The technical capabilities of the provider are the MOST important thing for an information security manager to verify when selecting a third-party forensics provider because they determine the quality, reliability, and validity of the forensic services and results that the provider can deliver. The technical capabilities of the provider include the skills, experience, and qualifications of the forensic staff, the methods, tools, and standards that the forensic staff use, and the facilities, equipment, and resources that the forensic staff have. The information security manager should verify that the technical capabilities of the provider match the forensic needs and expectations of the organization, such as the type, scope, and complexity of the forensic investigation, the legal and regulatory requirements, and the time and cost constraints12. The existence of a right-to-audit clause (A) is an important thing for an information security manager to verify when selecting a third-party forensics provider, but it is not the MOST important thing. A right-to-audit clause is a contractual provision that grants the organization the right to audit or review the performance, compliance, and security of the provider. A right-to-audit clause can help to ensure the accountability, transparency, and quality of the provider, as well as to identify and resolve any issues or disputes that may arise during or after the forensic service. However, a right-to-audit clause does not guarantee that the provider has the technical capabilities to conduct the forensic service effectively and efficiently12. The results of the provider’s business continuity tests (B) are an important thing for an information security manager to verify when selecting a third-party forensics provider, but they are not the MOST important thing. The results of the provider’s business continuity tests can indicate the ability and readiness of the provider to continue or resume the forensic service in the event of a disruption, disaster, or emergency. The results of the provider’s business continuity tests can help to assess the availability, resilience, and recovery of the provider, as well as to mitigate the risks of losing or compromising the forensic evidence or data. However, the results of the provider’s business continuity tests do not ensure that the provider has the technical capabilities to perform the forensic service accurately and professionally12. The existence of the provider’s incident response plan (D) is an important thing for an information security manager to verify when selecting a third-party forensics provider, but it is not the MOST important thing. The existence of the provider’s incident response plan can demonstrate the preparedness and capability of the provider to detect, report, and respond to any security incidents that may affect the forensic service or the organization. The existence of the provider’s incident response plan can help to protect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the forensic evidence or data, as well as to comply with the legal and contractual obligations. However, the existence of the provider’s incident response plan does not confirm that the provider has the technical capabilities to execute the forensic service competently and ethically12. References = 1: CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 310-3111; 2: A Risk-Based Management Approach to Third-Party Data Security, Risk and Compliance - ISACA2
