Pass Using ISA-IEC-62443 Exam Dumps

ISA/IEC 62443-2-1 requires objective, verifiable evidence of cybersecurity controls during audits and assessments.

Step 1: Evidence-based verification

Auditors assess whether required processes and technical controls are implemented and effective. Documentation such as configurations, procedures, logs, and policies provides verifiable proof.

Step 2: Why documentation matters

Written records demonstrate consistency, repeatability, and governance—key goals of the standard.

Step 3: Why other options fail

Financial spending does not prove control effectiveness. Anecdotes are subjective. Marketing materials are not evidence.

Thus, documentation verifying use and configuration of technologies is the correct evidence.

The ISA/IEC 62443-2-1 standard introduces Security Program Maturity Levels, which help assess how well an organization has integrated security into its industrial operations. Level 1 is the "Initial" stage where processes are ad-hoc, undocumented, and vary across the organization — precisely the case described in the question.

“Maturity Level 1 (Initial) — Processes are ad hoc and undocumented. There is no consistency in how security is implemented across the organization or teams. Security activities are performed inconsistently, typically in response to incidents.”

— ISA/IEC 62443-2-1:2010, Table 4 – Maturity Levels

The inconsistency between shifts and teams indicates a lack of standardized procedures, which is a hallmark of Level 1.

In ISA/IEC 62443, Target Security Protection Ratings correspond to the concept of Target Security Levels (SL-T).

Step 1: Definition of target ratings

Target ratings describe the desired level of protection that a system or zone must achieve during operation, based on risk assessment.

Step 2: Difference between target and achieved

Target ratings define what is required.

Achieved ratings (SL-A) describe what has actually been implemented and verified.

Step 3: Why Option D is correct

The target rating outlines the intended security outcome that implementation measures must fulfill during operation, not what currently exists.

Step 4: Why other options are incorrect

Actual achieved levels, cost metrics, or implementation measurements are separate concepts.

Therefore, the correct description is that they outline the desired levels of system security requirements to be fulfilled during operation.

The primary goal of the NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) is to help organizations enhance the security and resilience of critical infrastructure and reduce cybersecurity risks through a structured, risk-based approach.

“The Framework provides a policy framework of computer security guidance for how private sector organizations in the United States can assess and improve their ability to prevent, detect, and respond to cyber attacks. It is intended to enhance the resilience of critical infrastructure.”

— NIST CSF v1.1, Section 1.0 – Overview

The NIST CSF does not create new standards or certify organizations — it references existing standards and guides implementation in a flexible and sector-neutral way.