mediummultiple choiceObjective-mapped

A penetration tester has gained a shell on a Linux machine as a low-privileged user. The user can execute the binary 'less' with sudo privileges without a password. Which technique can the tester use to escalate privileges to root?

Question 1mediummultiple choice
Full question →

A penetration tester has gained a shell on a Linux machine as a low-privileged user. The user can execute the binary 'less' with sudo privileges without a password. Which technique can the tester use to escalate privileges to root?

Answer choices

Why each option matters

Good practice is not just finding the correct option. The wrong answers often show the exact trap the exam wants you to fall into.

A

Distractor review

Exploit a buffer overflow in the 'less' binary.

While buffer overflows could theoretically be exploited, this is not the most direct method given the sudo privilege. The '!' command provides immediate command execution without memory corruption.

B

Best answer

Use the '!' command within 'less' to execute a shell.

Correct. The '!' command in less allows execution of shell commands. With sudo, this runs as root, granting privilege escalation.

C

Distractor review

Run 'sudo -u root bash' to switch to a root shell.

The sudoers rule only allows 'less' specifically. Running 'sudo -u root bash' would prompt for a password or be denied because the rule is not general.

D

Distractor review

Modify the PATH to trick sudo into running a malicious binary.

PATH manipulation is not effective when the binary path is explicitly specified in sudoers (i.e., using the full path). Additionally, 'less' is typically at a fixed location.

Common exam trap

Common exam trap: authentication is not authorization

Logging in proves the user can authenticate. It does not automatically mean the user is allowed to enter privileged or configuration mode. Watch for AAA authorization, privilege level and command authorization details.

Technical deep dive

How to think about this question

This kind of question is testing the difference between identity and permission. A user may successfully log in to a router because authentication is working, but still fail to enter configuration mode because authorization is missing, misconfigured or mapped to a lower privilege level.

KKey Concepts to Remember

  • Authentication checks who the user is.
  • Authorization controls what the user is allowed to do after login.
  • Privilege levels affect access to EXEC and configuration commands.
  • AAA, TACACS+ and RADIUS can separate login success from command access.

TExam Day Tips

  • Do not assume successful login means full administrative access.
  • Look for words such as cannot enter configuration mode, privilege level, authorization or command access.
  • Separate login problems from permission problems before choosing the answer.

Related practice questions

Related PT0-002 practice-question pages

Use these pages to review the topic behind this question. This is how one missed question becomes focused revision.

More questions from this exam

Keep practising from the same exam bank, or move into a focused topic page if this question exposed a weak area.

FAQ

Questions learners often ask

What does this PT0-002 question test?

Authentication checks who the user is.

What is the correct answer to this question?

The correct answer is: Use the '!' command within 'less' to execute a shell. — When a user can run 'less' with sudo, they can use the built-in '!' command within less to execute arbitrary commands as the superuser. For example, 'sudo less /etc/passwd' followed by '!bash' opens a root shell. Other options are not directly applicable: buffer overflows are possible but not the easiest route, sudo -u root bash would fail because of password requirements, and race conditions are not relevant to this specific sudo assignment.

What should I do if I get this PT0-002 question wrong?

Then try more questions from the same exam bank and focus on understanding why the wrong options are tempting.

Discussion

Loading comments…

Sign in to join the discussion.