What type of security control is used in place of a recommended security control?

What type of security control is used in place of a recommended security control?

• A. Common control
• B. Compensating control
• C. Detective control
• D. Preventive control

Answer: (B)

The selected answer, compensating control, is appropriate because compensating controls are alternative measures that are put in place to satisfy a security requirement when the recommended control cannot be implemented for various reasons, such as technical constraints, cost, or operational considerations. These controls aim to provide a similar level of security and risk mitigation as the original recommended controls, ensuring that the organization's security posture remains strong despite the absence of the ideal control. Compensating controls often involve additional layers of protection or alternative strategies that serve to mitigate risks in a comparable manner. For example, if an organization cannot implement access controls on a system, it may instead employ a monitoring solution that flags unauthorized access attempts as a compensating strategy. Understanding compensating controls is crucial for auditors and compliance professionals, as they must evaluate whether these alternative measures adequately address the identified security risks and align with regulatory requirements. In essence, they serve as a stopgap solution to ensure continued protection until the recommended control can be applied. The other types of controls mentioned, such as common, detective, or preventive controls, have specific purposes that do not align with the concept of substituting one measure for another to meet an established standard. Common controls are shared security measures across multiple systems, detective controls are designed to identify

The selected answer, compensating control, is appropriate because compensating controls are alternative measures that are put in place to satisfy a security requirement when the recommended control cannot be implemented for various reasons, such as technical constraints, cost, or operational considerations. These controls aim to provide a similar level of security and risk mitigation as the original recommended controls, ensuring that the organization's security posture remains strong despite the absence of the ideal control.

Compensating controls often involve additional layers of protection or alternative strategies that serve to mitigate risks in a comparable manner. For example, if an organization cannot implement access controls on a system, it may instead employ a monitoring solution that flags unauthorized access attempts as a compensating strategy.

Understanding compensating controls is crucial for auditors and compliance professionals, as they must evaluate whether these alternative measures adequately address the identified security risks and align with regulatory requirements. In essence, they serve as a stopgap solution to ensure continued protection until the recommended control can be applied.

The other types of controls mentioned, such as common, detective, or preventive controls, have specific purposes that do not align with the concept of substituting one measure for another to meet an established standard. Common controls are shared security measures across multiple systems, detective controls are designed to identify