Isaca  CISM Certified Information Security Manager Exam Dumps and Practice Test Questions Set 5 Q61-75

Visit here for our full Isaca CISM exam dumps and practice test questions.

Question 61:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure enterprise-wide protection against insider threats?

A) Relying solely on access controls without monitoring user behavior
B) Implementing a comprehensive insider threat program, including user behavior analytics, access management, monitoring, training, incident response, and governance oversight
C) Responding to insider threats only after incidents are reported
D) Delegating insider threat management entirely to human resources without IT or security involvement

Answer: B

Explanation:

Insider threats are one of the most complex and challenging risks for enterprises because they involve trusted personnel who have legitimate access to systems and information. Option B, implementing a comprehensive insider threat program including user behavior analytics, access management, monitoring, training, incident response, and governance oversight, is the most effective because it addresses both preventive and detective measures while integrating governance and accountability. Relying solely on access controls (Option A) is insufficient because insiders may abuse legitimate privileges, circumvent controls, or exploit gaps that access policies cannot prevent. Responding only after incidents (Option C) is reactive, often too late to prevent data loss, operational disruption, or reputational damage. Delegating management entirely to human resources (Option D) isolates accountability, ignores technical controls, and undermines a holistic approach.

A mature insider threat program begins with governance oversight and executive sponsorship, ensuring alignment with enterprise objectives, risk appetite, and regulatory obligations. Policies define acceptable use, monitoring procedures, data handling, access privileges, reporting obligations, and consequences of violations. User behavior analytics (UBA) or entity behavior analytics (UEBA) provides advanced detection of anomalous behavior, unusual access patterns, and potential insider threats, enabling proactive intervention.

Access management enforces least privilege, role-based access control, separation of duties, and periodic privilege review to reduce unnecessary exposure and mitigate opportunities for malicious or inadvertent misuse. Monitoring mechanisms track system activity, data access, file transfers, network behavior, and anomaly alerts, providing early detection of potential insider threats. Training and awareness programs educate employees, contractors, and third parties about policies, acceptable behavior, ethical considerations, and reporting procedures, fostering a culture of compliance and vigilance.

Incident response procedures are tailored to insider threat scenarios, ensuring rapid containment, investigation, mitigation, and coordination with legal, HR, IT, and security teams. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure program effectiveness, detection capabilities, incident response efficiency, and risk exposure. Scenario simulations, tabletop exercises, and red-team testing validate readiness and operational effectiveness. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, monitoring, and emerging threat intelligence to refine policies, controls, and operational processes.

By implementing a comprehensive insider threat program, organizations reduce exposure to data breaches, operational disruption, financial loss, regulatory penalties, and reputational damage. Proactive monitoring, integrated governance, and behavioral analytics transform insider threat management into a strategic capability, ensuring resilience, operational continuity, and stakeholder confidence while aligning with enterprise objectives and risk management priorities.

Question 62:

Which of the following is the most effective method to ensure information security alignment with enterprise strategic objectives?

A) Focusing security investments solely on technical solutions without considering business objectives
B) Establishing a strategic information security governance framework with executive sponsorship, alignment with enterprise objectives, risk-based prioritization, performance measurement, and continuous improvement
C) Responding to security incidents reactively without strategic integration
D) Delegating security alignment entirely to IT managers without enterprise oversight

Answer: B

Explanation:

Aligning information security with enterprise strategic objectives ensures that security initiatives contribute to business value, risk management, compliance, and operational efficiency. Option B, establishing a strategic information security governance framework with executive sponsorship, alignment with enterprise objectives, risk-based prioritization, performance measurement, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it integrates security into strategic decision-making, resource allocation, and organizational culture. Focusing solely on technical solutions (Option A) risks misalignment with business priorities, resource inefficiency, and missed opportunities to manage enterprise risks holistically. Responding reactively to incidents (Option C) addresses operational failures but does not ensure strategic alignment or proactive risk management. Delegating alignment entirely to IT managers (Option D) isolates accountability, lacks enterprise-wide visibility, and fails to integrate security with strategic planning.

A mature governance framework begins with executive sponsorship, board oversight, and cross-functional engagement, ensuring security is considered in strategic planning, investment decisions, and risk management processes. Risk-based prioritization ensures that security initiatives address critical business risks, regulatory requirements, and strategic objectives, optimizing resource allocation. Policies, standards, and procedures guide operational implementation, ensuring consistency, accountability, and alignment with enterprise priorities.

Performance measurement through KPIs, KRIs, and metrics tracks security effectiveness, alignment with objectives, operational performance, and risk mitigation outcomes. Monitoring mechanisms provide real-time visibility into security posture, control effectiveness, and emerging threats. Scenario simulations, tabletop exercises, and stress testing validate the effectiveness of security controls and operational readiness in meeting strategic objectives. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, risk assessments, threat intelligence, and operational monitoring to refine policies, governance structures, and operational practices.

