Bob, your senior colleague, has sent you a mail regarding a deal with one of the clients. You are requested to accept the offer and you oblige. After 2 days, Bab denies that he had ever sent a mail. W

Question

Options

• ANon-Repudiation
• BIntegrity
• CAuthentication
• DConfidentiality

• A
  86% (25)
• B
  3% (1)
• C
  3% (1)
• D
  7% (2)

Explanation

Non-Repudiation Explained

Non-Repudiation (A) is correct because it is the security concept that prevents a sender from denying that they sent a message or performed an action. In this scenario, you need proof that Bob specifically sent that email and cannot later claim he didn't - this is exactly what non-repudiation provides, typically through digital signatures or audit logs.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• Integrity (B) ensures the message was not altered in transit, but doesn't prove who sent it
• Authentication (C) verifies identity at login/access time, not whether a specific past action was performed by a specific person
• Confidentiality (D) ensures the message content is kept secret from unauthorized parties - unrelated to proving the sender

Memory Tip: Think of Non-Repudiation as the digital equivalent of a signed receipt - just like a courier makes you sign for a package so you can't later deny receiving it, non-repudiation ensures no one can deny sending or receiving a message. The key phrase is "deny/denied" - whenever someone denies doing something, think Non-Repudiation.

No community discussion yet for this question.