CompTIA CS0-003 CompTIA CyberSecurity Analyst CySA+ Certification Exam Exam Practice Test

Implementing input validation is the best way to mitigate the buffer overflow vulnerability at the application level. Input validation is a technique that checks the data entered by users or attackers against a set of rules or constraints, such as data type, length, format, or range. Input validation can prevent common web application attacks such as SQL injection, cross-site scripting (XSS), or command injection, which exploit the lack of input validation to execute malicious code or commands on the server or the client side. By validating the input before allowing submission, the web application can reject or sanitize any malicious or unexpected input, and protect the application from being compromised12. References: How to detect, prevent, and mitigate buffer overflow attacks - Synopsys, How to mitigate buffer overflow vulnerabilities | Infosec

A signal-shielded bag and a tamper-evident seal are tools that can be used to maintain the integrity of the mobile phone while it is transported. A signal-shielded bag prevents the phone from receiving orsending any signals that could compromise the data or evidence on the device. A tamper-evident seal ensures that the phone has not been opened or altered during the transportation. References: Mobile device forensics, Section: Acquisition

Comprehensive and Detailed Step-by-Step Explanation:Directory traversal, also known as path traversal, is an attack that allows attackers to access restricted directories and execute commands outside the web server's root directory. The %2E encoding corresponds to a dot (.) in ASCII, and %2E%2E resolves to ../. The log entries indicate attempts to navigate directories upward to access sensitive files like /etc/passwd. Since no malicious activity was flagged, it is inferred this was either an unsuccessful or reconnaissance attempt.

The output shows the results of a port scan, which is a technique used to identify open ports and services running on a network host. Port scanning can be used by attackers to discover potential vulnerabilities and exploit them, or by defenders to assess the security posture and configuration of their network devices1

The output lists six ports that are open on the target host, along with the service name and version associated with each port. The service name indicates the type of application or protocol that is using the port, while the version indicates the specific release or update of the service. The service name and version can provide useful information for both attackers and defenders, as they can reveal the capabilities, features, and weaknesses of the service.

Among the six ports listed, two are particularly risky and should be investigated further by the security team: port 23 and port 636.

Port 23 is used by Telnet, which is an old and insecure protocol for remote login and command execution. Telnet does not encrypt any data transmitted over the network, including usernames and passwords, which makes it vulnerable to eavesdropping, interception, and modification by attackers. Telnet also has many known vulnerabilities that can allow attackers to gain unauthorized access, execute arbitrary commands, or cause denial-of-service attacks on the target host23

Port 636 is used by LDAP over SSL/TLS (LDAPS), which is a protocol for accessing and modifying directory services over a secure connection. LDAPS encrypts the data exchanged between the client and the server using SSL/TLS certificates, which provide authentication, confidentiality, and integrity. However, LDAPS can also be vulnerable to attacks if the certificates are not properly configured, verified, or updated. For example, attackers can use self-signed or expired certificates to perform man-in-the-middle attacks, spoofing attacks, or certificate revocation attacks on LDAPS connections.

Therefore, the security team should investigate further why port 23 and port 636 are open on the target host, and what services are running on them. The security team should also consider disabling or replacing these services with more secure alternatives, such as SSH for port 23 and StartTLS for port 6362

The correct answer is C. Legal department.

According to the CompTIA Cybersecurity Analyst (CySA+) certification exam objectives, one of the tasks for a security analyst is to “report and escalate security incidents to appropriate stakeholders and authorities” 1. This includes reporting any inappropriate use of resources, such as installing cryptominers on workstations, which may violate the company’s policies and cause financial and reputational damage. The legal department is the most appropriate group to escalate this issue to first, as they can advise on the legal implications and actions that can be taken against the employee. The legal department can also coordinate with other groups, such as law enforcement, help desk, or board members, as needed. The other options are not the best choices to escalate the issue to first, as they may not have the authority or expertise to handle the situation properly.

The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) is a public repository of standardized identifiers and descriptions for common cybersecurity vulnerabilities. It helps security analysts to identify, prioritize, and report on the most critical vulnerabilities in their systems and applications. The other options are not relevant for this purpose: Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) is a collection of information and analysis on current and emerging cyber threats; Cyber Analytics Repository (CAR) is a knowledge base of analytics developed by MITRE based on the ATT&CK adversary model; ATT&CK is a globally-accessible knowledge base of adversary tactics and techniques based on real-world observations.References: According to the CompTIA CySA+ Study Guide: Exam CS0-003, 3rd Edition1, one of the objectives for the exam is to “use appropriate tools and methods to manage, prioritize and respond to attacks and vulnerabilities”. The book also covers the usage and syntax of various cybersecurity frameworks and standards, such as CVE, CTI, CAR, and ATT&CK, in chapter 1. Specifically, it explains the meaning and function of each framework and standard, such as CVE, which provides a common language for describing and sharing information about vulnerabilities1, page 28. Therefore, this is a reliable source to verify the answer to the question.

The hard disk is the piece of data that should be collected first in order to preserve sensitive information before isolating the server. The hard disk contains all the files and data stored on the server, which may include evidence of malicious activity, such as malware installation, data exfiltration, or configuration changes. The hard disk should be collected using proper forensic techniques, such as creating an image or a copy of the disk and maintaining its integrity using hashing algorithms.

Input validation vulnerabilities occur when an application fails to properly validate or sanitize user input, allowing malicious data to be processed. This can lead to various attacks, most notably cross-site scripting (XSS).

Option A:DNS poisoning

Incorrect Choice:DNS poisoning involves corrupting the DNS cache to redirect users to malicious sites. It is not related to input validation vulnerabilities.

Option B:Pharming

Incorrect Choice:Pharming redirects users from legitimate websites to fraudulent ones, typically through DNS poisoning or host file manipulation. It is not directly related to input validation.

Option C:Phishing

Incorrect Choice:Phishing involves tricking individuals into providing sensitive information through deceptive emails or websites. It exploits human behavior rather than technical input validation flaws.

Option D:Cross-site scripting

Correct Choice:Cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks occur when an application includes untrusted data in a web page without proper validation or escaping. This allows attackers to execute malicious scripts in users' browsers, leading to data theft, session hijacking, or defacement. Remediating input validation vulnerabilities is essential to prevent XSS attacks.

The function that can be used on a shell script to identify anomalies on the network routing most accurately is:

function x() { info=(dig(dig -x $1 | grep PTR | tail -n 1 | awk -F “.in-addr” ’{print $1} ').origin.asn.cymru.com TXT +short) && echo “$1 | $info” }

This function takes an IP address as an argument and performs two DNS lookups using the dig command. The first lookup uses the -x option to perform a reverse DNS lookup and get the hostname associated with the IP address. The second lookup uses the origin.asn.cymru.com domain to get the autonomous system number (ASN) and other information related to the IP address. The function then prints the IP address and the ASN information, which can help identify any routing anomalies or inconsistencies

The best option to quickly find out whether the IP address in a SIEM alert is a known-malicious IP address is C. Add data enrichment for IPS in the ingestion pipeline.

Data enrichment is the process of adding more information and context to raw data, such as IP addresses, by using external sources. Data enrichment can help analysts to gain more insights into the nature and origin of the threats they face, and to prioritize and respond to them accordingly. Dataenrichment for IPS (Intrusion Prevention System) means that the IPS can use enriched data to block or alert on malicious traffic based on various criteria, such as geolocation, reputation, threat intelligence, or behavior. By adding data enrichment for IPS in the ingestion pipeline, analysts can leverage the IPS’s capabilities to filter out known-malicious IP addresses before they reach the SIEM, or to tag them with relevant information for further analysis. This can save time and resources for the analysts, and improve the accuracy and efficiency of the SIEM.

The other options are not as effective or efficient as data enrichment for IPS in the ingestion pipeline. Joining an information sharing and analysis center (ISAC) specific to the company’s industry (A) can provide valuable threat intelligence and best practices, but it may not be timely or comprehensive enough to cover all possible malicious IP addresses. Uploading threat intelligence to the IPS in STIX/TAXII format (B) can help the IPS to identify and block malicious IP addresses based on standardized indicators of compromise, but it may require manual or periodic updates and integration with the SIEM. Reviewing threat feeds after viewing the SIEM alert (D) can help analysts to verify and contextualize the malicious IP addresses, but it may be too late or too slow to prevent or mitigate the damage. Therefore, C is the best option among the choices given.

The scan output where ports are marked as “closed” suggests the use of ahalf-open or SYN scan. In a SYN scan, the scanner sends only the initial SYN packet and does not complete the TCP handshake. If a SYN-ACK is received, the port is open; if a RST is received, it is closed. This scanning method is also referred to as astealth scanand is frequently used to avoid detection.

 Select the command that generated the output in tab 1:

netstat -bo

 Select the command that generated the output in tab 2:

tasklist

 Identify the file responsible for the malicious behavior:

cmd.exe

Select the command that generated the output in tab 1: The output in tab 1 displays active network connections, which can be generated using the netstat command with options to display the owning process ID.

Select the command that generated the output in tab 1:

netstat -bo

Select the command that generated the output in tab 2: The output in tab 2 lists the running processes with their PIDs and memory usage, which can be generated using the tasklist command.

Select the command that generated the output in tab 2:

tasklist

Identify the file responsible for the malicious behavior: To identify the malicious file, we compare the hashes of the current files against the baseline hashes. From the provided data:

The hash for cmd.exe in the current state (tab 3) is 372ab227fd5ea779c211a1451881d1e1.

The baseline hash for cmd.exe (tab 4) is a2cdef1c445d3890cc3456789058cd21.

Since these hashes do not match, cmd.exe is the file responsible for the malicious behavior.

The most likely reason to include lessons learned in an after-action report is to identify areas of improvement in the incident response process. The lessons learned process is a way of reviewing and evaluating the incident response activities and outcomes, as well as identifying and documenting any strengths, weaknesses, gaps, or best practices. Identifying areas of improvement in the incident response process can help enhance the security posture, readiness, or capability of the organization for future incidents, as well as provide feedback or recommendations on how to address any issues or challenges.

Determining what attack the odd characters are indicative of is the next step that should be taken after reviewing web server logs and noticing several entries with the same time stamps, but all contain odd characters in the request line. This step can help the analyst identify the type and severity of the attack, as well as the possible source and motive of the attacker. The odd characters in the request line may indicate that the attacker is trying to exploit a vulnerability or inject malicious code into the web server or application, such as SQL injection, cross-site scripting, buffer overflow, or command injection. The analyst can use tools and techniques such as log analysis, pattern matching, signature detection, or threat intelligence to determine what attack the odd characters are indicative of, and then proceed to the next steps of incident response, such as containment, eradication, recovery, and lessons learned. Official References:

Data exfiltration is the theft or unauthorized transfer or movement of data from a device or network. It can occur as part of an automated attack or manually, on-site or through an internet connection, and involve various methods. It can affect personal or corporate data, such as sensitive or confidential information. Data exfiltration can be prevented or detected by using compression, encryption, authentication, authorization, and other controls1

The network activity shows that a device on the network is sending an outbound email via a mail client to a non-company email address daily at 10:00 p.m. This could indicate that the device is compromised by malware or an insider threat, and that the email is used to exfiltrate data from the network to an external party. The email could contain attachments, links, or hidden data that contain the stolen information. The timing of the email could be designed to avoid detection by normal network monitoring or security systems.

