Assessor_New_V4 Assessor_New_V4 Exam Questions and Answers

classifying media that contains cardholder data is intended to ensure that media is property protected according to the sensitivity of the data it contains, which means it should be markedwith labels or tags that indicate its level of confidentiality or integrity. This is one of the requirements for ensuring that media containing cardholder data is properly labeled.

critical systems must have correct and consistent time, which means they should use a reliable time source and synchronize their clocks with other systems. This is one of the requirements for ensuring that critical systems have accurate time.

Segmentation is a method of isolating system components that store, process, or transmit cardholder data from systems that do not, by using security controls such as firewalls, routers, switches, or other devices1. Segmentation can reduce the scope of the cardholder data environment (CDE) and thus reduce the scope of the PCI DSS assessment, as only the systems and networks within the CDE or connected to the CDE are subject to PCI DSS requirements2. However, segmentation is not mandatory for PCI DSS compliance, and it is the responsibility of the entity to define and document the scope of their CDE and the segmentation controls they use2.

The assessor’s role is to verify the scope of the CDE and the effectiveness of the segmentation controls, as specified in PCI DSS Requirement 11.3.43. The assessor must verify that the segmentation controls are configured properly and functioning as intended, and that they allow only necessary traffic into the CDE. The assessor must also perform penetration testing on the segmentation controls at least annually and after anychanges to the segmentation methods, to confirm that there are no exploitable vulnerabilities that could allow an attacker to access the CDE from out-of-scope systems3. Therefore, the correct answer is option D.

The other options are not true regarding the role of the assessor in verifying segmentation for PCI DSS. Option A is not true because the assessor must verify not only that the segmentation controls allow only necessary traffic into the CDE, but also that they are configured properly and functioning as intended, as stated in option D. Option B is not true because the assessor does not need to verify that the payment card brands have approved the segmentation, as PCI DSS does not require such approval, although the payment card brands may have their own policies and procedures for segmentation that the entity must follow2. Option C is not true because the assessor does not need to verify that approved devices and applications are used for the segmentation controls, as PCI DSS does not mandate the use of specific devices or applications for segmentation, although it requires the entity to use industry-accepted and strong methods for segmentation2. References:

• Network Segmentation - PCI Security Standards Council
• Guidance for PCI DSS Scoping and Network Segmentation
• PCI DSS v3.2.1

According to the PCI PTS standard2, point-of-interaction devices used to protect account data are point-of-interaction devices (POI), which are devices that are used to authenticate, authorize, or verify cardholder data or transactions. This is one of the requirements for ensuring that POI devices are used in accordance with PCI DSS.

The PCI DSS requires that the assessor validates that the sample of business facilities is representative of the entire population of facilities that are in scope for the assessment. According to the PCI DSS Requirement 12.8.5, “Maintain information about which PCI DSS requirements are managed by each service provider, and which are managed by the entity.” Furthermore, according to the PCI DSS Requirement 12.9.1, “For service providers, provide the written agreement/acknowledgment to their customers as specified at Requirement 12.8.2.” Therefore, the scenario that meets the PCI DSS requirements for validating the sample of business facilities is theone where all types and locations of facilities are represented, to ensure that the assessment covers the diversity and complexity of the card production environment. The other scenarios either do not account for the variability of the facilities, or do not follow the sampling methodology defined by the PCI DSS. References: PCI DSS v3.2.1, Card Production Security Assessor - Physical - Credly

According to the glossary, bespoke and custom software describes software developed by an entity for its own use, which means it should not be shared with other entities or sold or transferred without proper authorization. This is one of the requirements for ensuring that bespoke and custom software meets all the security standards and controls defined in Appendix E of the PCI DSS v3.2.1 Quick Reference Guide1.

when a cryptographic key is retired and replaced with a new key, the assessor will verify that the assessor observed the entity’s systems were compliant with the requirement, which means they should have implemented compensating controls to address any weaknesses or gaps in the customized control. This is one of the requirements for ensuring that an entity can use both approaches when appropriate.

