Code changes are compiled and placed in a change folder by the developer. An implementation team migrates changes to production from the change folder.
Which of the following BEST indicates separation of duties is in place during the migration process?
Separation of duties (SoD) is a fundamental control to prevent fraud and errors. It requires that the responsibility for critical tasks be divided among different individuals. The statement 'The implementation team does not have access to change the source code' ensures that the team responsible for migrating changes to production cannot alter the source code, thereby effectively separating the duties of developing and deploying code. This division reduces the risk that any one person has enough control to perform unauthorized or unintended changes.
A IS ANSWER
A IS NOT ANSWER
Why change your answer?
sorry A is correct.. my mistake.
Option D, where the developer approves changes prior to moving them to the change folder, is not an effective way of implementing separation of duties since it does not involve a separate individual verifying the code changes. This approach can lead to situations where the developer approves their own changes, increasing the risk of errors or malicious activity going undetected. Option C, where the implementation team does not have experience writing code, is not an effective separation of duties measure since it does not address the need for an independent verification of the code changes. Option B where the implementation team does not have access to change the source code, is not an effective separation of duties measure either since it does not address the need for an independent verification of the code changes.
In contrast, option A involves a separate individual performing a code review to ensure that the changes are properly documented, tested, and meet the required coding standards. This approach helps ensure that code changes are thoroughly vetted and tested before being implemented in production, reducing the risk of errors, fraud, or malicious activity.
I am B, it better to describe SoD
that's SOD
A. A second individual performs code review before the change is released to production
Apologies. Correct is B
Answer is A, because if its is B - the implementation team does not have access to change the source code, is a control, but it does not necessarily indicate separation of duties. It focuses on restricting access rather than involving a separate individual in the review process.
cannot be A because it describes 4 eyes principle, and not separation of duties.
The implementation team does not have access to the source code, so the compiled data by the developer cannot be modified by the implementation team.
The implementation team's lack of access to modify source code shows one aspect of the separation of duties in place, but it is not a complete proof of separation of duties. Simply not having access does not ensure that other processes (e.g. code reviews and approval processes) are in place. Separation of duties is not just about having separate roles, but also includes checks between each role, which makes it even more important that code reviews are performed.
Q: BEST indicates separation of duties is in place during the migration process Answer: A
correct answer is B, code review is not related to SoD