Documenting the chain of custody is the PRIMARY step for an organizational response to a security incident if civil litigation is a goal because it ensures the integrity, authenticity, and admissibility of the evidence collected from the incident. The chain of custody is the process of documenting the history of the evidence, including its identification, collection, preservation, transportation, analysis, storage, and presentation in court. The chain of custody should include information such as the date, time, location, description, source, owner, handler, and purpose of each evidence item, as well as any changes, modifications, or transfers that occurred to the evidence. Documenting the chain of custody can help to prevent the evidence from being tampered with, altered, lost, or destroyed, and to demonstrate that the evidence is relevant, reliable, and original12. Contacting law enforcement (A) is not the PRIMARY step for an organizational response to a security incident if civil litigation is a goal, but rather a possible or optional step depending on the nature, severity, and jurisdiction of the incident. Contacting law enforcement may help to obtain legal assistance, guidance, or support, but it may also involve risks such as loss of control, confidentiality, or reputation. Therefore, contacting law enforcement should be done after careful consideration of the legal obligations, contractual agreements, and organizational policies12. Capturing evidence using standard server-backup utilities © is not the PRIMARY step for an organizational response to a security incident if civil litigation is a goal, but rather a technical step that should be done after documenting the chain of custody. Capturing evidence using standard server-backup utilities may help to preserve the state of the systems or networks involved in the incident, but it may also introduce changes or errors that could compromise the validity or quality of the evidence. Therefore, capturing evidence using standard server-backup utilities should be done using forensically sound methods and tools, and following the documented chain of custody12. Rebooting affected machines in a secure area to search for evidence (D) is not the PRIMARY step for an organizational response to a security incident if civil litigation is a goal, but rather a technical step that should be done after documenting the chain of custody. Rebooting affected machines in a secure area may help to isolate and analyze the systems or networks involved in the incident, but it may also cause the loss or alteration of the evidence, such as volatile memory, temporary files, or logs. Therefore, rebooting affected machines in a secure area should be done with caution and following the documented chain of custody12. References = 1: CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 310-3111; 2: CISM Domain 4: Information Security Incident Management (ISIM) [2022 update]2
