CAS-004 Governance, Risk, and Compliance Practice Question
A company is evaluating a new cloud service provider. The provider offers a SOC 2 Type II report, a third-party penetration test summary, and a completed security questionnaire. However, the company's procurement team discovers that the provider uses a subcontractor for data storage. Which of the following is the BEST next step for the security team?
⚠ Common exam trap
CAS-005 often tests the misconception that a SOC 2 report from the primary provider automatically covers all subcontractors; candidates must recognize the need for additional assurance like right-to-audit clauses.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Request a right-to-audit clause covering the subcontractor.
When a cloud provider uses a subcontractor for data storage, the security team should ensure they have the right to audit the subcontractor's controls, typically through a right-to-audit clause in the contract. This allows the company to verify that the subcontractor meets the required security standards. The other options are either too extreme or insufficient.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Require the provider to use only in-house resources.
Why it's wrong here
Requiring the provider to use only in-house resources ignores the contractual and operational reality that the subcontractor is already engaged for data storage; the security team must instead assess the subcontractor’s own SOC 2 Type II report and contractual controls. This option is tempting because it would eliminate third-party risk entirely, and it would be correct if the provider’s subcontractor lacked any independent audit evidence or refused to provide a security questionnaire.
- ✗
Accept the risk because the provider has a SOC 2 report.
Why it's wrong here
A SOC 2 Type II report covers the provider's own controls, not the subcontractor's storage environment, so accepting leaves the subprocessor unassessed. SOC 2 reports are the right artefact when the assessed entity itself handles all data processing.
- ✓
Request a right-to-audit clause covering the subcontractor.
Why this is correct
The subcontractor stores data but sits outside the provider's direct audit scope, so its controls are unverified. A right-to-audit clause extending to subcontractors gives the security team contractual authority to assess that storage environment, closing the assurance gap the procurement team identified.
- ✗
Immediately terminate the contract due to subcontractor risk.
Why it's wrong here
Terminating the contract ignores the evidence already supplied — the SOC 2 Type II report, penetration test summary and questionnaire — and the subcontractor's own controls may be covered within that report's scope. Termination suits a provider refusing all assurance or breaching contractual terms outright, not one disclosing a storage subcontractor that can be assessed and risk-managed.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 973 original CAS-005 practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official CompTIA exam blueprint
This CAS-005 practice question is part of Courseiva's free CompTIA certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the CAS-005 exam.