CRISC IT Risk Identification Practice Question
A multinational corporation uses commercial threat intelligence feeds and participates in an ISAC. However, they recently missed a critical vulnerability exploited in the wild that was not in their feeds. Which additional source should they incorporate to improve vulnerability identification?
⚠ Common exam trap
CRISC often tests the difference between vulnerability severity (NVD/CVSS) and confirmed exploitation (CISA KEV); the trap is selecting NVD because it is a well-known government vulnerability database, when the question specifically asks about a vulnerability exploited in the wild that was missed by existing feeds.
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
✓
CISA KEV catalog
The CISA KEV catalog specifically lists vulnerabilities that have been confirmed as exploited in the wild, which is exactly the gap described—a critical vulnerability exploited in the wild that was missed by commercial feeds and ISAC participation. Incorporating KEV ensures the organization prioritizes vulnerabilities with known active exploitation, regardless of whether they appear in commercial feeds. This makes it the correct additional source.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
CISA KEV catalog
Why this is correct
The CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog lists vulnerabilities confirmed as exploited in the wild, including those absent from commercial feeds and ISAC sharing. Incorporating it closes the gap that let the exploited vulnerability go unidentified, directly addressing the missed in-the-wild exploitation described in the stem.
- ✗
NVD database
Why it's wrong here
NVD provides CVEs but does not prioritize exploited vulnerabilities.
- ✗
OSINT from social media
Why it's wrong here
Social media OSINT is unverified and unstructured, so it cannot reliably identify a specific exploited vulnerability absent from curated feeds. It is tempting because it can surface early rumour of attacks, and would be correct for gathering contextual threat awareness rather than authoritative vulnerability identification.
- ✗
Vendor advisories only
Why it's wrong here
Vendor advisories cover only that vendor's own products, so an exploited vulnerability outside those products would remain invisible. It is tempting because advisories are authoritative and patch-actionable, and would be correct for confirming fixes and affected versions once a vulnerability is already known.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every CRISC question from scratch — 1,062 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official ISACA exam blueprint
This CRISC 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 CRISC exam.