Isaca CISM Certified Information Security Manager Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 6 Q76-90
Visit here for our full Isaca CISM exam dumps and practice test questions.
Question 76:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to integrate cybersecurity risk management into enterprise strategic planning?
A) Considering cybersecurity only as an IT issue without integration into the enterprise strategy
B) Establishing a structured cybersecurity risk management program aligned with enterprise strategy, including governance, risk assessment, mitigation, monitoring, reporting, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on technical security controls without strategic alignment
D) Addressing cybersecurity risks only after incidents or breaches occur
Answer: B
Explanation:
Integrating cybersecurity risk management into enterprise strategic planning ensures that risk mitigation supports overall business objectives and long-term sustainability. Option B, establishing a structured cybersecurity risk management program aligned with enterprise strategy, including governance, risk assessment, mitigation, monitoring, reporting, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it embeds security into decision-making, aligns investments with business priorities, and ensures accountability at all levels. Considering cybersecurity only as an IT issue (Option A) isolates responsibility, reduces visibility, and increases the likelihood of unaddressed risks affecting business operations. Relying solely on technical controls (Option C) is insufficient, as operational and strategic risks require governance, risk prioritization, and business alignment. Addressing cybersecurity only after incidents (Option D) is reactive and exposes the enterprise to financial, operational, and reputational damage.
A mature program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to embed cybersecurity risk management within the enterprise strategy. Risk assessments identify threats, vulnerabilities, potential business impacts, regulatory requirements, and operational dependencies, guiding resource allocation and mitigation priorities. Risk mitigation strategies may include technical controls, policy enforcement, process improvement, awareness programs, and operational resilience measures.
Monitoring mechanisms provide continuous visibility into risk exposure, emerging threats, and control effectiveness. Reporting ensures that executives, boards, and stakeholders are informed of cybersecurity posture, risk trends, and mitigation progress. Governance oversight ensures accountability, policy compliance, strategic alignment, and resource allocation. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs quantify risk reduction, control effectiveness, operational resilience, and alignment with enterprise objectives.
Training and awareness programs ensure personnel understand cybersecurity risks, their roles, responsibilities, and how operational decisions influence security outcomes. Scenario testing, tabletop exercises, and audits validate preparedness, risk management effectiveness, and operational alignment with enterprise strategy. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, emerging threats, and regulatory changes to refine processes, controls, governance, and strategic integration.
By embedding cybersecurity risk management into enterprise strategic planning, organizations reduce exposure to operational disruption, financial loss, regulatory penalties, and reputational harm. Cybersecurity becomes a strategic enabler, supporting sustainable growth, innovation, operational resilience, and stakeholder confidence. Proactive governance, risk monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that cybersecurity initiatives evolve alongside enterprise strategy, threat landscapes, and regulatory requirements, maintaining long-term organizational resilience.
Question 77:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure enterprise-wide incident response readiness?
A) Developing an incident response plan only after a significant security breach occurs
B) Implementing a comprehensive incident response program including governance, policy, roles and responsibilities, communication, monitoring, testing, metrics, training, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on IT personnel to respond to security incidents without defined processes or cross-functional coordination
D) Addressing incident response solely through external vendors without internal oversight or accountability
Answer: B
Explanation:
Enterprise-wide incident response readiness is critical for minimizing the operational, financial, and reputational impact of security events. Option B, implementing a comprehensive incident response program including governance, policy, roles and responsibilities, communication, monitoring, testing, metrics, training, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it ensures proactive, coordinated, and measurable incident management. Developing a plan only after a breach (Option A) is reactive and likely insufficient to prevent damage or regulatory penalties. Relying solely on IT personnel (Option C) isolates responsibility, ignores cross-functional dependencies, and reduces situational awareness and response effectiveness. Addressing incidents exclusively through external vendors (Option D) limits internal accountability, delays decision-making, and may misalign response actions with enterprise objectives.
A mature incident response program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to provide authority, accountability, and alignment with enterprise risk appetite. Policies define acceptable response actions, escalation protocols, roles and responsibilities, communication requirements, and compliance obligations. Cross-functional collaboration ensures that legal, operations, IT, HR, communications, and risk management are engaged in incident planning and response.
Monitoring and detection mechanisms provide real-time visibility into anomalous activities, security events, and potential incidents, allowing timely escalation and intervention. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure incident response effectiveness, including detection time, containment duration, recovery time, and compliance with regulatory obligations. Testing and tabletop exercises validate readiness, decision-making, communication, and operational coordination.