An unintentional insider threat is a type of network security threat that occurs when a legitimate user of the network unknowingly exposes the network to malicious activity, such as opening a phishing email or a malware-infected attachment from an unknown source. This can compromise the network security and allow attackers to access sensitive data or systems. The other options are not related to the threat concept of ensuring that all network users only open attachments from known sources.

ReferencesCompTIA CySA+ Study Guide: Exam CS0-003, 3rd Edition, Chapter 1: Threat and Vulnerability Management, page 13.What is Network Security | Threats, Best Practices | Imperva, Network Security Threats and Attacks, Phishing section.Five Ways to Defend Against Network Security Threats, 2. Use Firewalls section.

Performing a tabletop drill based on previously identified incident scenarios is the best way to test the changes to the BC and DR plans without any impact to the business, as it is a low-cost and low-risk method of exercising the plans and identifying any gaps or issues. A tabletop drill is a type of BC/DR exercise that involves gathering key personnel from different departments and roles and discussing how they would respond to a hypothetical incident scenario. A tabletop drill does not involve any actual simulation or disruption of the systems or processes, but rather relies on verbal communication and documentation review. A tabletop drill can help to ensure that everyone is familiar with the BC/DR plans, that the plans reflect the current state of the organization, and that the plans are consistent and coordinated across different functions. The other options are not as suitable as performing a tabletop drill, as they involve more cost, risk, or impact to the business. Simulating an incident by shutting down power to the primary data center is a type of BC/DR exercise that involves creating an actual disruption or outage of a critical system or process, and observing how the organization responds and recovers. This type of exercise can provide a realistic assessment of the BC/DR capabilities, but it can also cause significant impact to the business operations, customers, and reputation. Migrating active workloads from the primary data center to the secondary location is a type of BC/DR exercise that involves switching over from one system or site to another, and verifying that the backup system or site can support the normal operations. This type of exercise can help to validate the functionality and performance of the backup system or site, but it can also incur high costs, complexity, and potential errors or failures. Comparing the current plan to lessons learned from previous incidents is a type of BC/DR activity that involves reviewing past experiences and outcomes, and identifying best practices or improvement opportunities. This activity can help to update and refine the BC/DR plans, but it does not test or validate them in a simulated or actual scenario

Port 1433 is commonly used by Microsoft SQL Server, which is a database management system. A spike in traffic on this port between two IP addresses on opposite sides of a WAN connection could indicate a database replication process, which is a way of copying and distributing data from one database server to another. This could be a legitimate activity performed by an administrator, but it should be communicated to the security operations center (SOC) to avoid confusion and false alarms.

Data loss prevention (DLP) is a tool that can prevent the exposure of PII outside of an organization by monitoring, detecting, and blocking sensitive data in motion, in use, or at rest.

Audit settings provide visibility into user actions and system events. These are classified asdetective controlsbecause they enable the detection of anomalies, policy violations, or unauthorized access by generating logs or alerts. They do not prevent actions (Preventive) or reverse harm (Corrective), nor do they provide policy guidance (Directive).

????Reference: CompTIA CySA+ All-in-One by Mya Heath, Chapter 13, “Vulnerability Handling and Response” – Control Types and Functions​.

????Objective: 2.5 - Explain the importance of prioritization, remediation, and mitigation of vulnerabilities​.

The threat was detected from the time the emails were sent at 8:30 a.m. to when the recipients started alerting the organization’s help desk about the email at 8:45 a.m., taking a total of 15 minutes. The detection time is the time elapsed between the occurrence of an incident and its discovery by the security team . The other options are either too short or too long based on the given information. References: : Detection Time : Incident Response Metrics: Mean Time to Detect and Mean Time to Respond

Quarantining the server is the best action to perform immediately, as it isolates the affected server from the rest of the network and prevents the ransomware from spreading to other systems or data. Quarantining the server also preserves the evidence of the ransomware attack, which can be useful for forensic analysis and law enforcement investigation. The other actions are not as urgent as quarantining the server, as they may not stop the ransomware infection, or they may destroy valuable evidence. Shutting down the server may not remove the ransomware, and it may trigger a data deletion mechanism by the ransomware. Reimaging the server may restore its functionality, but it will also erase any traces of the ransomware and make recovery of encrypted data impossible. Updating the OS to the latest version may fix some vulnerabilities, but it will not remove the ransomware or decrypt the data. Official References:

Based on the list of hosts and their functions, DCEast01, which is a Domain Controller, would be the most pivotal in the distribution of an encryption binary via Group Policy. Domain Controllers are responsible for security and administrative policies within a Windows Domain. Group Policy is a feature of Windows that facilitates a wide range of advanced settings that administrators can use to control the working environment of user accounts and computer accounts. Group Policy can be used to deploy software, which in this case would be the encryption binary of the ransomware. SQL01 is a database server and unlikely to be used for this purpose. WK10-Sales07 and WK7-Plant01 are client machines, and HQAdmin9, although it is a network admin laptop, would not typically be used to distribute policies across a network.

The system “blane” with the vulnerability name “snakedoctor” should be prioritized for patching as it has a network attack vector (AV:N), low attack complexity (AC:L), and high availability (A:H). These metrics indicate that it would be relatively easy to exploit this vulnerability over the internet, and the system is highly available. References: According to the CVSS v3.1 Specification Document, the exploitability metrics for CVSS are Attack Vector, Attack Complexity, Privileges Required, User Interaction, and Scope. These metrics measure how the vulnerability is accessed, the complexity of the attack, and the level of interaction and privileges required to exploit the vulnerability. The image shows a table with the values of these metrics for each system and vulnerability. Based on these values, the system “blane” has the highest exploitability score, as it has the most favorable conditions for an attacker. The other systems have either a lower attack vector, higher attack complexity, or lower availability, which make them less exploitable. Therefore, the system “blane” should be patched first.

The correct answer is B. Metrics.

The Metrics section of the vulnerability report provides information about the level of impact on data confidentiality if a successful exploitation occurs. The Metrics section contains the CVE dictionary entry and the CVSS base score of the vulnerability. CVE stands for Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures and it is a standardized system for identifying and naming vulnerabilities. CVSS stands for Common Vulnerability Scoring System and it is a standardized system for measuring and rating the severity of vulnerabilities.

The CVSS base score is a numerical value between 0 and 10 that reflects the intrinsic characteristics of a vulnerability, such as its exploitability, impact, and scope. The CVSS base score is composed of three metric groups: Base, Temporal, and Environmental. The Base metric group captures the characteristics of a vulnerability that are constant over time and across user environments. The Base metric group consists of six metrics: Attack Vector, Attack Complexity, Privileges Required, User Interaction, Scope, and Impact. The Impact metric measures the effect of a vulnerability on the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the affected resources.

In this case, the CVSS base score of the vulnerability is 9.8, which indicates a critical severity level. The Impact metric of the CVSS base score is 6.0, which indicates a high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Therefore, the Metrics section provides information about the level of impact on data confidentiality if a successful exploitation occurs.

The other sections of the vulnerability report do not provide information about the level of impact on data confidentiality if a successful exploitation occurs. The Payloads section contains links to request and response payloads that demonstrate how the vulnerability can be exploited. The Payloads section can help an analyst to understand how the attack works, but it does not provide a quantitative measure of the impact. The Vulnerability section contains information about the type, group, and description of the vulnerability. The Vulnerability section can help an analyst to identify and classify the vulnerability, but it does not provide a numerical value of the impact. The Profile section contains information about the authentication, times viewed, and aggressiveness of the vulnerability. The Profile section can help an analyst to assess the risk and priority of the vulnerability, but it does not provide a specific measure of the impact on data confidentiality.

Comprehensive and Detailed Step-by-Step Explanation:The logs indicate that the OWASP DirBuster tool is being used. This tool is designed for directory brute-forcing to find hidden files or directories on a web server, which aligns with reconnaissance activities. The series of GET and HEAD requests further confirm directory and file enumeration attempts.

Outdated librariesin a legacy web applicationintroduce security vulnerabilities, as theylack modern patchesandcontain known exploits​.

Option A (Misconfigured WAF)can contribute to security issues but is notinherent to legacy applications.

Option B (Data integrity failure)is apotential impactbut not a direct cause of recurring incidents.

Option D (Insufficient logging)affects detection, but theroot causeisinsecure, outdated components.

Thus,C (Outdated libraries) is the correct answer, aslegacy applications frequently suffer from unpatched vulnerabilities​.

Integrating an IT service delivery ticketing system to track remediation and closure is the best approach to ensure all vulnerabilities are patched in accordance with the SLA. A ticketing system is a software tool that helps manage, organize, and track the tasks and workflows related to IT service delivery, such as incident management, problem management, change management, and vulnerability management. A ticketing system can help the security team to prioritize, assign, monitor, and document the remediation of the vulnerabilities, and to ensure that they are completed within the specified time frame and quality standards. A ticketing system can also help the security team to communicate and collaborate with other teams, such as the IT operations team, the development team, and the business stakeholders, and to report on the status and progress of the remediation efforts12. Creating a compensating control item, accepting the risk, and requesting an exception are not the best approaches to ensure all vulnerabilitiesare patched in accordance with the SLA, as they do not address the root cause of the problem, which is the large number of critical and high findings that require patching. These approaches may also introduce more risks or challenges for the security team, such as compliance issues, resource constraints, or business impacts3 . References: What is a Ticketing System? | Freshservice ITSM Glossary, Vulnerability Management Best Practices, Compensating Controls: An Impermanent Solution to an IT … - Tripwire, [Risk Acceptance in Information Security - Infosec Resources], [Exception Management - ISACA]

The best action for the incident response team to recommend in this scenario is to perform no action until HR or legal counsel advises on next steps. This action can help avoid any potential legal or ethical issues, such as violating employee privacy rights, contractual obligations, or organizational policies. This action can also help ensure that any evidence or information collected from the employee’s system or network is admissible and valid in case of any legal action or dispute. The incident response team should consult with HR or legal counsel before taking any action that may affect the employee’s system or network.

The correct answer is Business Continuity Plan (BCP) because the question specifically asks for the document that ensures services remain available (operational) during or in the event of an incident.

Business Continuity Plan (BCP): This is the overarching plan focused on keeping the business running. It identifies mission-critical functions and outlines the procedures (such as failover to a hot site, manual workarounds, or redundant systems) to ensure those services are available to customers and users despite the incident. Its primary goal is availability and continuity of operations.

Disaster Recovery Plan (DRP): This focuses on the technical restoration of IT systems after they have failed or been disrupted. While DRP supports BCP, its specific goal is "recovery" (getting systems back up) rather than "continuity" (keeping them from going down or maintaining service levels).

B. Vulnerability management plan: This is a proactive process for identifying and patching weaknesses to prevent attacks, not a reactive plan to ensure availability during an active incident.

C. Disaster recovery plan: As noted above, this is a subset of BCP focused on restoring data and infrastructure after a failure, whereas BCP focuses on maintaining the availability of the critical service itself.

D. Asset management plan: This tracks hardware and software inventory but does not define procedures for maintaining availability during a crisis.

