ISC CISSP - Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP)

 A software assurance policy is a document that defines the standards, guidelines, and best practices for ensuring the quality, security, and reliability of software products and services. A software assurance policy can help address the requirements of security assessment during software acquisition, as it establishes the criteria and methods for evaluating and testing the software, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders involved. A software assurance policy can help ensure that the software meets the functional and non-functional requirements, as well as the security and compliance requirements, of the organization. Continuous monitoring is a process that involves collecting, analyzing, and reporting data on the performance and security of the systems and networks. Continuous monitoring can help maintain the security and availability of the systems and networks, but it does not address the security assessment during software acquisition. Software configuration management (SCM) is a process that involves controlling and tracking the changes and versions of the software products and components. SCM can help ensure the consistency and integrity of the software products and components, but it does not address the security assessment during software acquisition. Data loss prevention (DLP) policy is a document that defines the rules and actions for preventing the unauthorized disclosure, transfer, or leakage of sensitive data. DLP policy can help protect the data from being exposed, but it does not address the security assessment during software acquisition.

The most effective strategy to prevent an attacker from disabling a network is to design networks with the ability to adapt, reconfigure, and fail over. A network that can adapt, reconfigure, and fail over is a network that can dynamically adjust its topology, configuration, and routing, and switch to alternative or backup components, in response to any changes, disruptions, or attacks in the network environment. A network that can adapt, reconfigure, and fail over can prevent an attacker from disabling a network, as it can maintain the availability, resilience, and performance of the network, and mitigate the impact or damage of the attack12. References: CISSP CBK, Fifth Edition, Chapter 4, page 372; CISSP Practice Exam – FREE 20 Questions and Answers, Question 17.

The best response to the request from a former colleague for a copy of the organization’s confidential incident management policy is to submit the request using company official channels to ensure the policy is okay to distribute. The incident management policy is a policy that defines the roles, responsibilities, and procedures for the identification, response, and recovery of the security incidents that may affect the organization. The incident management policy is a confidential document that contains sensitive information and data, and that should be protected from unauthorized access, disclosure, or modification. Submitting the request using company official channels can help to ensure the policy is okay to distribute, as it can verify the legitimacy and validity of the request, and the authorization and clearance of the requester. Submitting the request using company official channels can also help to comply with the security policies and standards, and the legal, regulatory, or contractual requirements of the organization, and to prevent or mitigate any potential security risks or issues that may arise from the distribution of the policy34. References: CISSP CBK, Fifth Edition, Chapter 7, page 629; 2024 Pass4itsure CISSP Dumps, Question 17.

In systems security engineering, the security principle of modularity provides isolated functions and data. Modularity means dividing a system into well-defined logical units that have clear boundaries and interfaces. This helps to reduce complexity, improve maintainability, and enhance security. By isolating functions and data, modularity prevents unauthorized access, limits the impact of failures, and facilitates testing and verification. Modularity also supports the principle of least privilege, which grants the minimum access required to perform a function. References: CISSP Official Study Guide, 9th Edition, page 1019; CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, 8th Edition, page 1098

 Packet filtering routers are used in low-risk environments because they offer speed, flexibility, and transparency in filtering traffic based on IP protocol, source/destination IP address, or port number without adding significant overhead or complexity. References: Unable to provide specific references due to browsing limitations.

Split-tunneling is a configuration that allows remote clients to access both the public and private network simultaneously through a VPN connection. This poses a security concern, because it increases the attack surface and exposes the private network to potential threats from the public network. Remote sessions may still require multi-layer authentication, multiple IPSec tunnels may not be exploitable in specific circumstances, and the NIDS may still inspect SSL traffic, depending on the VPN configuration34. References: CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Eighth Edition, Chapter 6, page 473; 100 CISSP Questions, Answers and Explanations, Question 16.