Training and awareness programs ensure personnel understand incident response procedures, reporting requirements, communication protocols, and roles. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from actual incidents, simulation exercises, audits, and evolving threat intelligence to refine policies, processes, controls, and governance structures. Scenario planning ensures readiness for a variety of incident types, including cyberattacks, insider threats, natural disasters, and operational failures.
By implementing a structured incident response program, organizations enhance operational resilience, minimize financial and reputational impact, maintain regulatory compliance, and strengthen stakeholder confidence. Proactive governance, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that the enterprise is prepared to detect, respond to, and recover from incidents effectively, transforming incident management into a strategic enabler of operational security, business continuity, and enterprise resilience.
Question 78:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to manage third-party and supply chain cybersecurity risks?
A) Relying solely on contractual agreements without ongoing monitoring or assessment
B) Implementing a structured third-party risk management program, including due diligence, risk assessment, contractual controls, monitoring, reporting, governance, and continuous improvement
C) Trusting third parties to implement security measures independently without verification or oversight
D) Addressing third-party risks only after incidents or breaches occur
Answer: B
Explanation:
Third-party and supply chain cybersecurity risks can significantly impact enterprise operations, regulatory compliance, and reputational standing. Option B, implementing a structured third-party risk management program including due diligence, risk assessment, contractual controls, monitoring, reporting, governance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it provides a comprehensive approach to identify, assess, mitigate, and monitor risks from external partners. Relying solely on contracts (Option A) is insufficient, as contracts alone do not ensure compliance, operational alignment, or risk mitigation. Trusting third parties without verification (Option C) reduces visibility, increases operational exposure, and leaves the enterprise vulnerable to security incidents. Addressing risks only after incidents occur (Option D) is reactive and often results in financial, operational, and reputational harm.
A mature third-party risk management program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to ensure accountability, policy enforcement, and strategic alignment. Due diligence evaluates the security posture, compliance, financial stability, operational capacity, and incident history of potential partners. Risk assessments determine the likelihood and potential impact of cybersecurity threats from third-party systems and operations.
Contractual controls define security requirements, incident reporting obligations, audit rights, liability clauses, compliance mandates, and operational expectations. Monitoring mechanisms provide ongoing visibility into third-party security practices, operational changes, performance, and incidents. Reporting communicates risk exposure, remediation progress, and compliance status to executives and stakeholders.
Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure third-party compliance, control effectiveness, risk reduction, and operational performance. Training and awareness programs ensure internal teams understand risk management responsibilities, third-party policies, and escalation procedures. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from audits, incidents, regulatory changes, and emerging threat intelligence to refine policies, due diligence processes, monitoring practices, and governance structures.
By implementing a structured third-party risk management program, enterprises reduce exposure to data breaches, operational disruption, regulatory violations, and reputational damage. Third-party risk becomes a managed component of enterprise cybersecurity, supporting operational resilience, regulatory compliance, and stakeholder confidence. Proactive governance, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that third-party cybersecurity risks are identified, mitigated, and managed effectively, maintaining enterprise-wide operational and strategic security objectives.
Question 79:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to establish a security metrics and reporting program that supports enterprise risk management?
A) Collecting ad hoc security data without alignment to enterprise objectives or risk management priorities
B) Implementing a structured security metrics and reporting program, including defined metrics, data collection, analysis, reporting, governance, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on vendor-provided dashboards without tailoring metrics to enterprise needs
D) Addressing security metrics only after incidents, audits, or regulatory findings
Answer: B
Explanation:
Security metrics and reporting are critical for demonstrating the effectiveness of security programs, guiding risk-based decisions, and ensuring alignment with enterprise risk management objectives. Option B, implementing a structured security metrics and reporting program including defined metrics, data collection, analysis, reporting, governance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it provides actionable insights, accountability, and strategic alignment. Collecting ad hoc data (Option A) lacks structure, consistency, and relevance, reducing its value for decision-making. Relying solely on vendor dashboards (Option C) may not provide metrics tailored to enterprise objectives, risks, or regulatory requirements. Addressing metrics only after incidents (Option D) is reactive and fails to provide proactive risk visibility and management.
A mature metrics and reporting program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to ensure that metrics are aligned with enterprise strategy, risk appetite, and operational priorities. Defined metrics identify what is measured, the rationale, thresholds, and expected outcomes, covering areas such as incident response, vulnerability management, access control, compliance, operational performance, and emerging threats.