The command in question involves an encoded PowerShell command, which is typically used by attackers to obfuscate malicious scripts. To decode and understand the payload, one would need to decode the base64 encoded string. This is why option A is the correct answer, as 'base64 -d' is a command used to decode data encoded with base64. This process will reveal the plaintext of the encoded command, which can then be analyzed to understand the actions that the attacker was attempting to perform. Option B is risky and not advised without a controlled and isolated environment. Option C is not safe because executing unknown or suspicious code with administrator privileges could cause harm to the system or network. Option D also poses a risk of executing potentially harmful code on an analyst’s workstation.

ISO 27001 is an international standard that establishes a framework for implementing, maintaining, and improving an information security management system (ISMS). It helps organizations demonstrate their commitment to protecting their data and complying with various regulations and best practices. The other options are not relevant for this purpose: PCI DSS is a standard that focuses on protecting payment card data; COBIT is a framework that provides guidance on governance and management of enterprise IT; ITIL is a framework that provides guidance on service management and delivery.

The most likely reason for this vulnerability is B. The developer did not set proper cross-site scripting protections in the header. Cross-site scripting (XSS) is a type of web application vulnerability that allows an attacker to inject malicious code into a web page that is viewed by other users. XSS can be used to steal cookies, session tokens, credentials, or other sensitive information, or to perform actions on behalf of the victim1.

One of the common ways to prevent XSS attacks is to set proper HTTP response headers that instruct the browser how to handle the content of the web page. For example, the Content-Type header can specify the MIME type and character encoding of the web page, which can help the browser avoid interpreting data as code. The X-XSS-Protection header can enable or disable the browser’s built-in XSS filter, which can block or sanitize suspicious scripts. The Content-Security-Policy header can define a whitelist of sources and directives that control what resources and scripts can be loaded or executed on the web page2.

According to the output of Arachni, a web application security scanner framework3, it detected an XSS vulnerability in the form input ‘txtSearch’ with action This means that Arachni was able to inject a malicious script into the input field and observe its execution in the response. This indicates that the developer did not set proper cross-site scripting protections in the header of search.aspx, which allowed Arachni to bypass the browser’s default security mechanisms and execute arbitrary code on the web page.

1. Analyze the Screenshot: The provided image shows a vulnerability scan report (likely from OWASP ZAP). The specific alert highlighted in blue is "Cross-Domain Misconfiguration" with 34 occurrences. In CompTIA performance-based questions, the highlighted item dictates the problem you need to solve.

2. Identify the Vulnerability: Cross-Domain Misconfiguration typically refers to issues with CORS (Cross-Origin Resource Sharing).

CORS is a mechanism that allows a server to indicate any other origins (domains, schemes, or ports) than its own from which a browser should permit loading of resources.

A common misconfiguration occurs when the server sends the header Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *. This wildcard tells the browser to allow any website to access the resources on your server, which defeats the browser's Same-Origin Policy protection.

3. Evaluate the Solution (Option C): To tune this and fix the vulnerability without breaking functionality for legitimate partners, the analyst should change the configuration from a wildcard (*) to a specific allowlist.

Remediation: Set the Access-Control-Allow-Origin header to strictly define which authorized domains (e.g., are allowed to access the resources.

This aligns perfectly with Option C.

Why the other options are incorrect:

A. Set an HttpOnly flag to force communication by HTTPS:

This is incorrect for two reasons. First, it addresses the "Cookie No HttpOnly Flag" alert, not the highlighted "Cross-Domain" alert. Second, the definition is technically wrong: the HttpOnly flag prevents client-side scripts (like JavaScript) from accessing cookies (mitigating XSS); it does not force HTTPS. The Secure flag or HSTS headers are used to force HTTPS.

B. Block requests without an X-Frame-Options header:

This is the remediation for Clickjacking (seen in the alert list as "Missing Anti-clickjacking Header"), not Cross-Domain Misconfiguration.

D. Disable the cross-origin resource sharing header:

While removing the header entirely defaults the browser back to the strict Same-Origin Policy (which is secure), "tuning" implies adjusting the setting to work correctly. If the application requires cross-domain communication (which the presence of the header suggests), disabling it entirely would break the application. Configuring it correctly (Option C) is the professional remediation.

Server 1is runningWindows Server 2008 R2, anend-of-life operating system, which no longer receives security patches from Microsoft, making it highly vulnerable. Additionally, runningMicrosoft IISon this outdated OS exacerbates the risk. Even though it has antivirus software, the outdated OS presents a much more critical threat vector compared to other systems listed, all of which are on supported operating systems.

Comprehensive Detailed Explanation:The command output shown indicates that the analyst used a TCP connection test to check if communication on port 443 (usually HTTPS) succeeded. Here’s why each option was or was not suitable:

A. nmap: While nmap can scan ports, it does not provide direct feedback on connection success or failure in the manner shown.

B. tnc (Test-NetConnection in PowerShell): This command in PowerShell is specifically designed to test connectivity to a specified port and IP address. The output (TcpTestSucceeded: False) is characteristic of the tnc command.

C. ping: The ping command only tests ICMP echo replies and does not indicate success or failure on specific ports.

D. tracert: tracert traces the path packets take to reach a host but does not provide a direct indication of port availability or success.

Vulnerability 2 has the highest impact metrics, specifically the highest attack vector (AV) and attack complexity (AC) values. This means that the vulnerability is more likely to be exploited and more difficult to remediate.

CVSS 3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H is the attack vector that the analyst should remediate first, as it has the highest CVSSv3 score of 8.1. CVSSv3 (Common Vulnerability Scoring System version 3) is a standard framework for rating the severity of vulnerabilities, based on various metrics that reflect the characteristics and impact of the vulnerability. The CVSSv3 score is calculated from three groups of metrics: Base, Temporal, and Environmental. The Base metrics are mandatory and reflect the intrinsic qualities of the vulnerability, such as how it can be exploited, what privileges are required, and what impact it has on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The Temporal metrics are optional and reflect the current state of the vulnerability, such as whether there is a known exploit, a patch, or a workaround. The Environmental metrics are also optional and reflect the context of the vulnerability in a specific environment, such as how it affects the asset value, security requirements, or mitigating controls. The Base metrics produce a score ranging from 0 to 10, which can then be modified by scoring the Temporal and Environmental metrics. A CVSS score is also represented as a vector string, a compressed textual representation of the values used to derive the score.

The attack vector in question has the following Base metrics:

Attack Vector (AV): Network (N). This means that the vulnerability can be exploited remotely over a network connection.

Attack Complexity (AC): Low (L). This means that the attack does not require any special conditions or changes to the configuration of the target system.

Privileges Required (PR): Low (L). This means that the attacker needs some privileges on the target system to exploit the vulnerability, such as user-level access.

User Interaction (UI): None (N). This means that the attack does not require any user action or involvement to succeed.

Scope (S): Unchanged (U). This means that the impact of the vulnerability is confined to the same security authority as the vulnerable component, such as an application or an operating system.

Confidentiality Impact ©: High (H). This means that the vulnerability results in a total loss of confidentiality, such as unauthorized disclosure of all data on the system.

Integrity Impact (I): High (H). This means that the vulnerability results in a total loss of integrity, such as unauthorized modification or deletion of all data on the system.

Availability Impact (A): High (H). This means that the vulnerability results in a total loss of availability, such as denial of service or system crash.

Using these metrics, we can calculate the Base score using this formula:

Base Score = Roundup(Minimum[(Impact + Exploitability), 10])

Where:

Impact = 6.42 x [1 - ((1 - Confidentiality) x (1 - Integrity) x (1 - Availability))]

Exploitability = 8.22 x Attack Vector x Attack Complexity x Privileges Required x User Interaction

Using this formula, we get:

Impact = 6.42 x [1 - ((1 - 0.56) x (1 - 0.56) x (1 - 0.56))] = 5.9

Exploitability = 8.22 x 0.85 x 0.77 x 0.62 x 0.85 = 2.8

Base Score = Roundup(Minimum[(5.9 + 2.8), 10]) = Roundup(8.7) = 8.8

Therefore, this attack vector has a Base score of 8.8, which is higher than any other option.

The other attack vectors have lower Base scores, as they have different values for some of the Base metrics:

CVSS:3.0/AV:P/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H has a Base score of 6.2, as it has a lower value for Attack Vector (Physical), which means that the vulnerability can only be exploited by having physical access to the target system.

CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H has a Base score of 7.4, as it has a lower value for Attack Vector (Adjacent Network), which means that the vulnerability can only be exploited by being on the same physical or logical network as the target system.

CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H has a Base score of 6.8, as it has a lower value for Attack Vector (Local), which means that the vulnerability can only be exploited by having local access to the target system, such as through a terminal or a command shell.

Documenting the process in a step-by-step format on the team wiki ensures the junior analyst has a clear, repeatable reference. This approach also supports consistency and accuracy, and the documentation can be updated or referenced by other team members as needed. CompTIA emphasizes the importance of procedural documentation in both CySA+ and Security+ for ensuring team members have reliable resources for task execution, which aids in knowledge retention and standardized practices across the team.

Webhooksenable automatic and event-driven interactions between applications. In the context of code repositories and vulnerability scanning, webhooksautomate the scanning processevery time new code is committed. Thisensures continuous security coveragewithout relying on manual triggers, thereby embedding security checks into the development lifecycle efficiently. This automation leads to improved coverage and faster identification of vulnerabilities at the earliest stage possible in the DevSecOps pipeline.

EDR stands for Endpoint Detection and Response, which is a tool that collects and aggregates data from various endpoints, such as laptops, servers, or mobile devices. EDR helps analysts monitor, detect, and respond to threats and incidents on the endpoints. EDR is more suitable than DLP (Data Loss Prevention), NAC (Network Access Control), or NIDS (Network Intrusion Detection System) for data collection and aggregation from endpoints.

The best priority based on common attack frameworks for a new program to reduce attack surface risks and threats as part of a zero trust approach is to reduce the administrator and privileged access accounts. Administrator and privileged access accounts are accounts that have elevated permissions or capabilities to perform sensitive or critical tasks on systems or networks, such as installing software, changing configurations, accessing data, or granting access. Reducing the administrator and privileged access accounts can help minimize the attack surface, as it can limit the number of potential targets orentry points for attackers, as well as reduce the impact or damage of an attack if an account is compromised.

Indicators of compromise (IoCs) are pieces of data or evidence that suggest a system or network has been compromised by an attacker or malware. IoCs can include IP addresses, domain names, URLs, file hashes, registry keys, network traffic patterns, user behaviors, or system anomalies. IoCs can be used to detect, analyze, and respond to security incidents, as well as to share threat intelligence with other organizations or authorities. IoCs can produce the data needed for an executive briefing on possible threats to the organization, as they can provide information on the source, nature, scope, impact, and mitigation of the threats.

Federation is a system of trust between two parties for the purpose of authenticating users and conveying information needed to authorize their access to resources. By using federation, a user can use one set of credentials to access multiple domains that trust each other.

Enabling a user account lockout policy is a security measure that can effectively mitigate brute-force attacks. After a predetermined number of consecutive failed login attempts, the account will be locked, preventing the attacker from continuing to try different password combinations. This control directly addresses the issue of multiple failed attempts from the same IP address using a single user account, making it the most effective among the options provided. Option B suggests replacing RDP with another remote access tool, which does not address the brute-force attempt but rather avoids the RDP protocol. Option C, implementing a firewall block, could be effective but does not prevent attacks from other IP addresses and may not be as immediate. Option D, increasing log verbosity, enhances monitoring but does not prevent the attack itself.

