An employee recently resigned from a company. The employee was responsible for managing and supporting weekly batch jobs over the past five years. A few weeks after the employee resigned, one of the batch jobs failed and caused a major disruption. Which of the following would work best to prevent this type of incident from reoccurring?
Job rotation would prevent the type of incident described. By regularly rotating employees through different roles or tasks, multiple employees gain the knowledge and experience needed to handle essential tasks like managing and supporting weekly batch jobs. This creates a redundancy that ensures the organization is not dependent on any single employee, thereby mitigating the risk of disruptions when an employee resigns.
job rotation is correct. The employee resigned, so it is not a case of sabotage but a case of no one else to do the job. If there was job rotation, another person would know how to do the job.
I agree with a over d. D means that no-one knows how to do all of a certain task or job. so if he left it would still be an issue. A means more than one person knows how to do a task so there is redundancy.
In term of IT operation to continue "D" is the best answer
Most of your answers are spot on. Unfortunately, I have to disagree with you on this one. I find correct answer to be A. Job rotation serves two functions. First, it provides a type of knowledge redundancy. Second, moving personnel around reduces the risk of fraud, data modification, theft, sabotage, and misuse of information.
I appreciate you being kind to a stranger on the internet. :)
I think they're right though...that's what it seems like because A seems too broad...
“Job Rotation” is not a broad term. It simply means multiple people understand what that specific job is. D would almost be the exact opposite of what the question is asking. Separation of duties would basically mean that no one else knew what the worker was doing because they had separate duties. Job rotation means he/she would work on something for a few months, then cycle off with someone else. Then multiple people would understand what the duties are.
A - "over the past 5 years"
The batch job failed because no-one else knew how how to do the job. Period!! The right answer is option A. Note: If, (say), as a Sr DBA, you have other junior DBAs understudying you, and they are constantly rotated to understudy while you perform those Batch Jobs configuration & scheduling; others would know what needs to be done when you're no more an employee of the company.
From TestOut ;Daily Operational Policies Separation of duties restricts the amount of access or influence an employee has, thereby removing single points of failure within the organization Job rotation helps to catch irregularities that could arise when one person is unsupervised over an area of responsibility
Job Rotation is correct. Separation of duties will only limit those duties to that individual and the problem will still arise. Retention is probably a good second answer because if the employee never leaves there wouldn't be an issue.
Separation of Duties primarily because the scenario indicated that the former employee was responsible for both managing and supporting Batch jobs and those roles should have been separated. With that said, Job Rotation is a key complimentary personnel policy to go hand-in-hand with Separation of Duties and it does help provide more oversight on past transactions. This is certainly a tough question to answer, but because the question outlined two roles performed by the former employee I think it's setting up the best answer to be Separation of Duties.
I have to say A here. Separation of duties doesn't guarantee that everyone will be trained on everything whereas rotation offers more cover
From ChatGPT : "I understand your reasoning. However, from a security perspective and considering the CompTIA Security+ study guide, the more appropriate answer would be: D. Separation of duties The reason is that separation of duties is a fundamental principle in security management. It ensures that critical tasks are divided among multiple individuals or roles to prevent any single person from having unchecked control or authority over sensitive processes or systems. This principle helps mitigate the risk of disruptions or malicious activities caused by the actions of a single individual, such as in the scenario of an employee resigning."
The most effective way to avoid this kind of incident from happening again is to implement separation of duties. By dividing responsibilities, no one person will have full authority over important processes. Instead, different individuals or teams should be assigned to handle and assist with batch jobs, minimizing the chances of a single point of failure or deliberate disruption in the event of an employee leaving the company.
Both A and D are correct. I have two sy0-601 books and the information provided in each book does not help me discern which one is "best".
I know chatgpt does not always give the correct answers but it says D is the better answer between the two.