Data collection processes ensure accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and consistency. Analysis provides actionable insights, trends, and correlations to inform decisions on risk mitigation, resource allocation, policy updates, and strategic planning. Reporting communicates findings to executives, boards, risk committees, and operational teams, highlighting areas of concern, performance against targets, and emerging risks.
Governance oversight ensures accountability, policy adherence, regulatory compliance, and alignment with enterprise risk management objectives. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs quantify risk exposure, control effectiveness, operational performance, and program maturity. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from audits, incidents, regulatory changes, emerging threats, and operational feedback to refine metrics, collection methods, analysis, and reporting processes.
By implementing a structured security metrics and reporting program, organizations enhance visibility into security posture, operational effectiveness, and risk management. Metrics support proactive decision-making, resource prioritization, compliance demonstration, and stakeholder confidence. Proactive governance, analysis, and continuous improvement ensure that security metrics evolve alongside enterprise objectives, threat landscapes, and regulatory requirements, transforming metrics and reporting into a strategic tool that drives enterprise resilience, operational effectiveness, and long-term security outcomes.
Question 80:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure a secure and resilient enterprise network architecture?
A) Designing network architecture without formal security requirements or risk assessment
B) Implementing a secure and resilient network architecture program, including risk assessment, security controls, segmentation, monitoring, incident response, governance, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on default security features of network devices and solutions without enterprise-specific configuration
D) Addressing network security issues only after network compromises or operational failures occur
Answer: B
Explanation:
A secure and resilient enterprise network architecture is fundamental to protecting information assets, ensuring operational continuity, and mitigating cyber threats. Option B, implementing a secure and resilient network architecture program including risk assessment, security controls, segmentation, monitoring, incident response, governance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it ensures a structured, proactive, and holistic approach. Designing without security requirements (Option A) exposes the enterprise to unmanaged vulnerabilities and operational disruption. Relying solely on default features (Option C) is insufficient because enterprise-specific configurations are required to meet risk, operational, and compliance requirements. Addressing network security only after compromises (Option D) is reactive, often resulting in significant operational, financial, and reputational impact.
A mature network architecture program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to ensure alignment with enterprise objectives, risk appetite, and regulatory obligations. Risk assessments identify threats, vulnerabilities, critical network segments, potential impacts, and operational dependencies, guiding security design and controls.
Security controls include firewalls, intrusion detection/prevention systems, encryption, authentication, access management, and endpoint protection, implemented according to risk priority. Network segmentation isolates sensitive data, operational systems, and critical infrastructure, reducing lateral movement of threats and containing potential compromises. Monitoring mechanisms provide continuous visibility into network traffic, anomalies, threats, and policy compliance.
Incident response plans ensure timely detection, containment, mitigation, and recovery from network incidents, integrating with broader enterprise incident management processes. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure network security posture, control effectiveness, risk exposure, and operational performance. Training and awareness programs ensure personnel understand network security responsibilities, incident reporting procedures, and operational best practices. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from audits, incidents, emerging threats, technology changes, and operational feedback to refine network architecture, security controls, monitoring, and governance structures.
By implementing a structured and resilient network architecture program, enterprises reduce exposure to cyberattacks, operational disruption, and regulatory noncompliance. Secure and resilient networks support business continuity, operational efficiency, innovation, and stakeholder confidence. Proactive governance, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that network security evolves with enterprise needs, emerging threats, and technological advancements, creating a sustainable, resilient, and secure enterprise network environment.
Question 81:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to implement an enterprise-wide identity and access management (IAM) program?
A) Allowing departments to manage identities independently without enterprise oversight
B) Establishing a structured IAM program including governance, policy, role-based access, authentication, authorization, monitoring, auditing, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on default authentication features of applications without centralized control
D) Addressing identity and access management only after unauthorized access incidents occur
Answer: B
Explanation:
An enterprise-wide identity and access management (IAM) program is fundamental for securing systems, protecting sensitive data, enforcing least privilege, and ensuring compliance. Option B, establishing a structured IAM program including governance, policy, role-based access, authentication, authorization, monitoring, auditing, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it ensures consistency, accountability, and strategic alignment across the organization. Allowing departments to manage identities independently (Option A) introduces inconsistencies, increases the risk of unauthorized access, and reduces visibility. Relying solely on default authentication features (Option C) is insufficient because enterprise security requirements, regulatory obligations, and risk management priorities require centralized, controlled, and auditable IAM practices. Addressing IAM only after incidents (Option D) is reactive and exposes the enterprise to operational, reputational, and regulatory risks.
