Question 105 of 509
Information Gathering and Vulnerability ScanninghardMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

Quick Answer

The correct answer is that the scanner detected a vulnerable library used by the application, but the application's implementation does not expose the vulnerable code path. This happens because vulnerability scanners often rely on version-based detection, flagging any library with a known CVE regardless of whether the application actually calls the vulnerable functions. In a custom web application, the developer may include a library for non-critical features, leaving the exploitable code path unreachable or properly sanitized, which creates a false positive vulnerable library not exploited scenario. On the CompTIA PenTest+ PT0-002 exam, this tests your understanding of scanner limitations versus manual verification, a common trap where testers assume any flagged library is automatically exploitable. Remember the memory tip: “Version ≠ Execution”—just because a library version is vulnerable doesn’t mean the code path is active.

PT0-002 Practice Question: Information Gathering and Vulnerability Scanning

This PT0-002 practice question tests your understanding of information gathering and vulnerability scanning. The scenario asks you to isolate a root cause — eliminate options that address a different problem before choosing. A key principle to apply: vulnerability scanners often identify vulnerable libraries by version.. Once you have made your selection, read the full explanation to reinforce the concept and understand why each distractor is designed to mislead on exam day.

A penetration tester is using a vulnerability scanner to assess an internal network. The scanner reports a critical vulnerability in a custom web application, but manual verification shows the application is not vulnerable. Which of the following is the MOST likely cause of this false positive?

Clue words in this question

Noticing these words before you look at the options changes how you read each choice.

  • Clue: "most likely"

    Why it matters: Probability qualifier — the question wants the most probable cause or outcome, not a guaranteed one. Eliminate low-probability options.

Question 1hardmultiple choice
Full question →

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 scanner detected a vulnerable library used by the application, but the application's implementation does not expose the vulnerable code path

Option C is correct because vulnerability scanners often identify libraries or components with known CVEs, but they cannot determine whether the application's code actually invokes the vulnerable functions. In this case, the scanner flagged a library with a known vulnerability, but the custom web application's implementation does not expose the vulnerable code path, resulting in a false positive. This is a common limitation of static or version-based detection versus dynamic, context-aware analysis.

Key principle: Vulnerability scanners often identify vulnerable libraries by version.

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 scanner used an outdated vulnerability database that does not match the application's patches

    Why it's wrong here

    An outdated database could also cause false positives, but the more specific cause is version-based detection that doesn't account for custom modifications.

  • The scanner identified the application version from the HTTP response header, but the vulnerability was already patched in that version

    Why it's wrong here

    This is plausible but not as common as the next option. Many scanners use version strings but may not correctly correlate patches.

  • The scanner detected a vulnerable library used by the application, but the application's implementation does not expose the vulnerable code path

    Why this is correct

    This is a classic false positive: the scanner sees the library version but cannot determine if the vulnerable functionality is reachable. The tester must manually validate.

    Clue confirmation

    The clue word "most likely" in the question point toward this answer.

    Related concept

    Vulnerability scanners often identify vulnerable libraries by version.

  • The scanner performed an exploit attempt that succeeded on a different service on the same host

    Why it's wrong here

    This would indicate a true positive on another service, not a false positive on the custom application.

Common exam traps

Common exam trap: answer the scenario, not the keyword

The trap here is that candidates often assume a scanner's version-based detection is definitive, overlooking the fact that a vulnerable library may be present but not actively used in a way that exposes the vulnerability.

Detailed technical explanation

How to think about this question

Vulnerability scanners often use a technique called 'banner grabbing' or 'version fingerprinting' to identify software versions from HTTP headers (e.g., Server: Apache/2.4.41) or from file hashes, then cross-reference against CVE databases. However, this approach cannot verify whether the vulnerable code is actually reachable or if mitigations (e.g., input sanitization, WAF rules) are in place. In real-world engagements, a library like OpenSSL might be bundled but never used for TLS, leading to false positives that require manual validation.

KKey Concepts to Remember

  • Vulnerability scanners often identify vulnerable libraries by version.
  • A vulnerable library's presence does not guarantee an application is exploitable.
  • Custom application logic can prevent exposure of vulnerable library code paths.
  • Manual verification is essential to confirm scanner findings, especially for custom code.

TExam Day Tips

  • Watch for words such as best, first, most likely and least administrative effort.
  • Review why wrong options are wrong, not only why the correct option is correct.

Key takeaway

Vulnerability scanners often identify vulnerable libraries by version.

Real-world example

How this comes up in practice

A security team runs a vulnerability scan on a web application and discovers an unpatched SQL injection flaw. The team prioritises remediation by CVSS score — critical flaws are patched within 24 hours, high within 7 days. Questions like this test whether you understand vulnerability management processes, scanning tools, and remediation prioritisation.

What to study next

Got this wrong? Here's your next step.

Review vulnerability scanners often identify vulnerable libraries by version., then practise related PT0-002 questions on the same topic to reinforce the concept.

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.

Practice this exam

Start a free PT0-002 practice session

Short sessions build daily habit. Longer sessions build exam-day stamina. Try a timed session to simulate real conditions.

FAQ

Questions learners often ask

What does this PT0-002 question test?

Information Gathering and Vulnerability Scanning — This question tests Information Gathering and Vulnerability Scanning — Vulnerability scanners often identify vulnerable libraries by version..

What is the correct answer to this question?

The correct answer is: The scanner detected a vulnerable library used by the application, but the application's implementation does not expose the vulnerable code path — Option C is correct because vulnerability scanners often identify libraries or components with known CVEs, but they cannot determine whether the application's code actually invokes the vulnerable functions. In this case, the scanner flagged a library with a known vulnerability, but the custom web application's implementation does not expose the vulnerable code path, resulting in a false positive. This is a common limitation of static or version-based detection versus dynamic, context-aware analysis.

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

Review vulnerability scanners often identify vulnerable libraries by version., then practise related PT0-002 questions on the same topic to reinforce the concept.

Are there clue words in this question I should notice?

Yes — watch for: "most likely". Probability qualifier — the question wants the most probable cause or outcome, not a guaranteed one. Eliminate low-probability options.

What is the key concept behind this question?

Vulnerability scanners often identify vulnerable libraries by version.

About these practice questions

Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

Last reviewed: Jun 11, 2026

Question Discussion

Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.

Loading comments…

Sign in to join the discussion.

This PT0-002 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 PT0-002 exam.