200-201 Host-Based Analysis Practice Question
An analyst is examining a PE file and notices that the 'TimeDateStamp' in the optional header is 0x00000000. What does this suggest?
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
✓
The timestamp has been deliberately erased or not set, possibly to avoid forensic analysis.
A timestamp of zero often indicates the linker did not set it, which is common for malware or files compiled with certain tools that omit the timestamp.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
The timestamp has been deliberately erased or not set, possibly to avoid forensic analysis.
Why this is correct
Malware authors often zero out the timestamp to hinder timeline analysis.
- ✗
The file is digitally signed.
Why it's wrong here
Digital signatures do not affect the header timestamp field.
- ✗
The file was compiled on January 1, 1970 (Unix epoch).
Why it's wrong here
A zero timestamp technically corresponds to the epoch, but that is unlikely for a legitimate file.
- ✗
The file is a DLL rather than an executable.
Why it's wrong here
DLLs also have timestamps; zero is not normal for either.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every 200-201 question from scratch — 979 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. 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.