Skip to content

FRM Part II · FRM Exam Part II · Cyber-resilience: Range of Practices

A mid-sized bank hesitates to share cyber incident details with peers, citing concerns about confidentiality and reputational damage. Which approach best addresses these concerns while preserving the benefits of information sharing?

A trusted sharing arrangement with agreed protocols, including anonymisation or handling classifications, lets the bank exchange timely, actionable indicators while protecting confidential and reputational details. Waiting for publicity or slow regulator circulation loses timeliness, and sharing customer data adds new risk.

  1. AShare only after the incident is publicly disclosed in the press
  2. BUse a trusted sharing arrangement with agreed protocols, such as anonymised or classified-level sharing, so actionable indicators are exchanged without revealing sensitive identity detailsCorrect
  3. CShare full customer-level data to make intelligence more precise
  4. DRely solely on regulators to circulate information years later

Explanation

Trusted channels with clear protocols and anonymisation allow timely, actionable sharing while protecting sensitive information. Sharing customer data creates new risk, and waiting for press or delayed regulators loses timeliness.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Cyber-resilience: Range of Practices shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

More Cyber-resilience: Range of Practices questions