Which of the following best characterizes a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed between two internal departments regarding cybersecurity vulnerability remediation?
It functions as a service-level agreement that contractually enforces remediation targets and penalties for non-compliance.
It is a statutory mandate that compels the organization to notify regulators and remediate all critical vulnerabilities within 24 hours.
It serves as an internal audit standard that must be followed when configuring compensating controls for legacy systems.
It documents mutual intent to cooperate but usually does not impose legally enforceable obligations such as fixed remediation deadlines.
An MOU generally outlines a shared intent or cooperative relationship rather than creating a legally enforceable obligation. While it may describe desired remediation timelines, it typically lacks the contractual force, penalties, or statutory authority found in an SLA or a regulatory mandate. Therefore, only the first option correctly identifies an MOU's usual non-binding nature; the other options incorrectly portray it as a binding contract, a statutory requirement, or an internal audit standard.
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.
What is the difference between an MOU and an SLA?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why might an organization choose an MOU over a legally binding agreement?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does an MOU facilitate cybersecurity vulnerability remediation?