An electric car company hires an IT consulting company to improve the cybersecurity of us vehicles. Which of the following should achieve the BEST long-term result for the company?

Question

Options

• ADesigning Developing add-on security components for fielded vehicles
• BReviewing proposed designs and prototypes for cybersecurity vulnerabilities
• CPerforming a cyber-risk assessment on production vehicles
• DReviewing and influencing requirements for an early development vehicle

• A
  24% (10)
• B
  61% (25)
• C
  5% (2)
• D
  10% (4)

Explanation

Reviewing proposed designs and prototypes for cybersecurity vulnerabilities applies 'secure by design' principles before vehicles reach mass production. Finding and fixing vulnerabilities at the design/prototype stage is significantly cheaper and more effective than retrofitting security later. Answer A (add-on security for fielded vehicles) is purely reactive and inherently limited by the existing hardware/software architecture. Answer C (risk assessment on production vehicles) occurs too late in the lifecycle for cost-effective remediation. Answer D (influencing early development requirements) is beneficial but broader and less concrete than evaluating actual prototypes where real vulnerabilities can be identified and validated. B provides the best balance of impact and practicality for long-term security posture.

No community discussion yet for this question.