A software developer changed positions within a company and is now a sales engineer. The security team discovered that the former software developer had been modifying code to implement small features requested by customers. Which of the following would be the best thing for the security administrator to implement to prevent this from happening?
The best solution to prevent a former software developer, now a sales engineer, from modifying code is to implement a role-based access control (RBAC) policy. RBAC ensures that access permissions are closely aligned with an individual's current job responsibilities. It can restrict the former developer's access to the development environment and code repositories, thus preventing unauthorized modifications. This approach directly addresses the issue of inappropriate access after a role change, whereas other options like patching policies, firewalls, or password requirements do not specifically control access based on roles.
Role-based access control (RBAC) is a method of regulating access to computer or network resources based on the roles of individual users within an enterprise. In this context, roles are defined according to job competency, authority, and responsibility within the enterprise. Implementing RBAC will ensure that users only have the access necessary to fulfill their current roles. So, if a user changes roles, their access permissions change accordingly, preventing them from accessing systems or performing actions that are not relevant to their current role.
GPT says B. ExamTopics says B. So it's probably B, but A also seems like it could be the answer cause patches get reviewed and new code being pushed would be reviewed and denied if noticed it was out of scope of the current sprint.