Question 169 of 1,152
Threats, Vulnerabilities, and MitigationsmediumMultiple ChoiceObjective-mapped

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.

An attacker calls the service desk claiming to be a traveling contractor whose phone was stolen. They know the contractor's manager name and ask for an MFA reset to a new number 'just for today.' Which control would best reduce the success of this attack?

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

Require a callback to a previously verified number and ticket approval before reset.

Option B is correct because it introduces two verification factors that directly counter the social engineering vector: a callback to a previously verified number ensures the requestor is reachable at a known trusted contact point, and ticket approval creates an audit trail and requires secondary authorization. This combination prevents an attacker from simply claiming an identity and requesting a change without independent confirmation, which is the core weakness the attacker exploits.

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.

  • Trust any caller who can provide a manager's name and employee ID.

    Why it's wrong here

    This makes social engineering easier because attacker-supplied details are often available from public sources or prior leaks.

  • Require a callback to a previously verified number and ticket approval before reset.

    Why this is correct

    A callback to a known-good number, combined with ticket validation and approval workflow, forces the request to be verified through independent channels. This defeats the attacker’s ability to rely on stolen or guessed details during the call. It is a practical anti-pretexting control because it reduces trust in information provided by the caller alone.

    Related concept

    Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.

  • Remove MFA so users are less likely to get locked out while traveling.

    Why it's wrong here

    Removing MFA lowers security significantly and would make account compromise much easier, not harder.

  • Use caller ID alone to confirm the person is legitimate.

    Why it's wrong here

    Caller ID can be spoofed, so it is not a reliable method for identity verification in service desk workflows.

Common exam traps

Common exam trap: answer the scenario, not the keyword

The trap here is that candidates may think providing a manager's name and employee ID is sufficient proof of identity, but the exam tests that these are easily obtained via reconnaissance and do not constitute multi-factor authentication or out-of-band verification.

Detailed technical explanation

How to think about this question

Under the hood, a callback to a previously verified number leverages the PSTN or VoIP provider's authentication of the called number (e.g., via ANI or a verified caller ID database), which is harder for an attacker to spoof than an incoming call's display. The ticket approval process typically integrates with an identity management system (e.g., Active Directory or Azure AD) and requires a second administrator to approve the MFA reset, enforcing separation of duties as per NIST SP 800-63B guidelines for account recovery. In real-world attacks like the 2020 Twitter breach, social engineers used similar pretexting to trick help desk staff into resetting MFA without callback verification, leading to high-profile account takeovers.

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

An employee at a financial services firm receives an email that appears to come from the IT helpdesk, asking them to reset their password via a link. The link leads to a convincing fake portal that harvests credentials. Security teams use phishing simulations and security-awareness training to reduce this attack vector. Questions like this test whether you can identify social engineering techniques and appropriate controls.

What to study next

Got this wrong? Here's your next step.

Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.

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.

Practice this exam

Start a free SY0-701 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 SY0-701 question test?

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: Require a callback to a previously verified number and ticket approval before reset. — Option B is correct because it introduces two verification factors that directly counter the social engineering vector: a callback to a previously verified number ensures the requestor is reachable at a known trusted contact point, and ticket approval creates an audit trail and requires secondary authorization. This combination prevents an attacker from simply claiming an identity and requesting a change without independent confirmation, which is the core weakness the attacker exploits.

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 →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

Keep practising

More SY0-701 practice questions

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 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.