A critical patch is a software update that fixes a security vulnerability or a bug that may affect the performance, functionality, or reliability of a system or a network. A critical patch implementation is a process that applies the software update to the system or network in a timely and effective manner. The failure of a critical patch implementation is a situation where the software update is not applied or not applied correctly, which may expose the system or network to various threats, such as data theft, data corruption, data leakage, or denial of service. The failure of a critical patch implementation would be reflected in an organization's risk profile by increasing the residual risk. Residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response, which means the risk that is not avoided, transferred, or mitigated by the existing controls or measures. The failure of a critical patch implementation would increase the residual risk, as it would reduce the effectiveness or efficiency of the existing controls or measures that are supposed to address the security vulnerability or the bug. The failure of a critical patch implementation would also increase the likelihood or impact of the potential threats, as well as the exposure or consequences of the system or network. The other options are not the correct changes that would be reflected in an organization's risk profile after the failure of a critical patch implementation, although they may be affected or related. Risk tolerance is the degree of variation from the risk appetite that the organization is not willing to accept. Risk tolerance may be decreased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the organization may become more cautious or conservative in accepting the risk, but it is not a direct or immediate change in the risk profile. Inherent risk is the risk that exists in the absence of any controls or measures, which means the risk that is inherent to the system or network or the environment. Inherent risk may be increased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the system or network may become more vulnerable or susceptible to the threats, but it is not a change in the risk profile, as the risk profile considers the existing controls or measures. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that the organization is willing to accept in pursuit of its objectives. Risk appetite may be decreased by the failure of a critical patch implementation, as the organization may become less willing or able to accept the risk, but it is not a change in the risk profile, as the risk profile reflects the actual or current risk level, not the desired or expected risk level. References = CRISC Review Manual, pages 32-
331; CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual, page 972; What is a Critical Patch? - Definition from Techopedia3; What is Residual Risk? - Definition from Techopedia4

The factor that primarily influences an organization's capability to implement a risk management framework is the maturity of its risk culture, as it reflects the degree of awareness, understanding, and commitment of the organization's stakeholders towards the risk management objectives, values, and practices, and affects the adoption and integration of the risk management framework across the organization. The other options are not the primary factors, as they are more related to the guidance, competence, or approval of the risk management framework, respectively, rather than the influence of the risk management framework. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 99.

The first course of action for a risk practitioner when discovering a deficiency in a critical system that cannot be patched is to conduct a risk assessment. A risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks that could affect the achievement of the objectives of the system or the organization. A risk assessment helps to determine the level and nature of the risk exposure, and to prioritize and respond to the risks. Conducting a risk assessment is the first course of action, as it helps to understand the source, cause, and impact of the deficiency, and to estimate the likelihood and consequences of the risk events that could exploit the deficiency. Conducting a risk assessment also helps to identify and evaluate the existing or potential controls or mitigations that could address the deficiency, and to recommend the appropriate risk treatment options. Reporting the issue to internal audit, submitting a request to change management, and reviewing the business impact assessment are not the first courses of action, as they are either the outputs or the inputs of the risk assessment process, and they do not address the primary need of assessing the risk situation and status. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 49.

The best way to enable a risk practitioner to understand management's approach to organizational risk is to know the risk appetite and risk tolerance of the organization. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to pursue, retain, or take in order to achieve its objectives. Risk tolerance is the amount and type of risk that an organization is willing to accept in relation to specific performance measures, such as availability, reliability, or security. Risk appetite and risk tolerance reflect the management's attitude, preferences, and expectations towards risk, and guide the risk management process, such as risk identification, assessment, response, and monitoring. The other options are not as effective as knowing the risk appetite and risk tolerance, although they may provide some input or context for understanding the management's approach to organizational risk. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter
1, Section 1.2.1, page 1-8.

* A technical vulnerability is a weakness or flaw in the design or implementation of an information system or resource that can be exploited or compromised by a threat or source of harm that may affect the organization's objectives or operations. A technical vulnerability may be caused by various factors, such as human error, system failure, process inefficiency, resource limitation, etc.
* A vulnerability assessment is a process of identifying and evaluating the technical vulnerabilities that exist or may arise in the organization's information systems or resources, and determining their severity and impact. A vulnerability assessment can help the organization to assess and prioritize the risks, and to design and implement appropriate controls or countermeasures to mitigate or prevent the risks.
* The best response to the scenario of a recently discovered technical vulnerability being actively exploited is to conduct a vulnerability assessment, because it can help the organization to address the following questions:
* What is the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how does it affect the functionality or security of the information system or resource?
* How is the technical vulnerability being exploited or compromised, and by whom or what?
* What are the potential consequences or impacts of the exploitation or compromise of the technical vulnerability for the organization and its stakeholders?
* How can the technical vulnerability be detected and reported, and what are the available or feasible options or solutions to address or correct it?
* Conducting a vulnerability assessment can help the organization to improve and optimize the information system or resource quality and performance, and to reduce or eliminate the technical vulnerability. It can also help the organization to align the information system or resource with the organization's objectives and requirements, and to comply with the organization's policies and standards.
* The other options are not the best responses to the scenario of a recently discovered technical vulnerability being actively exploited, because they do not address the main purpose and benefit of conducting a vulnerability assessment, which is to identify and evaluate the technical vulnerability, and to determine its severity and impact.
* Assessing the vulnerability management process is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the process that is used to identify, analyze, evaluate, and communicate the technical vulnerabilities, and to align them with the organization's objectives and requirements. Assessing the vulnerability management process can help the organization to improve and optimize the process, and to reduce or eliminate the gaps or weaknesses in the process, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders.
* Conducting a control self-assessment is a process of evaluating and verifying the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls that are intended to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, availability, and reliability of the information systems and resources, using the input and feedback from the individuals or groups that are involved or responsible for the information systems activities or functions. Conducting a control self-assessment can help the organization to identify and document the control deficiencies, and to align them with the organization's objectives and requirements, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders.
* Reassessing the inherent risk of the target is a process of reevaluating and recalculating the amount and type of risk that exists in the absence of any controls, and that is inherent to the nature or characteristics of the target, which is the information system or resource that is affected by the technical vulnerability. Reassessing the inherent risk of the target can help the organization to understand and document the risk exposure or level, and to align it with the organization's risk appetite and tolerance, but it is not the best response to the scenario, because it does not indicate the nature and extent of the technical vulnerability, and how it affects the organization and its stakeholders. References =
* ISACA, CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, 2022, pp. 40-41, 47-48, 54-55, 58-59, 62-63
* ISACA, CRISC Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Database, 2022, QID 195
* CRISC Practice Quiz and Exam Prep