Comprehensive Detailed Explanation:To safely analyze malware while avoiding unintended disclosure of company information, it is best to use a local sandbox in a microsegmented environment. Here’s why:

A. Upload the malware to the VirusTotal website

Risk: VirusTotal and similar services are public and may share uploaded files with other security vendors, potentially exposing proprietary or sensitive information.

B. Share the malware with the EDR provider

Limitation: While EDR providers may offer insight, sharing potentially sensitive malware samples externally still introduces risk of disclosure or data leaks.

C. Hire an external consultant to perform the analysis

Cost and Risk: Hiring an external consultant can be costly and may introduce risks related to third-party handling of sensitive data. Although it may provide insights, this is typically not the most efficient initial response.

D. Use a local sandbox in a microsegmented environment

Explanation: A local sandbox provides a secure, isolated environment for malware analysis without exposing sensitive data outside the organization. Microsegmentation enhances security by further isolating the sandbox from the network, preventing lateral movement if the malware attempts to communicate externally.

Thepost-incident review processhelps an organization identify gaps in its response and security posture. Assigning different departmental groups ensures that flaws inspecific work areas (such as IT, HR, or legal teams)are identified and addressed​.

Option Bis incorrect because not all staff need exposure; the review focuses on relevant stakeholders.

Option Cis a part of the process, but the main goal is improvement, not just playbook verification.

Option D(cross-training) is a benefit but not the main objective.

Thus,A is the best answerbecause it focuses on identifyingflaws in specific areas of incident management.

Eradication is a step in the incident response process that involves removing any traces or remnants of the incident from the affected systems or networks, such as malware, backdoors, compromised accounts, or malicious files. Eradication also involves restoring the systems or networks to their normal or secure state, as well as verifying that the incident is completely eliminated and cannot recur. In this case, the analyst is remediating items associated with a recent incident by isolating the vulnerabilityand actively removing it from the system. This describes the eradication step of the incident response process.

To determine the correct vulnerability, you must map the specific threat intelligence (users clicking email links) to the CVSS Base Metrics provided in the table.

1. Analyze the Scenario:

Threat Vector: "End users frequently click on malicious links sent via email."

Attack Vector implication: The attack is coming from outside the organization (remote), meaning the Attack Vector must be Network.

Interaction implication: The success of the attack relies on the user performing an action (clicking), meaning User Interaction must be Yes (Required).

2. Evaluate the Table:

Vulnerability

Attack Vector

Attack Complexity

Auth Required

User Interaction

Analysis

A

Network

Low

No

Yes

Perfect Match. This represents a remote exploit (e.g., a browser drive-by download or malicious site) that triggers when a user clicks a link. It requires no authentication and is easy to execute.

B

Local

Low

Yes

Yes

Incorrect. "Local" usually implies the attacker already has physical access or a foothold. "Auth Required" makes it harder to exploit than A.

C

Network

High

Yes

Yes

Incorrect. "High" complexity and "Auth Required" make this significantly less likely/severe than A for a mass phishing campaign.

D

Local

Low

No

No

Incorrect. "Local" vector and "User Interaction: No" do not align with the specific threat of users clicking links.

3. Conclusion:

Vulnerability A is the highest risk because it is Remotely Exploitable (Network), easy to perform (Complexity: Low), requires No Authentication (anyone who clicks is vulnerable), and directly targets the behavior identified in the threat intelligence (User Interaction: Yes).

Attack Vector (AV:N): The context of "email" typically maps to Network because the payload is delivered over the internet/network stack.

User Interaction (UI:R): CompTIA defines this metric as required when a user must perform an action (like clicking a link or opening an attachment) for the vulnerability to be successfully exploited.

Risk Prioritization: Vulnerabilities with Network vectors and Low complexity are generally prioritized over Local/High Complexity ones because they are easier to scale and automate.

Reviewing the steps that the previous analyst followed is the most important step during the transition, as it ensures continuity and consistency of the investigation. It also helps the new analyst to understand the current status, scope, and findings of the investigation, and to avoid repeating the same actions or missing any important details. The other options are either less important, premature, or potentially biased. References: CompTIA CySA+ CS0-003 Certification Study Guide, Chapter 4: Incident Response and Management, page 191. Incident response best practices and tips, Tip 1: Always pack a jump bag.

Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) logs provide visibility into network traffic patterns and can help detect insecure or unusual connections. These logs will show if non-secure protocols are used, potentially revealing exposed credentials. According to CompTIA CySA+, IDS logs are essential for identifying malicious activity related to communications and network intrusions. Options like DNS (A) and tcpdump (B) provide network details, but IDS specifically monitors for intrusions and unusual activities relevant to security incidents.

A social engineering attack is a type of cyberattack that relies on manipulating human psychology rather than exploiting technical vulnerabilities. A social engineering attack may involve deceiving, persuading, or coercing users into performing actions that benefit the attacker, such as clicking on malicious links, divulging sensitive information, or granting access to restricted resources. An obfuscated link is a link that has been disguised or altered to hide its true destination or purpose. Obfuscated links are often used by attackers to trick users into visiting malicious websites or downloading malware. In this case, an incident response analyst notices multiple emails traversing the network that target only the administrators of the company. The email contains a concealed URL that leads to an unknown website in another country. This indicates that the analyst is witnessing a social engineering attack using obfuscated links.

A prioritized list of critical systems defined by executive leadership is the best option to use to develop a business continuity plan. A business continuity plan (BCP) is a system of prevention and recovery from potential threats to a company. The plan ensures that personnel and assets are protected and are able to function quickly in the event of a disaster1. A BCP should include a business impact analysis, which identifies the critical systems and processes that are essential for the continuity of the business operations, and the potential impacts of their disruption2. The executive leadership should be involved in defining the critical systems and their priorities, as they have the strategic vision and authority to make decisions that affect the whole organization3. A diagram of all systems and interdependent applications, a repository for all the software used by the organization, and a configuration management database in print at an off-site location are all useful tools for documenting and managing the IT infrastructure, but they are not sufficient to develop a comprehensive BCP that covers all aspects of the business continuity4. References: What Is a Business Continuity Plan (BCP), and How Does It Work?, Business continuity plan (BCP) in 8 steps, with templates, Business continuity planning | Business Queensland, Understanding the Essentials of a Business Continuity Plan

The correct answer is D. Disconnect the access point from the network.

A rogue access point is a wireless access point that has been installed on a network without the authorization or knowledge of the network administrator. A rogue access point can pose a serious security risk, as it can allow unauthorized users to access the network, intercept network traffic, or launch attacks against the network or its devices1234.

The first action that should be taken to protect the network while preserving evidence is to disconnect the rogue access point from the network. This will prevent any further damage or compromise of the network by blocking the access point from communicating with other devices or users. Disconnecting the rogue access point will also preserve its state and configuration, which can be useful for forensic analysis and investigation. Disconnecting the rogue access point can be done physically by unplugging it from the network port or wirelessly by disabling its radio frequency5.

The other options are not the best actions to take first, as they may not protect the network or preserve evidence effectively.

Option A is not the best action to take first, as running a packet sniffer to monitor traffic to and from the access point may not stop the rogue access point from causing harm to the network. A packet sniffer is a tool that captures and analyzes network packets, which are units of data that travel across a network. A packet sniffer can be useful for identifying and troubleshooting network problems, but it may not be able to prevent or block malicious traffic from a rogue access point. Moreover, running a packet sniffer may require additional time and resources, which could delay the response and mitigation of the incident5.

Option B is not the best action to take first, as connecting to the access point and examining its log files may not protect the network or preserve evidence. Connecting to the access point may expose the analyst’s device or credentials to potential attacks or compromise by the rogue access point. Examining its log files may provide some information about the origin and activity of the rogue access point, but it may also alter or delete some evidence that could be useful for forensic analysis and investigation. Furthermore, connecting to the access point and examining its log files may not prevent or stop the rogue access point from continuing to harm the network5.

Option C is not the best action to take first, as identifying who is connected to the access point and attempting to find the attacker may not protect the network or preserve evidence. Identifying who is connected to the access point may require additional tools or techniques, such as scanning for wireless devices or analyzing network traffic, which could take time and resources away from responding and mitigating the incident. Attempting to find the attacker may also be difficult or impossible, as the attacker may use various methods to hide their identity or location, such as encryption, spoofing, or proxy servers. Moreover, identifying who is connected to the access point and attempting to find the attacker may not prevent or stop the rogue access point from causing further damage or compromise to the network5.

Penetration testing is the best strategy to evaluate the security of the software without the source code. Penetration testing is a type of security testing that simulates real-world attacks on the software to identify and exploit its vulnerabilities. Penetration testing can be performed on the software as a black box, meaning that the tester does not need to have access to the source code or the internal structure of the software. Penetration testing can help the analyst to assess the security posture of the software, the potential impact of the vulnerabilities, and the effectiveness of the existing security controls12. Static testing, vulnerability testing, and dynamic testing are other types of security testing, but they usually require access to the source code or the internal structure of the software. Static testing is the analysis of the software code or design without executing it. Vulnerability testing is the identification and evaluation of the software weaknesses or flaws. Dynamic testing is the analysis of the software code or design while executing it345. References: Penetration Testing - OWASP, What is a Penetration Test and How Does It Work?, Static Code Analysis | OWASP Foundation, Vulnerability Scanning Best Practices, Dynamic Testing - OWASP

The lessons-learned register is an essential document that captures insights and feedback from past exercises or incidents, highlighting what went well and what did not. By utilizing this register, the SOC manager can identify specific areas for improvement and develop actionable steps to enhance future response efforts. According to CompTIA’s CySA+ and Security+ guidance, lessons learned fromtabletop exercises are crucial for iterative improvements in an incident response plan. Options A, B, and C are useful resources, but the lessons-learned register specifically focuses on reflection and improvement, which is the primary objective in this context.

The correct answers for key factors in the change management process to reduce the impact of system failures are:

D. Identify assets with dependence that could be impacted by the change.

F. Ensure that all assets are properly listed in the inventory management system.

D. Identify assets with dependence that could be impacted by the change: This is crucial in change management because understanding the interdependencies among assets can help anticipate and mitigate the potential cascading effects of a change. By identifying these dependencies, the organization can plan more effectively for changes and minimize the risk of unintended consequences that could lead to system failures.

F. Ensure that all assets are properly listed in the inventory management system: Maintaining an accurate and comprehensive inventory of assets is fundamental in change management. Knowing exactly what assets the organization possesses and their characteristics allows for better planning and impact analysis when changes are made. This ensures that no critical component is overlooked during the change process, reducing the risk of failures due to incomplete information.

Other Options:

A. Ensure users document system recovery plan prior to deployment: While documenting a system recovery plan is important, it's more related to disaster recovery and business continuity planning than directly reducing the impact of system failures due to changes.

B. Perform a full system-level backup following the change: While backups are essential, they are generally a reactive measure to recover from a failure, rather than a proactive measure to reduce the impact of system failures in the first place.

C. Leverage an audit tool to identify changes that are being made: While using an audit tool is helpful for tracking changes and ensuring compliance, it is not directly linked to reducing the impact of system failures due to changes.

E. Require diagrams to be completed for all critical systems: While having diagrams of critical systems is useful for understanding and managing them, it is not a direct method for reducing the impact of system failures due to changes. Diagrams are more about documentation and understanding rather than proactive change management.

