hardMultiple Choice
CRISC Practice Question: Refer to the exhibit
Exhibit
Refer to the exhibit. ``` Control Test Result: Access Control Review Control ID: AC-01 Test Date: 2024-03-20 Expected Result: No unauthorized access attempts Actual Result: 3 unauthorized access attempts detected Status: Failed Remediation: Implement additional logging ```
Refer to the exhibit. The control test failed because unauthorized access attempts were detected. The remediation plan suggests additional logging. Is this remediation appropriate?
⚠ Common exam trap
Many candidates confuse 'detecting' with 'preventing' and assume that adding logging is always a valid remediation, but CRISC emphasizes that remediation must address the root cause of the control failure, not just add monitoring.
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
✓
No, the remediation should focus on strengthening access controls.
The control test failure was due to unauthorized access attempts, which indicates a weakness in preventive controls. Adding logging (a detective control) does not address the root cause; the remediation should focus on strengthening access controls (e.g., tightening authentication, authorization, or firewall rules) to prevent unauthorized access in the first place. Logging alone would only record future incidents without reducing their likelihood.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
No, the control test methodology is flawed.
Why it's wrong here
Nothing in the stem indicates the test procedure itself was faulty; the test correctly detected unauthorised access attempts, so the control genuinely failed. Blaming the methodology is tempting when a test produces an unwanted result, and a flawed methodology would be the answer if the test had produced a false positive or false negative.
- ✗
Yes, because the control is detective in nature.
Why it's wrong here
Logging records events after the fact; it cannot prevent the unauthorised access attempts that caused the failure, so adding it leaves the control's preventive gap unaddressed. It is tempting because detective controls do rely on logging, and extra logging would be the right remediation where the failure was a detection or audit-trail shortfall.
- ✗
Yes, additional logging will help detect future attempts.
Why it's wrong here
Logging records events after the fact and provides no preventive control, so it cannot stop the unauthorised access attempts the test detected. It is tempting because logging supports detection and investigation, but remediation here requires an access control that prevents the attempts.
- ✓
No, the remediation should focus on strengthening access controls.
Why this is correct
Additional logging only records unauthorised attempts; it cannot prevent them, so the failed control remains unaddressed. Since the test detected unauthorised access, the root cause is weak access enforcement, and strengthening access controls directly satisfies that constraint. Logging supports detection and investigation, not prevention, making it an inappropriate primary remediation here.
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 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.