Pass ISC CISSP Exam in First Attempt Guaranteed!

This response addresses a different condition: A public transport authority has a BCP document but station managers have never rehearsed communication during a regional outage. The present case requires the measure described by Integrate business process workarounds and staff readiness into recovery exercises.

Business transactions can remain blocked despite functional infrastructure. The proposal would not be defensible for this case.

This is appropriate for a later condition (The bank adopts digital signatures for its manual fallback workflow.), but it does not directly resolve the initial need. Process changes require updated continuity dependencies and assurance.

This is an advantage of another design (Exercise the plan with operational roles, degraded communications and timed decisions.), not the particular flaw of Declare the rehearsal fully successful based solely on server uptime.

This is a limitation elsewhere: A public transport authority has a BCP document but station managers have never rehearsed communication during a regional outage. It does not explain the deficiency of the specified proposed approach.

This explains a later shift in requirements (The bank adopts digital signatures for its manual fallback workflow.), not the failure of the current proposal.

This is appropriate for a later condition (An emergency exit must permit rapid evacuation from the sample area.), but it does not directly resolve the initial need. Emergency egress takes priority over normal entry controls with appropriate safeguards.

This response addresses a different condition: A high-security facility uses access cards but guard staff have no process for investigating forced-door alarms. The present case requires the measure described by Install layered barriers, controlled visitor routes and escorted restricted-zone entry.

Signs alone do not enforce badge and escort requirements. The proposal would not be defensible for this case.

This explains a later shift in requirements (An emergency exit must permit rapid evacuation from the sample area.), not the failure of the current proposal.

This is an advantage of another design (Establish response procedures, monitored alarms and accountable guard dispatch.), not the particular flaw of Assume reception signage prevents unauthorized entry into restricted storage.

This is a limitation elsewhere: A high-security facility uses access cards but guard staff have no process for investigating forced-door alarms. It does not explain the deficiency of the specified proposed approach.

This other observation is relevant to: An enterprise wants to block known malicious outbound command-and-control domains from managed endpoints.

An approved change without an executed test cannot prove operating effectiveness. The needed evidence is Unauthorized visitor movement is blocked at the zone boundary and entry events recorded.

This demonstrates controls in another circumstance: A high-security facility uses access cards but guard staff have no process for investigating forced-door alarms.

This remains inappropriate: Signs alone do not enforce badge and escort requirements.

This is a record of how the initial safeguard would be checked, not an action implementing the newly requested condition: Unauthorized visitor movement is blocked at the zone boundary and entry events recorded.

This is the appropriate response to the original situation: Defense in depth should prevent public-area access from becoming sensitive-area access. It does not directly meet the new condition.

This response addresses a different condition: A pharmaceutical laboratory has a visitor lobby that opens directly into a restricted sample-storage corridor. The present case requires the measure described by Establish response procedures, monitored alarms and accountable guard dispatch.

Unmonitored forced access can go unnoticed during a high-risk period. The proposal would not be defensible for this case.

This is appropriate for a later condition (A new freight delivery entrance is added outside the guarded main entrance.), but it does not directly resolve the initial need. Changing site layout changes perimeter control coverage.

Office access controls do not mitigate travel threats, physical coercion or device loss. The proposal would not be defensible for this case.

This is appropriate for a later condition (A regional crisis interrupts ordinary cellular communications.), but it does not directly resolve the initial need. Emergency personnel support needs resilient channels beyond routine device security.

This response addresses a different condition: A field technician transports plaintext backup drives between regional offices using personal luggage. The present case requires the measure described by Perform travel threat assessment and issue safety, emergency contact and device-hardening guidance.

This is a limitation elsewhere: A lab uses shared removable devices across malware analysis and trusted production networks. It does not explain the deficiency of the specified proposed approach. In the current case, the assessed requirement is: An executive travels to a region with elevated kidnapping risk while carrying confidential prototypes and an unlocked smartphone. A designer proposes: Assume a standard office badge offers adequate protection during foreign travel. What is the MOST significant security deficiency in this proposal.

This explains a later shift in requirements (A regional crisis interrupts ordinary cellular communications.), not the failure of the current proposal.

This is an advantage of another design (Restrict removable media and provide approved sanitized transfer procedures between trust zones.), not the particular flaw of Assume a standard office badge offers adequate protection during foreign travel.

This demonstrates controls in another circumstance: A payment service shows evidence of stolen API tokens being used to make unauthorized transactions. In the current case, the assessed requirement is: An executive travels to a region with elevated kidnapping risk while carrying confidential prototypes and an unlocked smartphone. The organization has now implemented this response: Perform travel threat assessment and issue safety, emergency contact and device-hardening guidance. Which observation would MOST directly demonstrate that the security objective was met.

This other observation is relevant to: A vulnerability scanner reports a critical library on a decommissioned host whose management interface no longer exists. In the current case, the assessed requirement is: An executive travels to a region with elevated kidnapping risk while carrying confidential prototypes and an unlocked smartphone. The organization has now implemented this response: Perform travel threat assessment and issue safety, emergency contact and device-hardening guidance. Which observation would MOST directly demonstrate that the security objective was met.

An approved change without an executed test cannot prove operating effectiveness. The needed evidence is Pretravel checks verify emergency contacts, minimal carried data and safe response channels.

Incorrect — it fails the original constraint. Office access controls do not mitigate travel threats, physical coercion or device loss.

Incorrect — the measure Coordinate safety-aware containment with clinical owners while preserving critical care continuity. addresses a different case: A hospital has confirmed malware on clinical workstations but systems also support active patient care.

Incorrect — this evidence applies to another case: A hospital has confirmed malware on clinical workstations but systems also support active patient care. The specified requirement here is An executive travels to a region with elevated kidnapping risk while carrying confidential prototypes and an unlocked smartphone.