Free Practice Questions for CompTIA CS0-003 Exam

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 best control to allow the organization to identify rogue devices more quickly is A. Implement a continuous monitoring policy. A continuous monitoring policy is a set of procedures and tools that enable an organization to detect and respond to unauthorized or anomalous activities on its network in real time or near real time. A continuous monitoring policy can help identify rogue access points as soon as they appear on the network, rather than waiting for quarterly or monthly scans. A continuous monitoring policy can also help improve the overall security posture and compliance of the organization by providing timely and accurate information about its network assets, vulnerabilities, threats, and incidents1.

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.

USB ports are a common attack vector that can be used to deliver malware, steal data, or compromise systems. The first step to mitigate this vulnerability is to check the configurations of the company assets and disable or restrict the USB ports if possible. This will prevent unauthorized devices from being connected and reduce the attack surface. The other options are also important, but they are not the first priority in this scenario.

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 described behavior(pivoting across network segments, targeting domain servers, and exfiltrating data to an unknown location)is characteristic of anadvanced persistent threat (APT), often linked tonation-state actors​.

Option A (Hacktivist)attackers typically engage indefacements or disruptionrather thanstealthy exfiltration.

Option B (Zombie)refers tocompromised hosts in a botnet, but botnets do not usually pivot across networks.

Option C (Insider threat)could involve unauthorized access, but the traffic pattern suggests anexternalattacker withlateral movementtechniques.

Thus,D is the correct answer, asnation-state actors often use sophisticated tactics, including data exfiltration and network pivoting​.

The most likely explanation for this traffic pattern is C2 beaconing activity. C2 stands for command and control, which is a phase of the Cyber Kill Chain that involves the adversary attempting to establish communication with a successfully exploited target. C2 beaconing activity is a type of network traffic that indicates a compromised system is sending periodic messages or signals to an attacker’s system using various protocols, such as HTTP(S), DNS, ICMP, or UDP. C2 beaconingactivity can enable the attacker to remotely control or manipulate the target system or network using various methods, such as malware callbacks, backdoors, botnets, or covert channels.

Weaponization is a factor that describes how an adversary develops or acquires an exploit or payload that can take advantage of a vulnerability and deliver a malicious effect. Weaponization can increase the severity or impact of a vulnerability, as it makes it easier or more likely for an attacker to exploit it successfully and cause damage or harm. Weaponization can also indicate the level of sophistication or motivation of an attacker, as well as the availability or popularity of an exploit or payload in the cyber threat landscape. In this case, an older CVE with a vulnerability score of 7.1 was elevated to a score of 9.8 due to a widely available exploit being used to deliver ransomware. This indicates that weaponization was the reason for this escalation. 

Avoid is a risk management principle that describes the decision or action of not engaging in an activity or accepting a risk that is deemed too high or unacceptable. Avoiding a risk can eliminate the possibility or impact of the risk, as well as the need for any further risk management actions. In this case, the CISO decided the risk score would be too high and refused the software request. This indicates that the CISO selected the avoid principle for risk management.

The output shows the result of running the ssl-enum-ciphers script with Nmap, which is a tool that can scan web servers for supported SSL/TLS cipher suites. Cipher suites are combinations of cryptographic algorithms that are used to establish secure communication between a client and a server. The output shows the cipher suites that are supported by the server, along with a letter grade (A through F) indicating the strength of the connection. The output also shows the least strength, which is the strength of the weakest cipher offered by the server. In this case, the least strength is F, which means that the server is allowing insecure cipher suites that are vulnerable to attacks or have been deprecated. For example, the output shows that the server supports SSLv3, which is an outdated and insecure protocol that is susceptible to the POODLE attack. The output also shows that the server supports RC4, which is a weak and broken stream cipher that should not be used. Therefore, the best description of the output is that the host is allowing insecure cipher suites. The other descriptions are not accurate, as they do not reflect what the output shows. The host is not up or responding is incorrect, as the output clearly shows that the host is up and responding to the scan. The host is running excessive cipher suites is incorrect, as the output does not indicate how many cipher suites the host is running, only which ones it supports. The Secure Shell port on this host is closed is incorrect, as the output does not show anything about port 22, which is the default port for Secure Shell (SSH). The output only shows information about port 443, which is the default port for HTTPS.