Which of the following CANNOT be effectively determined during a code audit?
Which of the following CANNOT be effectively determined during a code audit?
A code audit focuses on examining the source code to detect issues like security vulnerabilities, code quality, and adherence to standards. It can effectively determine whether access control logic is correctly implemented, data sharing practices adhere to policies, and differential privacy methods correctly anonymize data. However, whether consent is durably recorded in the event of a server crash is a matter of system resilience, involving infrastructure design, backup strategies, and data durability practices, which are outside the scope of a code audit.
The option that CANNOT be effectively determined during a code audit is C. Whether consent is durably recorded in the case of a server crash. A code audit can review the code to check for access control logic (A), data sharing practices (B), and the implementation of differential privacy (D). However, whether consent is durably recorded in the case of a server crash © is more of a system resilience and data durability issue, which typically involves infrastructure and system design rather than just the code itself. This would be better evaluated through system testing and review of infrastructure design rather than a code audit. It’s also worth noting that the durability of consent recording in the event of a server crash would also depend on factors like backup and recovery strategies, which are outside the scope of a code audit.