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.

Ensuring that database changes are correctly applied is the primary reason for monitoring activities performed in a production database environment, as it helps to maintain the integrity, availability, and performance of the database and the applications that depend on it. Database changes are any modifications made to the database structure, configuration, data, or code, such as adding or deleting tables, columns, indexes, or triggers, updating or inserting data, or altering stored procedures or functions. Database changes can have significant impacts on the database functionality and behavior, and may introduce errors, inconsistencies, or vulnerabilities if not applied correctly. Therefore, monitoring database changes is essential to verify that the changes are implemented as intended, comply with the design specifications and standards, and do not cause any adverse effects or conflicts with the existing database or application components.
The other options are not the primary reasons for monitoring activities performed in a production database environment. Enforcing that changes are authorized is an important aspect of database change management, but it is not the main purpose of database monitoring. Database change management is the process of planning, reviewing, approving, and implementing database changes in a controlled and consistent manner.
Database change management helps to ensure that the changes are authorized by the appropriate stakeholders, aligned with the business requirements and objectives, and documented and communicated to the relevant parties. Database monitoring can support database change management by providing information and feedback on the change implementation and performance, but it does not enforce the change authorization.
Deterring illicit actions of database administrators is a possible benefit of database monitoring, but it is not the primary reason for it. Database administrators are the users who have the highest level of access and privilege to the database, and they are responsible for managing and maintaining the database operations and security.
Database monitoring can help to deter illicit actions of database administrators by tracking and auditing their activities and actions on the database, and alerting or escalating any suspicious or malicious behavior.
However, database monitoring is not the only or the most effective way to prevent or detect illicit actions of database administrators. Other measures, such as implementing the principle of least privilege, segregating duties, enforcing password policies, and encrypting data, are also necessary to protect the database from unauthorized or improper access or manipulation by database administrators or other users. Preventing system developers from accessing production data is a possible benefit of database monitoring, but it is not the primary reason for it. System developers are the users who design, develop, and test the applications that interact with the database. System developers should not have access to the production data, as it may contain sensitive or confidential information that could be compromised or misused by the developers. System developers should only use test or dummy data for their development and testing purposes. Database monitoring can help to prevent system developers from accessing production data by controlling and restricting their access and privilege to the database, and logging and reporting any unauthorized or inappropriate access attempts. However, database monitoring is not the only or the most effective way to prevent system developers from accessing production data. Other measures, such as implementing access control policies, masking or anonymizing data, and isolating development and production environments, are also necessary to safeguard the production data from system developers or other users. References = Database Monitoring: Basics & Introduction | Splunk, IT Risk Resources | ISACA, Best Practices for Database Performance Monitoring

A common risk taxonomy is a framework that defines and categorizes the sources, types, and impacts of risks within an organization1. It helps to establish a consistent and shared understanding of risk across the organization, and to facilitate effective risk identification, assessment, reporting, and communication2. A common risk taxonomy also enables comparison and aggregation of risks at different levels and domains, and supports alignment of risk management with business objectives and strategies3. Using key performance indicators (KPIs) and key risk indicators (KRIs) are important for measuring and monitoring risk and performance, but they are not the most important factor when discussing risk within an organization. KPIs and KRIs should be derived from the common risk taxonomy and aligned with the organization's risk appetite and tolerance4. Creating a risk communication policy is also important for ensuring that risk information is communicated to the right stakeholders at the right time and in the right format, but it is not the most important factor either. A risk communication policy should be based on the common risk taxonomy and the risk roles and responsibilities within the organization5. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 1: IT Risk Identification, Section 1.2: Risk Taxonomy, pp. 25-29.

Cybersecurity incident response procedures are the plans and actions that an organization takes to respond to and recover from a cybersecurity attack. They include identifying the source and scope of the attack, containing and eradicating the threat, restoring normal operations, and analyzing the root cause and lessons learned. Reviewing cybersecurity incident response procedures is the most effective course of action when the probability of a successful cybersecurity attack is increasing and the potential loss could exceed the organization's risk appetite, as it helps to prepare the organization for minimizing the impact and duration of the attack, as well as improving the resilience and security posture of the organization.

Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide an early warning of increasing risk exposure in various areas of the organization. They help to monitor changes in the level of risk and enable timely actions to mitigate the risk. The major advantage of using KRIs is that they identify when risk exceeds defined thresholds, which are the acceptable or tolerable levels of risk that the organization has established. By identifying when risk exceeds defined thresholds, the KRIs can alert the management and stakeholders of the need to take corrective or preventive measures, and avoid or reduce the potential losses or damages. References = 3