An IS auditor is reviewing how production process automation scripts move new batch job definitions from development into the production scheduler. Which statement BEST describes the segregation of duties expected in this flow?
- ADevelopers may submit, approve and promote new job definitions through the automation pipeline themselves, provided every action is logged in the source code repository for later inspection.
- BProduction control staff should write the underlying scheduler code on behalf of developers so that developers never touch the production scheduler and audit trails remain entirely within operations.
- CAny user with deployment privileges in the automation tool may release a job to production at any time, because the automation tool's role-based access control is sufficient compensating control on its own.
- DDevelopers author and unit test the job definitions, an independent change advisory function approves the promotion, and production control schedules and operates the job in the live environment. Correct
Why A is wrong: Logging supports detection after the fact but does not address the conflict; allowing developers to approve and promote their own job definitions collapses authorisation, custody and execution into one role.
Why B is wrong: Having operations author the code creates a different conflict because production control would then both build and execute the change, undermining its review role over what gets promoted.
Why C is wrong: Role-based access in the tool alone does not substitute for separated duties between authoring, approving and operating; the tool enforces who can press the button, not whether the duties themselves are split.
Why D is correct: Splitting authoring, approval and execution across three roles preserves segregation of duties over the change so no single party can introduce and run an unreviewed batch job in production.