According to the PCI DSS v3.2.1 Quick Reference Guide1, assigning a unique ID to each person is intended to ensure individual users are accountable for their own actions, rather than shared accounts or group accounts based on need-to-know. This is one of the requirements for ensuring that user accounts are properly managed and controlled.

According to requirement 4, an entity must monitor its TPSP’s PCI DSS compliance status at least annually, which means it should review its TPSP’s policies and procedures for protecting cardholder data and transactions against fraud and other threats at least once a year. This is one of the requirements for ensuring that an entity monitors its TPSP’s PCI DSS compliance status regularly.

The PCI DSS requires that access to databases containing cardholder data is restricted to authorized users and applications, and that direct access to such databases is prohibited. According to the PCI DSS Requirement 7.1.2, “Restrict access to privileged user IDs to least privileges necessary to perform job responsibilities.” Furthermore, according to the PCI DSS Requirement 8.3.1, “Implement multi-factor authentication for all non-console access into the cardholder data environment for personnel with administrative access.” Therefore, the scenario that meets the PCI DSS requirements for restricting access to databases containing cardholder data is the one where user access to the database is only through programmatic methods, such as through an application interface that enforces authentication, authorization, and encryption. The other scenarios either allow direct access to the database, or do not limit the access to the least privileges necessary, or do not use multi-factor authentication for administrative access. References: [PCI DSS v3.2.1], Card Production Security Assessor - Logical - Credly

when PAN is sent over the Internet, PAN must be encrypted with strong cryptography, which means it should use encryption techniques such as WEP, WPA, WPA2, or TLS/SSL to prevent unauthorized access or interception. This is one of the requirements for ensuring that PAN is protected from unauthorized access or interception.

 One of the best practices for hardening a firewall is to disable any firewall functions that are not needed in production, such as unused services, ports, protocols, or features. This reduces the attack surface and minimizes the potential for exploitation. According to the PCI Card Production Logical Security Requirements, section 3.2.1, “The firewall must be configured to deny all traffic by default and allow only traffic that is explicitly required for the card production environment.” Furthermore, section 3.2.2 states, “The firewall must be configured to block all unnecessary services, ports, protocols, and IP addresses.” References: PCI Card Production Logical Security Requirements, Card Production Security Assessor - Logical - Credly

According to the PCI DSS v3.2.1 Quick Reference Guide1, quarterly means occurring at some point in each quarter of a year, not at least once every 95 or 97 days. This is one of the requirements for ensuring that PCI DSS assessments are conducted on a regular basis.

The key-encrypting key (KEK) is used to protect the data-encrypting key (DEK) from unauthorized access or disclosure. The KEK should have a strength that is equal to or greater than the DEK, to prevent a weaker link in the encryption chain. According to the PCI Card Production Logical Security Requirements, section 4.1.1, “The key-encrypting key (KEK) must be at least as strong as the data-encrypting key (DEK) it protects.” Furthermore, section 4.1.2 states, “The KEK must be generated using a secure random number generator (RNG) that meets the requirements of NIST SP 800-90A or equivalent.” AES 128 is a symmetric encryption algorithm that uses a 128-bit key and meets the NIST standards. Therefore, it would be an appropriate strength for the KEK used to protect an AES 128-bit DEK. The other options are either weaker or asymmetric encryption algorithms, which are not suitable for the KEK. References: PCI Card Production Logical Security Requirements, [NIST SP 800-90A]

PCI DSS Requirement 12.10.1 requires entities to implement an incident response plan that includes roles, responsibilities, and communication and contact strategies for a data security incident, including notification of relevant payment brands1. This is important because each payment card brand has its own policies and procedures for dealing with a security breach, and failing to follow them or meet reporting deadlines could result in fines or loss of authority to process payment card transactions2. Therefore, an incident response plan must include procedures for notifying PCI SSC of the security incident, as well as any other entities that may require notification, whether by contract or law1. References:

• Guidance for PCI DSS Scoping and Network Segmentation
• Responding to a Cardholder Data Breach