The best control to help reduce the risk of fraudulent internal transactions in several business applications is the segregation of duties. Segregation of duties is the principle of dividing the roles and responsibilities of different individuals or groups involved in a business process or an IT service, so that no one person or group has complete control over the entire process or service. Segregation of duties can help to prevent or detect fraud, errors, conflicts of interest, or misuse of resources, by ensuring that there are checks and balances, and that there is adequate oversight and accountability. Segregation of duties can also help to reduce the risk of collusion, compromise, or coercion among the internal staff, by limiting their access and authority to the business applications and data. Periodic user privileges review, log monitoring, and periodic internal audits are also useful controls, but they are not as effective as segregation of duties, as they are reactive and detective measures, rather than proactive and preventive measures. References = CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 217.

During an initial risk assessment, it is crucial to consider existing controls primarily to determine the current risk level. Here's a detailed explanation:
* Understanding Existing Controls:
* Existing controls are measures already in place to mitigate risks. These controls can include technical, administrative, and physical safeguards designed to protect organizational assets.
* Knowing what controls are currently in place helps to understand the organization's current defense mechanisms against potential threats.
* Assessing the Current Risk Level:
* The current risk level is the risk that remains after considering the effectiveness of existing controls, often referred to as residual risk.
* By evaluating these controls, one can determine how much risk is actually mitigated and what level of risk remains.
* For instance, if an organization has implemented firewalls and intrusion detection systems, these controls would reduce the risk of cyber attacks. The effectiveness of these controls will determine the residual risk level.
* Differentiating Between Risk Types:
* Inherent Risk: This is the level of risk that exists before any controls are applied. It's the raw risk associated with a particular asset or process.
* Residual Risk: This is the risk that remains after existing controls have been applied. It's the actual risk that an organization faces after mitigation efforts.
* Current Risk: This term is often used interchangeably with residual risk but focuses on the risk level at the present moment, considering the existing controls.
* Primary Objective in Initial Risk Assessment:
* The primary objective of considering existing controls during the initial risk assessment is to gain an accurate picture of the current risk landscape. This allows risk practitioners to understand what additional controls or modifications might be needed to further reduce risk to acceptable levels.
* Without considering existing controls, the assessment would only reflect the inherent risk, which doesn't provide a realistic view of the organization's risk exposure.
* References:
* The CRISC Review Manual emphasizes the importance of understanding the current risk level by assessing existing controls (CRISC Review Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section
2.9.3 Current Risk).

The relationship owner is the person who has the authority and responsibility for managing the relationship with the service provider. The relationship owner should be accountable for ensuring that risk responses are implemented, as they are the primary point of contact and communication with the service provider. The relationship owner can also monitor and evaluate the performance and compliance of the service provider, and enforce the contractual obligations and service level agreements. The other options are not as accountable as the relationship owner, as they are related to the assessment, security, or legal aspects of the service provider, not the management or oversight of the service provider. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3: IT Risk Response, Section 3.3: IT Risk Response Implementation, page 145.

The risk practitioner's next step after identifying risk owners and responses for newly identified risk scenarios in a recent risk workshop is to update the risk register with the results, as it involves documenting and communicating the risk information and decisions, and maintaining the accuracy and completeness of the risk register. Preparing a business case for the response options, identifying resources for implementing responses, and developing a mechanism for monitoring residual risk are possible steps, but they are not the next step, as they require the prior update of the risk register with the new risk information and decisions. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 109.

Implementing an emergency change authorization process is the best control for an organization that allows programmers to change production systems in emergency situations, because it helps to ensure that the changes are justified, approved, documented, and tested before they are implemented, and that they are monitored and reviewed after they are implemented. An emergency change is a change that is required to resolve or prevent a critical issue or incident that may affect the availability, performance, or security of the production systems. A production system is a system that is used to support or enable the operational or business functions or processes of the organization. An emergency change authorization process is a process that defines the roles and responsibilities, criteria and procedures, and tools and techniques for managing and controlling the emergency changes. Implementing an emergency change authorization process is the best control, as it helps to minimize the risks and impacts of the emergency changes, and to maintain the integrity and reliability of the production systems. Periodically reviewing operator logs, limiting the number of super users, and reviewing the programmers' emergency change reports are all possible controls for an organization that allows programmers to change production systems in emergency situations, but they are not the best control, as they do not provide a comprehensive and consistent approach to the emergency change management. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.1, page 208