The captured traffic shows TCP packets with the Flags [FPU], which indicate that the FIN, PSH, and URG flags are set. This is characteristic of an Nmap Xmas scan. The Xmas scan is a type of port scan that sends packets with these flags set to determine port states based on responses from the target system. This technique is often used in stealth scanning to evade detection by firewalls or IDS/IPS​.

Nikto's web scan (B) is used for identifying web server vulnerabilities but does not generate TCP packets with such unusual flags​.

Socat's proxying (C) would not exhibit the specific Xmas scan pattern.

Angry IP Scanner (D) is a general-purpose scanner that does not use the TCP flags seen in this capture​.

Updating the system firmware and reimaging the hardware is the best action to perform to remediate the infected device, as it helps to ensure that the device is restored to a clean and secure state and that any traces of malware are removed. Firmware is a type of software that controls the low-level functions of a hardware device, such as a motherboard, hard drive, or network card. Firmware can be updated or flashed to fix bugs, improve performance, or enhance security. Reimaging is a process of erasing and restoring the data on a storage device, such as a hard drive or a solid state drive, using an image file that contains a copy of the operating system, applications, settings, and files. Reimaging can help to recover from system failures, data corruption, or malware infections. Updating the system firmware and reimaging the hardware can help to remediate the infected device by removing any malicious code or configuration changes that may have been made by the malware, as well as restoring any missing or damaged files or settings that may have been affected by the malware. This can help to prevent further damage, data loss, or compromise of the device or the network. The other actions are not as effective or appropriate as updating the system firmware and reimaging the hardware, as they do not address the root cause of the infection or ensure that the device is fully cleaned and secured. Installing an additional malware scanner that will send email alerts to the analyst may help to detect and remove some types of malware, but it may not be able to catch all malware variants or remove them completely. It may also create conflicts or performance issues with other security tools or systems on the device. Configuring the system to use a proxy server for Internet access may help to filter or monitor some types of malicious traffic or requests, but it may not prevent or remove malware that has already infected the device or that uses other methods of communication or propagation. Deleting the user profile and restoring data from backup may help to recover some data or settings that may have been affected by the malware, but it may not remove malware that has infected other parts of the system or that has persisted on the device.

The correct answer is A. Implanted a backdoor.

A backdoor is a method that allows an unauthorized user to access a system or network without the permission or knowledge of the owner. A backdoor can be installed by exploiting a software vulnerability, by using malware, or by physically modifying the hardware or firmware of the device. A backdoor can be used for various malicious purposes, such as stealing data, installing malware, executing commands, or taking control of the system.

In this case, the consultant implanted a backdoor in the website by using an HTML and PHP code snippet that displays an image of a shutdown button and an alert message that says “Exit”. However, the code also echoes the remote address of the server, which means that it sends the IP address of the visitor to the attacker. This way, the attacker can identify and target the visitors of the website and use their IP addresses to launch further attacks or gain access to their devices.

The code snippet is an example of a clickjacking attack, which is a type of interface-based attack that tricks a user into clicking on a hidden or disguised element on a webpage. However, clickjacking is not the main goal of the consultant, but rather a means to implant the backdoor. Therefore, option C is incorrect.

Option B is also incorrect because privilege escalation is an attack technique that allows an attacker to gain higher or more permissions than they are supposed to have on a system or network. Privilege escalation can be achieved by exploiting a software vulnerability, by using malware, or by abusing misconfigurations or weak access controls. However, there is no evidence that the consultant implemented privilege escalation on the website or gained any elevated privileges.

Option D is also incorrect because patching is a process of applying updates to software to fix errors, improve performance, or enhance security. Patching can prevent or mitigate various types of attacks, such as exploits, malware infections, or denial-of-service attacks. However, there is no indication that the consultant patched the web server or improved its security in any way.

An on-path attack is a type of man-in-the-middle attack where an attacker intercepts and modifies network traffic between two parties. In this case, someone with internal access may be performing an on-path attack by forcing users into port 80, which is used for HTTP communication, instead of port 443, which is used for HTTPS communication. This would allow the attacker to compromise the user accounts and access the company’s internal portal.

Hacktivists are threat actors who use cyberattacks to promote a social or political cause, such as environmentalism, human rights, or democracy. They may target companies that they perceive as violating their values or harming the public interest. Hacktivists often use techniques such as defacing websites, launching denial-of-service attacks, or leaking sensitive data to expose or embarrass their targets12. References: An introduction to the cyber threat environment, page 3; What is a Threat Actor? Types & Examples of Cyber Threat Actors, section 2.

CVE details and IoCs are information that would most likely be required by the infrastructure team so that vulnerabilities can be remediated quickly. CVE details provide the description, severity, impact, and solution of the vulnerabilities that affect the servers. IoCs are indicators of compromise that help identify and respond to potential threats or attacks on the servers. References: Server and Workstation Patch Management Policy, Section: Policy; Patch Management Policy: Why You Need One in 2024, Section: What is a patch management policy?

Command-and-control (C2) beaconing involves compromised systems communicating with an attacker’s server at regular intervals, often using HTTPS to blend in with legitimate traffic. This is indicative of a potential compromise where malware communicates back to a command center. The persistent nature of the connections after hours and throughout the day suggests automated beaconing, which is a tell-tale sign of C2 activity. According to CompTIA CySA+, this type of activity should raise immediate suspicion and warrants further investigation and containment. While options B, C, D, and E might indicate other issues, they do not fit the pattern described as well as option A.

The NTP configuration on each system should be checked first, as it is essential for ensuring accurate and consistent time stamps across different systems. NTP is the Network Time Protocol, which is used to synchronize the clocks of computers over a network. NTP uses a hierarchical system of time sources, where each level is assigned a stratum number. The most accurate time sources, such as atomic clocks or GPS receivers, are at stratum 0, and the devices that synchronize with them are at stratum 1, and so on. NTP clients can query multiple NTP servers and use algorithms to select the best time source and adjust their clocks accordingly1. If the NTP configuration is not consistent or correct on each system, the time stamps of the logs and events may differ, making it difficult to correlate incidents across different systems. This can affect the security analysis and correlation of events, as well as the compliance and auditing of the network23. References: How the Windows Time Service Works, Time Synchronization - All You Need To Know, What is SIEM? | Microsoft Security

Host03 should be patched first, based on the metrics, as it has the highest risk score and the highest number of critical vulnerabilities. The risk score is calculated by multiplying the CVSS score by the exposure factor, which is the percentage of systems that are vulnerable to the exploit. Host03 has a risk score of 10 x 0.9 = 9, which is higher than any other host. Host03 also has 5 critical vulnerabilities, which are the most severe and urgent to fix, as they can allow remote code execution, privilege escalation, or data loss. The other hosts have lower risk scores and lower numbers of critical vulnerabilities, so they can be patched later.

The correct answer is B. Replace the current MD5 with SHA-256.

The vulnerability that the security analyst is able to exploit is a hash collision, which is a situation where two different files produce the same hash value. Hash collisions can allow an attacker to bypass the integrity or authentication checks that rely on hash values, and submit malicious files to the system. The web application uses MD5, which is a hashing algorithm that is known to be vulnerable to hash collisions. Therefore, the analyst should suggest replacing the current MD5 with SHA-256, which is a more secure and collision-resistant hashing algorithm.

The other options are not the best suggestions to mitigate the vulnerability with the fewest changes to the current script and infrastructure. Deploying a WAF (web application firewall) to the front of the application (A) may help protect the web application from some common attacks, but it may not prevent hash collisions or detect malicious files. Deploying an antivirus application on the hosting system © may help scan and remove malicious files from the system, but it may not prevent hash collisions or block malicious files from being submitted. Replacing the MD5 with digital signatures (D)may help verify the authenticity and integrity of the files, but it may require significant changes to the current script and infrastructure, as digital signatures involve public-key cryptography and certificate authorities.

tcpdump is a command-line tool that can capture and analyze network packets from a given interface or file. The -n option prevents tcpdump from resolving hostnames, which can speed up the analysis. The -r option reads packets from a file, in this case packets.pcap. The host [IP address] filter specifies that tcpdump should only display packets that have the given IP address as either the source or thedestination. This command can help the security analyst detect connections to a suspicious IP address by collecting the packet captures from the gateway. Official References:

The log entry "......\boot.ini" is indicative of a directory traversal attack, where an attacker attempts to access files and directories that are stored outside the web root folder.

The log snippet "......\boot.ini" is indicative of a directory traversal attack. This type of attack aims to access files and directories that are stored outside the web root folder. By manipulating variables that reference files with “../” (dot-dot-slash), the attacker may be able to access arbitrary files and directories stored on the file system.

The suspicious entry on the host-based IDS logs indicates that a reverse shell was executed on the host, which connects to the remote IP address 10.1.2.3 on port 8080. The shell script option D uses the netstat command to check if there is any active connection to that IP address and port, and prints “Malicious activity” if there is, or “OK” otherwise. This is the most accurate way to confirm if the reverse shell is still active, as the other options may not detect the connection or may produce false positives.

ReferencesCompTIA CySA+ Study Guide: Exam CS0-003, 3rd Edition, Chapter 8: Incident Response, page 339.Reverse Shell Cheat Sheet, Bash section.

The Diamond Model of Intrusion Analysis is a framework that helps analysts to understand the relationships between the adversary, the victim, the infrastructure, and the capability involved in an attack. It also enables analytical pivoting, which is the process of moving from one piece of information to another related one, and identifies knowledge gaps that need further investigation. 

nessie.explosion should be prioritized for remediation, as it has the highest CVSSv3.1 exploitability score of 8.6. The exploitability score is a sub-score of the CVSSv3.1 base score, which reflects the ease and technical means by which the vulnerability can be exploited. The exploitability score is calculated based on four metrics: Attack Vector, Attack Complexity, Privileges Required, and User Interaction. The higher the exploitability score, the more likely and feasible the vulnerability is to be exploited by an attacker12. nessie.explosion has the highest exploitability score because it has the lowest values for all four metrics: Network (AV:N), Low (AC:L), None (PR:N), and None (UI:N). This means that the vulnerability can be exploited remotely over the network, without requiring any user interaction or privileges, and with low complexity. Therefore, nessie.explosion poses the greatest threat to the end user workstations, and should be remediated first. vote.4p, sweet.bike, and great.skills have lower exploitability scores because they have higher values for some of the metrics, such as Adjacent Network (AV:A), High (AC:H), Low (PR:L), or Required (UI:R). This means that the vulnerabilities are more difficult or less likely to be exploited, as they require physical proximity, user involvement, or some privileges34. References: CVSS v3.1 Specification Document - FIRST, NVD - CVSS v3 Calculator, CVSS v3.1 User Guide - FIRST, CVSS v3.1 Examples - FIRST

The analyst should focus on the impact of the events in order to move the incident forward. Impact is the measure of the potential or actual damage caused by an incident, such as data loss, financial loss, reputational damage, or regulatory penalties. Impact can help the analyst prioritize the events that need to be investigated based on their severity and urgency, and allocate the appropriate resources and actions to contain and remediate them. Impact can also help the analyst communicate the status and progress of the incident to the stakeholders and customers, and justify the decisions and recommendations made during the incident response12. Vulnerability score, mean time to detect, and isolation are all important metrics or actions for incident response, but they are not the main focus for moving the incident forward. Vulnerability score is the rating of the likelihood and severity of a vulnerability being exploited by a threat actor. Mean time to detect is the average time it takes to discover an incident. Isolation is the process of disconnecting an affected system from the network to prevent further damage or spread of the incident34 . References: Incident Response: Processes, Best Practices & Tools - Atlassian, Incident Response Metrics: What You Should Be Measuring, Vulnerability Scanning Best Practices, How to Track Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) and Mean Time to Respond (MTTR) to Cybersecurity Incidents, [Isolation and Quarantine for Incident Response]

ABusiness Impact Analysis (BIA)is the correct document thatidentifies critical servicesand definesRecovery Point Objectives (RPOs)andRecovery Time Objectives (RTOs). It helps organizations determine the impact of downtime and the maximum tolerable outages for business functions.