Training and awareness programs ensure that personnel understand security objectives, their responsibilities, and how security contributes to enterprise goals. Integration with enterprise risk management ensures that security decisions are made in the context of overall enterprise risks, risk appetite, and strategic planning. Communication and reporting mechanisms provide transparency, accountability, and visibility for executives, managers, and stakeholders, enabling informed decision-making and prioritization.

By establishing a strategic information security governance framework, organizations ensure that security initiatives are proactive, risk-based, and value-driven. Security becomes a business enabler, supporting operational resilience, regulatory compliance, stakeholder confidence, and long-term strategic success. Alignment ensures that security investments deliver measurable value, mitigate enterprise risks effectively, and adapt to changing business, regulatory, and threat landscapes. Continuous oversight, measurement, and improvement embed security into organizational culture, operational processes, and strategic decision-making, transforming it from a technical function into a critical component of enterprise strategy.

Question 63:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to integrate cybersecurity risk management into enterprise risk management (ERM)?

A) Managing cybersecurity risk independently without integration with enterprise objectives
B) Embedding cybersecurity risk into ERM through risk identification, assessment, mitigation, monitoring, reporting, and alignment with strategic and operational objectives
C) Addressing cybersecurity risk only after a significant incident occurs
D) Relying solely on external consultants to manage cybersecurity risk without internal governance

Answer: B

Explanation:

Cybersecurity risk is inherently linked to enterprise objectives, operational continuity, and strategic success. Option B, embedding cybersecurity risk into enterprise risk management (ERM) through risk identification, assessment, mitigation, monitoring, reporting, and alignment with strategic and operational objectives, is the most effective because it ensures a holistic, proactive, and accountable approach to managing organizational risks. Managing cybersecurity risk independently (Option A) isolates decision-making, lacks enterprise context, and may overlook critical dependencies. Addressing risk only after incidents (Option C) is reactive, leaving the enterprise exposed to operational, financial, and reputational consequences. Relying solely on external consultants (Option D) provides expertise but lacks internal ownership, strategic integration, and operational accountability.

A mature integration process begins with executive sponsorship and governance oversight, ensuring that cybersecurity risk is considered alongside other enterprise risks in strategic decision-making, resource allocation, and operational planning. Risk identification assesses threats, vulnerabilities, and potential impacts across the enterprise, considering technology, processes, personnel, regulatory requirements, and business objectives. Risk assessment quantifies likelihood and impact, prioritizing mitigation efforts based on enterprise risk appetite and strategic priorities.

Mitigation strategies encompass technical, administrative, and procedural controls, tailored to the nature of the risk and its potential impact on business objectives. Continuous monitoring tracks control effectiveness, emerging threats, and operational exposures, providing real-time visibility into the enterprise risk landscape. Reporting mechanisms provide transparency, accountability, and actionable insights for executives, risk committees, and stakeholders, supporting informed decision-making.

Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs quantify cybersecurity risk exposure, mitigation effectiveness, and operational resilience, enabling data-driven adjustments to security strategy and resource allocation. Scenario simulations, tabletop exercises, penetration testing, and stress testing validate the effectiveness of controls, incident response procedures, and risk management integration. Training and awareness programs educate personnel on cybersecurity risks, risk management processes, and operational responsibilities, reinforcing a culture of accountability and proactive risk management.

Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, threat intelligence, regulatory changes, and operational monitoring to refine risk management processes, policies, controls, and governance structures. Integration with ERM ensures that cybersecurity risk is assessed, prioritized, and managed in the context of broader enterprise risks, facilitating strategic alignment, operational resilience, and stakeholder confidence.

By embedding cybersecurity risk management into ERM, organizations transform cybersecurity from a technical function into a strategic capability. This approach ensures proactive identification, assessment, mitigation, and monitoring of risks, aligned with enterprise objectives, regulatory requirements, and operational priorities. Holistic integration improves resource allocation, enhances operational resilience, reduces financial and reputational exposure, and supports long-term strategic success. Ultimately, cybersecurity risk management becomes a core component of enterprise risk governance, driving informed decision-making, strategic alignment, and continuous improvement.

Question 64:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to manage third-party information security risks?

A) Trusting third parties without formal risk assessment or oversight
B) Implementing a third-party risk management program, including due diligence, contract requirements, continuous monitoring, audit rights, incident response integration, and governance oversight
C) Addressing third-party security risks only after a breach occurs
D) Delegating third-party risk entirely to procurement without collaboration with IT or security teams

Answer: B

Explanation:

Third-party relationships introduce significant information security risks due to shared systems, access privileges, sensitive data exchange, and reliance on external services. Option B, implementing a third-party risk management program including due diligence, contract requirements, continuous monitoring, audit rights, incident response integration, and governance oversight, is the most effective because it provides structured, proactive, and accountable management of third-party risks. Trusting third parties without assessment (Option A) is highly risky and exposes the enterprise to breaches, regulatory penalties, and reputational damage. Addressing risks only after a breach (Option C) is reactive and often too late to prevent substantial harm. Delegating entirely to procurement (Option D) isolates accountability, lacks technical and security insights, and reduces operational effectiveness.

