Free Practice Questions for ECCouncil 312-50v13 Exam

Hashing is a one-way function—by design, it cannot be reversed. Password-cracking tools do not "reverse" the hash. Instead, they:

Generate a list of potential passwords.

Hash each candidate using the same algorithm.

Compare the result to the target hash.

If a match is found, the original password is revealed by correlation, not reversal.

From CEH v13 Official Courseware:

Module 6: Cryptography and Password Cracking

CEH v13 Study Guide states:

“Hash functions are one-way and irreversible. Password-cracking tools work by hashing wordlists or character combinations and comparing them to known password hashes.”

According to CEH v13 Module 04: Enumeration and Module 08: Sniffing, packet sniffers such as Wireshark, tcpdump, and EtherApe are designed to capture and analyze network traffic at the data link (Layer 2) and network (Layer 3) layers of the OSI model.

At Layer 2 (Data Link), sniffers capture Ethernet frames, including MAC addresses and frame type.

At Layer 3 (Network), sniffers interpret IP headers, IP addresses, and transport layer protocols (TCP, UDP).

They do not operate at Layer 1 (Physical) as they do not deal with raw electrical signals.

Packet sniffers also do not manipulate traffic but passively monitor and capture packets that traverse the network.

Therefore, the correct statement is:

Packet Sniffers operate on both Layer 2 & Layer 3 of the OSI model.

Option Analysis:

A. Layer 1: ❌ Incorrect. Layer 1 is the physical layer (electrical, optical signals).

B. Layer 2: ❌ Partially correct but incomplete.

C. Both Layer 2 & Layer 3: Correct. Full coverage of packet sniffing capabilities.

D. Layer 3: ❌ Partially correct but incomplete.

Reference from CEH v13 Courseware:

Module 08 – Sniffing, Section: How Packet Sniffers Work

CEH iLabs: Capturing Ethernet Frames and IP Packets Using Wireshark

OSI Model Mapping in CEH Official eBook

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

To identify inconsistencies in secure asset records and confirm that systems meet baseline security standards, vulnerability scanning and checking data items (e.g., configuration settings, software versions) is essential. This helps the analyst discover gaps between expected and actual system states.

From CEH v13 Official Curriculum:

Module 5: Vulnerability Assessment → Security Assessment Techniques

“Automated vulnerability scanners and asset inventories help validate that systems are compliant with security baselines.”

Blind SQL Injection is a type of SQL injection attack where no error messages or data are directly returned to the attacker. Instead, the attacker sends specially crafted SQL queries that result in true or false responses. Based on how the application responds (such as redirecting to a different page or loading time), the attacker infers information about the backend database.

According to CEH v13:

Blind SQLi is used when standard SQL injection yields no visible output.

It comes in two forms:

Boolean-based: Infers information based on application behavior.

Time-based: Infers information based on server response time delays.

Incorrect Options:

A. Time-based SQLi is a sub-type of Blind SQLi, but the question describes Boolean-based behavior.

B. Union SQL injection uses the UNION keyword to fetch additional rows; requires visible output.

C. Error-based SQL injection relies on database error messages.

Reference – CEH v13 Official Courseware:

Module 14: Hacking Web Applications

Section: “Types of SQL Injection”

Subsection: “Blind SQL Injection (Boolean and Time-Based)”

===========

According to CEH v13 Module 06: Malware Threats, when analyzing suspicious system behavior or investigating a suspected Trojan infection, a common and effective approach is to:

Monitor system activity and network behavior using tools like netstat, Wireshark, and TCPView.

Trojans often create covert channels or backdoors for remote access, which can be identified through unexpected or unauthorized outgoing connections to remote IP addresses or domains.

Using netstat -an or netstat -ano helps identify open ports and active connections, and checking these against known IPs can indicate whether a Trojan is communicating with a Command and Control (C&C) server.

Analysis of Each Option:

A. Use ExifTool and check for malicious content

Incorrect. ExifTool is primarily used for extracting metadata from files, especially images and documents. It is not effective for analyzing executable malware or system behavior post-execution.

B. You do not check; rather, you immediately restore a previous snapshot of the operating system

Incorrect. While restoring from a snapshot might eventually be required, immediate restoration without diagnosis is not a recommended or forensically sound first step. It also prevents root cause analysis.

C. Upload the file to VirusTotal

Partially correct but not sufficient. While uploading the file to VirusTotal is a good step to confirm if the file is known malware, it does not identify whether the machine is currently infected or actively compromised.

