The correct answer involves using a write blocker and recording SHA-256 hashes of the source and the image to verify integrity. A hardware or software write blocker is essential because it intercepts and blocks any write commands from the operating system to the suspect drive, ensuring that no data is altered during acquisition, which preserves the original drive contents in a forensically sound state. This concept is tested on the Security+ SY0-701 exam under domain 2.0 (Architecture and Design) or 4.0 (Operations and Incident Response), often in scenario-based questions where you must select two practices to create a forensic image without altering the original drive. A common trap is choosing to simply copy files or boot the suspect system, which would modify metadata and timestamps. Remember the memory tip: “Block writes, then hash the bits”—the write blocker prevents changes, and hashing proves the copy is identical, ensuring evidence admissibility.
SY0-701 Security Operations Practice Question
This SY0-701 practice question tests your understanding of security operations. 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.
An investigator needs to make a forensic image of a suspect laptop without changing the original drive contents. Which two practices should be used? Select two.
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Use a hardware or software write blocker during acquisition
A hardware or software write blocker is essential because it intercepts and blocks any write commands from the operating system to the suspect drive, ensuring that no data is altered during acquisition. This preserves the original drive's contents in a forensically sound state, which is a fundamental requirement for evidence admissibility.
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.
✓
Use a hardware or software write blocker during acquisition
Why this is correct
A write blocker prevents the acquisition tool from modifying the source drive.
Related concept
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
✓
Record SHA-256 hashes of the source and the image to verify integrity
Why this is correct
Matching hashes help prove that the forensic copy is identical to the original evidence.
Related concept
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
✗
Mount the drive read/write so hidden files are easier to access
Why it's wrong here
Read/write mounting can alter evidence and defeats the purpose of forensic acquisition.
✗
Defragment the drive first to improve imaging speed
Why it's wrong here
Defragmentation changes the evidence and is inappropriate before imaging.
✗
Install triage tools directly on the suspect laptop
Why it's wrong here
Installing tools on the suspect system modifies it and can contaminate evidence.
Common exam traps
Common exam trap: answer the scenario, not the keyword
The trap here is that candidates often confuse 'verifying integrity after acquisition' (option B) with 'preventing alteration during acquisition' (option A), or they mistakenly think that mounting a drive read/write is acceptable if done carefully, not realizing that even read-only mounting by the OS can write metadata.
Detailed technical explanation
How to think about this question
Write blockers operate at the hardware level (e.g., Tableau, WiebeTech) by intercepting ATA/SCSI commands and returning a 'write protect' status, or at the software level (e.g., FTK Imager's 'Physical Write Blocker' mode) by filtering I/O requests. The SHA-256 hash verification (option B) is performed after acquisition to confirm bit-for-bit integrity; it does not prevent alteration during imaging but detects any changes that may have occurred. In real-world investigations, a common subtlety is that some USB write blockers may not block all proprietary commands from certain SSDs, so examiners must verify the blocker's compatibility with the target drive.
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 SOC analyst notices unusual lateral movement in the network at 2 AM. The IR playbook dictates: identify and contain (isolate the affected machine), then eradicate (remove the malware), then recover (restore from backup), then document. Skipping containment before eradication risks the attacker regaining access. Questions like this test the sequence and rationale of incident response phases.
Related glossary terms
Concepts from this question explained
These glossary pages explain the core terms tested in this SY0-701 question in full detail.
Security Operations — This question tests Security Operations — Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer..
What is the correct answer to this question?
The correct answer is: Use a hardware or software write blocker during acquisition — A hardware or software write blocker is essential because it intercepts and blocks any write commands from the operating system to the suspect drive, ensuring that no data is altered during acquisition. This preserves the original drive's contents in a forensically sound state, which is a fundamental requirement for evidence admissibility.
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.
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.