A mature third-party risk management program begins with governance oversight, executive sponsorship, and defined roles and responsibilities. Due diligence assesses the third party’s security posture, compliance with regulatory requirements, operational controls, financial stability, and reputation. Contractual agreements define security obligations, audit rights, incident notification procedures, data protection requirements, and compliance expectations, ensuring enforceable accountability.

Continuous monitoring tracks third-party performance, control effectiveness, security events, and regulatory adherence. Integration with enterprise incident response ensures coordinated management of third-party incidents, minimizing operational disruption and risk propagation. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs quantify risk exposure, compliance status, and effectiveness of controls, enabling informed decision-making and prioritization. Scenario simulations, tabletop exercises, and audits validate readiness and control effectiveness in managing third-party risks.

Training and awareness programs ensure internal stakeholders understand third-party risk responsibilities, contractual obligations, and operational processes. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from audits, incidents, operational monitoring, and emerging threat intelligence to refine policies, procedures, and oversight mechanisms. Integration with enterprise risk management ensures third-party risks are evaluated in the context of overall enterprise risk, aligning mitigation strategies with strategic objectives and operational priorities.

By implementing a structured third-party risk management program, organizations reduce exposure to data breaches, operational disruption, regulatory noncompliance, and reputational damage. Third-party risk becomes a managed capability, aligned with enterprise objectives, resilient against evolving threats, and accountable across governance, operations, and legal frameworks. This approach ensures proactive mitigation, operational oversight, and continuous improvement, transforming third-party relationships into secure, value-driven, and strategically aligned partnerships.

Question 65:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to establish an enterprise incident response capability?

A) Responding to incidents ad hoc without formal procedures or governance
B) Implementing a structured incident response program including governance, defined roles and responsibilities, policies, procedures, monitoring, detection, communication, training, testing, and continuous improvement
C) Delegating incident response entirely to IT without coordination with legal, compliance, or business units
D) Relying solely on external vendors for incident response after an event occurs

Answer: B

Explanation:

Establishing an enterprise incident response capability requires a structured, proactive, and integrated approach that ensures timely detection, containment, mitigation, communication, and recovery from security incidents. Option B, implementing a structured incident response program including governance, defined roles and responsibilities, policies, procedures, monitoring, detection, communication, training, testing, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it provides clear accountability, repeatable processes, operational readiness, and continuous enhancement. Responding ad hoc without formal procedures (Option A) is reactive, uncoordinated, and often ineffective. Delegating entirely to IT (Option C) isolates accountability and lacks cross-functional integration with legal, compliance, and business units, reducing effectiveness. Relying solely on external vendors (Option D) provides expertise but lacks internal knowledge, operational context, and timely coordination.

A mature incident response program begins with governance oversight and executive sponsorship, establishing authority, accountability, and alignment with enterprise objectives. Roles and responsibilities define operational, legal, compliance, communications, and executive functions in incident management. Policies and procedures provide structured guidance for incident detection, classification, escalation, containment, mitigation, recovery, and post-incident review.

Monitoring and detection mechanisms, including intrusion detection systems, log analysis, anomaly detection, and threat intelligence, provide early warning of potential incidents. Communication plans ensure timely and accurate information sharing with internal stakeholders, regulatory authorities, customers, and partners as required. Training and awareness programs reinforce operational readiness, role-specific responsibilities, and adherence to policies and procedures.

Testing through tabletop exercises, simulations, and live drills validates readiness, operational coordination, and control effectiveness. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure detection efficiency, response times, impact reduction, and operational resilience. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, monitoring, threat intelligence, and changing regulatory requirements to refine policies, procedures, controls, and governance structures. Integration with enterprise risk management ensures incidents are managed in the context of strategic, operational, financial, and regulatory priorities, aligning mitigation and recovery with enterprise objectives.

By implementing a structured incident response capability, organizations reduce operational disruption, financial loss, regulatory exposure, and reputational damage. Incident response becomes a proactive, strategic capability, embedded in enterprise governance and culture, ensuring timely and coordinated mitigation of security events. Continuous readiness, monitoring, testing, and improvement ensure resilience, operational continuity, and stakeholder confidence in a rapidly evolving threat landscape, transforming incident response from a reactive activity into a strategic enabler of enterprise resilience, risk management, and long-term sustainability.

Question 66:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure security in the adoption of emerging technologies such as AI and IoT within an enterprise?

A) Allowing departments to implement AI and IoT solutions independently without a formal security assessment
B) Establishing an emerging technology security framework that includes risk assessment, policy development, control implementation, monitoring, governance oversight, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on vendor-provided security controls for AI and IoT solutions
D) Addressing security issues only after a breach occurs in the deployed technology

Answer: B

Explanation:

The adoption of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IoT) introduces unique security challenges due to complex architectures, large volumes of data, autonomous decision-making capabilities, and connectivity across networks. Option B, establishing an emerging technology security framework that includes risk assessment, policy development, control implementation, monitoring, governance oversight, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it ensures a comprehensive, proactive, and structured strategy for securing these technologies. Allowing departments to implement solutions independently (Option A) can lead to inconsistent security practices, uncontrolled vulnerabilities, and operational risks. Relying solely on vendor-provided controls (Option C) is inadequate because vendor controls may not address enterprise-specific risks, regulatory requirements, or operational contexts. Addressing security only after a breach (Option D) is reactive, leaving the organization exposed to data compromise, operational disruption, and reputational damage.