Disaster recovery plan (A)uses the information from the BIA.

Playbooks (C)are tactical and focus on specific incidents.

Backup plans (D)support BIA but don't define RPO/RTO themselves.

Non-repudiation ensures that a message sender cannot deny the authenticity of their sent message. This is crucial in banking communications for legal and security reasons.

The goal of allowing a message recipient to prove the message's origin is non-repudiation. This ensures that the sender cannot deny the authenticity of their message. Non-repudiation is a fundamental aspect of secure messaging systems, especially in banking and financial communications.

Comprehensive Detailed Explanation:The most effective and economical way to ensure the security of an automated information system is to design it with security in mind from the outset. This is often referred to as "security by design." Here’s a breakdown of each option and why option A is correct:

A. Originally designed to provide necessary security

Explanation: Systems designed with security from the beginning integrate secure practices and considerations during the development process. This approach mitigates the need for costly and complex retroactive security implementations, which are common in systems where security was an afterthought.

Cost Efficiency: Security implementations at the design stage can be embedded into the system architecture, reducing the costs associated with later modifications.

Effectiveness: Security-by-design approaches often result in robust systems that are more resilient to vulnerabilities because they address security concerns at each development phase.

B. Subjected to intense security testing

While rigorous security testing (such as penetration testing and vulnerability assessments) is essential, it is reactive. Security testing is more effective when applied to systems already designed with foundational security principles, ensuring that tests identify potential flaws in an inherently secure system.

C. Customized to meet specific security threats

Customizing security to meet specific threats addresses unique risks, but such a targeted approach may miss new or emerging threats not initially considered. It also risks neglecting fundamental security practices that apply universally, leading to potential vulnerabilities.

D. Optimized prior to the addition of security

Optimizing a system before adding security features may enhance performance but does not guarantee security. Security cannot be effectively added onto a system as an afterthought without incurring additional costs or creating potential weaknesses.

A vulnerability scan is a process of identifying and assessing the security weaknesses of a system or network. A vulnerability scan can help a security analyst to effectively identify the most security risks associated with a locally hosted server, such as missing patches, misconfigurations, outdated software, or exposed services. A vulnerability scan can also provide recommendations on how to remediate the identified vulnerabilities and improve the security posture of the server12 References: 1: What is a Vulnerability Scan? | Definition and Examples 2: Securing a server: risks, challenges and best practices - Vaadata

Deploying EDR on the web server and the database server to reduce the adversaries capabilities and using micro segmentation to restrict connectivity to/from the web and database servers are two compensating controls that will help contain the adversary while meeting the other requirements. A compensating control is a security measure that is implemented to mitigate the risk of a vulnerability or an attack when the primary control is not feasible or effective. EDR stands for Endpoint Detection and Response, which is a tool that monitors endpoints for malicious activity and provides automated or manual response capabilities. EDR can help contain the adversary by detecting and blocking their actions, such as data exfiltration, lateral movement, privilege escalation, or command execution. Micro segmentation is a technique that divides a network into smaller segments based on policies and rules, and applies granular access controls to each segment. Micro segmentation can help contain the adversary by isolating the web and database servers from other parts of the network, and limiting the traffic that can flow between them. Official References:

SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) technology aggregates and analyzes activity from many different resources across your IT infrastructure. The description of correlating information from various sources and triggering notifications aligns with the capabilities of a SIEM system.

Asimulation(such as atabletop exercise or full-scale IR drill) is the best way to demonstrate real-world readiness without affecting operations​.

Option A (Reviewing lessons-learned and playbooks)is valuable but does not actively test readiness.

Option C (Deploying malware)is highly risky and unethical in a production environment.

Option D (Disaster recovery site testing)focuses on DR, not security incident readiness.

Thus,B is the best choice, as simulations effectivelytest incident response capabilities without operational disruption.

Application security scanning is a process that involves testing and analyzing applications for security vulnerabilities, such as injection flaws, broken authentication, cross-site scripting, and insecure configuration. Application security scanning can help identify and fix security issues before they become exploitable by attackers. Using application security scanning as part of the pipeline for the continuous integration/continuous delivery (CI/CD) flow can help mitigate the problem of finding the same vulnerabilities in a critical application during security scanning. This is because application security scanning can be integrated into the development lifecycle and performed automatically and frequently as part of the CI/CD process.

Automation is the best concept to describe the example, as it reflects the use of technology to perform tasks or processes without human intervention. Automation can help to improve efficiency, accuracy, consistency, and scalability of various operations, such as identity and access management (IAM). IAM is a security framework that enables organizations to manage the identities and access rights of users and devices across different systems and applications. IAM can help to ensure that only authorized users and devices can access the appropriate resources at the appropriate time and for the appropriate purpose. IAM can involve various tasks or processes, such as authentication, authorization, provisioning, deprovisioning, auditing, or reporting. Automation can help to simplify and streamline these tasks or processes by using software tools or scripts that can execute predefined actions or workflows based on certain triggers or conditions. For example, automation can help to create, update, or delete user accounts in bulk based on a file or a database, rather than manually entering or modifying each account individually. The example in the question shows that an API is used to insert bulk access requests from a file into an identity management system. An API (Application Programming Interface) is a set of rules or specifications that defines how different software components or systems can communicate and exchange data with each other. An API can help to enable automation by providing a standardized and consistent way to access and manipulate data or functionality of a software component or system. The example in the question shows that an API is used to automate the process of inserting bulk access requests from a file into an identity management system, rather than manually entering each request one by one. The other options are not correct, as they describe different concepts or techniques. Command and control is a term that refers to the ability of an attacker to remotely control a compromised system or device, such as using malware or backdoors. Command and control is not related to what is described in the example. Data enrichment is a term that refers to the process of enhancing or augmenting existing data with additional information from external sources, such as adding demographic or behavioral attributes to customer profiles. Data enrichment is not related to what is described in the example. Single sign-on is a term that refers to an authentication method thatallows users to access multiple systems or applications with one set of credentials, such as using a single username and password for different websites or services. Single sign-on is not related to what is described in the example.

The vulnerability that should be patched first, given the above third-party scoring system, is:

TSpirit: Cobain: Yes Grohl: Yes Novo: Yes Smear: No Channing: No

This vulnerability has three out of five metrics marked as Yes, which indicates a high severity level. The metrics Cobain, Grohl, and Novo are more important than Smear and Channing, according to the vulnerability management team. Therefore, this vulnerability poses a greater risk than the other vulnerabilities and should be patched first.

A vulnerability scan report should include information about the affected hosts, such as their IP addresses, hostnames, operating systems, and services. It should also include a risk score for each vulnerability, which indicates the severity and potential impact of the vulnerability on the host and the organization. Official References:

Mean time to detect (MTTD) is a metric that measures the average time it takes for an organization to discover or detect an incident. It is a key performance indicator in incident management and a measure of incident response capabilities. A low MTTD indicates that the organization can quickly identify security threats and minimize their impact12.

The best action that the SOC manager can recommend to help ensure new employees are accountable for following the company policy is to require all new employees to sign a user agreement to acknowledge the company security policy. A user agreement is a document that defines the rights and responsibilities of the users regarding the use of the company’s systems, networks, or resources, as well as the consequences of violating the company’s security policy. Signing a user agreement can help ensure new employees are aware of and agree to comply with the company security policy, as well as hold them accountable for any breaches or incidents caused by their actions or inactions.

Mean time to detect (MTTD) is the best metric for an organization to focus on given recent investments in SIEM, SOAR, and a ticketing system. MTTD is a metric that measures how long it takes to detect a security incident or threat from the time it occurs. MTTD can be improved by using tools and processes that can collect, correlate, analyze, and alert on security data from various sources. SIEM, SOAR, and ticketing systems are examples of such tools and processes that can help reduce MTTD and enhance security operations. Official References:

Before taking any action, the SOC analyst should first verify if the Indicators of Compromise (IoC) and Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs) reported are relevant to the organization’s environment. This involves checking if the vulnerable application or version is actually in use. As per CompTIA’s CySA+ guidelines, relevance verification helps in prioritizing resources and response actionseffectively, ensuring that time is not wasted on threats that do not impact the organization. Options A, B, and D are important subsequent steps if the threat is deemed relevant.

The first step should be to perform a public search for malware reports on taskhw.exe, as this file is suspicious for several reasons: it is located in a non-standard path, it has a high CPU usage, it is signed by an unknown entity, and it is only present on one host. A public search can help to determine if this file is a known malware or a legitimate program. If it is malware, the hunter can then take appropriate actions to remove it and prevent further damage. The other options are either premature or ineffective, as they do not provide enough information to assess the threat level of taskhw.exe. References: Cybersecurity Analyst+ - CompTIA, taskhw.exe Windows process - What is it? - file.net, Taskhostw.exe - What Is Taskhostw.exe & Is It Malware? - MalwareTips Forums

The first step that should be performed when establishing a disaster recovery plan is to agree on the goals and objectives of the plan. The goals and objectives of the plan should define what the plan aims to achieve, such as minimizing downtime, restoring critical functions, ensuring data integrity, or meeting compliance requirements. The goals and objectives of the plan should also be aligned with the business needs and priorities of the organization and be measurable and achievable.

PID 2264 (bash running as root) is suspicious because:

It has elevated privileges (root user).

Bash (command-line shell) is running with high CPU usage (14.0%), which is unusual unless actively being used.

If unauthorized, an attacker could be exfiltrating data via command-line methods like scp, wget, or custom scripts.

Why Not Other Options?

B (34218 - Xorg) → Xorg is a display server for GUI; no signs of exfiltration.

C (34834 - Cinnamon) → Cinnamon is a desktop environment, not a threat.

D (35963 - xrdp) → xrdp is a remote desktop service, expected behavior.

Making a forensic image of the device and creating a SRA-I hash is the best step to preserve evidence, as it creates an exact copy of the device’s data and verifies its integrity. A forensic image is a bit-by-bit copy of the device’s storage media, which preserves all the information on the device, including deleted or hidden files. A SRA-I hash is a cryptographic value that is calculated from the forensic image, which can be used to prove that the image has not been altered or tampered with. The other options are not as effective as making a forensic image and creating a SRA-I hash, as they may not capture all the relevant data, or they may not provide sufficient verification of the evidence’s authenticity. Official References:

A HTTP/404 error code means that the requested page or resource was not found on the web server. This could be caused by various reasons, such as incorrect URLs, moved or deleted pages, missing assets, or server misconfigurations123. The analyst should first identify the source of the requests and examine the related activity to determine if they are legitimate or malicious, and what actions need to be taken to resolve the issue. The other options are either premature or irrelevant without further investigation. References: 1: 404 Page Not Found Error: What It Is and How to Fix It 2: 404 Error Code: What Causes Them and How To Fix It 3: About 404 errors and how to Troubleshoot it?

