hardMultiple Choice
How to Validate a TLS 1.0 Scanner Finding When the Owner Disagrees
A scanner flags TLS 1.0 on a server, but the service owner says TLS 1.0 is disabled. What is the BEST validation method? For validation, Which action should be taken before closing or downgrading the finding?
Quick Answer
The correct answer is to manually test the service with a TLS client or scanner profile that negotiates protocol versions. This is the best validation method because it provides direct, empirical evidence of whether the server actually accepts TLS 1.0 connections, bypassing any potential misconfigurations or false positives in the original scan. When a service owner disagrees with a scanner finding, relying solely on their assertion or the scanner’s log is insufficient; only an independent test using a tool like OpenSSL s_client can confirm the server’s true behavior. On the CompTIA CySA+ CS0-003 exam, this scenario tests your understanding of the validation phase in vulnerability management, where you must distinguish between a true positive and a false positive. A common trap is to accept the owner’s word or simply rescan with the same tool, which may repeat the same error. Remember the mnemonic “Test, Don’t Trust”—always verify protocol support with a manual client before closing or downgrading any finding.
⚠ Common exam trap
The CS0-004 exam often tests the trap that candidates will trust the service owner's assertion over the scanner's evidence, leading them to close the finding without independent verification, which violates the principle of validate-before-remediate.
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
✓
Manually test the service with a TLS client or scanner profile that negotiates protocol versions
The only way to definitively resolve a discrepancy between a scanner finding and a service owner's claim is to perform an independent, manual test. Using a TLS client (e.g., OpenSSL s_client) or a scanner profile that specifically negotiates protocol versions allows you to directly verify whether the server actually accepts TLS 1.0 connections, eliminating false positives or misconfigurations.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Change the severity to informational automatically
Why it's wrong here
Changing severity to informational bypasses verification of the scanner's claim, so the TLS 1.0 finding stays unconfirmed. Severity adjustment suits triage of accepted risks or false-positive patterns already proven by evidence, not a disputed configuration. Here the service owner's assertion conflicts with the scan, so the port must be re-tested directly before any downgrade.
- ✗
Close the finding because the owner disagrees
Why it's wrong here
Closing on the owner's assertion alone leaves the scanner's evidence unverified; the disagreement itself is the reason to test, not to dismiss. This option suits a documented false positive already corroborated by independent evidence. Here, no handshake or configuration check has confirmed which protocol the service actually negotiates.
- ✗
Delete the server from the scan scope
Why it's wrong here
Deleting the server from the scan scope removes it from future assessment without verifying whether TLS 1.0 remains enabled, so the finding is neither validated nor remediated. It is tempting as a way to silence recurring false positives, and would be legitimate only after confirming decommissioning or a documented, approved risk acceptance.
- ✓
Manually test the service with a TLS client or scanner profile that negotiates protocol versions
Why this is correct
Negotiating protocol versions directly with the service confirms what the endpoint actually accepts, rather than relying on the owner's configuration claim. A TLS client or scanner profile that offers TLS 1.0 will reveal whether the handshake succeeds, providing evidence before the finding is closed or downgraded.
Visual reference
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This CS0-004 question is part of Courseiva's 701-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
Same concept, more angles
4 more ways this is tested on CS0-004
These questions test the same concept from different angles. Work through them to make sure you can recognise it however the exam phrases it.
Variation 1. A scanner flags TLS 1.0 on a server, but the service owner says TLS 1.0 is disabled. What is the BEST validation method? For business prioritization, Which recommendation gives the best risk-based order of work?
hard- ✓ A.Manually test the service with a TLS client or scanner profile that negotiates protocol versions
- B.Delete the server from the scan scope
- C.Change the severity to informational automatically
- D.Close the finding because the owner disagrees
Why A: The best validation method is to independently verify the server's TLS configuration by manually testing with a TLS client (e.g., OpenSSL s_client) or a scanner profile that explicitly attempts to negotiate TLS 1.0. This eliminates false positives from automated scanners that may rely on banner grabbing or outdated fingerprints, and directly confirms whether the service accepts TLS 1.0 handshakes at the protocol level.
Variation 2. A scanner flags TLS 1.0 on a server, but the service owner says TLS 1.0 is disabled. What is the BEST validation method? For stakeholder management, Which documentation or approval is required to keep the programme defensible?
hard- A.Close the finding because the owner disagrees
- ✓ B.Manually test the service with a TLS client or scanner profile that negotiates protocol versions
- C.Change the severity to informational automatically
- D.Delete the server from the scan scope
Why B: The scanner may have detected TLS 1.0 due to a false positive from a misconfigured cipher suite or a server-side protocol negotiation artifact. Manually testing with a TLS client (e.g., OpenSSL s_client -tls1) or a scanner profile that explicitly negotiates protocol versions provides definitive evidence of whether TLS 1.0 is actually enabled, resolving the discrepancy between the scanner result and the owner's claim.
Variation 3. A scanner flags TLS 1.0 on a server, but the service owner says TLS 1.0 is disabled. What is the BEST validation method? For tool configuration, Which scanner or pipeline change most directly improves result quality?
hard- A.Change the severity to informational automatically
- B.Delete the server from the scan scope
- C.Close the finding because the owner disagrees
- ✓ D.Manually test the service with a TLS client or scanner profile that negotiates protocol versions
Why D: The most reliable way to validate whether TLS 1.0 is truly disabled is to perform an active, negotiated test using a TLS client (e.g., OpenSSL s_client) or a scanner profile that explicitly attempts to connect using only TLS 1.0. This bypasses any potential misconfiguration in the scanner's service detection or version negotiation logic, and directly confirms whether the server accepts a TLS 1.0 handshake. Relying solely on the scanner's banner grab or the owner's assertion can miss cases where the server still supports the protocol on certain ports or under specific cipher suites.
Variation 4. A scanner flags TLS 1.0 on a server, but the service owner says TLS 1.0 is disabled. What is the BEST validation method? For control selection, Which control best addresses the stated weakness without hiding risk?
hard- A.Close the finding because the owner disagrees
- B.Change the severity to informational automatically
- C.Delete the server from the scan scope
- ✓ D.Manually test the service with a TLS client or scanner profile that negotiates protocol versions
Why D: The best validation method is to manually test the service using a TLS client (e.g., OpenSSL s_client) or a scanner profile that explicitly attempts to negotiate TLS 1.0. This directly verifies whether the server truly rejects TLS 1.0 handshakes, eliminating false positives from scanner misconfiguration or version negotiation quirks. Relying on the owner's assertion or altering the finding without technical proof would violate vulnerability management best practices.
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This CS0-004 practice question is part of Courseiva's free CompTIA 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 CS0-004 exam.