mediummulti selectObjective-mapped

A help desk technician receives a phone call from someone claiming to be the VP of Finance. The caller says they are in an airport, forgot their phone, and need a password reset immediately. They also ask the technician to skip callback verification because a meeting starts in five minutes. Which two details are the strongest indicators of a pretexting or vishing attempt? Select two.

Question 1mediummulti select
Full question →

A help desk technician receives a phone call from someone claiming to be the VP of Finance. The caller says they are in an airport, forgot their phone, and need a password reset immediately. They also ask the technician to skip callback verification because a meeting starts in five minutes. Which two details are the strongest indicators of a pretexting or vishing attempt? Select two.

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

Best answer

the caller claims an executive title and uses authority to pressure the technician

Impersonating a senior executive is a common social engineering tactic because it creates authority pressure and makes the target more likely to comply quickly. In a help desk context, attackers often borrow a title that sounds urgent and important. That pressure is a strong sign the call may be a pretext rather than a legitimate request.

B

Distractor review

the call is routed through the company ticketing system with an approved change record

A documented request with an approved change record would support legitimate administrative action, not social engineering. Proper workflow and traceability reduce the likelihood of a pretext. This option describes a controlled process, which is the opposite of the suspicious behavior in the scenario.

C

Best answer

the caller asks the technician to bypass identity verification and callback procedures

Requests to bypass normal verification are among the strongest red flags in any help desk interaction. Legitimate users usually expect identity checks, while attackers try to avoid them. Asking for an exception to established process is a classic attempt to weaken controls and increase the chance of unauthorized access.

D

Distractor review

the caller answers all security questions correctly after being prompted for them

Correct answers to security questions do not automatically prove fraud, and they may simply mean the caller is a legitimate user who knows the information. The suspicious part of the scenario is the pressure to skip verification. Social engineering is indicated more by process evasion than by a user being able to answer questions.

E

Distractor review

the call occurs after normal business hours on a holiday weekend

Unusual timing can raise suspicion, but it is not as strong as impersonation and a request to skip verification. Real support requests can occur outside normal hours. The strongest indicators are the manipulative tactics used to create urgency and bypass established identity checks.

Common exam trap

Common exam trap: NAT rules depend on direction and matching traffic

NAT is not only about the public address. The inside/outside interface roles and the ACL or rule that matches traffic are just as important.

Technical deep dive

How to think about this question

NAT questions usually test address translation, overload/PAT behaviour, static mappings and whether the right traffic is being translated. Read the interface direction and address terms carefully.

KKey Concepts to Remember

  • Static NAT maps one inside address to one outside address.
  • PAT allows many inside hosts to share one public address using ports.
  • Inside local and inside global describe the private and translated addresses.
  • NAT ACLs identify traffic for translation, not always security filtering.

TExam Day Tips

  • Identify inside and outside interfaces first.
  • Check whether the scenario needs static NAT, dynamic NAT or PAT.
  • Do not confuse NAT matching ACLs with normal packet-filtering intent.

Related practice questions

Related SY0-701 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 SY0-701 question test?

Static NAT maps one inside address to one outside address.

What is the correct answer to this question?

The correct answer is: the caller claims an executive title and uses authority to pressure the technician — Pretexting and vishing work by creating a believable story and pressuring the target to violate normal process. In this scenario, the caller impersonates an executive to borrow authority, then tries to bypass callback verification to weaken identity checks. Those two behaviors are classic signs of a social engineering attempt. The airport story and time pressure reinforce the urgency, but the authority claim and process bypass are the clearest indicators. Why others are wrong: A ticketing record and approved change would support a legitimate request, not a scam. Answering security questions correctly is not, by itself, proof of fraud because legitimate users can also know the answers. Unusual timing may be suspicious, but it is too weak on its own when compared with explicit impersonation and an attempt to skip verification.

What should I do if I get this SY0-701 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.