A mature IAM program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to provide authority, accountability, and alignment with organizational objectives. Policies define user roles, access rights, authentication requirements, approval processes, and compliance obligations. Role-based access ensures that users are granted only the privileges necessary to perform their job functions, reducing the risk of insider threats, errors, and non-compliance.
Authentication mechanisms may include multi-factor authentication, single sign-on, biometrics, and other advanced security measures to ensure secure verification of user identities. Authorization processes control access to systems, data, and applications based on roles, responsibilities, and risk exposure. Monitoring mechanisms provide real-time visibility into access patterns, anomalies, and potential policy violations, enabling proactive intervention.
Auditing ensures accountability, regulatory compliance, and traceability of access decisions and changes. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure access control effectiveness, unauthorized access attempts, policy adherence, and overall IAM program maturity. Training and awareness programs ensure employees, contractors, and third parties understand IAM policies, security responsibilities, and proper access request procedures. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, emerging threats, regulatory changes, and technology updates to refine policies, processes, and governance.
By implementing a structured IAM program, enterprises reduce the risk of unauthorized access, data breaches, and operational disruption. IAM becomes a strategic enabler, supporting secure operations, regulatory compliance, operational efficiency, and stakeholder confidence. Proactive governance, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that identity and access management evolves with enterprise needs, emerging threats, and regulatory requirements, creating a secure and resilient operational environment.
Question 82:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to implement a data privacy program aligned with regulatory and enterprise requirements?
A) Reacting to data privacy concerns only after regulatory enforcement actions or data breaches occur
B) Establishing a structured data privacy program, including governance, policies, data mapping, risk assessment, consent management, training, monitoring, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on technical encryption solutions without formal privacy governance or policy enforcement
D) Delegating privacy responsibilities entirely to IT without enterprise coordination or accountability
Answer: B
Explanation:
A data privacy program ensures that personal and sensitive information is collected, processed, stored, and shared in compliance with legal, regulatory, and organizational requirements. Option B, establishing a structured data privacy program including governance, policies, data mapping, risk assessment, consent management, training, monitoring, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it provides a comprehensive framework to manage privacy risks proactively and systematically. Reacting only after incidents (Option A) is reactive and exposes the organization to regulatory penalties, financial loss, and reputational damage. Relying solely on technical encryption (Option C) is insufficient because privacy involves policies, procedures, governance, consent management, and operational processes. Delegating privacy responsibilities solely to IT (Option D) isolates accountability, reduces organizational visibility, and risks non-compliance.
A mature data privacy program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to ensure strategic alignment, accountability, and authority for enterprise-wide implementation. Policies define data handling, retention, sharing, access control, consent, and compliance requirements. Data mapping identifies personal data across systems, processes, and third-party interactions, providing visibility into risk exposure. Risk assessments evaluate potential harm, likelihood of data breaches, regulatory impact, and operational consequences, guiding mitigation priorities.
Consent management ensures that data subjects’ rights are respected, including opt-in/opt-out mechanisms, data access requests, and lawful processing. Monitoring mechanisms track policy adherence, unauthorized access, data transfers, and emerging privacy risks. Training and awareness programs educate personnel on privacy obligations, secure handling of personal data, and compliance requirements. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs quantify program effectiveness, risk reduction, compliance, and operational maturity.
Audits and assessments validate compliance, identify gaps, and reinforce accountability. Scenario simulations and incident response exercises ensure readiness to manage data breaches or privacy violations. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from audits, incidents, regulatory updates, emerging threats, and stakeholder feedback to refine policies, procedures, governance structures, and operational processes.
By implementing a structured data privacy program, enterprises protect personal and sensitive information, reduce regulatory risk, and maintain stakeholder trust. Privacy management becomes an integral part of enterprise risk management, supporting operational resilience, legal compliance, ethical standards, and strategic objectives. Proactive governance, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that privacy practices evolve with regulatory changes, emerging threats, and business needs, maintaining long-term compliance, security, and operational integrity.
Question 83:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure secure software development lifecycle (SDLC) practices within an enterprise?
A) Allowing development teams to follow ad hoc processes without security oversight or standards
B) Establishing a structured, secure SDLC program, including governance, policies, secure coding standards, risk assessments, code reviews, testing, monitoring, training, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on automated scanning tools without human review or governance
D) Addressing software security vulnerabilities only after production deployment or incidents occur
Answer: B
Explanation:
Secure software development lifecycle (SDLC) practices are critical to minimizing vulnerabilities, ensuring compliance, and protecting enterprise assets. Option B, establishing a structured, secure SDLC program including governance, policies, secure coding standards, risk assessments, code reviews, testing, monitoring, training, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it embeds security at every phase of software development and operational deployment. Allowing ad hoc development (Option A) leads to inconsistent practices, undetected vulnerabilities, and operational risk. Relying solely on automated tools (Option C) may detect some issues, but lacks context, risk prioritization, and governance oversight. Addressing vulnerabilities only after deployment (Option D) is reactive, resulting in operational, financial, and reputational consequences.