 The best way to restrict access to the network in an environment where there is not full administrative control over all network connected endpoints, such as a university where non-corporate devices are used, is to use a clientless Network Access Control (NAC) solution. A clientless NAC solution is a type of NAC solution that does not require the installation or configuration of any software or agent on the endpoints that connect to the network. A clientless NAC solution can enforce the network access policies and rules based on the attributes or characteristics of the endpoints, such as device type, operating system, IP address, MAC address, or user identity. A clientless NAC solution can also perform the network access authentication and authorization, and the network health and compliance checks, without relying on the endpoint cooperation or compliance. A clientless NAC solution is suitable for an environment where there is not full administrative control over all network connected endpoints, such as a university where non-corporate devices are used, because it can provide a consistent and centralized network access control, regardless of the endpoint ownership, configuration, or status56. References: CISSP CBK, Fifth Edition, Chapter 4, page 378; CISSP Practice Exam – FREE 20 Questions and Answers, Question 19.

The standard that is used to exchange authorization information between different identity management systems is Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML). SAML is an XML-based standard that defines a framework for exchanging security information, such as authentication, authorization, or attributes, between different parties or domains, such as service providers, identity providers, or users. SAML can be used to enable single sign-on (SSO), which is a process that allows a user to access multiple services or applications with a single authentication, by using assertions, which are statements or claims that contain the security information, such as the identity, role, or privilege of the user, that are issued or validated by the identity provider, and that are consumed or verified by the service provider. SAML can help to simplify, streamline, or secure the identity management process, by providing a standard, interoperable, or flexible way to exchange the security information between different identity management systems. Service Oriented Architecture (SOA), Extensible Markup Language (XML), or Wireless Authentication Protocol (WAP) are not the standards that are used to exchange authorization information between different identity management systems, as they are either more related to the architectural styles, data formats, or communication protocols, that are used to design, represent, or transmit the information, rather than to exchange the security information, between different identity management systems. References: CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Eighth Edition, Chapter 5: Identity and Access Management, page 295; CISSP Official (ISC)2 Practice Tests, Third Edition, Domain 5: Identity and Access Management, Question 5.14, page 224.

The best description of when an organization should conduct a black box security audit on a new software product is when the organization is confident the final source code is complete. A black box security audit is a type of security testing that involves testing the functionality and behavior of the software product, without having any knowledge or access to the internal structure, design, or code of the software product. A black box security audit can help to identify and evaluate the security vulnerabilities and issues of the software product, from the perspective of an external attacker or user. A black box security audit should be conducted when the organization is confident the final source code is complete, as it can provide a comprehensive and realistic assessment of the security of the software product, and validate the security requirements and expectations of the software product34. References: CISSP CBK, Fifth Edition, Chapter 3, page 234; 2024 Pass4itsure CISSP Dumps, Question 19.

Mechanically shredding the entire HDD is the most appropriate technique for destroying magnetic platter style hard disk drives containing data with a “HIGH” security categorization. Mechanical shredding is a process that uses a powerful machine to cut, tear, or crush the HDD into small pieces, making it impossible to recover any data from the platters or the components. Mechanical shredding is the most appropriate technique for destroying HDDs with high security data, because it can:

Ensure the complete and irreversible destruction of the HDD and the data, regardless of the type, size, or condition of the HDD, and without requiring any prior preparation or disassembly of the HDD.

Provide a high level of assurance and confidence that the HDD and the data are destroyed beyond any possibility of recovery, even by advanced forensic techniques or specialized equipment.

Comply with the industry standards and the best practices for the secure disposal of HDDs and the data, such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-88 Revision 1, Guidelines for Media Sanitization1, or the Department of Defense (DoD) 5220.22-M, National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual2.

The other options are not the most appropriate techniques for destroying HDDs with high security data. Drilling through the device and platters is a process that uses a drill to make holes in the HDD and the platters, making it difficult to read the data from the platters. Drilling through the device and platters is not the most appropriate technique for destroying HDDs with high security data, because it may not:

Destroy the entire HDD and the data, as some parts of the platters or the components may remain intact or readable, and may be recovered by sophisticated methods or tools.

