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

Geoblocking is the best mitigation technique for unusual network scanning activity coming from a country that the company does not do business with, as it can prevent any potential attacks or data breaches from that country. Geoblocking is the practice of restricting access to websites or services based on geographic location, usually by blocking IP addresses associated with a certain country or region. Geoblocking can help reduce the overall attack surface and protect against malicious actors who may be trying to exploit vulnerabilities or steal information. The other options are not as effective as geoblocking, as they may not block all the possible sources of the scanning activity, or they may not address the root cause of the problem. Official References:

https://www.blumira.com/geoblocking/

https://www.avg.com/en/signal/geo-blocking

The formal incident declaration is crucial to identify and document the staff who have the authority to declare an incident, ensuring that incidents are handled by authorized personnel. References: CompTIA CySA+ Study Guide: Exam CS0-003, 3rd Edition, Chapter 5: Incident Response, page 197.

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.

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​.

User behavior analysis (UBA) is the most effective method for detecting abnormal account activity.

UBA uses machine learning and behavioral analytics to identify patterns in how users interact with systems. If an employee suddenly logs in from an unusual location or accesses resources outside of their normal behavior, it raises an alert​.

Option A (Malicious command interpretation) is focused on malware analysis, not user behavior.

Option B (Network monitoring) detects anomalies at the network level, but does not specifically focus on user behaviors.

Option D (SSL Inspection) is useful for decrypting encrypted traffic, but it does not analyze user activity patterns.

ï‚· Select the command that generated the output in tab 1:

netstat -bo

ï‚· Select the command that generated the output in tab 2:

tasklist

ï‚· 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.

Reverse engineering is a technique that involves analyzing a binary file to understand its structure, functionality, and behavior. Reverse engineering can help security analysts perform malware analysis, vulnerability research, exploit development, and software debugging. Reverse engineering can be done using various tools, such as disassemblers, debuggers, decompilers, and hex editors.

The correct answer is A. System hardening.

System hardening is the process of securing a system by reducing its attack surface, applying patches and updates, configuring security settings, and implementing security controls. System hardening can help prevent or mitigate vulnerability events that may affect operating systems. Host-based IPS, firewalls, and two-factor authentication are examples of security controls that can be applied to harden a system1.

The other options are not the best descriptions of the scenario. A hybrid network architecture (B) is a network design that combines on-premises and cloud-based resources, which may or may not involve system hardening. Continuous authorization © is a security approach that monitors and validates the security posture of a system on an ongoing basis, which is different from system hardening. Secure access service edge (D) is a network architecture that delivers cloud-based security services to remote users and devices, which is also different from system hardening.

A Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB) would have reduced the complexity of identity and access management in cloud-based assets. CASBs provide visibility into cloud application usage, data protection, and governance for cloud-based services.

C. Impossible geo-velocity: This is an event where a single user's account is accessed from different geographical locations within a timeframe that is impossible for normal human travel. In the log, we can see that the user "jdoe" is accessing from the United States and then within a few minutes from Russia, which is practically impossible to achieve without the use of some form of automated system or if the account credentials are being used by different individuals in different locations.

B. Push phishing: This could also be an indication of push phishing, where the user is tricked into approving a multi-factor authentication request that they did not initiate. This is less clear from the logs directly, but it could be inferred if the user is receiving MFA requests that they are not initiating and are being approved without their genuine desire to access the resources.