A mature, secure SDLC program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to provide authority, accountability, and strategic alignment. Policies define secure coding standards, testing requirements, risk assessment protocols, and compliance obligations. Risk assessments evaluate potential vulnerabilities, business impact, regulatory implications, and operational dependencies, guiding design and implementation decisions.
Code reviews and peer assessments identify weaknesses, ensure adherence to standards, and provide learning opportunities for developers. Testing includes static and dynamic analysis, penetration testing, vulnerability scanning, and functional testing to detect security flaws and operational issues. Monitoring mechanisms track adherence to secure development practices, emerging threats, and defect trends.
Training and awareness programs educate developers, testers, and operations personnel on secure coding, threat modeling, risk assessment, and vulnerability remediation. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure SDLC security maturity, vulnerability rates, defect remediation time, and adherence to standards. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, emerging threats, regulatory updates, and technological advancements to refine policies, procedures, controls, and governance structures.
By implementing a structured, secure SDLC program, organizations reduce the likelihood of introducing vulnerabilities, minimize operational and regulatory risks, and enhance software quality and reliability. Security becomes an integral part of software design and development, supporting operational resilience, compliance, and strategic objectives. Proactive governance, monitoring, training, and continuous improvement ensure that secure SDLC practices evolve with enterprise needs, emerging threats, and industry standards, creating resilient and secure software systems throughout their lifecycle.
Question 84:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure enterprise business continuity and disaster recovery readiness?
A) Developing continuity and disaster recovery plans only after experiencing operational disruptions
B) Implementing a comprehensive business continuity and disaster recovery program, including risk assessment, impact analysis, plan development, testing, training, monitoring, governance, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on backup systems without formal plans, testing, or governance
D) Addressing continuity only for IT systems without considering business processes or critical operations
Answer: B
Explanation:
Business continuity and disaster recovery (BC/DR) programs are essential to ensure that critical business operations can continue during disruptions and that recovery occurs efficiently. Option B, implementing a comprehensive BC/DR program including risk assessment, impact analysis, plan development, testing, training, monitoring, governance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it provides structured, proactive, and enterprise-wide readiness. Developing plans only after disruptions (Option A) is reactive and exposes the enterprise to operational, financial, and reputational harm. Relying solely on backup systems (Option C) is insufficient because it does not address recovery procedures, process dependencies, or operational readiness. Addressing continuity only for IT systems (Option D) ignores the interdependencies of business processes, personnel, supply chains, and external partners.
A mature BC/DR program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to ensure authority, accountability, and alignment with enterprise objectives and risk appetite. Risk assessments identify potential disruptions, threats, vulnerabilities, and operational impact. Business impact analyses evaluate critical processes, dependencies, recovery time objectives (RTOs), recovery point objectives (RPOs), and operational priorities.
Plans define procedures, roles, responsibilities, communication protocols, and resource requirements to maintain or resume operations. Testing and simulation exercises validate readiness, coordination, and effectiveness of response procedures. Training ensures personnel understand their roles, responsibilities, and procedures during disruptions. Monitoring mechanisms track plan readiness, emerging threats, and compliance with BC/DR objectives.
Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure plan effectiveness, recovery time, system availability, process resilience, and operational continuity. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from tests, incidents, audits, regulatory changes, and emerging threats to refine plans, governance, procedures, and operational capabilities. Scenario planning ensures readiness for diverse events, including cyberattacks, natural disasters, infrastructure failures, and supply chain disruptions.
By implementing a structured BC/DR program, enterprises enhance resilience, reduce operational and financial risks, maintain stakeholder confidence, and ensure regulatory compliance. Proactive governance, testing, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that continuity and recovery capabilities evolve alongside business priorities, technological advancements, and emerging threats, supporting enterprise sustainability, operational effectiveness, and strategic objectives.
Question 85:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to establish an enterprise security governance framework that aligns with business objectives?