A mature emerging technology security framework begins with governance and executive sponsorship to ensure alignment with enterprise strategy, risk appetite, and regulatory obligations. Risk assessments identify vulnerabilities in AI and IoT systems, including data integrity issues, algorithm bias, privacy risks, device vulnerabilities, network exposure, and potential operational impact. Policies provide clear guidance on data management, device security, access controls, ethical considerations, regulatory compliance, and incident response.

Control implementation includes technical, administrative, and procedural measures such as authentication, encryption, network segmentation, continuous monitoring, anomaly detection, patch management, and secure configuration baselines. Monitoring mechanisms provide visibility into system performance, security events, and emerging threats, allowing timely detection and proactive intervention. Governance oversight ensures accountability, compliance with standards, and alignment of security initiatives with enterprise objectives.

Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure the effectiveness of security controls, risk mitigation, operational resilience, and compliance adherence. Scenario simulations, tabletop exercises, penetration testing, and red-team evaluations validate system resilience and operational readiness. Training and awareness programs ensure personnel understand security responsibilities, threat awareness, and operational procedures. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, monitoring, threat intelligence, and regulatory changes, ensuring the security framework remains adaptive to evolving technological landscapes.

By adopting a structured and proactive framework, enterprises reduce exposure to cyberattacks, operational disruptions, regulatory penalties, and reputational harm. AI and IoT adoption becomes a strategic enabler, delivering business value while maintaining security, compliance, and operational resilience. Embedding security into governance, risk management, and operational processes ensures the enterprise remains prepared for evolving threats, supporting long-term sustainability and stakeholder confidence.

Question 67:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure secure management of enterprise mobile devices and applications?

A) Allowing employees to use personal devices without policies or monitoring
B) Implementing a mobile device and application security program, including policies, access controls, encryption, monitoring, governance, and training
C) Relying solely on device manufacturers’ default security features
D) Addressing mobile security only after incidents of data loss or compromise

Answer: B

Explanation:

Enterprise mobile devices and applications present significant security challenges due to their portability, network connectivity, diverse platforms, and potential exposure to malicious applications or unauthorized access. Option B, implementing a mobile device and application security program including policies, access controls, encryption, monitoring, governance, and training, is the most effective approach because it ensures comprehensive risk management and operational control. Allowing employees to use personal devices without policies or monitoring (Option A) exposes the organization to uncontrolled access, data leakage, malware infection, and regulatory noncompliance. Relying solely on manufacturer defaults (Option C) is insufficient because default settings rarely meet enterprise security requirements or protect against sophisticated threats. Addressing security only after incidents (Option D) is reactive, often resulting in operational disruption, financial loss, and reputational damage.

A mature mobile security program begins with governance oversight and executive sponsorship to ensure alignment with enterprise objectives, regulatory requirements, and risk management priorities. Policies define acceptable device use, application installation guidelines, access restrictions, data handling procedures, compliance obligations, and incident reporting. Access controls enforce authentication, role-based permissions, least privilege, and session management to prevent unauthorized access to enterprise resources. Encryption protects sensitive data both at rest and in transit, mitigating the impact of device loss or theft.

Monitoring mechanisms track device usage, application installation, security events, network activity, and compliance status, providing real-time visibility and early detection of potential threats. Governance oversight ensures accountability, alignment with enterprise strategy, and enforcement of security standards. Training and awareness programs educate users on secure device usage, phishing threats, malware prevention, and incident reporting procedures, reinforcing a culture of security and compliance.

Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure compliance, control effectiveness, risk exposure, and operational performance. Scenario-based testing, simulations, and penetration testing validate operational readiness, response capability, and security effectiveness. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, operational monitoring, and threat intelligence to refine policies, procedures, controls, and governance structures.

By implementing a structured mobile device and application security program, organizations reduce exposure to unauthorized access, data loss, malware infections, regulatory violations, and reputational damage. Secure mobile adoption becomes a strategic enabler of business agility, workforce productivity, and operational resilience. Proactive monitoring, governance, and continuous improvement ensure the enterprise can adapt to evolving mobile technologies and emerging threats, maintaining long-term security and stakeholder confidence.

Question 68:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure business continuity and disaster recovery are aligned with enterprise risk management?