D. Use netstat and check for outgoing connections to strange IP addresses or domains

Correct. This method helps detect if the system is making suspicious external connections that are common in Trojan infections.

Reference from CEH v13 Study Guide and Course Materials:

CEH v13 Official Module 06 – Malware Threats, Section: Types of Malware – Trojans, and System Monitoring Tools

CEH v13 eCourseware Lab Manual: "Detecting Trojan Activity using netstat and TCPView"

CEH Engage Range: Malware Investigation Phase – Trojan Behavior Detection

Vulnerability scanning software is a tool that can help security analysts identify and prioritize known vulnerabilities in their systems and applications. However, it is not a perfect solution and has some limitations that need to be considered. One of the most critical limitations is that vulnerability scanning software is not immune to software engineering flaws that might lead to serious vulnerabilities being missed. This means that the software itself might have bugs, errors, or oversights that could affect its accuracy, reliability, or performance. For example, the software might:

Fail to detect some vulnerabilities due to incomplete or outdated databases, incorrect signatures, or insufficient coverage of the target system or application.

Produce false positives or false negatives due to misinterpretation of the scan results, incorrect configuration, or lack of context or validation.

Cause unintended consequences or damage to the target system or application due to intrusive or aggressive scanning techniques, such as exploiting vulnerabilities, modifying data, or crashing services.

Be vulnerable to attacks or compromise by malicious actors who could exploit its weaknesses, tamper with its functionality, or steal its data.

Therefore, the security analyst should be most cautious about this limitation of vulnerability scanning software, as it could lead to a false sense of security, missed opportunities for remediation, or increased exposure to threats. The security analyst should always verify the scan results, use multiple tools and methods, and update and patch the software regularly to mitigate this risk.

SSL/TLS is a protocol that provides encryption and authentication for data in transit between a client and a server. However, SSL/TLS does not provide any protection against data tampering, which is the alteration, deletion, or insertion of data without authorization or proper validation. Data tampering can compromise the integrity and accuracy of the data, and potentially lead to breaches or fraud. To detect and prevent data tampering, you should implement IPsec in addition to SSL/TLS. IPsec is a protocol that provides encryption, authentication, and integrity for data in transit at the network layer. IPsec uses cryptographic mechanisms, such as digital signatures and hash-based message authentication codes (HMACs), to verify the identity of the sender and the receiver, and to ensure that the data has not been modified during transmission. IPsec can also provide replay protection, which prevents an attacker from retransmitting old or duplicate packets. By combining SSL/TLS and IPsec, you can achieve a higher level of security and reliability for your cloud-based application. References:

EC-Council CEHv12 Courseware Module 18: Cryptography, page 18-20

EC-Council CEHv12 Courseware Module 19: Cloud Computing, page 19-29

A comprehensive guide to data tampering

Tamper Detection

These types of attacks occur when faults or glitches are INJECTED into the Power supply that can be used for remote execution.

Burp Suite is a comprehensive web vulnerability scanner and testing suite widely used in penetration testing and ethical hacking.

Key features include:

Intercepting proxy: Allows inspection and modification of traffic between the browser and target server.

Session hijacking/testing tools

Intruder and Repeater modules for customized payload injection

Sequencer module for testing session token randomness

Extensibility through plugins and custom scripts

Incorrect Options:

A. Nmap is a network scanning tool, not used for intercepting web traffic.

C. CxSAST (Checkmarx) is a static application security testing (SAST) tool.

D. Wireshark is a packet analyzer but does not include intercepting proxy features or token testing.

Reference – CEH v13 Official Courseware:

Module 14: Hacking Web Applications

Section: “Burp Suite as a Web Vulnerability Testing Tool”

CEH iLab: Using Burp Suite for Web App Testing

===========

In CEH v13 Module 17: Mobile and IoT Security, Spearphone is defined as a privacy-intrusion attack that:

Exploits a smartphone’s speaker output, particularly when loudspeaker mode is used.

Leverages motion sensors (accelerometer, gyroscope) through a malicious app to capture acoustic signals emitted during:

Phone calls

Voice assistant interactions

Media playback

This enables attackers to extract private speech content without needing microphone access.

