Cyber AB Updated CMMC-CCA Exam Questions and Answers by ayub

To verify scanning (such as anti-virus and file integrity functions), the strongest evidence includes system configurations, AV alerts/logs, and interviews with technical staff. A policy document (System Information and Integrity Policy) provides intent but not actual implementation proof, making it the least helpful.

Extract:

“Policies provide documented intent, but assessors must validate actual implementation through configuration reviews, alerts/logs, and personnel interviews.”

Thus, the policy alone is the least useful evidence for confirming scans are actually performed.

Certification can only be granted to the legal entities that own the CAGE codes under assessment. If multiple CAGE codes are in play (HQ, host, and supporting units), and they are all included in scope, then all entities with corresponding CAGE codes that were assessed can be certified.

Exact Extracts:

CMMC Assessment Guide: “The CMMC certificate is issued to the legal entity (as identified by the CAGE code(s)) that was assessed.”

“When multiple CAGE codes are presented, all in-scope entities must provide documentation and may be certified if assessed.”

“Certification applies to the OSC legal entity (or entities) within scope, including HQ, host, and supporting units, as applicable.”

Why other options are not correct:

A/B/C: Limit scope to only HQ or subsets, but the requirement is that all entities with provided and in-scope CAGE codes are eligible.

The CMMC Assessment Process (CAP) specifies that when disputes cannot be resolved by the Lead Assessor, they must be elevated to the C3PAO Official, who has authority to make the final decision.

Extract:

“Unresolved disputes between the OSC and the Assessment Team must be elevated to the C3PAO Official for final resolution.”

Therefore, the C3PAO Official is the final arbiter in such disputes.

Verification of physical access controls under PE.L2-3.10.3: Physical Access Control requires evidence from records, logs, and audit trails. Reviewing access logs provides direct confirmation of which badge types grant entry into controlled areas. SOPs or interviews may support the claim but are indirect; testing physical entry is not an approved method for CCAs.

Exact extracts:

“Assessment Methods – Examine: access control policy; physical access control system records; physical access audit logs.”

“Assessment Methods – Interview: staff may be interviewed, but interviews must be supported by documentary evidence.”

“Testing physical entry by assessors is not an authorized assessment method.”

Why the other options are incorrect:

A/B: Interviews or SOP reviews may provide supporting context, but they do not prove operational badge restrictions.

D: Assessors are prohibited from attempting physical bypass or entry tests.