A scenario review asks how specific exposed information could affect a real business process and whether the team would respond appropriately. Use hypothetical, clearly labeled examples based on authorized findings. The purpose is testing verification and escalation, not predicting an attack, identifying a supposed adversary or teaching staff that every public fact is an emergency.
01
Choose a scenario tied to an actual control
A public travel announcement may test approval procedures when a leader is unavailable. An exposed business contact may test handling of impersonation messages. NIST's risk approach supports linking information to context and impact. Keep the scenario limited to the decision you want to examine, rather than adding dramatic details that make the exercise frightening but less actionable.
02
Walk through roles and evidence
Ask who receives the request, how they verify it and what happens if the executive cannot be reached. Identify required records and a backup decision-maker. Do not use real passwords, payment details or family schedules in the exercise. A tabletop discussion can reveal unclear responsibility without sending deceptive messages to staff or exposing sensitive material beyond the authorized group.
- Label the scenario as hypothetical and define its purpose.
- Identify the control or decision being tested.
- Record uncertainties and missing escalation contacts.
- Assign a concrete improvement and check its completion.
03
Example of a travel-related request
During a planned absence, an assistant receives a hypothetical urgent request to release a confidential document to a new adviser. The team walks through the established verification route and discovers that the backup approver is unclear. Fixing that responsibility is the useful result. The exercise does not prove anyone attempted the scenario or that the organization is now immune to impersonation.
Frequently asked questions
Should every scenario involve a highly sophisticated attacker?
No. Start with realistic decisions and ordinary process weaknesses. The exercise is valuable when it improves verification, ownership or communication, even without an elaborate fictional adversary.
Does completing a tabletop exercise prove security?
No. It checks a defined process under discussion conditions. Follow up on identified gaps and use qualified testing where appropriate rather than describing the exercise as comprehensive protection.
Continue with your next step
Related guides on this topic
Sources and policies
Check the current policy before submitting a request.
You do not have to figure out the next step alone.
Share the URLs and explain your concern. We will review the context and explain which options are worth assessing.
Request a confidential reviewOr call (307) 429-2531Educational information, not legal advice. Outcomes depend on the facts and decisions made by third parties.