam Questions and Answers by indy

 Information security policies are the foundation of an organization’s security program, as they define the objectives, roles, responsibilities, and standards for protecting the information assets and systems. However, information security policies are not static, and they need to be reviewed and updated regularly to reflect the changes in the organization’s environment, risk profile, and compliance requirements. Therefore, the best course of action when conducting an organization-wide risk assessment is to review the policies against current needs to determine adequacy. This means comparing the policies with the current threats, vulnerabilities, controls, and best practices, and identifying any gaps or weaknesses that need to be addressed. The other options are not the best course of action, as they do not consider the current needs of the organization. Reviewing and updating the policies to align with industry standards may not be sufficient, as the organization may have specific or unique needs that are not covered by the standards. Determining that the policies should be updated annually may not be realistic, as the frequency of updates may depend on the nature and complexity of the policies and the organization. Reporting that the policies are adequate and do not need to be updated frequently may not be accurate, as the policies may be outdated or ineffective, and may expose the organization to unnecessary risks. References = Risk Assessment and Analysis Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative - ISACA, Does Your Organization Need a Security Risk Assessment? - ISACA, SP 800-39, Managing Information Security Risk: Organization, Mission …

 In an environment where reduced time-to-market for new software products is a top business priority, the risk practitioner’s greatest concern should be whether sufficient resources are assigned to IT development projects. Resources include human, financial, technical, and physical assets that are needed to plan, design, develop, test, and deliver high-quality software products in a timely manner. If the IT development projects are under-resourced, they may face challenges such as delays, errors, defects, rework, scope creep, or failure to meet customer expectations or requirements. These challenges can increase the risk of losing competitive advantage, market share, customer satisfaction, or reputation. The other options are less critical, as they are not directly related to the core business priority of reducing time-to-market for new software products. Customer support help desk staff training, email infrastructure rollback plans, and corporate email system phishing detection are important aspects of information security and customer service, but they are not the primary drivers of software product development and delivery. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.2: Risk Response Options, p. 115-116.

The business process owner should own the risk of customer data leakage caused by the service provider, as they have the responsibility and authority over the design, execution, and performance of the business process. The business process owner is also accountable for the risks and controls associated with their process, and they can provide valuable input and feedback on the likelihood and impact of customer data leakage on the process outcomes and objectives.

The other options are not the best choices for owning the risk of customer data leakage caused by the service provider. The service provider is responsible for delivering and supporting the billing function and ensuring the security and privacy of the customer data, but they may not have the full visibility or understanding of the business process and objectives. The vendor risk manager is responsible for managing and monitoring the vendor relationship and performance, but they may not have the direct involvement or influence on the business process and its risks and controls. The legal counsel is responsible for providing legal advice and guidance on the contractual and regulatory obligations and implications of the outsourcing arrangement, but they may not have the detailed knowledge or experience of the business process and its risks and controls. References = Guide to Vendor Risk Assessment | Smartsheet, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Data Ownership: Considerations for Risk Management - ISACA

The management’s primary consideration when approving risk response action plans should be the changes in residual risk after implementing the plans. Residual risk is the level of risk that remains after the implementation of risk responses1. It indicates the degree of exposure or uncertainty that the organization still faces, and the potential impact or consequences of the risk events. The management should evaluate the effectiveness and adequacy of the risk responses, and decide whether the residual risk is acceptable or not2. The management should also compare the residual risk with the risk appetite, which is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept or pursue in order to achieve its objectives3. The management should ensure that the residual risk is aligned with the risk appetite, and that the risk responses are consistent and proportional to the risk level4.

The other options are not the primary consideration when approving risk response action plans, because:

Ability of the action plans to address multiple risk scenarios is a desirable but not essential criterion for approving risk response action plans. Risk scenarios are hypothetical situations that describe how a risk event could occur and what the consequences could be5. They can help to understand and communicate the nature and impact of the risks, and to design and evaluate the risk responses6. However, not all risk scenarios are equally likely or relevant, and some risk scenarios may be too complex or improbable to address. Therefore, the ability of the action plans to address multiple risk scenarios is not the primary consideration, but rather a secondary or supplementary one.

Ease of implementing the risk treatment solution is a practical but not critical criterion for approving risk response action plans. Risk treatment is the process of selecting and applying appropriate measures to modify the risk7. It can involve different strategies, such as avoid, reduce, transfer, or accept the risk8. The ease of implementing the risk treatment solution depends on various factors, such as the availability of resources, the feasibility of the solution, or the cooperation of the stakeholders. However, the ease of implementation is not the primary consideration, but rather a supporting or facilitating one.

Prioritization for implementing the action plans is a useful but not vital criterion for approving risk response action plans. Prioritization is the process of ranking the action plans according to their importance, urgency, or impact. It can help to allocate the resources, schedule the activities, and monitor the progress of the action plans. However, prioritization is not the primary consideration, but rather a subsequent or follow-up one.

References =

Residual Risk - CIO Wiki

What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia

Risk Appetite - CIO Wiki

Risk Appetite: What It Is and Why It Matters - Gartner

Risk Scenarios Toolkit - ISACA

Risk Scenarios Starter Pack - ISACA

Risk Treatment - CIO Wiki

Risk Treatment Plan - CIO Wiki

[Prioritization - CIO Wiki]