A) Implementing security controls without formal policies, roles, or alignment with business strategy
B) Establishing a structured enterprise security governance framework, including policies, roles and responsibilities, risk alignment, performance metrics, oversight, compliance, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on technical security teams to enforce security practices without enterprise-wide governance
D) Addressing governance gaps only after security incidents, audits, or regulatory findings
Answer: B
Explanation:
Enterprise security governance provides the framework for ensuring security activities align with organizational objectives, risk management priorities, and regulatory requirements. Option B, establishing a structured enterprise security governance framework including policies, roles and responsibilities, risk alignment, performance metrics, oversight, compliance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it integrates security decision-making into enterprise strategy, ensures accountability, and enables continuous improvement. Implementing controls without formal policies or alignment (Option A) risks inconsistencies, gaps, and misaligned security efforts. Relying solely on technical teams (Option C) isolates responsibility and limits strategic oversight. Addressing governance gaps only after incidents (Option D) is reactive and exposes the enterprise to operational, regulatory, and reputational risks.
A mature governance framework begins with executive sponsorship to ensure authority, accountability, and alignment with enterprise objectives. Policies define acceptable use, risk appetite, operational priorities, compliance obligations, and decision-making authority. Roles and responsibilities clarify accountability across executive, management, operational, and technical teams. Risk alignment ensures that security initiatives support enterprise objectives, mitigate critical risks, and optimize resource allocation.
Performance metrics, KPIs, and KRIs quantify security effectiveness, compliance, risk reduction, operational maturity, and program success. Oversight mechanisms monitor policy enforcement, control implementation, incident management, and regulatory adherence. Compliance ensures alignment with legal, regulatory, and industry requirements. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from audits, incidents, emerging threats, regulatory changes, and technology advancements to refine governance structures, policies, and operational practices.
By implementing a structured enterprise security governance framework, organizations enhance strategic alignment, operational resilience, regulatory compliance, and stakeholder confidence. Governance transforms security from a reactive operational function into a strategic enabler of enterprise objectives. Proactive oversight, metrics, and continuous improvement ensure that security governance evolves with business strategy, emerging threats, and regulatory requirements, creating a resilient, accountable, and effective enterprise security program.
Question 86:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to implement enterprise-wide cybersecurity awareness and training programs?
A) Conducting occasional training sessions without a structured curriculum or alignment to enterprise risks
B) Establishing a structured cybersecurity awareness program, including governance, role-based training, simulated exercises, performance metrics, monitoring, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on written policies and emails without interactive training or engagement
D) Addressing awareness and training only after a security incident has occurred
Answer: B
Explanation:
Enterprise-wide cybersecurity awareness and training programs are critical for reducing human-related risks, strengthening the security culture, and ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements. Option B, establishing a structured cybersecurity awareness program including governance, role-based training, simulated exercises, performance metrics, monitoring, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it ensures consistent, proactive, and measurable engagement across the enterprise. Conducting occasional, unstructured sessions (Option A) is insufficient, as it lacks consistency, relevance, and alignment with risk priorities. Relying solely on written policies and emails (Option C) fails to engage employees, lacks interactivity, and does not ensure comprehension or behavior change. Addressing training only after incidents (Option D) is reactive and increases the likelihood of recurring human-related security breaches.
A mature program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to provide authority, accountability, and alignment with organizational objectives. Policies define training requirements, frequency, roles, responsibilities, and compliance obligations. Role-based training ensures that employees, contractors, and executives receive content relevant to their responsibilities, operational risks, and exposure to sensitive data.
Simulated exercises, such as phishing tests, tabletop exercises, and social engineering simulations, provide practical learning experiences and validate awareness effectiveness. Monitoring and metrics assess completion rates, knowledge retention, behavior changes, incident reduction, and alignment with organizational risk management priorities. Feedback mechanisms identify knowledge gaps, misunderstandings, or operational deficiencies.
Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, emerging threats, technology changes, and employee feedback to refine curriculum, delivery methods, and engagement strategies. By embedding awareness and training into operational and strategic processes, organizations ensure that human behaviors reinforce security policies, reduce insider threats, improve compliance, and enhance overall cybersecurity posture.
A structured awareness program promotes a security-conscious culture, supports risk-based decision-making, and transforms employees from potential vulnerabilities into active participants in enterprise security. Proactive governance, role-based training, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that the program evolves with emerging threats, regulatory requirements, technological changes, and business priorities, maintaining enterprise-wide readiness and resilience.
Question 87:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to implement enterprise vulnerability management and patching programs?
