Pass the Isaca Certification CISM Questions and answers with ExamsMirror

The information security steering committee is composed of business leaders is the best indicator that information security governance and corporate governance are integrated, as this shows that the information security program is aligned with the business objectives and strategies, and that the information security manager has the support and involvement of the senior management. The information security steering committee is responsible for overseeing the information security program, setting the direction and scope, approving policies and standards, allocating resources, and monitoring performance and compliance. The information security steering committee also ensures that the information security risks are communicated and addressed at the board level, and that the information security program is consistent with the corporate governance framework and culture. The information security team is aware of business goals, the board is regularly informed of information security key performance indicators (KPIs), and a cost-benefit analysis is conducted on all information security initiatives are also important, but not as important as the information security steering committee is composed of business leaders, as they do not necessarily imply that the information security governance and corporate governance are integrated, and that the information security program has the authority and accountability to achieve its goals. References = CISM Review Manual 2023, page 271; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 2023, page 342; ISACA CISM - iSecPrep, page 193

The primary basis for establishing metrics that measure the effectiveness of an information security program should be the risk tolerance of the organization, which is the degree of risk that the organization is willing to accept or avoid in pursuit of its objectives. Metrics based on risk tolerance can help to evaluate whether the information security program is aligned with the business strategy, supports the risk management process, and delivers value to the organization. Residual risk, regulatory requirements, and control objectives are also important factors to consider when developing metrics, but they are not as fundamental as the risk tolerance.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, page 69

A threat analysis will best identify the external influences to an organization’s information security because it involves identifying and evaluating the sources and likelihood of potential adverse events that could affect the organization’s assets, operations, or reputation. External influences include factors such as emerging technologies, social media, business environment, risk tolerance, regulatory requirements, third-party considerations, and threat landscape1. A threat analysis can help the organization to align its information security strategy with its business objectives and risk appetite, and to prioritize and mitigate the most relevant and impactful threats. A business impact analysis (BIA) is a process of assessing the potential consequences of a disruption to the organization’s critical business functions or processes. A BIA does not directly identify the external influences to the organization’s information security, but rather the impact of those influences on the organization’s continuity and recovery. A gap analysis is a process of comparing the current state of the organization’s information security with a desired or expected state, based on best practices, standards, or frameworks. A gap analysis does not directly identify the external influences to the organization’s information security, but rather the areas of improvement or compliance. A vulnerability analysis is a process of identifying and evaluating the weaknesses or flaws in the organization’s information systems or processes that could be exploited by threats. A vulnerability analysis does not directly identify the external influences to the organization’s information security, but rather the exposure or susceptibility of the organization to those influences. References = CISM Review Manual, 15th Edition, pages 22-232; CISM Exam Content Outline, Domain 1, Knowledge Statement 1.113

Threat analysis is a process that is used to identify and assess the external influences or threats that could potentially affect an organization's information security. It is used to identify potential risks and develop strategies to mitigate or reduce those risks. Threat analysis involves analyzing the environment, identifying potential threats and their potential impacts, and then evaluating the organization's current security measures and developing strategies to address any deficiencies.

= Data owner is the best suited to determine how the information in a database should be classified, because data owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for the data and its protection. Data owner is accountable for the business value, quality, integrity, and security of the data. Data owner also defines the data classification criteria and levels based on the data sensitivity, criticality, and regulatory requirements. Data owner assigns the data custodian and grants the data access rights to the data users. Data owner reviews and approves the data classification policies and procedures, and ensures the compliance with them.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 1: Information Security Governance, Section: Data Classification, page 331

 The business client should be responsible for determining access levels to an application that processes client information, because the business client is the owner of the data and the primary stakeholder of the application. The business client has the best knowledge and understanding of the business requirements, objectives, and expectations of the application, and the sensitivity, value, and criticality of the data. The business client can also define the roles and responsibilities of the users and the access rights and privileges of the users based on the principle of least privilege and the principle of separation of duties. The business client can also monitor and review the access levels and the usage of the application, and ensure that the access levels are aligned with the organization’s information security policies and standards.

The information security team, the identity and access management team, and the business unit management are all involved in the process of determining access levels to an application that processes client information, but they are not the primary responsible party. The information security team provides guidance, support, and oversight to the business client on the information security best practices, controls, and standards for the application, and ensures that the access levels are consistent with the organization’s information security strategy and governance. The identity and access management team implements, maintains, and audits the access levels and the access control mechanisms for the application, and ensures that the access levels are compliant with the organization’s identity and access management policies and procedures. The business unit management approves, authorizes, and sponsors the access levels and the access requests for the application, and ensures that the access levels are aligned with the business unit’s goals and strategies. References =

ISACA, CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, 2020, pages 125-126, 129-130, 133-134, 137-138.

ISACA, CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 12th Edition, 2020, question ID 1037.

