Final answer:
The information security engineer should classify the data as sensitive but accessible, balancing the concerns of the engineers and the perspective of the data owner. This approach acknowledges potential risks without overly restricting access, while still protecting the company's interests.
Step-by-step explanation:
In this scenario, the information security engineer must determine the appropriate level of protection for corporate data. Given that there is disagreement on the sensitivity of the data between the engineers and the data owner, a pragmatic approach would be required. The engineer should consider several factors, such as the potential impact on the company if the data were exposed, the data's relevance to competitors, and legal regulations around data protection.
According to the situation described, it is not clear that the data falls under the categories of being export-controlled or extremely sensitive. Furthermore, there's no evidence provided that suggests the necessity of the most restrictive classification. Therefore, the most inappropriate choice would be to label the data as extremely sensitive, which would be excessive without concrete justification.
Conversely, since there is a concern from the engineering team, classifying the data as non-sensitive might be irresponsible. The harmonic balance would likely be to classify the data as sensitive but accessible. This classification acknowledges the engineers' concerns while not overly restricting access based on the data owner's perspective. It provides a level of security that can ensure the company's operations remain secure while still allowing necessary access for business functions.
It is important to remember that decisions about data classification should be rooted in facts and evidence. Thus, the engineer should gather more information, possibly consulting with legal and compliance departments, to make a well-informed decision.