A) Developing business continuity and disaster recovery plans in isolation without integrating with enterprise risk management
B) Establishing an integrated business continuity and disaster recovery program, including risk assessment, strategy, plan development, testing, monitoring, governance, and continuous improvement
C) Addressing business continuity only after a disruptive event occurs
D) Delegating business continuity and disaster recovery entirely to operational units without executive oversight

Answer: B

Explanation:

Business continuity (BC) and disaster recovery (DR) are critical to maintaining enterprise resilience and operational stability. Option B, establishing an integrated BC and DR program including risk assessment, strategy, plan development, testing, monitoring, governance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it ensures alignment with enterprise risk management (ERM), proactive mitigation of operational risks, and resilience against disruptive events. Developing BC and DR plans in isolation (Option A) risks misalignment with enterprise objectives, incomplete coverage, and inefficiency. Addressing continuity only after disruptions (Option C) is reactive and may result in operational losses, financial impact, and reputational damage. Delegating entirely to operational units (Option D) isolates accountability and reduces oversight, resulting in gaps, inconsistent readiness, and misalignment with enterprise strategy.

A mature integrated program begins with governance and executive sponsorship, ensuring BC and DR are prioritized in alignment with enterprise strategy and risk appetite. Risk assessment identifies critical business processes, potential threats, vulnerabilities, and impacts, guiding the prioritization of continuity and recovery strategies. Strategy development defines recovery objectives, acceptable downtime, resource requirements, and operational dependencies.

Plan development documents procedures, roles, responsibilities, communication protocols, and step-by-step recovery actions for various scenarios. Testing and exercises validate plan effectiveness, team readiness, and interdependencies across functions, providing opportunities for refinement. Monitoring mechanisms track compliance, readiness, emerging risks, and changes in operational or technological environments. Governance oversight ensures accountability, enforcement of standards, and alignment with strategic objectives.

Training and awareness programs ensure personnel understand their responsibilities, procedures, and decision-making authority during disruptions. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure plan effectiveness, recovery times, operational resilience, and risk mitigation. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from tests, audits, incidents, monitoring, and environmental changes, ensuring BC and DR capabilities remain effective, relevant, and aligned with enterprise risk priorities.

By integrating BC and DR with ERM, organizations enhance operational resilience, minimize downtime, and reduce financial, regulatory, and reputational impact. Proactive risk identification, strategy alignment, testing, and continuous improvement ensure that enterprises are prepared for disruptive events, safeguarding critical assets, personnel, and business operations. This integrated approach transforms BC and DR from operational functions into strategic capabilities that contribute to long-term sustainability and stakeholder confidence.

Question 69:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to managing identity and access management (IAM) risks in a large enterprise environment?

A) Implementing IAM controls sporadically without governance or continuous monitoring
B) Establishing a comprehensive IAM program including policies, governance, access controls, monitoring, auditing, user lifecycle management, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on default access configurations provided by applications
D) Addressing IAM risks only after unauthorized access or breaches occur

Answer: B

Explanation:

Identity and access management (IAM) is a foundational component of enterprise security because improper access can lead to data breaches, operational disruption, and regulatory noncompliance. Option B, establishing a comprehensive IAM program including policies, governance, access controls, monitoring, auditing, user lifecycle management, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it ensures holistic, proactive, and accountable management of identities, privileges, and access across the enterprise. Implementing IAM controls sporadically (Option A) results in inconsistent coverage, gaps, and unmanaged risk. Relying solely on default application configurations (Option C) is inadequate because defaults rarely meet enterprise-specific security and compliance requirements. Addressing IAM risks only after breaches (Option D) is reactive, often too late to prevent a significant impact.

A mature IAM program begins with governance and executive sponsorship, ensuring alignment with enterprise objectives, compliance obligations, and risk appetite. Policies define access principles, user provisioning, authentication requirements, authorization practices, and role-based access structures. Access controls enforce least privilege, separation of duties, multi-factor authentication, role-based access, and conditional access based on risk.

Monitoring and auditing mechanisms track user activity, access requests, privilege changes, and anomalous behavior, providing visibility and early detection of potential misuse. User lifecycle management ensures timely provisioning, modification, and de-provisioning of access rights to prevent orphaned accounts or privilege creep. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs quantify access compliance, control effectiveness, and operational risk exposure.

Training and awareness programs educate personnel on IAM responsibilities, access request processes, credential management, and reporting anomalies. Scenario testing, penetration tests, and audits validate control effectiveness, policy enforcement, and operational readiness. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned, audit findings, incident reviews, and evolving threat intelligence to refine IAM policies, controls, and governance processes.

By implementing a comprehensive IAM program, organizations reduce the risk of unauthorized access, data compromise, and operational disruption. IAM becomes a strategic enabler, supporting secure digital transformation, regulatory compliance, operational efficiency, and stakeholder confidence. Proactive governance, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that IAM practices evolve with enterprise needs, emerging threats, and technological changes, transforming identity management into a sustainable and resilient enterprise capability.

Question 70:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure secure software development lifecycle (SDLC) practices within an enterprise?