Root Cause Analysis (RCA)is the best approach toidentify and resolve the underlying cause of recurring incidents. It involves a systematic investigation of logs, configurations, and operational data to pinpoint the reason behindpersistent security issues​.

Option A (Vulnerability assessment)helpsidentify security weaknessesbut does not focus onrecurring operational issues.

Option C (Recurrence reports)trackpatternsbut do notresolve the root cause.

Option D (Lessons learned)is valuable but is typicallya post-mortem discussion rather than an investigative method.

Thus,B is the correct answer, asroot cause analysis is the best approach for diagnosing recurring availability issues​.

The lessons learned process is the final stage of the incident management life cycle, where the incident team reviews the incident and evaluates the effectiveness of the response and the plans in place. The lessons learned report should include the who-what-when information and any recommendations for improvement123 References: 1: What is incident management? Steps, tips, and best practices 2: 5 Steps of the Incident Management Lifecycle | RSI Security 3: Navigating the Incident Response Life Cycle: A Comprehensive Guide

A social engineering attack is underway is the most likely explanation for the outbound traffic to a host IP that resolves to while the site’s standard VPN logon page is A social engineering attack is a technique that exploits human psychology and behavior to manipulate people into performing actions or divulging information that benefit the attackers. A common type of social engineering attack is phishing, which involves sending fraudulent emails or other messages that appear to come from a legitimate source, such as a company or a colleague, and lure the recipients into clicking on malicious links or attachments, or entering their credentials or other sensitive information on fake websites. In this case, the attackers may have registered a domain name that looks similar to the company’s domain name, but with a typo (offce365 instead of office365), and set up a fake website that mimics the company’s VPN logon page. The attackers may have also sent phishing emails to the company’s employees, asking them to reset their passwords or log in to their VPN accounts using the malicious link. The security analyst should investigate the source and content of the phishing emails, and alert the employees not to click on any suspicious links or enter their credentials on any untrusted websites. Official References:

The given firewall logs indicatehigh outbound traffic with low IP reputation, sustained over time, which is a strongindicator of cryptomining activity​.

Option A (Anomalous activity)is a general term but does not specifywhythe activity is suspicious.

Option B (Bandwidth saturation)occurs when network traffic is overwhelming, but cryptomining typicallyuses CPU/GPU powerrather than overwhelming bandwidth.

Option D (Denial of service - DoS)would result incontinuous large requests, but cryptomining generatesconsistent, high-bandwidth outbound trafficrather than bursts of large requests.

Thus,C is the correct answer, as cryptomininggenerates unusual outbound network activity from internal hosts to mining pools​.

The vulnerability scan shows that the version information is visible in the http-server-header, which can be exploited by attackers to identify vulnerabilities specific to that version. Removing or obfuscating this information can enhance security.

A distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack is a type of cyberattack that aims to overwhelm a target’s network or server with a large volume of traffic from multiple sources. A common technique for launching a DDoS attack is to compromise DNS servers, which are responsible for resolving domain names into IP addresses. By flooding DNS servers with malicious requests, attackers can disrupt the normal functioning of the internet and prevent users from accessing external SaaS resources. Official References:

Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) is the most appropriate Key Performance Indicator (KPI) to monitor the effectiveness of an incident response reporting and communication program among the choices provided.

Why B is correct: The primary goal of an "incident reporting" program (whether automated by tools or reported by users/staff) is to alert the security team to an issue as quickly as possible. MTTD measures the average time it takes for an organization to identify (detect and report) an incident after it has occurred. A lower MTTD directly indicates that the reporting mechanisms and communication channels from the source to the analysts are operating effectively.

Why A is incorrect: Incident volume measures the quantity of incidents, which reflects the threat landscape or workload rather than the effectiveness of the response program itself. While an increase in user-reported volume can indicate better awareness, MTTD is the standard performance metric for the process.

Why C is incorrect: Average time to patch is a KPI for Vulnerability Management, not Incident Response reporting.

Why D is incorrect: Remediated incidents refers to the volume of resolved issues (Response/Recovery phase) and does not specifically measure the speed or quality of the reporting and communication (detection) phase.

In Domain 4 (Reporting and Communication) and Domain 1 (Security Operations), CompTIA emphasizes the use of time-based metrics to evaluate process maturity.

MTTD (Mean Time to Detect): Measures "dwell time" and the efficiency of the Detection & Reporting phase.

MTTR (Mean Time to Respond): Measures the efficiency of the Response & Recovery phase.

​

According to the CompTIA CySA+ Study Guide: Exam CS0-003, 3rd Edition1, the best technique to provide the necessary assurance for embedded software that drives centrifugal pumps at a power plant is formal methods. Formal methods are a rigorous and mathematical approach to software development and verification, which can ensure the correctness and reliability of critical software systems. Formal methods can be used to specify, design, implement, and verify embedded software using formal languages, logics, and tools1.

Containerization, manual code reviews, and static and dynamic analysis are also useful techniques for software assurance, but they are not as rigorous or comprehensive as formal methods. Containerizationis a method of isolating and packaging software applications with their dependencies, which can improve security, portability, and scalability. Manual code reviews are a process of examining the source code of a software program by human reviewers, which can help identify errors, vulnerabilities, and compliance issues. Static and dynamic analysis are techniques of testing and evaluating software without executing it (static) or while executing it (dynamic), which can help detect bugs, defects, and performance issues1.

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) occurs when an attacker manipulates a web server to make unauthorized internal or external requests, often to access internal resources or exfiltrate data.

A Web Application Firewall (WAF) is the best mitigation because it:

Filters and blocks malicious requests before they reach the server.

Prevents attackers from sending unauthorized requests to internal services.

Can detect and block SSRF patterns in incoming traffic.

Why Not Other Options?

B (CASB) → Used for cloud access control, not effective against SSRF.

C (Forward Proxy) → Helps with outbound traffic control, but SSRF involves incoming requests.

D (MFA) → Helps with authentication but does NOT prevent SSRF attacks.

ThePHP script allows remote users to execute system commands via the system() function, meaning an attacker can send arbitrary commands to the server​.

Option A (Cross-site scripting - XSS)is incorrect because this script does not inject JavaScript into a webpage.

Option B (Reverse shell)is possible if an attacker sends a crafted command, but the script itself is more of a general backdoor than a dedicated reverse shell.

Option D (Logic bomb)is incorrect because a logic bomb is typicallytriggered by a specific event or daterather than executing arbitrary commands on demand.

Thus,C (Backdoor attempt) is the best answer, as this scriptgrants unauthorized remote command execution.

Comprehensive Detailed Explanation:To match the mitigation criteria, we analyze each machine’s CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) attributes:

Attack Vector (AV): N for network (matches the requirement of network-based attack).

Attack Complexity (AC): L for low (meets the requirement for low complexity).

Privileges Required (PR): N for none (indicating no privileges are needed).

User Interaction (UI): N for none (matches the requirement that no user action is needed).

Confidentiality (C), Integrity (I), and Availability (A): Requires high confidentiality and availability with low integrity.

From these criteria:

Computer1 requires user interaction (UI:R), which disqualifies it.

Computer2 has a local attack vector (AV:L), which disqualifies it for a network-based attack.

Computer3 has a high attack complexity (AC:H), which does not meet the low complexity requirement.

Computer4 meets all criteria: network attack vector, low complexity, no privileges, no user interaction, and appropriate confidentiality, integrity, and availability levels.

Thus, Computer4 is the correct answer.

In a root cause analysis following unauthorized access, the initial step is usually to review relevant log files. These logs can provide critical information about how and when the attacker gained access.

The first step in a root cause analysis after a data breach is typically to review the logs. This helps the analyst understand how the attacker gained access by providing a detailed record of all events, including unauthorized or abnormal activities. Documenting the incident, interviewing employees, and identifying immediate containment actions are important steps, but they usually follow the initial log review.

The correct answer is A. Configure the server to prefer TLS 1.3 and B. Remove cipher suites that use CBC.

A padding oracle attack is a type of attack that exploits the padding validation of a cryptographic message to decrypt the ciphertext without knowing the key. A padding oracle is a system that responds to queries about whether a message has a valid padding or not, such as a web server that returns different error messages for invalid padding or invalid MAC. A padding oracle attack can be applied to the CBC mode of operation, where the attacker can manipulate the ciphertext blocks and use the oracle’s responses to recover the plaintext12.

To remediate this issue, the organization should make the following configuration changes:

Configure the server to prefer TLS 1.3. TLS 1.3 is the latest version of the Transport Layer Security protocol, which provides secure communication between clients and servers. TLS 1.3 has several security improvements over previous versions, such as:

It deprecates weak and obsolete cryptographic algorithms, such as RC4, MD5, SHA-1, DES, 3DES, and CBC mode.

It supports only strong and modern cryptographic algorithms, such as AES-GCM, ChaCha20-Poly1305, and SHA-256/384.

It reduces the number of round trips required for the handshake protocol, which improves performance and latency.

It encrypts more parts of the handshake protocol, which enhances privacy and confidentiality.

It introduces a zero round-trip time (0-RTT) mode, which allows resuming previous sessions without additional round trips.

It supports forward secrecy by default, which means that compromising the long-term keys does not affect the security of past sessions3456.

Remove cipher suites that use CBC. Cipher suites are combinations of cryptographic algorithms that specify how TLS connections are secured. Cipher suites that use CBC mode are vulnerable to padding oracle attacks, as well as other attacks such as BEAST and Lucky 13. Therefore, they should be removed from the server’s configuration and replaced with cipher suites that use more secure modes of operation, such as GCM or CCM78.

The other options are not effective or necessary to remediate this issue.

Option C is not effective because configuring the server to prefer ephemeral modes for key exchange does not prevent padding oracle attacks. Ephemeral modes for key exchange are methods that generate temporary and random keys for each session, such as Diffie-Hellman or Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman. Ephemeral modes provide forward secrecy, which means that compromising the long-term keys does not affect the security of past sessions. However, ephemeral modes do not protect against padding oracle attacks, which exploit the padding validation of the ciphertext rather than the key exchange9.

Option D is not necessary because requiring client browsers to present a user certificate for mutual authentication does not prevent padding oracle attacks. Mutual authentication is a process that verifies the identity of both parties in a communication, such as using certificates or passwords. Mutual authentication enhances security by preventing impersonation or spoofing attacks. However, mutual authentication does not protect against padding oracle attacks, which exploit the padding validation of the ciphertext rather than the authentication.

Option E is not necessary because configuring the server to require HSTS does not prevent padding oracle attacks. HSTS stands for HTTP Strict Transport Security and it is a mechanism that forces browsers to use HTTPS connections instead of HTTP connections when communicating with a web server. HSTS enhances security by preventing downgrade or man-in-the-middle attacks that try to intercept or modify HTTP traffic. However, HSTS does not protect against padding oracle attacks, which exploit the padding validation of HTTPS traffic rather than the protocol.

