CMMC-CCP Exam Dumps - Cyber AB CMMC Questions and Answers

Understanding Evidence Sufficiency in CMMC Level 2 Assessments

During aCMMC Level 2 Assessment, theLead Assessormust determine whether the evidence collected for each practice issufficientto support an assessment finding. This aligns with theCMMC Assessment Process (CAP) Guide, which requires assessors to evaluate:

Examinations– Reviewing documents, configurations, and system records.

Interviews– Speaking with personnel to confirm implementation and understanding.

Testing– Observing security controls in action to validate effectiveness.

To determine whether evidence issufficient, the assessor ensures that it:

Directly supports the assessment objective.

Demonstrates that the practice is consistently implemented.

Can be independently verified.

Why Option B (Sufficiency) is Correct

Sufficiencyrefers to whetherenoughevidence has been collected to make an accurate determination about compliance.

Option A (Adequacy)is incorrect because adequacy relates tothe qualityof evidence, while sufficiency focuses on whetherenoughevidence exists.

Option C (Process Mapping)is incorrect because process mapping is used for understanding workflows but is not an assessment verification method.

Option D (Assessment Scope)is incorrect because defining the scope happensbeforeevidence collection, during the planning phase.

Official CMMC Documentation References

CMMC Assessment Process (CAP) Guide – Section 3.6 (Determining Sufficiency of Evidence)

CMMC Level 2 Assessment Guide – Evidence Collection and Evaluation

Final Verification

Since theLead Assessor is ensuring enough evidence is available to verify compliance, the correct answer isOption B: Sufficiency.

PerDFARS 252.204-7021, contractors must achieve the requiredCMMC certification levelbefore contract awardif the solicitation specifies it.

Key Requirements:

✔Contractorsmust be certified at the required CMMC levelprior to contract award.

✔Thecertification must be conducted by a C3PAO(for Level 2) orthrough self-assessment(for Level 1).

✔The certification must bevalid and registered in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS)before award.

Why is the Correct Answer " At the Time of Award " (A)?

A. At the time of award → Correct

DFARS 252.204-7021requires CMMC certification before a contract can be awardedif the solicitation includes CMMC requirements.

B. Upon solicitation submission → Incorrect

Contractorsdo notneed to be CMMC-certified at thetime of bid submission, only by the time of award.

C. Thirty days from the award date → Incorrect

Contractorsmust already be certified before the award is granted. There isno grace period.

D. Before the due date of submission → Incorrect

While compliance planning is important,CMMC certification is only required before contract award, not before bid submission.

CMMC 2.0 References Supporting This Answer:

DFARS 252.204-7021 (CMMC Requirement Clause)

CMMC certification is required prior to contract awardif specified in the solicitation.

CMMC 2.0 Program Overview

States that certificationis not needed at bid submission but is required before award.

DoD Interim Rule & SPRS Guidance

Contractors must havea valid CMMC certification recorded in SPRSbefore award.

In the context of the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) 2.0, the remediation review process is a critical phase where identified deficiencies from an initial assessment are addressed. The Lead Assessor, representing a Certified Third-Party Assessment Organization (C3PAO), plays a pivotal role in this process.

Role of the Lead Assessor in Remediation Reviews:

Validation of Remediation Efforts:

Objective: Ensure that the Organization Seeking Certification (OSC) has effectively addressed and corrected all deficiencies identified during the initial assessment.

Process: The Lead Assessor reviews the evidence provided by the OSC to confirm that each previously unmet practice now meets the required standards. This involves examining updated policies, procedures, system configurations, and other relevant artifacts.

Delta Assessment Remediation Package Submission:

Definition: A delta assessment focuses on evaluating only the components or practices that were previously found non-compliant or deficient.

Responsibility: After validating the remediation efforts, the Lead Assessor compiles a remediation package that includes:

Detailed documentation of the deficiencies identified in the initial assessment.

Evidence of the corrective actions taken by the OSC.

Findings from the reassessment of the remediated practices.

Internal Quality Review: This remediation package is then submitted for the C3PAO ' s internal quality review process. The purpose of this review is to ensure the accuracy, completeness, and consistency of the assessment findings before finalizing the certification decision.

Rationale for Selecting Answer C:

Alignment with CMMC Assessment Process: The submission of a delta assessment remediation package for internal quality review is a standard procedure outlined in the CMMC Assessment Process. This step ensures that all remediated items are thoroughly evaluated and validated, maintaining the integrity of the certification process.

Clarification of Incorrect Options:

Option A: " Help OSC to complete planned remediation activities. "

The Lead Assessor ' s role is to assess and validate the OSC ' s compliance, not to assist in the implementation or completion of remediation activities. Providing such assistance could lead to a conflict of interest and compromise the objectivity of the assessment.

Option B: " Plan two consecutive remediation reviews for an OSC. "

The standard process involves conducting a single remediation review after the OSC has addressed the identified deficiencies. Planning multiple consecutive remediation reviews is not a typical practice and could indicate a lack of proper remediation planning by the OSC.

