The greatest concern when assessing the risk profile of an organization is that the risk profile was last reviewed two years ago. A risk profile is a snapshot of the current risk exposure and appetite of the organization, based on the identification, analysis, and evaluation of the risks that could affect the achievement of the organization's objectives. A risk profile should be reviewed and updated regularly, at least annually, or whenever there are significant changes in the internal or external environment, such as new projects, strategies, regulations, or incidents. A risk profile that was last reviewed two years ago may not reflect the current risk situation and status of the organization, and may lead to inaccurate or incomplete risk assessment and response. The risk profile not being updated after a recent incident, the risk profile being developed without using industry standards, and the risk profile not containing historical loss data are also concerns, but they are not as critical as the risk profile being outdated. References = CRISC Review Manual,
6th Edition, ISACA, 2015, page 48.

Automated information security controls are controls that are implemented or executed by software or hardware, without human intervention, to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information and systems1. Examples of automated information security controls include firewalls, antivirus software, encryption, authentication, and logging2. The effectiveness of automated information security controls refers to how well they achieve their intended objectives and outcomes, such as preventing, detecting, or responding to security threats or incidents3. The best way to measure the effectiveness of automated information security controls prior to going live is to test them in a non-production environment, which is an environment that simulates the production environment, but does not contain real or sensitive data or systems4. Testing in a non-production environment allows the organization to verify the proper and consistent configuration, functionality, and performance of the automated information security controls, without affecting the normal operations or risking the exposure of the data or systems5. Testing in a non-production environment also enables the organization to identify and resolve any issues or gaps in the automated information security controls, and to evaluate their compatibility and interoperability with other systems or controls6. Performing a security control review, reviewing the security audit report, and conducting a risk assessment are not the best ways to measure the effectiveness of automated information security controls prior to going live, as they do not provide direct and timely information on the configuration, functionality, and performance of the automated information security controls. Performing a security control review is a process that involves checking and verifying that the organization's security controls are up to date, relevant, and effective7. A security control review can help to identify and address any issues or gaps in the security controls, but it does not show the actual behavior and results of the automated information security controls in a realistic environment. Reviewing the security audit report is a process that involves reading and analyzing the findings and recommendations of an independent examination and evaluation of the organization's security controls8.
A security audit report can help to provide assurance and advice on the adequacy and effectiveness of the security controls, but it does not show the current and dynamic status and performance of the automated information security controls in a changing environment. Conducting a risk assessment is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the risks and their potential impacts on the organization's objectives and performance. A risk assessment can help to anticipate and prepare for the risks that may affect the organization's security, but it does not show the actual impact and outcome of the automated information security controls in a specific scenario. References = 1: Automation Support for Security Control Assessments
- NIST2: Automated Security Control Assessment: When Self-Awareness Matters3: Technology Control Automation: Improving Efficiency, Reducing ... - ISACA4: [What is a Non-Production Environment? | Definition and FAQs] 5: [Why You Need a Non-Production Environment - Plutora] 6: [Testing Automated Security Controls - SANS Institute] 7: A brief guide to assessing risks and controls | ACCA Global8: IT Risk Resources | ISACA : [Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2: IT Risk Assessment, Section 2.1: Risk Identification, pp. 57-59.]

The most concerning factor for a risk practitioner reviewing risk action plans for documented IT risk scenarios is that many action plans were discontinued after senior management accepted the risk. Risk action plans are documents that define the roles, responsibilities, procedures, and resources for implementing the risk responses and strategies for the IT risk scenarios. Risk action plans help to reduce, transfer, avoid, or accept the IT risks, and to monitor and report on the IT risk performance and improvement. Discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk is a major concern, because it may indicate that the risk acceptance decision was not based on a proper risk analysis or evaluation, or that the risk acceptance decision was not communicated or coordinated with the relevant stakeholders, such as the board, management, business units, and IT functions. Discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk may also create challenges or risks for the organization, such as compliance, legal, reputational, or operational risks, or conflicts or inconsistencies with the organization's risk appetite, risk objectives, or risk policies. The other options are not as concerning as discontinuing risk action plans after senior management accepted the risk, although they may also pose some difficulties or limitations for the risk management process. Individuals outside IT managing action plans for the risk scenarios, target dates for completion missing from some action plans, and senior management approving multiple changes to several action plans are all factors that could affect the quality and timeliness of the risk management process, but they do not necessarily indicate a lack of risk management accountability or oversight. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1, page 4-32.

A risk practitioner should evaluate the relevance of the evolving threats to the organization's industry, as this is the best course of action to understand the current and future risk landscape, and to align the risk management strategy accordingly. By evaluating the relevance of the evolving threats, the risk practitioner can determine the impact and likelihood of the threats affecting the organization's objectives, assets, and processes, and prioritize the most critical and urgent risks. The risk practitioner can also identify the gaps and weaknesses in the existing controls, and recommend appropriate risk response measures to mitigate the threats. The other options are not as good as evaluating the relevance of the evolving threats, because they do not address the root cause of the rising security incidents, but rather focus on the symptoms or consequences of the incidents. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 85.

Detailed Explanation:A high number of exceptions often indicate misalignment between policies and business needs. Reviewing policies helps determine if they are overly restrictive or need adjustments to reduce exceptions while maintaining security.