B seems like the easy way out. If the audit finding is incorrect, then there's no need to worry about remediation at all. Maybe they should double-check their work, just to be sure. *winks*
I'm leaning towards A. If the asset is more expensive than the remediation, then it's a no-brainer to just go with the fix. Though, that would be one expensive asset, huh? *chuckles*
D all the way! Audit findings must be addressed, no matter the cost. It's the principle of the thing, you can't just ignore them because it's too expensive. What are they even thinking?
Hmm, I think option C makes the most sense. If the asset being protected is less valuable than the remediation costs, then it's not worth the investment. Gotta weigh the pros and cons, you know?
Staci
2 months agoAleisha
2 months agoLeah
22 days agoGilbert
23 days agoJerry
1 months agoLashawnda
2 months agoJean
1 months agoHailey
1 months agoAndrew
2 months agoAbel
3 months agoMelda
3 months agoCharlena
3 months agoSylvia
3 months agoFrederick
3 months agoSylvia
3 months ago