The CMMC Assessment Process (CAP) requires that results be reported at the OSC level. While findings may be gathered from enclaves or units, the final reporting must be aggregated and scored across the entire OSC assessment boundary.
Extract:
"Final recommended assessment results must be consolidated and reported at the OSC level, regardless of assessment locations or enclaves." Thus, the Lead Assessor must ensure aggregation to the OSC level.
Reference: CMMC Assessment Process (CAP), Reporting Results.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:
SC.L2-3.13.13 - Mobile Code requires "controlling and monitoring mobile code use to prevent unacceptable risk." Mobile code (e.g., scripts executed in browsers) is a concern via web interfaces accessing microservices. Unauthorized code execution (D) is the primary risk, as it could exploit users or systems.
MDM (A) secures devices, not web code; container vulnerabilities (B) are separate; and JavaScript use (C) isn't inherently mobile code unless executed client-side without control. The CMMC guide focuses on execution risks.
Extract from Official CMMC Documentation:
* CMMC Assessment Guide Level 2 (v2.0), SC.L2-3.13.13: "Control mobile code to prevent unauthorized execution via web interfaces."
* NIST SP 800-171A, 3.13.13: "Assess risks of mobile code in user-accessible systems." Resources:
* https://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/Documents/CMMC/AG_Level2_MasterV2.
0_FINAL_202112016_508.pdf

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:
SPAs, per the CMMC Assessment Scope - Level 2, are assets providing security functions or capabilities to the CMMC Assessment Scope, regardless of CUI handling. Hosted VPN Services (Option A), Cloud-based security solutions (Option C), and SIEM Solutions (Option D) all provide security (e.g., encryption, monitoring), qualifying as SPAs. Virtualized desktops (Option B) are endpoints for user access, not security tools, unless configured as such (not indicated here). B is the correct answer.
Reference:
CMMC Assessment Scope - Level 2, Section 2.3.3 (SPAs), p. 6: "SPAs provide security functions, e.g., VPNs, SIEMs, not general-purpose endpoints."

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:
The CMMC Assessment Process (CAP) requires the Lead Assessor to validate the scope and resolve disagreements with the OSC before proceeding to Phase 2. This collaborative approach ensures accuracy without escalating (Options B, D) or compromising integrity (Option C). A is the mandated step per the CAP.
Reference:
CMMC Assessment Process (CAP) v1.0, Section 2.2 (Scope Validation), p. 9: "Disagreements must be resolved before the assessment begins."

Malicious code protection is typically implemented and managed by system or network administrators, who configure, deploy, and monitor anti-malware solutions. Interviews with these administrators provide direct evidence of control implementation.
Exact Extracts:
* SI.L2-3.14.2: "Provide protection from malicious code at appropriate locations within organizational information systems."
* CMMC Assessment Guide: "Interviews should be conducted with administrators responsible for deployment and monitoring of malicious code protection."
* NIST SP 800-171A (SI.L2-3.14.2): "Interview system or network administrators to determine how malicious code protection is implemented." Why other options are not correct:
* A (developers): Developers do not typically manage system-wide malicious code protections.
* C (audit personnel): They review logs, not deploy/manage protections.
* D (security advisory staff): They track alerts but don't operate malicious code defenses.
References:
CMMC Assessment Guide - Level 2, Version 2.13: SI.L2-3.14.2 (pp. 142-144).
NIST SP 800-171A: Assessment procedures for malicious code protection.