CRISC Risk Response and Reporting Practice Question
An organization uses automated SIEM rules to continuously monitor for unauthorized access attempts. This is an example of which type of monitoring?
⚠ Common exam trap
Watch out — candidates often confuse 'continuous monitoring' with 'periodic control testing' or 'access review' because they all involve oversight of access, but only continuous monitoring uses automated, real-time detection of events as they happen, not scheduled checks or static permission audits.
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
✓
Continuous monitoring
Continuous monitoring involves the use of automated tools, such as Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems, to provide real-time or near-real-time oversight of security events. In this scenario, the SIEM rules are configured to detect unauthorized access attempts as they occur, which aligns directly with the definition of continuous monitoring rather than periodic or point-in-time assessments.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Periodic control testing
Why it's wrong here
Periodic control testing evaluates controls at scheduled intervals, such as quarterly access reviews, producing point-in-time assurance rather than continuous detection. Automated SIEM rules evaluate events as they arrive, which is continuous monitoring. Periodic testing suits attestation cycles, not real-time unauthorised-access alerting.
- ✗
Vulnerability scanning
Why it's wrong here
Vulnerability scanning enumerates known weaknesses on hosts and applications on a schedule; it does not inspect authentication event streams for unauthorised access attempts. It is tempting because scanning also supports continuous monitoring programmes, and it would be the right choice when the requirement is to identify missing patches or misconfigurations rather than detect live intrusion attempts.
- ✗
Access review
Why it's wrong here
Access reviews are periodic, human-driven recertifications of entitlements, not continuous automated detection of access attempts. The temptation is that both concern authorisation, and a review would be correct where the objective is to attest that existing permissions remain appropriate, rather than to alert on attempted unauthorised access in real time.
- ✓
Continuous monitoring
Why this is correct
Continuous monitoring fits because the SIEM rules run automatically and without interruption, satisfying the stem's requirement for continuous oversight of unauthorised access attempts. Unlike periodic or ad hoc reviews, this provides ongoing, real-time detection aligned with CRISC's definition of continuous monitoring as automated, recurring control assessment.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This CRISC question is part of Courseiva's 1,062-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
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.