Quick Answer
The answer is to create an agreed corrective action plan with dates and to review ownership, resourcing, and change-window constraints. These two recommendations are correct because repeated SLA breaches typically stem from operational misalignments—such as unclear task ownership, insufficient staffing, or change windows that conflict with service delivery timelines—rather than from purely technical failures. A remediation report highlighting repeated breaches demands root-cause analysis, not superficial fixes, and an actionable plan with specific dates ensures accountability and measurable progress. On the CompTIA CySA+ CS0-003 exam, this scenario tests your ability to apply the reporting and communication domain, where you must distinguish between tactical patches and strategic corrective actions. A common trap is selecting a technical solution, like upgrading hardware, when the issue is procedural or resource-based. Remember the mnemonic “ORC” for Ownership, Resourcing, and Change-window constraints—these are the three pillars to inspect when SLA breaches recur.
This CS0-003 practice question tests your understanding of reporting and communication. Read the scenario carefully and evaluate each option against the stated constraints before committing to an answer. After answering, compare your reasoning against the explanation and wrong-answer breakdown below. Once you have made your selection, read the full explanation to reinforce the concept and understand why each distractor is designed to mislead on exam day.
A remediation report shows repeated SLA breaches by one business unit. Which recommendations are appropriate? (Choose two.)
Automatically accept all future risk permanently
Why wrong: Automatic acceptance is poor governance.
Review ownership, resourcing, and change-window constraints
Persistent breaches often reflect operational blockers.
Hide the business unit from future reports
Why wrong: Hiding performance undermines accountability.
Create an agreed corrective action plan with dates
Action plans turn reporting into improvement.
Answer choices
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
Review ownership, resourcing, and change-window constraints
Option B is correct because reviewing ownership, resourcing, and change-window constraints directly addresses the root causes of repeated SLA breaches. SLA breaches often stem from inadequate staffing, misaligned change windows, or unclear ownership of remediation tasks, not from technical failures alone. This recommendation aligns with the reporting and communication domain's emphasis on actionable, root-cause analysis rather than superficial fixes.
Key principle: Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.
Answer analysis
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
Automatically accept all future risk permanently
Why it's wrong here
Automatic acceptance is poor governance.
Review ownership, resourcing, and change-window constraints
Why this is correct
Persistent breaches often reflect operational blockers.
Related concept
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
Hide the business unit from future reports
Why it's wrong here
Hiding performance undermines accountability.
Create an agreed corrective action plan with dates
Why this is correct
Action plans turn reporting into improvement.
Related concept
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
Common exam traps
Cisco often tests the misconception that hiding or ignoring non-compliant data is an acceptable reporting strategy, when in fact the exam emphasizes transparency and root-cause analysis as the only valid path to remediation.
Detailed technical explanation
In practice, SLA breaches are often tracked via a governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) platform that logs remediation timelines against defined SLAs. Reviewing constraints like change windows (e.g., maintenance blackout periods) and resourcing (e.g., FTE allocation per vulnerability) helps identify systemic bottlenecks, such as a single team being overloaded with patches during a critical change freeze. This approach mirrors the NIST SP 800-55 framework for measuring security performance, where metrics must drive process improvement, not just reporting.
Key takeaway
Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.
Real-world example
A security team runs a vulnerability scan on a web application and discovers an unpatched SQL injection flaw. The team prioritises remediation by CVSS score — critical flaws are patched within 24 hours, high within 7 days. Questions like this test whether you understand vulnerability management processes, scanning tools, and remediation prioritisation.
What to study next
Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.
Reporting and Communication — study guide chapter
Learn the concepts, then practise the questions
Reporting and Communication practice questions
Targeted practice on this topic area only
All CS0-003 questions
503 questions across all exam domains
CompTIA CySA+ CS0-003 study guide
Full concept coverage aligned to exam objectives
CS0-003 practice test guide
How to use practice tests most effectively before exam day
Related practice questions
Use these pages to review the topic behind this question. This is how one missed question becomes focused revision.
Practise CS0-003 questions linked to Security Operations.
Practise CS0-003 questions linked to Vulnerability Management.
Practise CS0-003 questions linked to Incident Response and Management.
Practise CS0-003 questions linked to Reporting and Communication.
Practise CS0-003 questions linked to CompTIA A+ hardware.
Practise CS0-003 questions linked to CompTIA A+ mobile devices.
Practise CS0-003 questions linked to CompTIA A+ networking.
Practise CS0-003 questions linked to CompTIA A+ operating systems.
Practise CS0-003 questions linked to CompTIA A+ security.
Practise CS0-003 questions linked to CompTIA A+ software troubleshooting questions.
Practise CS0-003 questions linked to CompTIA A+ operational procedures questions.
Practice this exam
Short sessions build daily habit. Longer sessions build exam-day stamina. Try a timed session to simulate real conditions.
FAQ
Reporting and Communication — This question tests Reporting and Communication — Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer..
The correct answer is: Review ownership, resourcing, and change-window constraints — Option B is correct because reviewing ownership, resourcing, and change-window constraints directly addresses the root causes of repeated SLA breaches. SLA breaches often stem from inadequate staffing, misaligned change windows, or unclear ownership of remediation tasks, not from technical failures alone. This recommendation aligns with the reporting and communication domain's emphasis on actionable, root-cause analysis rather than superficial fixes.
Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
About these practice questions
Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
Last reviewed: Jun 11, 2026
This CS0-003 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 CS0-003 exam.
Question Discussion
Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.
Sign in to join the discussion.