The correct answer is the evil twin access point attack. This wireless threat occurs when an attacker deploys a rogue access point broadcasting the same SSID as a legitimate network, such as 'CorpNet,' but with a stronger signal, tricking client devices into automatically associating with the fraudulent AP. On the Security+ SY0-701 exam, this scenario tests your ability to distinguish between common wireless attacks, where the evil twin is often confused with a rogue AP or a deauthentication attack—the key difference is that the evil twin mimics a trusted SSID to intercept traffic, not just to disrupt it. A classic trap is assuming any duplicate SSID is a misconfiguration; instead, remember that the attacker’s goal is credential harvesting through a man-in-the-middle position. Memory tip: think of an “evil twin” as a malicious clone—same name, stronger signal, bad intentions.
SY0-701 Threats, Vulnerabilities, and Mitigations Practice Question
This SY0-701 practice question tests your understanding of threats, vulnerabilities, and mitigations. Read the scenario carefully and evaluate each option against the stated constraints before committing to an answer. After answering, compare your reasoning against the explanation and wrong-answer breakdown below. 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.
Exhibit
Wireless scan from the lobby:
SSID: CorpWiFi BSSID: 18:AA:10:22:44:60 Signal: -78 dBm
SSID: CorpWiFi BSSID: 7C:22:90:11:33:AA Signal: -41 dBm
SSID: CorpGuest BSSID: 18:AA:10:22:44:61 Signal: -79 dBm
User report: "My tablet connected to CorpWiFi automatically, then a sign-in page appeared that looked different from our normal one."
Based on the exhibit, what wireless threat is most likely occurring?
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.
Wireless scan from the lobby:
SSID: CorpWiFi BSSID: 18:AA:10:22:44:60 Signal: -78 dBm
SSID: CorpWiFi BSSID: 7C:22:90:11:33:AA Signal: -41 dBm
SSID: CorpGuest BSSID: 18:AA:10:22:44:61 Signal: -79 dBm
User report: "My tablet connected to CorpWiFi automatically, then a sign-in page appeared that looked different from our normal one."
A
Evil twin access point
Two access points are broadcasting the same SSID, but one has a much stronger signal and triggers a suspicious captive portal. That pattern fits an evil twin access point, which imitates a legitimate network to lure users into connecting. The attacker can then intercept traffic or harvest credentials.
B
Bluetooth pairing abuse
Why wrong: Bluetooth pairing abuse involves short-range device pairing, not duplicate Wi-Fi SSIDs and captive portals.
C
NFC skimming
Why wrong: NFC skimming targets very close-range contactless communication, such as badges or payment cards. The exhibit is about wireless network access.
D
DNS poisoning
Why wrong: DNS poisoning manipulates name resolution. The evidence here is a fake wireless access point, not a changed DNS record.
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Evil twin access point
The exhibit shows a legitimate access point (SSID: 'CorpNet') with a second, rogue access point broadcasting the same SSID but with a stronger signal. This is the classic behavior of an evil twin attack, where an attacker sets up a fraudulent AP to intercept client connections and capture credentials or sensitive data. The victim's device automatically associates with the stronger signal, believing it is the legitimate network.
Key principle: Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
✓
Evil twin access point
Why this is correct
Two access points are broadcasting the same SSID, but one has a much stronger signal and triggers a suspicious captive portal. That pattern fits an evil twin access point, which imitates a legitimate network to lure users into connecting. The attacker can then intercept traffic or harvest credentials.
Clue confirmation
The clue word "most likely" in the question point toward this answer.
Related concept
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
✗
Bluetooth pairing abuse
Why it's wrong here
Bluetooth pairing abuse involves short-range device pairing, not duplicate Wi-Fi SSIDs and captive portals.
✗
NFC skimming
Why it's wrong here
NFC skimming targets very close-range contactless communication, such as badges or payment cards. The exhibit is about wireless network access.
✗
DNS poisoning
Why it's wrong here
DNS poisoning manipulates name resolution. The evidence here is a fake wireless access point, not a changed DNS record.
Common exam traps
Common exam trap: answer the scenario, not the keyword
The trap here is that candidates confuse an evil twin with a rogue access point—a rogue AP is an unauthorized device plugged into the wired network, while an evil twin is a standalone attacker AP that mimics a legitimate SSID over the air.
Detailed technical explanation
How to think about this question
An evil twin attack relies on the 802.11 management frame beaconing process; the attacker configures a wireless interface (e.g., using airbase-ng or a rogue router) to broadcast the same SSID and BSSID as the legitimate AP, often with a higher signal strength to trigger client roaming. Once connected, the attacker can perform a man-in-the-middle attack, capturing handshake frames (e.g., 4-way handshake for WPA2) or serving a fake captive portal to harvest credentials. In enterprise environments, this is mitigated by 802.1X/EAP with mutual authentication and WIPS (Wireless Intrusion Prevention Systems) that detect rogue APs via RF fingerprinting.
KKey Concepts to Remember
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
Find the constraint that changes the correct option.
Eliminate answers that are true in general but not in this case.
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
Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.
Real-world example
How this comes up in practice
A security analyst at a medium-sized enterprise encounters this scenario during an investigation or architecture review. The correct answer reflects best practice for the specific threat or control described. Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option. Security exam questions test whether you can match controls to threats in context — not just recall definitions.
Related glossary terms
Concepts from this question explained
These glossary pages explain the core terms tested in this SY0-701 question in full detail.
Threats, Vulnerabilities, and Mitigations — This question tests Threats, Vulnerabilities, and Mitigations — Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer..
What is the correct answer to this question?
The correct answer is: Evil twin access point — The exhibit shows a legitimate access point (SSID: 'CorpNet') with a second, rogue access point broadcasting the same SSID but with a stronger signal. This is the classic behavior of an evil twin attack, where an attacker sets up a fraudulent AP to intercept client connections and capture credentials or sensitive data. The victim's device automatically associates with the stronger signal, believing it is the legitimate network.
What should I do if I get this SY0-701 question wrong?
Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.
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?
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
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 →
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.
This SY0-701 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 SY0-701 exam.
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.
Sign in to join the discussion.