Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

BCS CISMP-V9 Exam - Topic 9 Question 114 Discussion

Why is it prudent for Third Parties to be contracted to meet specific security standards?
A) Vulnerabilities in Third Party networks can be malevolently leveraged to gain illicit access into client environments.
B) It is a legal requirement for Third Party support companies to meet client security standards.
C) All access to corporate systems must be controlled via a single set of rules if they are to be enforceable.
D) Third Parties cannot connect to other sites and networks without a contract of similar legal agreement.

BCS CISMP-V9 Exam - Topic 9 Question 114 Discussion

Actual exam question for BCS's CISMP-V9 exam
Question #: 114
Topic #: 9
[All CISMP-V9 Questions]

Why is it prudent for Third Parties to be contracted to meet specific security standards?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

Contracting third parties to meet specific security standards is prudent because vulnerabilities within their networks can be exploited to gain unauthorized access to a client's environment. Third-party vendors often have access to an organization's sensitive data and systems, which can become a potential entry point for cyber attackers. By ensuring that third parties adhere to stringent security standards, an organization can better protect itself against the risk of data breaches and cyber attacks that may originate from less secure third-party networks. This proactive approach to third-party security helps maintain the integrity and confidentiality of the organization's data and systems.


by Titus at May 30, 2026, 05:17 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CISMP-V9 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Brandon
1 day ago
B makes sense too. Legal compliance is crucial.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ronald
6 days ago
Agreed! If they get hacked, we’re all at risk.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cathrine
12 days ago
I think A is spot on. Third parties can be a weak link.
upvoted 0 times
...
Antonette
17 days ago
Definitely, better safe than sorry with third-party access!
upvoted 0 times
...
France
22 days ago
I thought third parties could connect without strict contracts?
upvoted 0 times
...
Leota
27 days ago
Yes! Consistent rules are key for security enforcement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rochell
1 month ago
Wait, is it really a legal requirement for all third parties?
upvoted 0 times
...
Meghan
1 month ago
Totally agree, third-party vulnerabilities can be a huge risk!
upvoted 0 times
...
Filiberto
1 month ago
D sounds a bit off to me. I thought third parties could connect without a contract as long as they follow certain guidelines.
upvoted 0 times
...
Olga
2 months ago
I feel like we covered something similar in practice questions about access control. C could be a good point, but I’m not convinced it’s the main reason.
upvoted 0 times
...
Teri
2 months ago
I’m not entirely sure, but I think B might be true in some cases, especially with compliance regulations.
upvoted 0 times
...
Boris
2 months ago
I remember discussing how vulnerabilities in third-party networks can really be a gateway for attacks. So, A seems pretty relevant.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel