When designing emergency change control procedures, how can accountability for system support personnel be best ensured?

When designing emergency change control procedures, how can accountability for system support personnel be best ensured?

• A. Production access is granted to the individual support ID when needed
• B. Developers use a firefighter ID to promote code to production
• C. A dedicated user promotes emergency changes to production
• D. Emergency changes are authorized prior to promotion

Answer: (A)

Ensuring accountability for system support personnel during emergency change control procedures is critical for maintaining system integrity and oversight. Granting production access to individual support IDs when needed ensures that only specific personnel, who are trained and authorized, have the ability to implement changes in emergency situations. This approach allows for a clear trail of accountability, as any changes made can be directly linked to the supporting individual. Having production access tied to individual IDs means that actions taken during emergency changes can be tracked, reviewed, and audited effectively. Audit trails are crucial for post-incident reviews, helping organizations to improve their change management processes in the future and ensuring adherence to compliance standards. In contrast, relying on a shared or generic account risks obscuring accountability since multiple individuals could operate under the same ID, making it unclear who implemented specific changes. This can compromise security and accountability, making option A the superior choice for maintaining clear responsibility and tracking during the emergency change process.

Ensuring accountability for system support personnel during emergency change control procedures is critical for maintaining system integrity and oversight. Granting production access to individual support IDs when needed ensures that only specific personnel, who are trained and authorized, have the ability to implement changes in emergency situations. This approach allows for a clear trail of accountability, as any changes made can be directly linked to the supporting individual.

Having production access tied to individual IDs means that actions taken during emergency changes can be tracked, reviewed, and audited effectively. Audit trails are crucial for post-incident reviews, helping organizations to improve their change management processes in the future and ensuring adherence to compliance standards.

In contrast, relying on a shared or generic account risks obscuring accountability since multiple individuals could operate under the same ID, making it unclear who implemented specific changes. This can compromise security and accountability, making option A the superior choice for maintaining clear responsibility and tracking during the emergency change process.