Provide a sufficient level of assurance and confidence that the HDD and the data are destroyed beyond any possibility of recovery, as the number, size, and location of the holes may vary depending on the type, size, or condition of the HDD, and the skill, experience, or equipment of the operator.

Comply with the industry standards and the best practices for the secure disposal of HDDs and the data, as drilling through the device and platters is not considered a reliable or effective method of sanitization or destruction by the NIST or the DoD.

Removing the control electronics is a process that involves detaching the circuit board or the controller from the HDD, making it unable to communicate or operate with other devices. Removing the control electronics is not the most appropriate technique for destroying HDDs with high security data, because it does not:

Destroy the HDD and the data, as the platters and the components that store the data are still intact and readable, and may be recovered by replacing the control electronics or using other devices.

Provide any level of assurance and confidence that the HDD and the data are destroyed beyond any possibility of recovery, as removing the control electronics is a reversible and trivial process that does not affect the data on the platters or the components.

Comply with the industry standards and the best practices for the secure disposal of HDDs and the data, as removing the control electronics is not considered a method of sanitization or destruction by the NIST or the DoD.

HP iProcess the HDD through a degaussing device is a process that uses a powerful magnet to erase the data from the HDD by altering or eliminating the magnetic field of the platters or the components. HP iProcess the HDD through a degaussing device is not the most appropriate technique for destroying HDDs with high security data, because it may not:

Destroy the HDD and the data, as some types of HDDs, such as solid state drives (SSDs) or hybrid drives, do not use magnetic fields to store the data, and may not be affected by the degaussing device, or may require a higher level of magnetic force to erase the data.

Provide a reliable level of assurance and confidence that the HDD and the data are destroyed beyond any possibility of recovery, as the effectiveness of the degaussing device may depend on the type, size, or condition of the HDD, and the strength, duration, or orientation of the magnetic field, and it may be difficult to verify or validate the results of the degaussing process.

Comply with the industry standards and the best practices for the secure disposal of HDDs and the data, as the NIST and the DoD recommend the use of degaussing devices that are certified or approved by the National Security Agency (NSA) or the Center for Magnetic Recording Research (CMRR), and that are compatible with the type and size of the HDD.

If you want to learn more about the different techniques for destroying HDDs and the data, you can check out these resources:

How to Destroy a Hard Drive — The Family Handyman

How can I physically destroy data from a failed HDD? - Super User

The right way to destroy an old hard drive - CNET

 The best example to minimize the attack surface for a customer’s private information is collection limitation. Collection limitation is a principle of data protection that states that the collection of personal data should be limited to the minimum necessary for the specified purpose, and that the data should be obtained by lawful and fair means, with the consent of the data subject. Collection limitation reduces the attack surface for a customer’s private information, as it reduces the amount and scope of the data that is exposed to potential threats, and ensures that the data is collected in a legitimate and transparent manner. Obfuscation, authentication, and data masking are not examples of minimizing the attack surface, but rather examples of protecting the data that is already collected. Obfuscation is a technique of obscuring or hiding the meaning or intent of the data, such as by using encryption, hashing, or encoding. Authentication is a process of verifying the identity or credentials of a user or a system that requests access to the data. Data masking is a technique of replacing or modifying the sensitive data with fictitious or anonymized data, such as by using pseudonymization, tokenization, or generalization. References: Official (ISC)2 Guide to the CISSP CBK, Fifth Edition, Chapter 2: Asset Security, page 115.

