CISM Information Security Program Practice Question
A large financial institution is maturing its information security program and wants to move from a reactive to a proactive posture. Which of the following initiatives would best support this transition?
⚠ Common exam trap
A common mix-up: candidates confuse proactive security with reactive vulnerability management or detection improvements, mistakenly selecting bug bounty programs or SOC staffing increases because they seem forward-looking, when in fact only threat intelligence directly addresses the proactive shift by focusing on adversary behavior and prevention.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Establish a threat intelligence unit that analyzes adversary tactics and shares indicators across the organization.
Establishing a threat intelligence unit directly supports a proactive posture by enabling the organization to anticipate and prepare for emerging threats based on adversary tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs). Unlike reactive measures, this initiative shifts focus from responding to incidents to preventing them by sharing actionable indicators across the enterprise, aligning with the CISM goal of maturing the security program toward proactive risk management.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Deploy an automated compliance monitoring tool.
Why it's wrong here
Automated compliance monitoring reports deviations against existing controls after the fact, which remains detective rather than proactive. It is the right investment when the priority is evidencing regulatory adherence, not anticipating threats before they materialise.
- ✗
Implement a bug bounty program to uncover vulnerabilities.
Why it's wrong here
A bug bounty crowdsources vulnerability discovery but remains reactive: findings arrive only after researchers probe live assets, so it cannot pre-empt threats. It is tempting because bug bounties genuinely strengthen detection and remediation maturity once a vulnerability management programme exists. Here the institution needs predictive controls, such as threat modelling or continuous control monitoring, that act before exploitation occurs.
- ✓
Establish a threat intelligence unit that analyzes adversary tactics and shares indicators across the organization.
Why this is correct
Threat intelligence shifts the programme from reacting to incidents toward anticipating them, because analysing adversary tactics and sharing indicators lets controls be tuned before attacks succeed. This directly satisfies the stem's requirement to move from a reactive to a proactive posture.
- ✗
Increase the number of security operations center (SOC) analysts.
Why it's wrong here
Adding SOC analysts scales detection and response capacity, which is still reactive work triggered by events. Headcount growth is warranted when alert volumes overwhelm the existing team, not when the goal is shifting posture ahead of incidents.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 924 original CISM practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This CISM practice question is part of Courseiva's free ISACA certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the CISM exam.