Option D: " Validate that practices previously listed on the POA & M have been removed on an updated Risk Assessment. "

While it ' s essential to ensure that deficiencies are addressed, the primary focus of the Lead Assessor during a remediation review is to validate the implementation of remediated practices. Updating the Risk Assessment is the responsibility of the OSC ' s internal risk management team, not the Lead Assessor.

Understanding the Principle of Least Functionality in the CM Domain

TheConfiguration Management (CM) domainin CMMC 2.0 focuses on maintaining the security and integrity of an organization’s systems through controlled configurations and restrictions on system capabilities.

The principle ofLeast Functionalityrefers to limiting a system’s features, services, and applications to only those necessary for its intended purpose. This principle reduces the attack surface by minimizing unnecessary components that could be exploited by attackers.

Justification for the Correct Answer: Least Functionality (C)

CMMC Practice CM.L2-3.4.6 (Use Least Functionality)explicitly states:

" Employ the principle of least functionality by configuring organizational systems to provide only essential capabilities. "

Thegoalis to prevent unauthorized or unnecessary applications, services, and ports from running on the system.

Examples of Implementation:

Disabling unnecessary services, such as remote desktop access if not required.

Restricting software installation to approved applications.

Blocking unused network ports and protocols.

Why Other Options Are Incorrect

A. Least Privilege

This principle (associated with Access Control) ensures that users and processes have only the minimum level of access necessary to perform their jobs.

It is relevant to CMMC PracticeAC.L2-3.1.5 (Least Privilege)but does not define system capabilities.

B. Essential Concern

There is no officially recognized cybersecurity principle called " Essential Concern " in CMMC, NIST, or related frameworks.

D. Separation of Duties

This principle (covered under CMMCAC.L2-3.1.4) ensures that no single individual has unchecked control over critical functions, reducing the risk of fraud or abuse.

While important for security, it does not define essential system capabilities.

Official CMMC and NIST References

CMMC 2.0 Level 2 Assessment Guide – Configuration Management (CM) Domain

CM.L2-3.4.6 mandatesleast functionalityto enhance security by removing unnecessary features.

NIST SP 800-171 (which CMMC is based on) – Requirement 3.4.6

States: " Limit system functionality to only the essential capabilities required for organizational missions or business functions. "

NIST SP 800-53 – Control CM-7 (Least Functionality)

Provides detailed recommendations on configuring systems to operate with only necessary features.

Conclusion

Theprinciple of Least Functionality (C)is the basis for defining essential system capabilities in theConfiguration Management (CM) domainof CMMC 2.0. By applying this principle, organizations reduce security risks by ensuring that only the necessary functions, services, and applications are enabled.

The best resource for identifying the category of Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) is NARA , because NARA is the CUI Executive Agent for the federal CUI Program and maintains the authoritative CUI Registry . The Registry is specifically where the government publishes the approved CUI categories (and related markings and handling guidance) used across the Executive Branch.

NARA’s own CUI FAQs explicitly point users to the CUI Registry as the place that “lists all authorized CUI Categories (basic and specified).” Likewise, NIST’s CUI-related FAQ page also points to the NARA CUI Registry for CUI categories, reinforcing that the Registry is the correct source for determining which category applies to a given type of information.

By contrast, DFARS Part 252 (including clauses like 252.204-7012) addresses contractual safeguarding and cyber reporting requirements, not the authoritative categorization list itself. The CMMC Assessment Guide is about how to assess controls for CMMC levels, not how to determine CUI categories. And the Cyber AB (formerly CMMC-AB) administers the ecosystem and assessment processes, not the federal CUI category taxonomy. Therefore, NARA is the best answer.

Per the CMMC Assessment Process (CAP), the Assessment Team is responsible for determining the adequacy and sufficiency of evidence collected during the assessment. The team validates whether practices and components for each in-scope Host Unit, Supporting Organization, or enclave meet the target CMMC level. The OSC (Organization Seeking Certification) provides evidence, but only the Assessment Team makes the verification and scoring determination.

Reference Documents:

CMMC Assessment Process (CAP), v1.0

During aCMMC assessment, organizations must provide evidence to demonstrate compliance with requiredpractices and processes. Assessors evaluate this evidence based on two key criteria:

Adequacy– Does the evidence meet the intent of the security requirement?

Sufficiency– Is there enough evidence to reasonably conclude that the practice/process is effectively implemented?

These principles are outlined in theCMMC Assessment Process Guide, which provides a structured approach for evaluating compliance.

Step-by-Step Breakdown:

✅1. Adequacy – Does the evidence fully meet the requirement?

Adequacyrefers to whether the evidence properly demonstrates that the security practice has been implemented as required.

Example: If an organization claims to enforceMulti-Factor Authentication (MFA), an assessor would checksystem configurations, login policies, and user authentication logsto confirm that MFA is actually in use.

✅2. Sufficiency – Is there enough evidence to support the claim?

Sufficiencymeans that there isenough supporting evidenceto prove compliance.

Example: If an organization providesonly one screenshot of an MFA login screen, that alone may not besufficient—additional logs, policies, and user records would help strengthen the case.