A SIEM system is the best tool for providing an incident response team with the greatest insight into insider threat activity across multiple systems because it can collect, correlate, analyze, and report on security events and logs from various sources, such as network devices, servers, applications, and user activities. A SIEM system can also detect and alert on anomalous or suspicious behaviors, such as unauthorized access, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, or policy violations, that may indicate an insider threat. A SIEM system can also support forensic investigations and incident response actions by providing a centralized and comprehensive view of the security posture and incidents.

= Security reporting is the process of providing relevant and timely information on the status and performance of the information security program to the stakeholders. Security reporting should be aligned with the business objectives and risk appetite of the organization, and should provide meaningful insights and recommendations for decision making and improvement. Security reporting should also include forward-looking trends, which are projections or predictions of future events or conditions based on historical data, current situation, and external factors. Forward-looking trends can help the organization anticipate and prepare for potential risks and opportunities, and adjust their strategies and plans accordingly.

One of the most effective ways to communicate forward-looking trends within security reporting is to use key risk indicators (KRIs). KRIs are metrics that measure the level of exposure or likelihood of a risk event occurring, and provide early warning signals of potential changes in the risk profile. KRIs can help the organization monitor and manage the key risks that may affect the achievement of their objectives, and take proactive actions to mitigate or avoid them. KRIs can also help the organization identify emerging risks and trends, and evaluate the effectiveness of their risk treatment options. KRIs should be aligned with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, and should be regularly reviewed and updated to reflect the changing risk environment.

The other options are not the most effective ways to communicate forward-looking trends within security reporting. Key control indicators (KCIs) are metrics that measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the security controls implemented to reduce the impact or likelihood of a risk event. KCIs can help the organization assess and improve the performance of their security processes and activities, and ensure compliance with the security policies and standards. However, KCIs do not directly measure the level of exposure or likelihood of a risk event, and may not provide sufficient information on the future trends and scenarios. Key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics that measure the achievement of the security objectives and goals, and demonstrate the value and contribution of the information security program to the organization. KPIs can help the organization evaluate and communicate the results and outcomes of their security initiatives and projects, and align them with the business strategy and vision. However, KPIs do not directly measure the level of exposure or likelihood of a risk event, and may not provide sufficient information on the future trends and scenarios. Key goal indicators (KGIs) are metrics that measure the progress and completion of the security goals and targets, and indicate the degree of success and satisfaction of the information security program. KGIs can help the organization track and report the status and milestones of their security plans and actions, and ensure alignment with the stakeholder expectations and requirements. However, KGIs do not directly measure the level of exposure or likelihood of a risk event, and may not provide sufficient information on the future trends and scenarios. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2020, pp. 77-78, 81-821; CISM Online Review Course, Domain 3: Information Security Program Development and Management, Module 4: Information Security Program Resources, ISACA2

= Requiring steering committee approval of risk treatment plans is the best way to help ensure an organization’s risk appetite will be considered as part of the risk treatment process because the steering committee is composed of senior management and key stakeholders who are responsible for defining and communicating the risk appetite and ensuring that it is aligned with the business objectives and strategy. The steering committee can review and approve the risk treatment plans proposed by the information security manager and ensure that they are consistent with the risk appetite and the risk tolerance levels. The steering committee can also monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the risk treatment plans and provide feedback and guidance to the information security manager. Establishing key risk indicators (KRIs), using quantitative risk assessment methods, and providing regular reporting on risk treatment to senior management are not the best ways to help ensure an organization’s risk appetite will be considered as part of the risk treatment process, although they may be useful tools and techniques to support the risk management process. KRIs are metrics that measure the level of risk exposure and the performance of risk controls. Quantitative risk assessment methods are techniques that use numerical values and probabilities to estimate the likelihood and impact of risk events. Regular reporting on risk treatment to senior management is a way to communicate the status and results of the risk treatment process and to obtain feedback and support from senior management. However, none of these methods can ensure that the risk treatment plans are approved and aligned with the risk appetite, which is the role of the steering committee. References = CISM Review Manual 2023, Chapter 2, Section 2.4.3, page 76; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database - 12 Month Subscription, Question ID: 121.

= Information classification is the process of assigning appropriate labels to information assets based on their sensitivity and value to the organization. Information classification should be aligned with the business objectives and risk appetite of the organization, and should be reviewed periodically to ensure its accuracy and relevance. The information security manager is responsible for establishing and maintaining the information classification policy and procedures, as well as providing guidance and oversight to the data owners and custodians. Data owners are the individuals who have the authority and accountability for the information assets within their business unit or function. Data owners are responsible for determining the appropriate classification level and security controls for their information assets, as well as ensuring compliance with the information classification policy and procedures. Data custodians are the individuals who have the operational responsibility for implementing and maintaining the security controls for the information assets assigned to them by the data owners.

