In a professional setting where high-value transactions are recorded, which of the following best explains the relevance of video recording for securing such operations?
You selected this option
Video surveillance complicates the transaction process, making it less appealing for potential fraudsters.
You selected this option
Timed stamped reports of the transaction provide a better level of detail and evidence than video recordings.
You selected this option
Video recordings provide visual evidence that can prevent parties from denying their actions, thus ensuring non-repudiation.
You selected this option
Signed documents are stronger evidence of non-repudiation compared to video recordings.
Video recordings offer a visual account of events that can serve as undeniable proof that a particular action, transaction, or event took place. This can be crucial in disputes where a party may deny their involvement or the occurrence of the transaction. Signed documents can be claimed to be forgeries, and witnesses might have conflicting testimonies, but video footage of the event provides strong evidence that is hard to dispute, thereby providing non-repudiation. While timestamps and reports also provide evidence of actions, they lack the visual confirmation that a video offers, making them weaker forms of non-repudiation in comparison.
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 does non-repudiation mean?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How do video recordings enhance security in financial operations?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are the limitations of relying solely on video recordings for evidence?