Executive board members at a major technology firm maintain that purchasing comprehensive cybersecurity insurance is an unnecessary expense, contending that internal cash reserves are sufficient to absorb potential breach penalties. However, recent empirical studies demonstrate that the indirect financial damage of a major breach—including reputational harm and lost customer lifetime value—routinely exceeds a firm’s total liquid reserves by several orders of magnitude. Furthermore, insurance underwriters require continuous security audits that proactively identify software vulnerabilities before exploit incidents occur. Therefore, relying exclusively on internal financial reserves to manage enterprise cyber risk is an unsound management strategy.
In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
- The first is evidence presented to undermine the position held by the board members; the second is the author's main conclusion.Cevap
- BThe first is a position that the argument as a whole seeks to establish; the second is an intermediate conclusion that supports that position.
- CThe first provides general background context for the argument; the second is a claim attributed to the board members that the author refutes.
- DThe first is evidence supporting the board members' view; the second is an intermediate conclusion supporting an alternative policy.
- EThe first is an intermediate conclusion drawn by the author; the second is an explicit assumption upon which the final argument depends.