Option Clarification:

A. Man-in-the-disk: Exploits unprotected external storage in Android.

B. aLTEr: Exploits LTE protocol weaknesses; unrelated to loudspeaker eavesdropping.

C. SIM card attack: Targets SIM-level vulnerabilities (e.g., SIMjacker).

D. Spearphone: Correct — exploits loudspeaker emissions and motion sensors.

Active Online Attacks: Hash Injection/Pass-the-Hash (PtH) Attack A hash injection/PtH attack allows an attacker to inject a compromised hash into a local session and use the hash to validate network resources The attacker finds and extracts a logged-on domain admin account hash The attacker uses the extracted hash to log on to the domain controller

In CEH v13 Module 03: Scanning Networks, stealth scanning refers to a method of scanning that avoids detection by not completing the TCP handshake.

-sS = TCP SYN scan (Stealth scan)

Sends SYN packet.

If SYN-ACK is returned, the port is open; then a RST is sent back instead of completing handshake.

Harder to detect via IDS/IPS.

Option Analysis:

A. -sM: TCP Maimon scan (rarely used).

B. -sU: UDP scan.

C. -sS: Stealth SYN scan.

D. -sT: TCP Connect scan (not stealthy).

The hacker’s next step to confirm the XSS vulnerability would be to utilize a script hosted on the application’s domain to test the form. This is because the application’s CSP allows scripts from its own domain, but not from inline or external sources. Therefore, the hacker can try to inject a payload that references a script file on the same domain as the application, such as:

where script.js contains some benign code, such as alert('XSS') or print('XSS'). If the script executes in the browser, then the hacker has confirmed the XSS vulnerability. Otherwise, the CSP has blocked the script and prevented the XSS attack.

The other options are not feasible or effective for the following reasons:

A. Try to disable the CSP to bypass script restrictions: This option is not feasible because the hacker cannot disable the CSP on the server side, and the browser enforces the CSP on the client side. The hacker would need to modify the browser settings or use a browser extension to disable the CSP, but this would not affect the victim’s browser or the application’s security.

B. Inject a benign script inline to the form to see if it executes: This option is not effective because the application’s CSP disallows inline scripts, meaning scripts that are embedded in the HTML code. Therefore, the hacker would not be able to inject a script tag or an event handler attribute that contains some code, such as:

 or 

The CSP would block these scripts and prevent the XSS attack.

D. Load a script from an external domain to test the vulnerability: This option is not effective because the application’s CSP disallows scripts from external domains, meaning scripts that are loaded from a different domain than the application. Therefore, the hacker would not be able to inject a script tag that references a script file on another domain, such as:

The CSP would block these scripts and prevent the XSS attack.

Josh is preparing to send the payload (malicious file) to the target, which clearly maps to the Delivery phase of the Cyber Kill Chain.

According to CEH v13 and the Cyber Kill Chain model (developed by Lockheed Martin and used in ethical hacking methodology):

Delivery is the third phase of the kill chain.

It involves transmitting the weaponized payload to the target via phishing emails, USB drops, or malicious links.

In this case, Josh is preparing the email with a spoofed identity and malicious attachment — representing an act of delivery.

Incorrect options:

A. Exploitation occurs after delivery, when the payload is executed.

B. Weaponization is the phase where the malicious file is created (combining exploit with a backdoor or trojan).

D. Reconnaissance involves information gathering, completed earlier in the scenario.

Reference – CEH v13 Official Courseware:

Module 01: Introduction to Ethical Hacking

Section: “Cyber Kill Chain Model”

Table Reference: “Stages of a Cyber Attack”

CEH Engage Lab: “Kill Chain Simulation in Phishing Campaigns”

The File Transfer Protocol (FTP) is a standard organization convention utilized for the exchange of PC records from a worker to a customer on a PC organization. FTP is based on a customer worker model engineering utilizing separate control and information associations between the customer and the server.[1] FTP clients may validate themselves with an unmistakable book sign-in convention, ordinarily as a username and secret key, however can interface namelessly if the worker is designed to permit it. For secure transmission that ensures the username and secret phrase, and scrambles the substance, FTP is frequently made sure about with SSL/TLS (FTPS) or supplanted with SSH File Transfer Protocol (SFTP).

The primary FTP customer applications were order line programs created prior to working frameworks had graphical UIs, are as yet dispatched with most Windows, Unix, and Linux working systems.[2][3] Many FTP customers and mechanization utilities have since been created for working areas, workers, cell phones, and equipment, and FTP has been fused into profitability applications, for example, HTML editors.