Quick Answer
The answer is PEiD, the most appropriate tool for identifying a packer that might be obfuscating the code in a PE file. PEiD is a signature-based packer detection tool specifically designed to scan PE files for known packer, cryptor, and compiler signatures, often found in the entry point and section headers like .text, .rdata, .data, and .rsrc. On the Computer Hacking Forensic Investigator CHFI exam, this question tests your understanding of static malware analysis tools, where PEiD stands out because it directly targets obfuscation rather than disassembling or extracting strings. A common trap is choosing a general-purpose tool like OllyDbg or IDA Pro, but those are for dynamic analysis or deeper reverse engineering, not quick packer identification. Memory tip: PEiD = Packer Entry-point Identifier, so when you see a suspicious entry point in the .text section, think PEiD first.
This CHFI practice question tests your understanding of mobile and malware forensics. Compare every option against the stated constraints before choosing — the best answer satisfies all requirements, not just the most obvious one. 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.
In malware static analysis, a PE file is examined. The section names include '.text', '.rdata', '.data', and '.rsrc'. The entry point is in the .text section. Which tool would be MOST appropriate to identify any packer that might be obfuscating the code?
strings
Why wrong: Strings only extracts text strings; it does not detect packers.
Ghidra
Why wrong: Ghidra is a reverse engineering suite; it can detect packers but PEiD is more specialized.
PEiD
PEiD is designed to identify packers, cryptors, and compilers using signatures.
IDA Pro
Why wrong: IDA Pro is for disassembly and debugging, not specifically for packer detection.
Answer choices
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
PEiD
PEiD is specifically designed to detect packers, cryptors, and compilers by scanning PE files for known signatures in the entry point and section headers. Since the question asks for identifying a packer that obfuscates code, PEiD's signature-based detection directly targets this need, unlike general-purpose disassemblers or string extractors.
Key principle: Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.
Answer analysis
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
strings
Why it's wrong here
Strings only extracts text strings; it does not detect packers.
Ghidra
Why it's wrong here
Ghidra is a reverse engineering suite; it can detect packers but PEiD is more specialized.
PEiD
Why this is correct
PEiD is designed to identify packers, cryptors, and compilers using signatures.
Related concept
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
IDA Pro
Why it's wrong here
IDA Pro is for disassembly and debugging, not specifically for packer detection.
Common exam traps
EC-Council often tests the distinction between tools for packer detection versus general reverse engineering; the trap here is that candidates choose IDA Pro or Ghidra because they are powerful, but the question specifically asks for the *most appropriate* tool to *identify* a packer, not to analyze the unpacked code.
Detailed technical explanation
PEiD uses a signature database (often stored in `userdb.txt`) that matches byte patterns at the entry point (EP) or section names like `.UPX0` or `.packed`. A real-world scenario: when analyzing a ransomware sample, PEiD can instantly flag UPX or MEW packers, saving hours of manual unpacking. However, PEiD may fail against custom or polymorphic packers that modify their signatures, requiring heuristic or behavioral analysis.
Key takeaway
Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.
Real-world example
A small business has 20 workstations on the 192.168.1.0/24 network and one public IP from its ISP. The router uses PAT (NAT overload) so all 20 devices share one public address using different source ports. NAT questions test whether you understand the four address terms and which direction each translation applies.
What to study next
Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.
Mobile and Malware Forensics — study guide chapter
Learn the concepts, then practise the questions
Mobile and Malware Forensics practice questions
Targeted practice on this topic area only
All CHFI questions
1,000 questions across all exam domains
Computer Hacking Forensic Investigator CHFI study guide
Full concept coverage aligned to exam objectives
CHFI practice test guide
How to use practice tests most effectively before exam day
Related practice questions
Use these pages to review the topic behind this question. This is how one missed question becomes focused revision.
Practise CHFI questions linked to Computer Forensics Investigation Process.
Practise CHFI questions linked to Computer Forensics Fundamentals and Process.
Practise CHFI questions linked to Storage Forensics and File System Analysis.
Practise CHFI questions linked to Incident Response and First Responder Skills.
Practise CHFI questions linked to Computer Forensics Lab.
Practise CHFI questions linked to Evidence Acquisition and Duplication.
Practise CHFI questions linked to OS and Network Forensics.
Practise CHFI questions linked to OS and File System Forensics.
Practise CHFI questions linked to Application, Email and Cloud Forensics.
Practise CHFI questions linked to Mobile and Malware Forensics.
Practise CHFI questions linked to Network and Cloud Forensics.
Practise CHFI questions linked to Database and Application Forensics.
Practice this exam
Short sessions build daily habit. Longer sessions build exam-day stamina. Try a timed session to simulate real conditions.
FAQ
Mobile and Malware Forensics — This question tests Mobile and Malware Forensics — Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer..
The correct answer is: PEiD — PEiD is specifically designed to detect packers, cryptors, and compilers by scanning PE files for known signatures in the entry point and section headers. Since the question asks for identifying a packer that obfuscates code, PEiD's signature-based detection directly targets this need, unlike general-purpose disassemblers or string extractors.
Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.
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 →
Last reviewed: Jun 30, 2026
This CHFI practice question is part of Courseiva's free EC-Council 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 CHFI 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.