A) Allowing developers to implement security as an afterthought after software deployment
B) Integrating security into all phases of the SDLC, including requirements, design, development, testing, deployment, monitoring, governance, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on application security testing tools without embedding security in processes
D) Delegating software security entirely to external vendors without internal oversight

Answer: B

Explanation:

Ensuring secure software development lifecycle (SDLC) practices is critical to mitigate vulnerabilities, reduce security incidents, and maintain operational integrity. Option B, integrating security into all phases of the SDLC, including requirements, design, development, testing, deployment, monitoring, governance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it embeds security proactively throughout the software lifecycle, ensuring risk mitigation and operational resilience. Allowing security only after deployment (Option A) is reactive and often results in costly remediation and exposure. Relying solely on security testing tools (Option C) is insufficient because tools cannot replace secure design, development, and governance practices. Delegating security entirely to vendors (Option D) isolates accountability, reduces internal knowledge, and may misalign with enterprise policies and compliance obligations.

A mature SDLC security approach begins with governance and executive sponsorship, defining roles, responsibilities, policies, and accountability. Security requirements are defined alongside functional and performance requirements, ensuring that applications meet confidentiality, integrity, and availability standards. Secure design practices identify potential threats, architectural vulnerabilities, and mitigation strategies.

During development, coding standards, secure coding practices, peer reviews, and static analysis ensure that vulnerabilities are minimized. Testing includes functional security tests, vulnerability assessments, penetration testing, and quality assurance to identify and remediate weaknesses before deployment. Deployment processes ensure that production environments are configured securely, with proper access controls, monitoring, and change management.

Monitoring mechanisms track application performance, security events, user activity, and emerging threats. Governance oversight ensures compliance with policies, regulatory requirements, and enterprise standards. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs assess security effectiveness, risk exposure, and operational performance. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, threat intelligence, and operational monitoring to refine SDLC processes, policies, and governance.

Training and awareness programs ensure that developers, testers, and operations personnel understand secure development principles, coding practices, and security responsibilities. Scenario simulations, code reviews, and security assessments validate operational readiness, adherence to policies, and effectiveness of controls.

By embedding security into all SDLC phases, organizations reduce vulnerabilities, operational risks, regulatory exposure, and reputational damage. Secure SDLC practices enable resilient, reliable, and compliant software delivery, supporting enterprise objectives, digital transformation, and long-term sustainability. Proactive governance, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that software security remains adaptive to evolving threats, emerging technologies, and enterprise priorities, transforming SDLC security into a strategic enabler of operational resilience, business value, and stakeholder confidence.

Question 71:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to implement a risk-based vulnerability management program in an enterprise environment?

A) Scanning systems sporadically and addressing vulnerabilities only when incidents occur
B) Establishing a formal risk-based vulnerability management program, including asset inventory, risk assessment, prioritization, remediation, monitoring, reporting, and governance oversight
C) Relying solely on automated vulnerability scanning tools without human analysis or governance
D) Delegating vulnerability management entirely to individual departments without enterprise coordination

Answer: B

Explanation:

A risk-based vulnerability management program is essential for proactively identifying, assessing, prioritizing, and mitigating security vulnerabilities across the enterprise. Option B, establishing a formal risk-based vulnerability management program including asset inventory, risk assessment, prioritization, remediation, monitoring, reporting, and governance oversight, is the most effective approach because it provides a structured, consistent, and accountable methodology for addressing vulnerabilities. Scanning systems sporadically (Option A) is reactive and often insufficient, leaving critical vulnerabilities unaddressed. Relying solely on automated tools (Option C) provides technical detection but lacks context, risk prioritization, and governance accountability. Delegating management entirely to departments (Option D) risks inconsistent practices, coverage gaps, and a lack of enterprise-level oversight.

A mature risk-based vulnerability management program begins with a comprehensive asset inventory, which provides visibility into all enterprise systems, applications, devices, and networks. Risk assessment evaluates the potential impact and likelihood of vulnerabilities being exploited, considering business criticality, regulatory obligations, threat landscape, and operational dependencies. Prioritization focuses remediation efforts on vulnerabilities that pose the highest risk to enterprise objectives and continuity.

Remediation strategies may include patch management, configuration changes, application updates, or compensating controls, tailored to risk levels and operational constraints. Monitoring mechanisms continuously track the status of vulnerabilities, remediation progress, and emerging threats, providing real-time insight into enterprise security posture. Reporting mechanisms communicate progress, risk exposure, and compliance status to executive leadership, risk committees, and stakeholders.

Governance oversight ensures accountability, alignment with enterprise objectives, enforcement of policies, and integration with overall risk management. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure vulnerability management effectiveness, remediation timeliness, risk reduction, and operational performance. Scenario simulations, penetration testing, and tabletop exercises validate vulnerability detection and remediation processes, identifying gaps and opportunities for improvement.

Training and awareness programs educate personnel on vulnerability reporting, remediation processes, secure configuration practices, and risk-based decision-making. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, threat intelligence, and emerging vulnerabilities to refine policies, procedures, and operational practices. By implementing a formal risk-based vulnerability management program, organizations reduce exposure to cyberattacks, operational disruption, financial loss, and reputational harm. This approach ensures proactive detection, mitigation, monitoring, and governance of vulnerabilities, enhancing enterprise resilience and long-term security posture while aligning with strategic objectives and regulatory compliance.

