Breakdown of Task 2

-

 Section 1 — Introduction

Briefly set the context. Reference the findings from Task 1 specifically,  the Trojan in Email 2, the phishing attempts in Emails 1 and 3, and the credential breach background. Explain the purpose of this report. This signals to the examiner that your maintenance recommendations are grounded in the actual investigation rather than being generic.

Section 2 — Vulnerability Identification Table

This should be a structured table covering the key vulnerabilities identified, their type, countermeasures, and justification. The distinction exemplar used exactly this format, and the examiner praised it. Cover both digital and physical vulnerabilities — the exemplar went beyond digital, and the examiner credited it.

Suggested rows to include:

  • Malware/Trojan via email attachment
  • Phishing and credential harvesting
  • Unpatched software/OS vulnerabilities
  • Insider threat and privilege misuse (directly relevant, given Linkchain's previous breach)
  • Lack of network visibility/monitoring
  • Weak authentication/password policies
  • Physical security (clear desk, document disposal, visitor access)

For each row, you need: vulnerability name, type (physical/digital), countermeasure(s), and a justification that explains why it matters and what happens if it isn't addressed.

Section 3 — Proposed Remediation and System Upgrades Table

This is where you address the "system upgrades" requirement. Each row should cover a specific tool or measure, a plain-English explanation of what it does, and crucially, how it will be managed. The "how it will be managed" column is what the examiner specifically looks for to distinguish Band 3 from Band 4.

Suggested rows:

  • Scheduled antivirus deep scans → managed via Microsoft Intune
  • Windows Server Update Services (WSUS) → centralised patch management
  • Microsoft Intune (RMM) → remote monitoring of all endpoints, including remote workers
  • Cloud email security gateway → quarantine malicious attachments before delivery
  • Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) → enforced via Azure Active Directory
  • Nessus/Acunetix vulnerability scanning → weekly scans with remediation plan
  • Penetration testing → annual third-party testing
  • Cyber awareness training (e.g. iHasco) → mandatory with tracked completion
  • Privileged Access Management (PAM) → time-limited admin access with manager sign-off

Section 4 — Evaluation of the Maintenance Programme

This is the section most students miss or underdevelop, and it's what the word "evaluative report" in the brief is specifically asking for. You need to:

  • Assess the programme as a whole — does it address all the attack vectors from Task 1?
  • Acknowledge trade-offs or limitations (cost, resource, time)
  • Prioritise — what should Linkchain Gaming implement first and why?
  • Conclude with the consequences of not implementing these measures, referencing GDPR, reputational damage, and financial penalties

Section 5 — Conclusion

Short but important. Tie the entire report back to Task 1, confirm that the programme addresses the root causes found, and end with a forward-looking statement about Cyber Essentials or NCSC guidance as a framework for ongoing improvement.


Checklist Before You Write

  •  Every measure is justified with a "because" and linked to Task 1 where possible
  •  Every measure has a "how it will be managed" explanation
  •  System upgrades are named specifically (WSUS, Intune, Nessus, etc.)
  •  You evaluate the programme — not just list it
  •  You acknowledge limitations and prioritise
  •  GDPR is referenced in the conclusion
  •  Tables are used to present vulnerability and remediation information clearly

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

OS A3 Task 1

-
    Threat   Vulnerability   Asset   Impact   Likelihood   Risk   Action   Control Type   Gate is left unlocked for the purpose of  convenience   This allows intruders to access the building with ease   Physical  data  stored  on premises                  Confidential data could be accessed by the attackers  and  stolen           Medium   Gates are always left unlocked for convenience and  visitors           High   Data is exfiltrated from the company with potential  to damage company reputation, breach of GDPR with financial implications and potential for customers  becoming victims of identity theft     High   Provide users with passcodes to enter the  building and  implement a security system at the gate to  identify  and authorise access buil...
Read more

OS A3 Task 2

-
Task 2   Introduction   As a new , up-and-coming,  growing organisation,  Linkchain  Gaming must ensure that its information security policy is tailored to  its  requirements and aligned with regulatory standards. A modern s ecurity compliance with laws and regulations. This report will outline recommended user and  administrative  controls for an updated security policy. These controls aim to protect sensitive data ,  and recommendat ions are supported by recognised frameworks.   User Controls    Network and Wi-Fi Access:   Threats Addressed:  Network passphrase on noticeboard, visitors on same network   To  protect the network, it is important to remove the passphrase from the noticeboard and change it. It is recommended  to create a segmented network with a   separate  guest passphrase for  visitors,  so they are completely isolated from internal systems and the file server. ...
Read more