Which practice best helps limit the chance of incomplete oversight when using an automated tool to classify security events in a production environment?
Rely on regular vendor updates to inform classification accuracy
Conduct scheduled manual reviews of the tool’s output and verify event risk levels with separate data sources
Turn off supplementary monitoring tools after significant testing shows reliable results
Grant the tool authority to classify events while maintaining external oversight
Performing scheduled reviews by skilled teams helps confirm whether automated outputs are trustworthy. A dependable AI system benefits from additional verification steps, which adds a layer of protection to operational security. Relying on a single source restricts needed feedback, while failing to update or monitor introduces overlooked risks. Granting the tool authority or turning off additional monitoring removes important safeguards against classification errors, and trusting vendor updates alone may not ensure thorough risk coverage.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
Why is it important to manually review an automated tool's output?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is the role of external data sources in verifying security event classifications?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why is relying solely on vendor updates for automated tools insufficient?