If the information security manager believes that information has been classified inappropriately, increasing the risk of a breach, the best action is to complete a risk assessment and refer the results to the data owners. A risk assessment is a systematic process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks associated with the information assets, and recommending appropriate risk treatment options. By conducting a risk assessment, the information security manager can provide objective and evidence-based information to the data owners, highlighting the potential impact and likelihood of a breach, as well as the cost and benefit of implementing additional security controls. This will enable the data owners to make informed decisions about the appropriate classification level and security controls for their information assets, and to justify and document any deviations from the information classification policy and procedures.

The other options are not the best actions for the information security manager. Refering the issue to internal audit for a recommendation is not the best action, because internal audit is an independent and objective assurance function that provides assurance on the effectiveness of governance, risk management, and control processes. Internal audit is not responsible for providing recommendations on information classification, which is a management responsibility. Re-classifying the data and increasing the security level to meet business risk is not the best action, because the information security manager does not have the authority or accountability for the information assets, and may not have the full understanding of the business context and objectives of the data owners. Instructing the relevant system owners to reclassify the data is not the best action, because system owners are not the same as data owners, and may not have the authority or accountability for the information assets either. System owners are the individuals who have the authority and accountability for the information systems that process, store, or transmit the information assets. System owners are responsible for ensuring that the information systems comply with the security requirements and controls defined by the data owners and the information security manager. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, ISACA, 2020, pp. 49-51, 63-64, 69-701; CISM Online Review Course, Domain 3: Information Security Program Development and Management, Module 2: Information Security Program Framework, ISACA2

 A compromised endpoint device is a potential threat to the security of the network and the data stored on it. The best course of action to prevent further damage is to isolate the endpoint device from the network and other devices, so that the attacker cannot access or spread to other systems. Isolating the endpoint device also allows the information security manager to investigate the incident and determine the root cause, the extent of the compromise, and the appropriate remediation steps. Wiping and resetting the endpoint device may not be feasible or desirable, as it may result in data loss or evidence destruction. Powering off the endpoint device may not stop the attack, as the attacker may have installed persistent malware or backdoors that can resume once the device is powered on again. Running a virus scan on the endpoint device may not be effective, as the attacker may have used sophisticated techniques to evade detection or disable the antivirus software. References = CISM Review Manual, 15th Edition, page 1741; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, question ID 2112; Using EDR to Address Unmanaged Devices - ISACA3; Boosting Cyberresilience for Critical Enterprise IT Systems With COBIT and NIST Cybersecurity Frameworks - ISACA; Endpoint Security: On the Frontline of Cyber Risk.

The best way to reduce the risk associated with a bring your own device (BYOD) program is to implement a mobile device policy and standard. This policy should include guidelines and rules regarding the use of mobile devices, such as acceptable use guidelines and restrictions on the types of data that can be stored or accessed on the device. Additionally, it should also include requirements for secure mobile device practices, such as the use of strong passwords, encryption, and regular patching. A mobile device management (MDM) solution can also be implemented to help ensure mobile devices meet the organizational security requirements. However, it is not enough to simply implement the policy and MDM solution; employees must also be trained on the secure mobile device practices to ensure the policy is followed.

The business data owner is accountable for data loss in the event of an information security incident at a third-party provider because they are ultimately responsible for the protection and use of their data, regardless of where it is stored or processed. The information security manager is not accountable for data loss at a third-party provider, but rather responsible for implementing and enforcing the security policies and standards that govern the relationship with the provider. The service provider that hosts the data is not accountable for data loss at their site, but rather liable for any breach of contract or service level agreement that may result from such an incident. The incident response team is not accountable for data loss at a third-party provider, but rather responsible for responding to and managing the incident according to the incident response plan. References: https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2017/volume-1/data-ownership-and-custodianship-in-the-cloud https://www.isaca.org/resources/isaca-journal/issues/2018/volume-3/incident-response-lessons-learned

Residual risk is the risk that remains after implementing risk mitigation actions. It is the most valuable component for senior management because it helps them to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of risk management and make informed decisions about risk acceptance, transfer or avoidance. References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.41

Validating the authenticity of the patch is the first step in patch management procedures when receiving an emergency security patch, as it helps to ensure that the patch is genuine and not malicious. Validating the authenticity of the patch can be done by verifying the source, signature, checksum, or certificate of the patch, and comparing it with the information provided by the software vendor or manufacturer. Installing an unverified patch may introduce malware, compromise the system, or cause unexpected errors or conflicts.

