Courseiva
Security Assessment and TestingmediumMultiple SelectObjective-mapped

CISSP Security Assessment and Testing Practice Question

An organization is selecting security metrics to report to the board. Which THREE metrics would best demonstrate the effectiveness of the vulnerability management program?

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

Open vulnerability count by severity

These three metrics cover remediation speed, current risk posture, and compliance with patching policies, which are key indicators.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

  • Open vulnerability count by severity

    Why this is correct

    Tracking open vulnerabilities segmented by severity (critical, high, medium, low) gives the board a direct, current-state view of unremediated risk exposure. Because it's broken out by severity rather than a single aggregate number, it lets leadership see whether the highest-risk items are being prioritized correctly, and trends over time reveal whether the program is keeping pace with new findings or falling behind.

  • Number of employees in IT security

    Why it's wrong here

    Headcount describes program capacity or investment, not program effectiveness — a team of ten people running a mature, well-tuned vulnerability management process can outperform a team of thirty using ad hoc, unmeasured processes. The board is asking whether the program is working, and staffing levels say nothing about outcomes like remediation speed or residual risk.

  • Budget for security tools

    Why it's wrong here

    Dollar spend on tooling reflects investment, not results — an organization can license expensive scanning and patching platforms and still leave critical vulnerabilities unremediated for months if the underlying process is broken. Effectiveness metrics need to measure what the program actually achieves, such as detection coverage, remediation speed, and residual exposure, not how much was spent trying to achieve it.

  • Mean time to remediate critical vulnerabilities

    Why this is correct

    Mean time to remediate for critical findings is one of the clearest effectiveness signals available because it directly measures the program's ability to close the highest-risk exposure windows before they're exploited. A program that finds vulnerabilities quickly but takes months to fix critical ones is still leaving the organization exposed, so remediation speed on the highest-severity findings is exactly what a board needs to see.

  • Patch compliance percentage

    Why this is correct

    Patch compliance shows what proportion of the estate is actually up to date against known fixes, which is a direct proxy for how well the remediation half of the vulnerability management lifecycle is functioning across the whole environment, not just for individually tracked critical items. Low compliance percentages typically correlate with a growing backlog of exploitable, patchable vulnerabilities that scanning alone won't fix.

About these practice questions

Courseiva writes every CISSP question from scratch — 747 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

JA

Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security

Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva

This CISSP practice question is part of Courseiva's free ISC2 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 CISSP exam.