= The primary objective of performing a post-incident review is to identify the root cause of the incident, which is the underlying factor or condition that enabled or facilitated the occurrence of the incident.
Identifying the root cause helps to understand the nature and origin of the incident, and to prevent or mitigate similar incidents in the future. A post-incident review also aims to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the incident response process, identify lessons learned and best practices, and recommend improvements for the incident management policies, procedures, controls, and tools. However, these are secondary objectives that depend on the identification of the root cause as the first step.
Re-evaluating the impact of incidents is not the primary objective of performing a post-incident review, as it is already done during the incident response process. The impact of incidents is the extent and severity of the damage or harm caused by the incident to the organization's assets, operations, reputation, or stakeholders. Re- evaluating the impact of incidents may be part of the post-incident review, but it is not the main goal.
Identifying vulnerabilities is not the primary objective of performing a post-incident review, as it is also done during the incident response process. Vulnerabilities are weaknesses or flaws in the system or network that can be exploited by attackers to compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the information or resources. Identifying vulnerabilities may be part of the post-incident review, but it is not the main goal.
Identifying control improvements is not the primary objective of performing a post-incident review, as it is a result of the root cause analysis. Controls are measures or mechanisms that are implemented to protect the system or network from threats, reduce risks, or ensure compliance with policies and standards. Identifying control improvements is an important outcome of the post-incident review, but it is not the main goal. References = ISACA CISM: PRIMARY goal of a post-incident review should be to?
CISM Exam Overview - Vinsys
CISM Review Manual, Chapter 4, page 176
CISM Exam Content Outline | CISM Certification | ISACA, Domain 4, Task 4.3

= The best approach for developing a physical access control policy for the organization is to conduct a risk assessment to determine the security risks and mitigating controls that are relevant and appropriate for the organization's data center. A risk assessment is a process of identifying, analyzing, and evaluating the information security risks that could affect the availability, integrity, or confidentiality of the servers, applications, and data that are hosted in the data center. A risk assessment can help to determine the likelihood and impact of the unauthorized or inappropriate physical access to the data center, such as theft, damage, sabotage, or espionage, and the potential consequences for the organization and its customers, such as service disruption, data loss, data breach, or legal liability. A risk assessment can also help to identify and prioritize the appropriate risk treatment options, such as implementing technical, administrative, or physical controls to prevent, detect, or respond to the physical access incidents, such as locks, alarms, cameras, guards, badges, or logs. A risk assessment can also help to communicate and report the risk level and status to the senior management and the relevant stakeholders, and to provide feedback and recommendations for improvement and optimization of the physical access control policy and the risk management process.
Reviewing customers' security policies, developing access control requirements for each system and application, and designing single sign-on (SSO) or federated access are all possible steps that the organization can take after conducting the risk assessment, but they are not the best ones. Reviewing customers' security policies is a process of understanding and complying with the customers' expectations and requirements for the security of their servers, applications, and data that are hosted in the data center, and ensuring that the organization's physical access control policy is consistent and compatible with them. Developing access control requirements for each system and application is a process of defining and implementing the specific rules and criteria for granting or denying the physical access to the servers and applications that are hosted in the data center, based on the roles, responsibilities, and privileges of the users, and the sensitivity and criticality of the systems and applications. Designing single sign-on (SSO) or federated access is a process of enabling and facilitating the authentication and authorization of the users who need to access the servers and applications that are hosted in the data center, by using a single or shared identity and credential across multiple systems and domains. References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, pages 51-531; CISM Practice Quiz, question 1542

A gap analysis is a tool that helps to identify the current state of compliance and the desired state of compliance, as well as the actions needed to achieve the desired state. A gap analysis should be done before implementing any specific controls or solutions, such as encryption, data minimization, or ROI analysis.
References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 65; Information Security Architecture: Gap Assessment and Prioritization, ISACA Journal, volume 2, 2018.

Assigning ownership is the best way to enable an effective information asset classification process, as it establishes the authority and responsibility for the information asset and its protection. The owner of the information asset should be involved in the classification process, as they have the best knowledge of the value, sensitivity, and criticality of the asset, as well as the impact of its loss or compromise. The owner should also ensure that the asset is properly labeled, handled, and secured according to its classification level.
(From CISM Review Manual 15th Edition)
References: CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, page 64, section 2.2.1.2; Information Asset and Security Classification Procedure1, section 3.1.

The best option to reduce the risk of unauthorized sharing of information during the due diligence process is B). Establishing mutual non-disclosure agreements (NDAs). This is because NDAs are legal contracts that bind the parties to keep confidential any information that is exchanged or disclosed during the due diligence process. NDAs can help to protect the sensitive data, intellectual property, trade secrets, or business strategies of both the organization and the third party from being leaked, stolen, or misused by unauthorized parties.
NDAs can also specify the terms and conditions for the use, storage, and disposal of the information, as well as the consequences for breaching the agreement.
References = CISM Review Manual 15th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.1, page 1341; CISM Review Questions, Answers & Explanations Manual 9th Edition, Question 70, page 18