Why the Other Answer Choices Are Incorrect:

(B) Adequacy and Thoroughness❌

Thoroughnessis not a defined metric in CMMC evidence evaluation.

The focus is onwhether the evidence meets the requirement (adequacy)and if there isenough of it (sufficiency).

(C) Sufficiency and Thoroughness❌

Thoroughnessis not a recognized term in CMMC compliance validation.

Evidence must beadequate and sufficient, not just thorough.

(D) Sufficiency and Appropriateness❌

Appropriatenessis not a CMMC-defined criterion.

Thecorrect terms used in CMMC assessmentsareAdequacy(Does it meet the requirement?) andSufficiency(Is there enough proof?).

Final Validation from CMMC Documentation:

CMMC Assessment Process Guideexplicitly states that evidence must be evaluated based onadequacyandsufficiencyto confirm compliance with security practices.

During a Readiness Review (Phase 1), the purpose is to validate whether an OSC is prepared to move forward with a formal assessment. The CAP specifies that the Lead Assessor must collect sufficient evidence for each practice to make a preliminary determination of readiness.

Supporting Extracts from Official Content:

CAP v2.0, Readiness Review (§2.14): “The Lead Assessor must collect a sufficient amount of evidence for each practice to determine the OSC’s readiness.”

Why Option A is Correct:

The requirement is for sufficient evidence; CAP does not mandate a set number of assessment objects or methods.

Options B, C, and D incorrectly suggest minimum counts or methods that are not part of the readiness review requirements.

References (Official CMMC v2.0 Content):

CMMC Assessment Process (CAP) v2.0, Phase 1 Readiness Review.

===========

Control Reference: CA.L2-3.12.1

CA.L2-3.12.1: " Periodically assess the security controls in organizational systems to determine if the controls are effective in their application. "

This control is derived fromNIST SP 800-171, Requirement 3.12.1, which mandates organizations to performregular security control assessmentsto ensure compliance and effectiveness.

Assessment Criteria & Justification for the Correct Answer:

Evidence Review & Assessment Timeline:

The organization ' s procedureexplicitly statesthat security control assessments must be conductedquarterly(every three months).

Since the Lead Assessor only has access to thefirst-quarter report, the second-quarter report is missing at the time of assessment.

CMMC Audit Requirements:

For an assessor to rate a control asMET, sufficient evidence must bereadily availableat the time of evaluation.

Since the second-quarter report is missingat the time of assessment, the Lead Assessorcannot verify compliancewith the organization ' s own stated frequency of assessment.

Why the Answer is NOT A, C, or D:

A (Sufficient, MET)→Incorrect: The control assessment frequency is quarterly, but the evidence for Q2 is not available. Compliance cannot be confirmed.

C (Sufficient, and re-rate later)→Incorrect: If evidence is not available during the audit, the controlcannot be rated as MET initially. There is no provision in CMMC 2.0 to " conditionally " pass a control pending future evidence.

D (Insufficient, but re-rate later)→Incorrect: Once a control is ratedNOT MET, it staysNOT METuntil a re-assessment is conducted in a new audit cycle. The assessordoes not adjust ratings retroactivelybased on future evidence.

Official CMMC 2.0 References Supporting the Answer:

CMMC Assessment Process (CAP) Guide (2023):

" For a control to be rated as MET, the assessed organization must provide sufficient evidence at the time of the assessment. "

" If evidence is missing or incomplete, the finding shall be rated as NOT MET. "

NIST SP 800-171A (Security Requirement Assessment Guide):

" Evidence must be current, relevant, and sufficient to demonstrate compliance with stated periodicity requirements. "

Since the procedure mandatesquarterly assessments, missing evidence means compliancecannot be validated.

DoD CMMC Scoping Guidance:

" Assessors shall base their determination on the evidence provided at the time of assessment. If required evidence is not available, the control shall be rated as NOT MET. "

Final Conclusion:

Thecorrect answer is Bbecause the required evidence (the second-quarter report) is not availableat the time of assessment, making itinsufficientto validate compliance. The Lead Assessormust rate the control as NOT METin accordance with CMMC 2.0 assessment rules.

For CMMC Level 1 scoping , the DoD’s CMMC Scoping Guide – Level 1 (v2.13) instructs an organization performing a Level 1 self-assessment to consider what is in scope for protecting Federal Contract Information (FCI) . Specifically, it states that to appropriately scope a Level 1 self-assessment, the OSA should consider the people, technology, facilities, and external service providers (ESPs) within its environment that process, store, or transmit FCI .

In this scenario, the director is evaluating company offices and data centers where FCI is stored. These are physical locations and physical environments—exactly what the scoping guidance categorizes under Facilities . Facilities in a Level 1 context include physical sites and spaces that may house systems or media containing FCI (e.g., offices, server rooms, data centers), because those locations affect physical access controls, environmental protections, and overall safeguarding of where FCI is handled and stored.

This is distinct from Technology (devices/systems), People (personnel who handle FCI), and ESPs (external providers delivering IT/cyber services). Since the question is explicitly about which offices and data centers store FCI —a physical boundary and location question—the correct asset type is Facilities .