Download Certified Information Security Manager.CISM.SelftestTraining.2018-09-05.426q.vcex

Risk assessment needs to be performed on a continuous basis because of organizational and technical changes. Risk assessment must take into account all significant changes in order to be effective.

The risk environment is impacted by factors such as changes in technology, and business strategy. These changes introduce new threats and vulnerabilities to the organization. As a result, risk assessment should be performed continuously. Justification of a budget should never be the main reason for performing a risk assessment. New vulnerabilities should be managed through a patch management process. Informing management about emerging risks is important, but is not the main driver for determining when a risk assessment should be performed.

The best protection is to identify the vulnerable systems and apply compensating controls until a patch is installed. Minimizing the use of vulnerable systems and communicating the vulnerability to system users could be compensating controls but would not be the first course of action. Choice D does not make clear the timing of when the intrusion detection system (IDS) signature list would be updated to accommodate the vulnerabilities that are not yet publicly known. Therefore, this approach should not always be considered as the first option.

Penetration testing focuses on identifying vulnerabilities. None of the other choices would identify vulnerabilities introduced by changes.

In a countermeasure cost-benefit analysis, the annual cost of safeguards is compared with the expected cost of loss. This can then be used to justify a specific control measure. Penetration testing may indicate the extent of a weakness but, by itself, will not establish the cost/benefit of a control. Frequent risk assessment programs will certainly establish what risk exists but will not determine the maximum cost of controls. Annual loss expectancy (ALE) is a measure which will contribute to the value of the risk but. alone, will not justify a control.

Risk can never be eliminated entirely. Transferring the risk gives it away such as buying insurance so the insurance company can take the risk. Implementing additional controls is an example of mitigating risk. Doing nothing to mitigate the risk would be an example of accepting risk.

Although the information owner may be in a management position and is also considered a user, the information owner role has the responsibility for determining information classification levels. Management is responsible for higher-level issues such as providing and approving budget, supporting activities, etc. The information custodian is responsible for day-to-day security tasks such as protecting information, backing up information, etc. Users are the lowest level. They use the data, but do not classify the data. The owner classifies the data.

The assigned class of sensitivity and criticality of the information resource determines the level of access controls to be put in place. The assignment of sensitivity and criticality takes place with the information assets that have already been included in the information security program and has only an indirect bearing on the costs to be incurred. The assignment of sensitivity and criticality contributes to, but does not decide, the overall budget of the information security program.

Gap analysis would help identify the actual gaps between the desired state and the current implementation of information security management. BIA is primarily used for business continuity planning. Technical vulnerability assessment is used for detailed assessment of technical controls, which would come later in the process and would not provide complete information in order to identify gaps.

Listing all possible scenarios that could occur, along with threats and impacts, will better frame the range of risks and facilitate a more informed discussion and decision. Estimated productivity losses, value of information assets and vulnerability assessments would not be sufficient on their own.