According to the CRISC Review Manual1, the application owner is the person who has the authority and accountability for the achievement of the application objectives and the management of the associated risks.
The application owner is responsible for defining the level of resiliency needed for the application, which is the ability of the application to recover from disruptions and continue to operate. The application owner is also responsible for accepting or rejecting the residual risks after the implementation of the disaster recovery controls, which are the measures to restore the application functionality and data in the event of a disaster. Therefore, the risk owner in this scenario is the application owner, as they are the ones who will be affected by the potential impact of the disaster on the application and its objectives. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 194.

The main purpose of monitoring risk is to provide decision support for the organization. Risk monitoring is the process of tracking and reviewing the risk management activities, the risk profile, and the risk performance of the organization. By monitoring risk, the organization can obtain timely and relevant information and feedback on the risk situation, and use it to make informed and effective decisions on risk management and business objectives. Communication, risk analysis, and benchmarking are other possible purposes of risk monitoring, but they are not as important as decision support. References = ISACA Certified in Risk and Information Systems Control (CRISC) Certification Exam Question and Answers, question 12; CRISC Review Manual, 6th Edition, page 215.

According to the CRISC Review Manual1, control process efficiency is the degree to which a control process achieves its intended objectives with minimum resources, time, and cost. The primary objective for automating controls is to improve control process efficiency, as automation can help to reduce human errors, increase consistency and accuracy, enhance scalability and flexibility, and optimize performance and productivity. Automation can also help to achieve other objectives, such as facilitating continuous control monitoring, complying with functional requirements, and reducing the need for audit reviews, but these are not the primary objective for automating controls. References = CRISC Review Manual1, page 202.

The best recommendation to reduce the risk associated with potential system compromise when a vendor stops releasing security patches and updates for a business-critical legacy system is to segment the system on its own network. Network segmentation is the process of dividing a network into smaller subnetworks or segments, based on different criteria, such as function, location, or security level. Network segmentation helps to isolate the system from the rest of the network, and limit the exposure and access to the system. Network segmentation also helps to improve the performance and security of the network, by reducing the network traffic and congestion, and enhancing the monitoring and control capabilities. The other options are not as effective as segmenting the system on its own network, although they may provide some additional protection or recovery options. Ensuring regular backups take place, virtualizing the system in the cloud, and installing antivirus software on the system are all measures that can help to reduce the risk of data loss or system damage, but they do not address the root cause of the risk, which is the lack of security patches and updates for the system. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 3-11.

A compensating control is a control that is implemented to reduce the risk exposure when the primary control is not feasible or cost-effective. A compensating control may not directly address the root cause of the risk, but it can provide an alternative or supplementary way of mitigating the risk. A residual risk is the risk that remains after the risk response has been implemented. A residual risk can be accepted, monitored, or further reduced depending on the risk tolerance and appetite of the organization. During a risk assessment, a risk practitioner is a person who is responsible for identifying and analyzing the potential sources and consequences of risk events. When a risk practitioner learns that an IT risk factor is adequately mitigated by compensating controls in an associated business process, the action that would enable the most effective management of the residual risk is to schedule periodic reviews of the compensating controls' effectiveness, which means to measure and evaluate the performance and compliance of the compensating controls on a regular basis. By scheduling periodic reviews of the compensating controls' effectiveness, the risk practitioner can ensure that the compensating controls are still operating as intended, and that they are delivering the expected results. The risk practitioner can also identify any gaps or weaknesses in the compensating controls, and recommend any improvements or adjustments as needed. References = CRISC Review Manual, 7th Edition, page 177.