A) Applying patches and updates sporadically based on IT staff availability without risk assessment
B) Establishing a structured vulnerability management program, including risk assessment, patch prioritization, monitoring, reporting, governance, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on vendor-provided patch notifications without internal validation or testing
D) Addressing vulnerabilities only after a security incident or exploit has been observed
Answer: B
Explanation:
Vulnerability management and patching are essential to maintain enterprise security, prevent exploitation, and support compliance with regulatory frameworks. Option B, establishing a structured vulnerability management program including risk assessment, patch prioritization, monitoring, reporting, governance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it ensures timely, systematic, and risk-based mitigation of security weaknesses. Applying patches sporadically (Option A) introduces inconsistencies, leaves critical vulnerabilities unaddressed, and increases operational and reputational risk. Relying solely on vendor notifications (Option C) is insufficient because internal validation, testing, and operational prioritization are necessary to ensure compatibility and minimize disruption. Addressing vulnerabilities only after incidents (Option D) is reactive and exposes the organization to preventable security breaches.
A mature program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to provide authority, accountability, and alignment with enterprise risk management objectives. Risk assessments evaluate vulnerabilities based on severity, exploitability, business impact, regulatory implications, and operational dependencies, guiding patch prioritization. Policies define patching schedules, validation procedures, testing requirements, and communication protocols.
Monitoring mechanisms track vulnerability detection, patch deployment status, compliance with policies, and emerging threats. Reporting provides visibility to executives, boards, and risk committees regarding patch coverage, outstanding vulnerabilities, and risk exposure. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs quantify vulnerability resolution times, patch success rates, incident reduction, and overall program maturity.
Training and awareness programs ensure personnel understand procedures, responsibilities, and the operational impact of patch management. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, emerging threats, technological changes, and regulatory updates to refine policies, risk assessment methodologies, deployment strategies, and governance structures. Scenario testing and simulations validate program readiness for zero-day vulnerabilities, widespread exploits, and critical operational systems.
By implementing a structured vulnerability management program, organizations reduce exposure to cyberattacks, operational disruption, and regulatory noncompliance. Proactive governance, risk-based prioritization, monitoring, and continuous improvement transform vulnerability management from a reactive operational activity into a strategic enabler of enterprise resilience, operational stability, and stakeholder confidence.
Question 88:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to establish a comprehensive enterprise risk management (ERM) framework?
A) Allowing departments to manage risks independently without centralized oversight
B) Implementing a structured ERM framework, including risk identification, assessment, prioritization, mitigation, monitoring, reporting, governance, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on IT risk assessments without integrating business, operational, and strategic risks
D) Addressing risk only after incidents, audits, or regulatory findings occur
Answer: B
Explanation:
An enterprise risk management (ERM) framework ensures that risks across all organizational domains are identified, assessed, and managed in alignment with strategic objectives. Option B, implementing a structured ERM framework including risk identification, assessment, prioritization, mitigation, monitoring, reporting, governance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it provides a consistent, proactive, and integrated approach to enterprise-wide risk management. Allowing departments to manage risks independently (Option A) results in fragmented risk visibility, inconsistent mitigation strategies, and potential gaps in critical areas. Relying solely on IT risk assessments (Option C) ignores operational, financial, reputational, and strategic risks, limiting enterprise-wide risk awareness and decision-making. Addressing risks only after incidents (Option D) is reactive, often costly, and increases exposure to preventable losses.
A mature ERM framework begins with governance and executive sponsorship to provide authority, accountability, and strategic alignment. Risk identification systematically catalogs potential threats across business, operational, IT, financial, compliance, reputational, and strategic domains. Risk assessments evaluate the likelihood, impact, and priority of each risk, guiding mitigation strategies.
Mitigation strategies include controls, policy enforcement, process redesign, training, technology solutions, insurance, and contingency planning. Monitoring mechanisms provide continuous visibility into risk exposure, emerging threats, and the effectiveness of controls. Reporting communicates risk posture, mitigation progress, and emerging concerns to executives, boards, and risk committees. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure program maturity, risk reduction, operational performance, and alignment with strategic objectives.
Training and awareness programs ensure that employees understand risk management responsibilities, enterprise risk policies, and procedures for reporting and mitigating risks. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, regulatory changes, emerging threats, and operational feedback to refine policies, governance structures, risk assessment methodologies, and mitigation strategies. Scenario planning and stress testing validate readiness for high-impact risks, operational failures, and emerging threats.
By implementing a structured ERM framework, organizations enhance decision-making, operational resilience, regulatory compliance, and stakeholder confidence. Proactive governance, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that risk management evolves with strategic priorities, emerging threats, and organizational objectives, transforming ERM into a strategic enabler of sustainable growth, operational stability, and long-term enterprise success.
Question 89:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to implement secure cloud adoption practices within an enterprise?