Question 72:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure enterprise-wide compliance with information security policies and regulatory requirements?

A) Publishing policies without monitoring or enforcement mechanisms
B) Implementing a comprehensive compliance program including policy dissemination, monitoring, auditing, training, corrective action, governance, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on self-assessment by departments without verification or oversight
D) Addressing compliance issues only after regulatory penalties or incidents occur

Answer: B

Explanation:

Enterprise-wide compliance with information security policies and regulatory requirements is crucial for mitigating operational, legal, and reputational risks. Option B, implementing a comprehensive compliance program including policy dissemination, monitoring, auditing, training, corrective action, governance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective approach because it ensures consistent adherence to policies, proactive risk management, and accountability. Publishing policies without monitoring (Option A) is ineffective, as adherence cannot be verified or enforced. Relying solely on departmental self-assessments (Option C) risks inconsistent compliance, a lack of accountability, and unrecognized gaps. Addressing compliance only after incidents (Option D) is reactive, often resulting in penalties, operational disruption, and reputational damage.

A mature compliance program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to ensure accountability, alignment with enterprise strategy, and enforcement of policies. Policy dissemination ensures that all personnel, contractors, and stakeholders understand security requirements, roles, responsibilities, and expectations. Monitoring mechanisms track adherence to policies, controls, and regulatory requirements, providing early detection of potential noncompliance.

Auditing validates compliance through independent assessment, identifying gaps, inconsistencies, and control deficiencies. Corrective actions address deficiencies promptly, preventing recurrence and minimizing operational or regulatory impact. Governance oversight ensures accountability, transparency, and alignment with enterprise objectives, risk appetite, and regulatory obligations. Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure compliance effectiveness, control implementation, policy adherence, and risk exposure.

Training and awareness programs educate employees on policy requirements, regulatory obligations, reporting procedures, and ethical responsibilities, fostering a culture of compliance and accountability. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from audits, incidents, regulatory changes, and monitoring activities to refine policies, controls, procedures, and governance structures. Scenario simulations, tabletop exercises, and audits validate readiness, policy effectiveness, and organizational compliance culture.

By implementing a structured compliance program, organizations mitigate legal, financial, operational, and reputational risks while ensuring regulatory adherence. Proactive monitoring, governance oversight, and continuous improvement enhance enterprise security posture, operational efficiency, and stakeholder confidence. Compliance becomes a strategic enabler, aligning operational practices with enterprise objectives, regulatory requirements, and industry standards, creating sustainable, accountable, and resilient enterprise operations.

Question 73:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure secure cloud adoption in an enterprise environment?

A) Migrating workloads to the cloud without a formal security assessment or controls
B) Implementing a cloud security program, including risk assessment, architecture review, policy development, access control, monitoring, incident response, governance, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on cloud service provider security features without internal oversight
D) Addressing cloud security only after data breaches or incidents occur

Answer: B

Explanation:

Cloud adoption introduces security, operational, and compliance risks that must be managed proactively. Option B, implementing a cloud security program including risk assessment, architecture review, policy development, access control, monitoring, incident response, governance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it provides a structured, enterprise-wide approach to securing cloud resources. Migrating workloads without assessment (Option A) exposes the enterprise to misconfigurations, data breaches, and operational disruption. Relying solely on provider security features (Option C) is insufficient because cloud security is a shared responsibility; the enterprise retains accountability for configurations, access, and data protection. Addressing security only after incidents (Option D) is reactive, often resulting in regulatory, financial, and reputational damage.

A mature cloud security program begins with governance and executive sponsorship to ensure alignment with enterprise strategy, regulatory obligations, and risk management priorities. Risk assessments identify threats, vulnerabilities, data sensitivity, compliance requirements, and potential operational impact. Architecture reviews evaluate cloud design, network segmentation, identity management, encryption, and control effectiveness. Policies guide data protection, access management, acceptable use, compliance, and incident response.

Access controls enforce least privilege, role-based access, multi-factor authentication, and segregation of duties, reducing the risk of unauthorized access. Monitoring mechanisms provide real-time visibility into cloud resource usage, security events, and policy compliance. Incident response plans ensure rapid detection, containment, mitigation, and recovery from cloud-related incidents, integrating with enterprise incident management processes.

Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure cloud security posture, control effectiveness, risk exposure, and operational resilience. Training and awareness programs ensure personnel understand cloud risks, responsibilities, and secure operational practices. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, threat intelligence, regulatory changes, and emerging technologies to refine policies, controls, and operational processes. Scenario simulations, penetration tests, and red-team exercises validate cloud security readiness, control effectiveness, and operational resilience.