The primary reason for selecting the appropriate level of detail for audit record generation is to facilitate a root cause analysis (RCA). Audit record generation is a process that involves creating and storing the records or the logs of the activities, events, or issues that occur on a system or a network, using various sources, such as the system, the application, the user, or the device. Audit record generation can provide various benefits, such as monitoring, auditing, reporting, or troubleshooting the system or the network. The level of detail for audit record generation refers to the amount or the quality of the information or the data that are included or captured in the audit records or the logs, such as the date, the time, the source, the destination, the action, or the outcome. The level of detail for audit record generation can vary depending on various factors, such as the purpose, the scope, the policy, or the standard of the audit record generation. The primary reason for selecting the appropriate level of detail for audit record generation is to facilitate a root cause analysis (RCA). A RCA is a process that involves identifying, analyzing, and resolving the underlying or the fundamental cause or the problem of an activity, event, or issue that occurs on a system or a network, using various methods, such as the 5 Whys, the fishbone diagram, or the fault tree analysis. A RCA can provide various benefits, such as preventing or mitigating the recurrence or the impact of the activity, event, or issue, and improving the performance, reliability, or security of the system or the network. Selecting the appropriate level of detail for audit record generation can facilitate a RCA, as it can provide the sufficient and relevant information or data that are needed or used for the RCA34. References: CISSP CBK, Fifth Edition, Chapter 6, page 581; 2024 Pass4itsure CISSP Dumps, Question 16.

The first step prior to executing a test of an organization’s disaster recovery (DR) or business continuity plan (BCP) is to develop clear evaluation criteria. Evaluation criteria are the standards or measures that are used to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the DR or BCP test. Evaluation criteria should be aligned with the objectives and scope of the test, and should be agreed upon by the stakeholders and participants of the test. Evaluation criteria should also be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound (SMART). Evaluation criteria can include metrics such as recovery time objective (RTO), recovery point objective (RPO), mean time to recovery (MTTR), mean time between failures (MTBF), and customer satisfaction. Evaluation criteria can also include qualitative aspects such as communication, coordination, documentation, and lessons learned. Developing clear evaluation criteria is essential for conducting a successful DR or BCP test, as it provides a basis for measuring the performance, identifying the gaps, and recommending the improvements of the DR or BCP process. Identifying key stakeholders, developing recommendations for disaster scenarios, and identifying potential failure points are also important steps in the DR or BCP testing process, but they are not the first step. These steps can be performed after developing the evaluation criteria, or as part of the test planning phase. References: Official (ISC)2 CISSP CBK Reference, Fifth Edition, Domain 7, Security Operations, page 737. CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Eighth Edition, Chapter 7, Security Operations, page 698.

When an organization uses a public cloud service provider (CSP) to store sensitive data, it should ensure that the data is protected both during and after the service agreement. One of the best ways to do this is to use a contractual agreement that specifies the CSP’s obligations and responsibilities for wiping the data from the storage environment once the agreement expires and the assets are reused. This way, the organization can hold the CSP accountable for the secure deletion of the data and prevent any unauthorized access or disclosure of the data by the CSP or other customers. Using internal encryption keys, continuous monitoring, or NIST recommendations are good practices, but they do not guarantee that the CSP will wipe the data from the storage environment. References: CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Eighth Edition, Chapter 5: Cloud Computing and Virtualization, page 281; CISSP Official (ISC)2 Practice Tests, Third Edition, Domain 5: Identity and Access Management, Question 5.9, page 216.

The first action for a security administrator who detects an intrusion on the network based on precursors and other indicators is to isolate and contain the intrusion. An intrusion is an unauthorized or malicious activity that attempts to compromise the security or the functionality of a system or a network. An intrusion can be detected by various methods, such as the analysis of the network traffic, the logs, the alerts, or the anomalies. Precursors and indicators are the signs or the evidence of an intrusion or an attempted intrusion. Precursors are the events or the activities that occur before or during an intrusion, such as the reconnaissance, the scanning, or the probing. Indicators are the events or the activities that occur after or as a result of an intrusion, such as the exploitation, the backdoor, or the payload. The first action for a security administrator who detects an intrusion on the network is to isolate and contain the intrusion, which means to disconnect or block the affected system or network from the rest of the environment and prevent the intrusion from spreading or causing more damage. Isolating and containing the intrusion can help protect the other systems or networks from being compromised, preserve the evidence for the investigation, and facilitate the recovery and the restoration of the normal operations. References: CISSP All-in-One Exam Guide, Eighth Edition, Chapter 7: Security Operations, page 364. Free daily CISSP practice questions, Question 4.