Had something like this in a mock. C makes sense since log can't be altered, which is the main thing for integrity. Rest are good but not enough to guarantee original data.
Q: 10
Which of the following provides the MOST assurance of the integrity of a firewall log?
Options
Discussion
Nah, I don’t think it's B-just restricting access isn't enough for log integrity. Option C makes more sense because if the log can’t be modified, that directly prevents tampering. Monthly reviews (A) help but don't stop changes from happening in between. Pretty sure C is right here but open if someone sees a gotcha.
Option B-require authorized access. I remember similar questions in the official guide focusing on controlled access, not immutability.
Monthly reviews show active oversight, so A.
Totally C here. Nothing beats a log that can't be modified when it comes to ensuring integrity.
Its C, not B. Being read-only prevents tampering, initial or ongoing review isn't enough here.
Its B, not C. Controlling access stops unauthorized people from viewing or changing logs, which gives strong assurance too.
Looks like C
My vote is C since logs that can't be modified provide the most direct assurance of integrity. Reviewing or restricting access helps, but only immutability really stops tampering. I think that's what the question is looking for, agree?
C imo, because if the log can't be modified, its integrity is preserved regardless of who accesses it or how often it's reviewed. The others are good practices but they don't actually prevent tampering. Pretty sure that's the main point.
Be respectful. No spam.
Question 10 of 35