By implementing a structured cloud security program, enterprises reduce the risk of data breaches, operational disruption, regulatory noncompliance, and reputational damage. Cloud adoption becomes a secure, resilient, and strategic enabler, supporting business agility, scalability, and innovation. Proactive governance, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that cloud security evolves with enterprise needs, threat landscapes, and technological advancements, maintaining long-term operational resilience and stakeholder confidence.

Question 74:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure secure data classification and protection within an enterprise?

A) Allowing employees to classify and protect data without formal guidelines or oversight
B) Establishing a data classification and protection program, including policy, governance, classification schema, access control, encryption, monitoring, training, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on technical controls without formal classification policies
D) Addressing data protection only after data loss or breaches occur

Answer: B

Explanation:

Secure data classification and protection are foundational to managing enterprise information risks, regulatory compliance, and operational resilience. Option B, establishing a data classification and protection program including policy, governance, classification schema, access control, encryption, monitoring, training, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it provides a structured, comprehensive, and accountable approach. Allowing employees to classify data without guidelines (Option A) results in inconsistencies, gaps, and potential exposure. Relying solely on technical controls (Option C) is insufficient, as access policies, data labeling, and operational procedures are required to enforce proper protection. Addressing data protection only after breaches (Option D) is reactive, leaving sensitive information exposed to operational, regulatory, and reputational risks.

A mature program begins with governance and executive sponsorship, ensuring alignment with enterprise objectives, regulatory obligations, and risk management strategies. Policies define data classification categories, handling procedures, access requirements, and compliance obligations. Classification schemas provide standardized labeling and categorization of data based on sensitivity, criticality, regulatory requirements, and business impact.

Access controls enforce least privilege, role-based access, and segregation of duties to protect sensitive information. Encryption protects data at rest, in transit, and in use, mitigating the impact of unauthorized access or breaches. Monitoring mechanisms track access patterns, policy compliance, and potential misuse, providing real-time visibility and early detection of anomalies. Training and awareness programs educate employees on classification practices, handling procedures, and reporting responsibilities.

Metrics, KPIs, and KRIs measure policy compliance, control effectiveness, risk reduction, and operational performance. Scenario-based testing, audits, and simulations validate the effectiveness of classification, protection mechanisms, and operational readiness. Continuous improvement incorporates lessons learned from incidents, audits, monitoring, regulatory changes, and emerging threats to refine policies, procedures, and governance structures.

By implementing a structured data classification and protection program, enterprises reduce exposure to unauthorized access, data breaches, operational disruption, regulatory penalties, and reputational harm. Data becomes a managed enterprise asset, supporting operational resilience, regulatory compliance, strategic decision-making, and stakeholder confidence. Proactive governance, monitoring, and continuous improvement ensure that data protection practices evolve with enterprise needs, emerging threats, and regulatory changes, creating a sustainable, secure, and resilient information management capability.

Question 75:

Which of the following is the most effective approach to ensure enterprise-wide security awareness and training programs are impactful?

A) Conducting periodic awareness sessions without evaluating effectiveness or reinforcement
B) Implementing a comprehensive security awareness and training program, including role-based content, continuous learning, phishing simulations, monitoring, metrics, governance, and continuous improvement
C) Relying solely on e-learning modules without engagement or reinforcement
D) Addressing awareness only after a security incident or breach occurs

Answer: B

Explanation:

Security awareness and training are critical to reducing human-related security risks, promoting compliance, and supporting enterprise resilience. Option B, implementing a comprehensive security awareness and training program including role-based content, continuous learning, phishing simulations, monitoring, metrics, governance, and continuous improvement, is the most effective because it ensures targeted, measurable, and continuously reinforced learning aligned with enterprise objectives. Conducting periodic sessions without evaluation (Option A) lacks effectiveness measurement, reinforcement, and accountability. Relying solely on e-learning (Option C) may not engage personnel or provide practical, contextual learning. Addressing awareness only after incidents (Option D) is reactive and does not prevent recurring human errors or policy violations.

A mature program begins with governance and executive sponsorship, ensuring alignment with enterprise strategy, regulatory obligations, and security objectives. Role-based content ensures that personnel receive training tailored to their responsibilities, access privileges, and risk exposure. Continuous learning programs reinforce concepts over time, adapting content based on emerging threats, policy changes, and operational needs.

Phishing simulations, tabletop exercises, and scenario-based activities test personnel’s understanding, response, and adherence to security practices. Monitoring and metrics assess engagement, comprehension, behavior changes, and program effectiveness. Governance oversight ensures accountability, alignment with objectives, and continuous improvement. Feedback mechanisms allow adjustment of content, frequency, and methods based on employee performance, incident trends, and threat landscape.

By implementing a structured and continuous security awareness program, organizations reduce human-related risks, improve compliance, enhance operational resilience, and strengthen security culture. Awareness and training become strategic enablers, supporting enterprise objectives, risk management, and stakeholder confidence. Proactive governance, measurement, engagement, and continuous improvement ensure that personnel remain vigilant, informed, and capable of responding effectively to evolving threats, creating a resilient and security-conscious organizational environment.