References = CISM Review Manual 2022, page 3131; CISM Exam Content Outline, Domain 4, Task 4.42; Practical Patch Management and Mitigation1; Vulnerability and patch management in the CISSP exam3

 Management support is the primary consideration when developing an incident response plan, as it is essential for obtaining the necessary resources, authority, and commitment for the plan. Management support also helps to ensure that the plan is aligned with the organization’s business objectives, risk appetite, and security strategy, and that it is communicated and enforced across the organization. Management support also facilitates the coordination and collaboration among different stakeholders, such as business units, IT functions, legal, public relations, and external parties, during an incident response.

The definition of an incident (A) is an important component of the incident response plan, as it provides the criteria and thresholds for identifying, classifying, and reporting security incidents. However, the definition of an incident is not the primary consideration, as it is derived from the organization’s security policies, standards, and procedures, and may vary depending on the context and impact of the incident.

Compliance with regulations (B) is also an important factor for the incident response plan, as it helps to ensure that the organization meets its legal and contractual obligations, such as notifying the authorities, customers, or partners of a security breach, preserving the evidence, and reporting the incident outcomes. However, compliance with regulations is not the primary consideration, as it is influenced by the nature and scope of the incident, and the applicable laws and regulations in different jurisdictions.

Previously reported incidents (D) are a valuable source of information and lessons learned for the incident response plan, as they help to identify the common types, causes, and impacts of security incidents, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the current incident response processes and capabilities. However, previously reported incidents are not the primary consideration, as they are not predictive or comprehensive of the future incidents, and may not reflect the changing threat landscape and business environment.

References = CISM Review Manual, 16th Edition, Chapter 4: Information Security Incident Management, Section: Incident Response Plan, page 181-1821

Learn more:

= Disconnecting the device from the network is the first step when an IoT device in an organization’s network is confirmed to have been hacked, as it prevents the attacker from further compromising the device or using it as a pivot point to attack other devices or systems on the network. Disconnecting the device also helps preserve the evidence of the attack for later forensic analysis and remediation. Disconnecting the device should be done in accordance with the incident response plan and the escalation procedures123. References =

1: CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 2004

2: CISM Practice Quiz, question 1072

3: IoT Security: Incident Response, Forensics, and Investigations, section “IoT Incident Response”

The strongest justification for granting an exception to the security policy that disables access to USB storage devices on laptops and desktops is that the benefit is greater than the potential risk. A security policy is a document that defines the goals, objec-tives, principles, roles, responsibilities, and requirements for protecting information and systems in an organization. A security policy should be based on a risk assessment that identifies and evaluates the threats and vulnerabilities that affect the organiza-tion’s assets, as well as the potential impact and likelihood of incidents. A security pol-icy should also be aligned with the organization’s business objectives and risk appe-tite1. However, there may be situations where a security policy cannot be fully enforced or complied with due to technical, operational, or business reasons. In such cases, an exception to the policy may be requested and granted by an authorized person or body, such as a security manager or a policy committee. An exception to a security policy should be justified by a clear and compelling reason that outweighs the risk of non-compliance. An exception to a security policy should also be documented, approved, monitored, reviewed, and revoked as necessary2. The strongest justification for grant-ing an exception to the security policy that disables access to USB storage devices on laptops and desktops is that the benefit is greater than the potential risk. USB storage devices are portable devices that can store large amounts of data and can be easily connected to laptops and desktops via USB ports. They can provide several benefits for users and organizations, such as:

•Enhancing data mobility and accessibility

•Improving data backup and recovery

•Supporting data sharing and collaboration

•Enabling data encryption and authentication

However, USB storage devices also pose significant security risks for users and organi-zations, such as:

•Introducing malware or viruses to laptops and desktops

•Exposing sensitive data to unauthorized access or disclosure

•Losing or stealing data due to device loss or theft

•Violating security policies or regulations

Therefore, an exception to the security policy that disables access to USB storage de-vices on laptops and desktops should only be granted if the benefit of using them is greater than the potential risk of compromising them. For example, if a user needs to transfer a large amount of data from one laptop to another in a remote location where there is no network connection available, and the data is encrypted and protected by a strong password on the USB device, then the benefit of using the USB device may be greater than the risk of losing or exposing it. The other options are not the strongest justifications for granting an exception to the security policy that disables access to USB storage devices on laptops and desktops. Enabling USB storage devices based on user roles is not a justification, but rather a possible way of implementing a more gran-ular or flexible security policy that allows different levels of access for different types of users3. Users accepting the risk of noncompliance is not a justification, but rather a requirement for requesting an exception to a security policy that acknowledges their responsibility and accountability for any consequences of noncompliance4. Accessing being restricted to read-only is not a justification, but rather a possible control that can reduce the risk of introducing malware or viruses from USB devices to laptops and desktops5. References: 1: Information Security Policy - NIST 2: Policy Exception Man-agement - ISACA 3: Deploy and manage Removable Storage Access Control using In-tune - Microsoft Learn 4: Policy Exception Request Form - University of California 5: Re-movable Media Policy Writing Tips - CurrentWare