A) Migrating applications to the cloud without formal security policies, risk assessment, or governance
B) Establishing a structured cloud security program, including governance, policy, risk assessment, configuration management, monitoring, vendor management, incident response, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on cloud vendor default security controls without enterprise-specific configurations or oversight
D) Addressing cloud security only after a breach or misconfiguration is detected
Answer: B
Explanation:
Secure cloud adoption is essential for protecting data, applications, and infrastructure while leveraging cloud scalability and flexibility. Option B, establishing a structured cloud security program including governance, policy, risk assessment, configuration management, monitoring, vendor management, incident response, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it provides a comprehensive, proactive, and controlled framework. Migrating without policies or governance (Option A) exposes the enterprise to misconfigurations, data breaches, compliance violations, and operational disruption. Relying solely on vendor default controls (Option C) is insufficient, as enterprise-specific requirements, compliance obligations, and operational needs must be addressed. Addressing cloud security only after a breach (Option D) is reactive and increases exposure to preventable incidents and financial or reputational loss.
A mature cloud security program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to provide authority, accountability, and alignment with enterprise strategy. Policies define acceptable use, access control, data protection, regulatory compliance, monitoring, and incident response requirements. Risk assessments evaluate threats, vulnerabilities, operational dependencies, compliance obligations, and potential business impact.
Configuration management ensures secure cloud deployment, proper access controls, encryption, and compliance with security baselines. Monitoring mechanisms provide real-time visibility into cloud activity, threats, vulnerabilities, and compliance deviations. Vendor management ensures that cloud providers meet security, contractual, and regulatory requirements. Incident response plans integrate cloud-specific scenarios into enterprise-wide response procedures.
Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure cloud security posture, compliance, incident reduction, and operational effectiveness. Training and awareness programs educate personnel on cloud security policies, secure practices, and incident reporting. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from audits, incidents, emerging threats, regulatory changes, and technological advancements to refine cloud security policies, configurations, governance, and operational processes.
By implementing a structured cloud security program, organizations reduce operational, regulatory, and reputational risks, ensure compliance, and enable secure cloud adoption. Proactive governance, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that cloud security evolves with enterprise needs, emerging threats, regulatory requirements, and technological innovation, supporting resilience, efficiency, and strategic business objectives.
Question 90:
Which of the following is the most effective approach to implement enterprise data classification and protection programs?
A) Applying generic protection measures without identifying data sensitivity or value
B) Establishing a structured data classification and protection program, including governance, policy, risk assessment, classification labels, access controls, monitoring, training, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on endpoint encryption without policies, monitoring, or governance
D) Addressing data protection only after incidents, breaches, or regulatory enforcement actions
Answer: B
Explanation:
Data classification and protection are essential for safeguarding sensitive information, meeting compliance obligations, and reducing operational and reputational risks. Option B, establishing a structured data classification and protection program including governance, policy, risk assessment, classification labels, access controls, monitoring, training, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it ensures that data protection efforts are consistent, risk-based, and aligned with enterprise objectives. Applying generic measures without classifying data (Option A) may leave sensitive information exposed or over-protect non-critical data. Relying solely on endpoint encryption (Option C) addresses only one aspect of protection and fails to provide governance, monitoring, or enterprise-wide control. Addressing protection only after incidents (Option D) is reactive and increases the likelihood of regulatory, operational, and reputational damage.
A mature program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to provide authority, accountability, and strategic alignment. Policies define classification levels, handling requirements, access controls, retention, sharing protocols, and regulatory obligations. Risk assessments evaluate the potential impact of data loss, unauthorized access, operational disruption, or non-compliance.
Classification labels categorize data according to sensitivity, confidentiality, criticality, and compliance requirements. Access controls enforce least privilege, role-based permissions, and separation of duties. Monitoring mechanisms detect unauthorized access, policy violations, and potential data leaks. Auditing ensures accountability, traceability, and compliance verification.
Training and awareness programs educate employees and stakeholders on proper data handling, classification procedures, security policies, and compliance obligations. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure classification accuracy, policy adherence, incident frequency, and protection effectiveness. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from audits, incidents, emerging threats, regulatory updates, and operational feedback to refine classification schemes, controls, policies, and governance structures.
By implementing a structured data classification and protection program, enterprises enhance information security, ensure regulatory compliance, and reduce operational and reputational risks. Proactive governance, monitoring, training, and continuous improvement transform data protection from an operational task into a strategic enabler that supports enterprise resilience, decision-making, and stakeholder confidence.