Isaca CRISC Exam Dumps

* Understanding the Question:

The question is about mitigating the impact of social engineering attacks that use AI technology to impersonate senior management personnel.

* Analyzing the Options:

A . Training and awareness of employees for increased vigilance:This is the most proactive approach. Educating employees about the risks and signs of social engineering attacks enhances their ability to recognize and respond appropriately to such threats.

B . Increased monitoring of executive accounts:Useful but reactive; it doesn't prevent initial attempts.

C . Subscription to data breach monitoring sites:Helps detect breaches but doesn't directly mitigate impersonation attacks.

D . Suspension and takedown of malicious domains or accounts:Reactive measure and might not be immediate or comprehensive.

*

Importance of Training:Employees are often the first line of defense against social engineering attacks. Regular training ensures they are aware of the tactics used in such attacks, including those leveraging AI, and how to respond effectively.

Proactive Measure:Training increases vigilance and the likelihood of early detection, reducing the potential impact of the attack.

CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 3: Risk Response and Reporting, discusses the importance of training and awareness programs in mitigating social engineering risks.

The main goal of updating a risk awareness program in response to rising threats is to ensure employees understand new risks and how to respond to them, thereby enhancing overall security posture.

The primary accountability for a control owner is to ensure the control operates effectively, as they have the authority and responsibility to design, implement, monitor, and report on the performance and adequacy of the control, and to identify and address any control gaps or deficiencies. Communicating risk to senior management, owning the associated risk the control is mitigating, and identifying and assessing control weaknesses are not the primaryaccountabilities, as they are more related to the roles and responsibilities of the risk owner, the risk practitioner, or the auditor, respectively, rather than the control owner.Reference= CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 101.

Assessing the risk of using production data for testing before making a decision is the best recommendation for the risk practitioner, because it helps to balance the benefits and drawbacks of using real data for the proof of concept (POC) of a security tool. A POC is a demonstration or trial of a proposed solution or product to verify its feasibility, functionality, and value. A security tool is a software or hardware device that helps to protect the IT systems or networks from threats or attacks. Using production data for testing purposes can yield the best results, as it reflects the actual data that the security tool will handle in the operational environment. However, using production data for testing also poses risks, such as data leakage, data corruption, data privacy violation, or regulatory non-compliance. Therefore, assessing the risk ofusing production data for testing before making a decision is the best recommendation, as it helps to identify and evaluate the potential risks and issues, and to determine the appropriate controls or mitigating factors to reduce or eliminate them. Accepting the risk of using the production data, benchmarking against what peer organizations are doing, and denying the request are all possible recommendations, but they are not the best recommendation, as they do not consider the risk assessment process and the trade-offs involved in using production data for testing. Reference = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 208