During an audit, excessive restrictions on public-facing documents are noted. What label adjustment should be made?

Choosing to relabel the documents from "Confidential" to "Public" is the most appropriate adjustment in this scenario where excessive restrictions have been noted on public-facing documents. By changing the label to "Public," the intent is to ensure that these documents align with their intended purpose, which is accessible sharing with the general public. This adjustment helps facilitate easier access and encourages user engagement while complying with the necessary transparency and information-sharing practices that organizations often strive for.

In the context of an audit that identifies overly restrictive access controls on documents that are meant to be public-facing, it is crucial to balance security with accessibility. Documents that carry the "Public" label indicate that they are permissible for wide distribution, which aids in eliminating unnecessary hurdles for users who require access to that data.

The other choices do not address the issue of excessive restrictions effectively. Maintaining a "Highly Confidential" label would only exacerbate the existing problem by continuing to limit accessibility. Adjusting the label to "General" offers a marginal increase in accessibility but does not fully resolve the fundamental issue that the documents should be public. Additionally, keeping the "Confidential" label while allowing exceptions introduces complexity and uncertainty regarding sharing policies, potentially leading to confusion or misuse of access rights. Thus, relabel