Option F is not effective because removing cipher suites that use GCM does not prevent padding oracle attacks. GCM stands for Galois/Counter Mode and it is a mode of operation that provides both encryption and authentication for block ciphers, such as AES. GCM is more secure and efficient thanCBC mode, as it prevents various types of attacks, such as padding oracle, BEAST, Lucky 13, and IV reuse attacks. Therefore, removing cipher suites that use GCM would reduce security rather than enhance it .

Mean time to contain is the metric that the cybersecurity team lead should include in the weekly executive briefs, as it measures how long it takes to stop the spread of malware that enters the network. Mean time to contain is the average time it takes to isolate and neutralize an incident or a threat, such as malware, from the time it is detected. Mean time to contain is an important metric for evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of the incident response process, as well as the potential impact and damage of the incident or threat. A lower mean time to contain indicates a faster and more successful response, which can reduce the risk and cost of the incident or threat. Mean time to contain can also be compared with other metrics, such as mean time to detect or mean time to remediate, to identify gaps or areas for improvement in the incident response process. 

Allowing anonymous read access to /etc/passwdis acriticalvulnerability because it canexpose user account details, aiding attackers inpassword cracking and privilege escalation​.

Option B (Anonymous FTP access)is a risk, but /etc/passwd exposure ismore criticalas it directly affects user authentication.

Option C (Defender updates disabled)isimportant, but it does not present animmediateattack vector like credential exposure.

Option D (less escape exploit)is significant, but it requires user interaction, making itless immediate than a global credential leak.

Thus,A is the correct answer, as it representsan immediate, high-impact security risk​.

The MITRE ATT&CK framework is specifically designed for tracking Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs) associated with cyber threats. It provides a detailed matrix of known adversarial behaviors, which is useful for correlating SIEM data to known attack patterns. According to CompTIA CySA+, MITRE ATT&CK is an industry-standard framework for threat intelligence and behavior analysis, making it the ideal tool for tracking malicious IP addresses and understanding their tactics. Other options like OSSTMM, the Diamond Model, and OWASP do not focus on TTPs as directly as MITRE ATT&CK does.

Thegoal of forensic analysisin a post-incident scenario is to identify theroot causeof the incident. This helps prevent future occurrences and enhances the security posture of the organization​.

Option A (Full picture of risks)is more aligned with a risk assessment rather than forensic analysis.

Option B (Notifying law enforcement)depends on the situation, but forensic analysis is performed even when legal action is not involved.

Option C (Further containment)is part of incident response, but forensic analysis happensaftercontainment.

Thus,D is the correct answer, asdetermining root cause is the key objective of forensic analysis​.

Risk scoringis the best method for prioritizing patching, as it considers factors likeCVSS severity, exploitability, asset criticality, and business impact​.

Option A (Affected hosts)is relevant but does notdetermine prioritywithout a risk assessment.

Option C (Mitigation strategy)is useful but focuses on alternative protections rather than prioritization.

Option D (Annual recurrence)is not a standard method for vulnerability prioritization.

Thus,B is the correct answer, asrisk scores allow organizations to prioritize patching efforts effectively​.

A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is a formal agreement that outlines the roles and responsibilities of each party involved in a particular process or project, especially within security frameworks. In the context of cybersecurity, an MOU is commonly used to clarify and document the security responsibilities of different departments or entities involved. It helps ensure everyone understands their specific duties and contributions to security, which is crucial for coordination and risk management. According to CompTIA Security+ guidelines, while options A, C, and D describe other forms of agreements, they do not capture the essential purpose of an MOU as accurately as option B does.

SOAR (Security Orchestration, Automation and Response) and SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) are solutions that can help centralize the workload for the internal security team by collecting, correlating, and analyzing alerts from different sources, such as EDR. SOAR can also automate and streamline incident response workflows, while SIEM can provide dashboards and reports for security monitoring and compliance. References: What is EDR? Endpoint Detection & Response, How Does the Cyber Kill Chain Protect Against Attacks?; What is EDR Solution?, EDR solutions secure diverse endpoints through central monitoring

A tabletop exercise is a type of simulation exercise that involves testing possible incident scenarios and how to react properly, without actually performing any actions or using any resources. A tabletop exercise is usually conducted by a facilitator who presents a realistic scenario to a group of participants, such as a cyberattack, a natural disaster, or a data breach. The participants then discuss and evaluatetheir roles, responsibilities, plans, procedures, and policies for responding to the incident, as well as the potential impacts and outcomes. A tabletop exercise can help identify strengths and weaknesses in the incident response plan, improve communication and coordination among the stakeholders, raise awareness and preparedness for potential incidents, and provide feedback and recommendations for improvement.

The best way to prevent network printers from printing pages during a vulnerability scan is to create a tailored scan for the printer subnet that excludes the ports and services that trigger the printing behavior. The other options are not effective for this purpose: performing non-credentialed scans may not reduce the impact on the printers; ignoring embedded web server ports may not cover all the possible ports that cause printing; increasing the threshold length of the scan timeout may not prevent the printing from occurring.

When acritical vulnerabilityis identified, the immediate next step should be toassess the riskassociated with the vulnerability.

Risk assessment (Option B)helps determine the severity, exploitability, and business impact before deciding on mitigation measures.

Option A (delaying the fix)is dangerous because payment data theft can have severe consequences, including regulatory penalties and reputational damage.

Option C (ignoring the vulnerability)is incorrect because passing a compliance audit does not mean the system is secure.

Option D (isolating and reimaging)is an extreme measure that might not be necessary unless active exploitation is detected.

????Reference:CompTIA CySA+ CS0-003 Official Study Guide, Risk Management & Vulnerability Management Lifecycle.

Registry key values would be missing from a scan performed with this configuration, as the scanner appliance would not have access to the Windows Registry of the scanned systems. The WindowsRegistry is a database that stores configuration settings and options for the operating system and installed applications. To scan the Registry, the scanner would need to have credentials to log in to the systems and run a local agent or script. The other items would not be missing from the scan, as they can be detected by the scanner appliance without credentials. Operating system version can be identified by analyzing service banners or fingerprinting techniques. Open ports can be discovered by performing a port scan or sending probes to common ports. IP address can be obtained by resolving the hostname or using network discovery tools.

Step 1: Analyzing the SFTP Log

The SFTP log provides a record of file transfer and login activities:

User “sjames” logged in from several IP addresses:

192.168.10.32 and 192.168.10.37 (internal network IPs)

32.111.16.37 and 41.21.18.102 (external IPs)

We see file alterations in the /var/www directory, which is commonly the web directory.

Modified files: about_us.html, index.html

Suspicious activity:

192.168.11.102 and 41.21.18.102 modified the files.

32.111.16.37 had failed login attempts, indicating possible unauthorized access attempts.

The most suspicious IP here is 41.21.18.102, as it’s associated with direct file modifications, possibly indicating unauthorized access.

Step 2: Reviewing Netstat

The netstat output shows active connections and their states:

IP 41.21.18.102 has an ESTABLISHED connection with port 22, commonly used for SFTP.

IP 32.111.16.37 is also attempting connections, and 32.111.16.37 connections are in a TIME_WAIT state, showing prior connections were recently closed.

The netstat output reaffirms 41.21.18.102 is actively connected and potentially involved in malicious activities.

Step 3: Checking the HTTP Access Log

The HTTP Access log shows access to about_us.html:

32.111.16.37 repeatedly accessed /about_us.html with 404 errors, indicating attempts to reach non-existing pages.

41.21.18.102 accessed the 200 status code, showing successful page requests, but since this IP was modifying files directly on the server, it might be testing or verifying changes.

Again, 41.21.18.102 stands out as it matches both successful file modification and page request patterns, while 32.111.16.37 shows unsuccessful attempts.

Step 4: Selecting the IP of Concern

Based on the above analysis:

Answer: 41.21.18.102 should be the IP of concern due to its direct file modifications on critical web files (about_us.html, index.html).

Step 5: Identifying the Indicator of Compromise

Potential indicators include unauthorized file modifications:

Modified index.html file is the correct answer, as it indicates direct changes to website content and is often a clear sign of compromise.

Step 6: Selecting Corrective Actions

To mitigate and prevent further compromise:

Change the password on the “sjames” account: The account was used across various IPs, indicating potential account compromise.

Block external SFTP access: Restricting SFTP to internal IPs only would prevent unauthorized external modifications. Since 41.21.18.102 was external, this would stop similar threats.

Summary

IP of Concern: 41.21.18.102

Indicator of Compromise: Modified index.html file

Corrective Actions:

Change the password on the sjames account

Block external SFTP access

These selections address both the immediate security breach and implement a preventative measure against future unauthorized access.

In digital forensics, a write blocker is a critical tool used to prevent any modifications to the source drive during imaging. When a forensic image is created, it should be an exact bit-for-bit copy of the original evidence. If a write blocker is not used, system processes or other unintended changes can alter the contents of the drive, leading to a hash mismatch between the original and the image copy​.

Chain of custody (Option A)ensures proper documentation of who accessed the evidence, but it does not directly affect the hash values.

Legal authorization (Option B)is necessary but unrelated to the technical integrity of the image.

Data integrity verification (Option C)is part of the process, but in this scenario, the failure to maintain integrity stems from the lack of a write blocker​.

Thus, the correct answer isD, as using a write blocker would have prevented any unintended changes to the data​.

To identify existing vulnerabilities in the web application, the best options are to contract a penetration test and create a bug bounty program. A penetration test simulates attacks against the application to uncover security flaws proactively. A bug bounty program incentivizes external security researchers to find and report vulnerabilities, expanding the testing scope without overburdening internal resources. According to CompTIA CySA+, both methods are highly effective in identifying vulnerabilities from an external perspective, particularly when internal resources are limited. Options like a WAF (A) focus more on prevention than detection, while threat modeling (F) and tabletop exercises (D) are generally proactive measures not focused on active flaw identification.

Comprehensive and Detailed Step-by-Step Explanation:The SPF = PASS result confirms the email came from an authorized server, but DKIM = FAIL indicates the message was not properly signed with the expected DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) signature. DMARC = FAIL suggests that because DKIM failed, the overall email authentication failed. This scenario is consistent with a legitimate server sending an unsigned email.

The most likely cause of the issue where an ICS (Industrial Control System) could not be updated due to hardware versioning incompatibility is a legacy system. Legacy systems often have outdated hardware and software that may not be compatible with modern updates and patches. This can pose significant challenges in maintaining security and operational efficiency.

The OWASP Web Security Testing Guide (WSTG) includes a section on threat modeling, which is a structured approach to identify, quantify, and address the security risks associated with an application. The first step in the threat modeling process is decomposing the application, which involves creating use cases, identifying entry points, assets, trust levels, and data flow diagrams for the application. This helps to understand the application and how it interacts with external entities, as well as to identify potential threats and vulnerabilities1. The other options are not part of the OWASP WSTG threat modeling process.

The best practice for securing access to sensitive data is to implement multifactor authentication (MFA), which combines multiple factors of authentication to enhance security.

Option B (Biometrics + Device with a Personalized Code) uses two strong factors:

Biometrics (something you are)

A device with a personalized code (something you have)This combination significantly reduces the risk of unauthorized access​.

Option A (Randomized Code) is good but weaker than biometrics because it relies only on something you have.

Option C (Passphrase) is single-factor authentication, which is susceptible to brute-force attacks​.

Option D (One-time Code + Push Notification) is useful, but email-based authentication can be vulnerable to phishing and MITM attacks.