easyMultiple Choice
200-201 Practice Question: A security monitoring tool generates an alert for…
A security monitoring tool generates an alert for a user accessing a sensitive file at an unusual hour. What is the most appropriate next step?
⚠ Common exam trap
Cisco often tests the distinction between triage and escalation, trapping candidates who jump to escalation or containment without first performing the basic verification step of contacting the user.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Contact the user to confirm if the access was legitimate.
The alert indicates an anomaly (unusual hour), but not necessarily malicious activity. The most appropriate first step is to verify the user's intent through direct communication, as this aligns with the principle of validation before escalation. In security monitoring, contacting the user helps confirm whether the access was authorized, reducing false positives and unnecessary incident response activation.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Ignore the alert since it is likely a false positive.
Why it's wrong here
Dismissing the alert without validation leaves a potentially genuine compromise uninvestigated, and unusual-hour access to sensitive files is a recognised indicator. Ignoring alerts is defensible only after triage confirms a documented, authorised cause such as a scheduled maintenance window.
- ✓
Contact the user to confirm if the access was legitimate.
Why this is correct
Contacting the user directly verifies whether the unusual-hour access was legitimate, satisfying the need to validate the alert before escalation. This human confirmation quickly distinguishes authorised activity from a genuine compromise, avoiding wasted incident response effort on false positives while preserving evidence if the access proves malicious.
- ✗
Escalate the alert to the incident response team.
Why it's wrong here
Escalating before any triage skips validation, handing the incident response team an unconfirmed alert and wasting their capacity. Escalation is warranted once initial investigation confirms suspicious activity that exceeds the analyst's authority or containment capability.
- ✗
Block the user's account immediately.
Why it's wrong here
Immediate account blocking acts before triage confirms malicious activity, disrupting a legitimate user and destroying volatile evidence. Blocking is justified once investigation establishes an active compromise requiring containment, not on the strength of a single unverified alert.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 968 original 200-201 practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This 200-201 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Cisco certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the 200-201 exam.