I'm leaning towards option A, but I want to make sure I'm not missing something. The other choices seem a bit extreme or less effective for an independent organization.
This seems like a straightforward question about internal controls. I'll focus on the key terms like "reasonable assurance" and "objectives" to determine the correct answer.
I'm feeling a bit 'audited' just thinking about these options. Maybe the privacy organization should consider a more 'principle'-d approach, if you ask me.
Option D, obviously. Everyone loves a good ol' privacy police coming in and handing out fines left and right. It's the only way to keep those pesky companies in line, am I right?
Option D, issuing penalties, seems a bit too aggressive for an independent organization. They're probably better off sticking to more collaborative approaches, like A or C.
I'm not sure, but I feel like option B, enacting new legislation, might be a bit too heavy-handed for an independent organization. They'd probably want to avoid getting tangled up in the political process.
I think option A is the most likely way an independent privacy organization would work to promote sound privacy practices. Self-regulation seems like the most practical approach.
Kenneth
5 days agoLisbeth
12 days agoEna
13 days agoShizue
13 days agoMargot
5 months agoLuke
5 months agoGabriele
5 months agoDierdre
4 months agoDerick
4 months agoGeoffrey
4 months agoMarcelle
5 months agoNikita
4 months agoOllie
4 months agoMalcom
4 months agoShannon
5 months agoElenor
5 months agoBillye
4 months agoTonja
4 months agoYun
5 months agoBillye
6 months agoShawna
6 months agoLang
6 months ago