The correct option is Collaborate with the vendor to create and enforce a remediation plan with deadlines and scheduled compliance audits.

This choice is correct because collaborating preserves business continuity while creating a structured path to reduce the identified risk. A remediation plan with clear deadlines and scheduled compliance audits gives you measurable milestones verification of fixes and contractual leverage to ensure the vendor follows through.

The remediation approach lets you monitor progress perform independent verification where needed and escalate to stricter actions if the vendor misses deadlines or fails audits. This balances risk reduction with the need to keep the procurement pipeline functioning and aligns with common third party risk management frameworks.

Suspend new orders and mandate an independent third party security assessment before resuming business is not the best immediate step because it is often overly disruptive and can halt critical procurement. It may be appropriate if the vendor will not cooperate or if the risk is immediate and severe, but it is usually better to first seek remediation that can be verified.

Require the vendor to adopt Google Cloud Security Command Center and related cloud controls before continuing services is incorrect because it is overly prescriptive and platform specific. Forcing a particular cloud vendor technology may not be feasible for the supplier and it does not necessarily address the underlying control gaps in a vendor neutral way.

Terminate the vendor contract immediately is not the preferred immediate action because termination is highly disruptive and can create supply chain and operational shocks. Termination may be necessary later if the vendor refuses to remediate or if there is clear imminent danger, but a managed remediation and verification process is the appropriate first step.

Full AWS Practitioner Certification Question